TrumpPutingate III: the beginning of the end

#4,526
#4,526
hog88 said:
Let me know when he indicts someone for corruption. It’s only been a year.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,528
#4,528
hog88 said:
Give a prosecutor enough money and time and he could indict anyone.
Click to expand...

again, I want this same investigation to play out over EVERY politician. Willing to bet real money 99% end up as guilty as Trump and his team.
 
#4,529
#4,529
LouderVol said:
again, I want this same investigation to play out over EVERY politician. Willing to bet real money 99% end up as guilty as Trump and his team.
Click to expand...

I disagree. We shouldn't be investigating someone simply because they were elected.

Now, if it were possible to chip a politician after they assume office so all movement, conversations and activity are recorded, sure.
 
#4,530
#4,530
hog88 said:
Give a prosecutor enough money and time and he could indict anyone.
Click to expand...

First he has had no contact with Russia, at all, ever.

Then it was well, yes, contact, but no financial ties.

Then it was well, yes, financial ties, but none recent. And no coordination with the campaign

Then it was well, yes, there was that one meeting with the Russians in Trump Tower, involving my campaign chief and son, but that was about adoption.

Then it was, well, yes, the purpose of the meeting was to get dirt on Hillary, but we ended up not getting any.

Then it was, well, yes, I said that we'd have some dirt on her the next week, but it was wikileaks who got it, not us or the Russians.

Then it was, well, yes, the intelligence services say that wikileaks who worked with the Russians to obtain it and disseminate it, but there was no effort to interfere in the election.

Then it was well, yes, they did interfere in the election, but I didn't ask them to.

And now it is, well, maybe he did ask them to and that is about to be proven, and if so the retort will be as hog's above: "Well, yes, I did collude with the Russians and I owe them billions/they have blackmial material on me, but if given enough time that will always be proven by a prosecutor with the time and money to do it."

Its amazing how every time that Trump and his mindless followers set a bar and say, well, it wasn't THIS, that when it is shown that "this" indeed occurred, they just change the bar to well, maybe so but THAT didn't happen.

Its the reason this is taking the time it is and its the reason the case is being made, to borrow a UT term, brick by brick. The evidence is going to have to be overwhelming to get the Trump mindless minions to accept it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#4,531
#4,531
lawgator1 said:
First he has had no contact with Russia, at all, ever.

Then it was well, yes, contact, but no financial ties.

Then it was well, yes, financial ties, but none recent. And no coordination with the campaign

Then it was well, yes, there was that one meeting with the Russians in Trump Tower, involving my campaign chief and son, but that was about adoption.

Then it was, well, yes, the purpose of the meeting was to get dirt on Hillary, but we ended up not getting any.

Then it was, well, yes, I said that we'd have some dirt on her the next week, but it was wikileaks who got it, not us or the Russians.

Then it was, well, yes, the intelligence services say that wikileaks who worked with the Russians to obtain it and disseminate it, but there was no effort to interfere in the election.

Then it was well, yes, they did interfere in the election, but I didn't ask them to.

And now it is, well, maybe he did ask them to and that is about to be proven, and if so the retort will be as hog's above: "Well, yes, I did collude with the Russians and I owe them billions/they have blackmial material on me, but if given enough time that will always be proven by a prosecutor with the time and money to do it."

Its amazing how every time that Trump and his mindless followers set a bar and say, well, it wasn't THIS, that when it is shown that "this" indeed occurred, they just change the bar to well, maybe so but THAT didn't happen.

Its the reason this is taking the time it is and its the reason the case is being made, to borrow a UT term, brick by brick. The evidence is going to have to be overwhelming to get the Trump mindless minions to accept it.
Click to expand...

The reason it's taking time is because Muller can't find anything.
 
#4,532
#4,532
lawgator1 said:
First he has had no contact with Russia, at all, ever.

Then it was well, yes, contact, but no financial ties.

Then it was well, yes, financial ties, but none recent. And no coordination with the campaign

Then it was well, yes, there was that one meeting with the Russians in Trump Tower, involving my campaign chief and son, but that was about adoption.

Then it was, well, yes, the purpose of the meeting was to get dirt on Hillary, but we ended up not getting any.

Then it was, well, yes, I said that we'd have some dirt on her the next week, but it was wikileaks who got it, not us or the Russians.

Then it was, well, yes, the intelligence services say that wikileaks who worked with the Russians to obtain it and disseminate it, but there was no effort to interfere in the election.

Then it was well, yes, they did interfere in the election, but I didn't ask them to.

And now it is, well, maybe he did ask them to and that is about to be proven, and if so the retort will be as hog's above: "Well, yes, I did collude with the Russians and I owe them billions/they have blackmial material on me, but if given enough time that will always be proven by a prosecutor with the time and money to do it."

Its amazing how every time that Trump and his mindless followers set a bar and say, well, it wasn't THIS, that when it is shown that "this" indeed occurred, they just change the bar to well, maybe so but THAT didn't happen.

Its the reason this is taking the time it is and its the reason the case is being made, to borrow a UT term, brick by brick. The evidence is going to have to be overwhelming to get the Trump mindless minions to accept it.
Click to expand...
Well, we saw how that game ended up for Mrs. Clinton.

"He was extremely careless but there was no intent to commit a crime."

How's that sound to you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,533
#4,533
lawgator1 said:
The Trump Army does not want to hear this. When they are accidentally exposed to facts, they deflect to something about a Clinton or Obama. They are the most intellectually dishonest political group in the history of the USA.
Click to expand...

All sounds familiar.

Change a letter, change a stance.
 
#4,534
#4,534
Trump's team received advanced notice that the NYT was about to break the story about the Trump Hotel meeting while they were in Hamburg at the G20 summit. Evidently on the flight back to the US, Trump, Jarvanka, Hicks, and a few others met in private to discuss the cover story. When it is proven that this meeting took place, obstruction of justice charges will follow. This is ONE of the reasons none of the people are willing to answer questions about anything from the time Trump was sworn in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,535
#4,535
37L1 said:
Well, we saw how that game ended up for Mrs. Clinton.

"He was extremely careless but there was no intent to commit a crime."

How's that sound to you?
Click to expand...


I realize that it is a possibility that Trump will claim that to be the result.

However, not realizing that keeping your emails in such shoddy fashion on an unsecured server is simply not going to come anywhere close to being as bad as altering US policy to either reward Russia for helping you win, or paying them off for big loans, or paying them off to avoid blackmail.

But hey, keep just trying to make it about her or Obama did somethingsomethingsomething. Its not working except amongst the Fox News 36 % echo chamber.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#4,536
#4,536
luthervol said:
Trump's team received advanced notice that the NYT was about to break the story about the Trump Hotel meeting while they were in Hamburg at the G20 summit. Evidently on the flight back to the US, Trump, Jarvanka, Hicks, and a few others met in private to discuss the cover story. When it is proven that this meeting took place, obstruction of justice charges will follow. This is ONE of the reasons none of the people are willing to answer questions about anything from the time Trump was sworn in.
Click to expand...

WTH?

Luther you might want to look up what OOJ is.
 
#4,539
#4,539
Some former Trump campaign staffer named Nunberg has been subpoenaed by Mueller but... get this... Nunberg says he's not going to cooperate - plans to be a no show before the Grand Jury and won't provide the requested documents.

So... contempt of court = Mueller arrests his ass and let's him sit in jail until he does what he's told.

This should be amusing. I give the guy 48 hours max until he begs to cooperate. What a fool.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...c9f29a55815_story.html?utm_term=.e9b65ff8afd0
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,540
#4,540
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...c9f29a55815_story.html?utm_term=.1a930588c3c5

In an interview with The Washington Post, Nunberg said he was asked to come to Washington to appear before the grand jury on Friday. He also provided a copy of what appears to be his two-page grand jury subpoena seeking documents related to President Trump and nine other people, including emails, correspondence, invoices, telephone logs, calendars and “records of any kind.”

Nunberg said he does not plan to comply with the subpoena, including either providing testimony or documents.

“Let him arrest me,” Nunberg said. “Mr. Mueller should understand I am not going in on Friday.”

He should expect a knock on his door any minute now.



Trump Lawyer’s Payment to Stormy Daniels Was Reported as Suspicious by Bank - WSJ

The bank used by President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer to wire $130,000 to a former adult-film actress flagged the transaction as suspicious and reported it to the Treasury Department, according to a person familiar with the matter.

The lawyer, Michael Cohen, wired the money to a lawyer for former actress Stephanie Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, from an account at First Republic Bank . The money was received on Oct. 27, 2016, 12 days before the presidential election, another person familiar with the matter said. It isn’t clear when First Republic reported it to the government as suspicious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,545
#4,545
Obsessed said:
What do you think the meeting on the tarmac was about?
Click to expand...

I don't know. She had to recuse herself because of it. Do tell your conspiracy theory. Pay to play, adopting russian children to sell to a pizza joint, the best way to dump a body? All good choices.

Hog must be afraid to answer as well as you.
 
Last edited:
#4,546
#4,546
Obsessed said:
Is “ I plead the 5th” directing a subordinate to lie?
Click to expand...

No but directing a subordinate to lie is directing a subordinate to lie. Pleading the 5th so you do not have to admit that you were directed to lie is what is happening.
 
#4,547
#4,547
Mick said:
I don't know. She had to recuse herself because of it. Do tell your conspiracy theory. Pay to play, adopting russian children to sell to a pizza joint, the best way to dump a body? All good choices.

Hog must be afraid to answer.
Click to expand...

It is no theory.
 
#4,550
#4,550
luthervol said:
Maybe you should.

A federal employee directing a subordinate to lie in order to cover up a wrongdoing is OOJ. Federal employees colluding to create a fabricated story to cover up wrong doing is OOJ.

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34303.pdf
Click to expand...

First there would have to be wrong doing.

Second our prisons would be full of federal employees if we used such loose interpretations as that.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top