Donald J. Trump
‏
Verified account

@realDonaldTrump
Follow Follow @realDonaldTrump
More
If anyone is looking for a good lawyer, I would strongly suggest that you don’t retain the services of Michael Cohen!

5:44 AM - 22 Aug 2018

There are tire tracks up and down most of the "great people" Trump hired along the way.

it’s not good for trump, that’s for sure.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hahaha - what did you expect when you had to choose from Trump and Hillary :hihi:

Not surprised one bit

Train wreck ........
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

When Trump says Paul is a good man and he is sad that this happened to him and suggesting he has been treated unfairly; is that because he got caught trying to defraud to government🤢?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What was that you used to say, John, We get the government we deserve

I get that feeling that most anyone who is investigated long enough by someone with unlimited legal powers will suffer some sort of repercussions. Everyone has some dirt in their past. Special councils are scary.

I get that feeling that most anyone who is investigated long enough by someone with unlimited legal powers will suffer some sort of repercussions. Everyone has some dirt in their past. Special councils are scary.
Of multiple serious felonies???

Fess up, what are you hiding?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Of multiple serious felonies???

Fess up, what are you hiding?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Murder, Rape, Kidnapping...those are Serious Felonies.

Paying off a couple of chicks you banged....not so much.

be more overly Dramatic...you can't :rolleyes:

Murder, Rape, Kidnapping...those are Serious Felonies.

Paying off a couple of chicks you banged....not so much.

be more overly Dramatic...you can't :rolleyes:

yeah...at least he was nice and sent them money...the Clinton's would not have been so nice

Murder, Rape, Kidnapping...those are Serious Felonies.

Paying off a couple of chicks you banged....not so much.

be more overly Dramatic...you can't :rolleyes:
If you’re looking at 8 to 10 or more you’ve done something pretty bad...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Murder, Rape, Kidnapping...those are Serious Felonies.

Paying off a couple of chicks you banged....not so much.

be more overly Dramatic...you can't :rolleyes:

Really? So campaign violations, begging Russia to attack our democracy by hacking and possible collusion by family and campaign staff to work with the Russians to impact the election your ok with. I suggest that if it wasn’t Hillary and a candidate you really would prefer over Trump, you might see it differently.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is this a country with the rule of law or did Republicans become Unitarians, and now they call them the Ten Suggestions?

Really? So campaign violations, begging Russia to attack our democracy by hacking and possible collusion by family and campaign staff to work with the Russians to impact the election your ok with. I suggest that if it wasn’t Hillary and a candidate you really would prefer over Trump, you might see it differently.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

See that word, "Possible" ANYTHING isn't a felony.... and by your relatives and people you know makes it even less so. So you can delete that from your rant.

Cohen was indicted for 8 crimes, only one of them was a campaign violation....by Cohen

"Cohen pleaded guilty to a total of eight counts, including five counts of tax evasion involving nearly $4 million, one count of making a false statement to a financial institution, one count of willful cause of unlawful corporate contribution from June 2016 to October 2016, and one excessive campaign contribution on October 27, 2016."

As far as Begging Russia, that's some serious "TDS" leaping right there from what Cohen pled guilty too. When they get any actual proof that happened, let me know.

Who knows, they are obviously still digging. looks like they found something that they can dig deeper into by trying to link Campaign funds going to a couple of bimbos. We will see what comes from that. It's never going to stop.

Is this a country with the rule of law or did Republicans become Unitarians, and now they call them the Ten Suggestions?

Ask the Mexicans in cages if we have rules
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you’re looking at 8 to 10 or more you’ve done something pretty bad...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe Donald looked at Bill and said "Hold my Beer"

Time will tell and I doubt that is the only road they are going down. I think Trumps finances are a far more interesting path.
Cohen pleaded guilty in federal court on Tuesday to multiple charges, including campaign finance violations that he said he committed on the direction of Trump. While discussing the possible implications for Trump, Davis went on to give some details about information he said Cohen had that relate to the special counsel's investigation into Russian election interference.

Specifically, he said Cohen was willing to provide the special counsel Robert Mueller with evidence that Trump worked with Russia to sway the election.

"Michael Cohen knows information that would be of interest to the special counsel regarding both knowledge about a conspiracy to corrupt American democracy by the Russians and the failure to report that knowledge to the FBI," Davis said.

"Michael Cohen knows information that would be of interest to the special counsel regarding both knowledge about a conspiracy to corrupt American democracy by the Russians and the failure to report that knowledge to the FBI," Davis said.

wait...is this "LANNY DAVIS"?

wait...is this "LANNY DAVIS"?

My thoughts exactly.

Shawn Spicer had a great quote this morning about the Mueller investigation, "I'm glad I paid all my parking tickets".

Shawn Spicer had a great quote this morning about the Mueller investigation, "I'm glad I paid all my parking tickets".

Last I heard, not paying a parking ticket wasn’t a felony.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

It may not be a felony but it would be enough to get them digging into your past.

Davis did mention something to the effect that if they can tie the bimbo payoffs to campaign funds they could pursue legal action against Trump but it would likely end up in the Supreme Court. I sometimes get lost in all the legal ramifications.

Does anyone know if either of the women took the payoff?

It may not be a felony but it would be enough to get them digging into your past.

Davis did mention something to the effect that if they can tie the bimbo payoffs to campaign funds they could pursue legal action against Trump but it would likely end up in the Supreme Court. I sometimes get lost in all the legal ramifications.

Does anyone know if either of the women took the payoff?

They did take the money.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn’t Clinton impeached simply for denying that he had an affair with Lewinski?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Scratch that... I just googled it. :hihi:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Google has all the answers

Google has all the answers

For what is living in your beard??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Does anyone have an example of an infraction that lead Mueller to eventually charge someone w/breaking the law?

For what is living in your beard??
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I can brush a 3 course meal out of this bad boy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I can brush a 3 course meal out of this bad boy
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Hahaha!! Same here
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They did take the money.

Correct me if I am wrong but wasn’t Clinton impeached simply for denying that he had an affair with Lewinski?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

He lied about it under oath. He also wrote a huge check to one of his accusers (was it Juanita Brodderick?).

He lied about it under oath. He also wrote a huge check to one of his accusers (was it Juanita Brodderick?).

I thought it was Paula Jones that they reached a settlement with.

I thought it was Paula Jones that they reached a settlement with.

Yes.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Murder, Rape, Kidnapping...those are Serious Felonies.

Paying off a couple of chicks you banged....not so much.

be more overly Dramatic...you can't :rolleyes:

Lying about oral affairs w/ an adult intern?

Also interesting that the same crowd, including the Cheeze-it Commander in Chief, yell "rule of law" and want to arrest people who report to designated areas and turn themselves in and request asylum as they law instructs say this if is no big deal. Just a felony, I guess 🤔

Also, the crime wasn't paying off a couple of chicks, but you know that don't you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Love how the faithful keep insisting there is nothing to see...

And love how Trump heaps praise on convicted felons ,, basically calling the government and people in the jury part of the which hunt .... so much for the rule of law


I guess it wouldn't be an issue to some if he pardoned Manafort

Lying about oral affairs w/ an adult intern?

Also interesting that the same crowd, including the Cheeze-it Commander in Chief, yell "rule of law" and want to arrest people who report to designated areas and turn themselves in and request asylum as they law instructs say this if is no big deal. Just a felony, I guess 🤔
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


illegal immigration isn't even a felony but for Trumpanzees its the most heinous crime in America

“Trumpanzees” !!!!!!!
:rotfl:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Lying about oral affairs w/ an adult intern? Under Oath.....but you knew that, didn't you


Also, the crime wasn't paying off a couple of chicks, but you know that don't you?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're right, that isn't the crime.

They are trying, desperately, to link it to campaign funds......because the multi millionaire couldn't afford to pay for it himself. :rolleyes:

Soooooooo......still got nothing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Under Oath.....but you knew that, didn't you




You're right, that isn't the crime.

They are trying, desperately, to link it to campaign funds......because the multi millionaire couldn't afford to pay for it himself. :rolleyes:

Soooooooo......still got nothing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
That is either a completely uniformed or intentionally ignorant statement. He could afford to pay it. The reason money was funneled through Cohen and the trump foundation was to hide it. That is where the crime came from. Given the lot that supports him he would have been better off letting it come out. It's always the cover up as they say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Don't forget about the timing which was clearly because of the fear that if it came out prior to the election it would impact the results.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

They are trying, desperately, to link it to campaign funds......because the multi millionaire couldn't afford to pay for it himself. :rolleyes:

Soooooooo......still got nothing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Doesn’t matter if it was linked to campaign funds or private cash. If the payoffs were intended to influence the election, which Cohen said they were, and they were directed by Trump, which Cohen says they were under oath, then Trump quite likely is looking at a clearly impeachable offense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We will see what happens with this. Clearly it has our resident #^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&#^&s in a lather. I predict more whining will ensue when it becomes another nothing 🍔.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

illegal immigration isn't even a felony but for Trumpanzees its the most heinous crime in America

Deflating a football is only punishable by a 50k fine.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What was that you used to say, John, We get the government we deserve


OHHHH BOY we got it didn't we

Does anyone have an example of an infraction that lead Mueller to eventually charge someone w/breaking the law?

Financial stuff - not collusion with Russia - that is what we need. Hard proof.

That is either a completely uniformed or intentionally ignorant statement. He could afford to pay it. The reason money was funneled through Cohen and the trump foundation was to hide it. That is where the crime came from. Given the lot that supports him he would have been better off letting it come out. It's always the cover up as they say.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No, the crime was that Trump used campaign funds to pay off the women for their silence. Hence the supposed funneling through Cohen. Funneling his own money through his own lawyer really isn't that sneaky.

Zero proof of that as of yet, other than Cohen's testimony, but now they have something to dig into.

And it's Uninformed not uniformed.....and I'm the ignorant one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And it's Uninformed not uniformed.....and I'm the ignorant one.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Yes you are right, a spelling error while typing with Swype on a cellphone clearly places me a step below you on the ignorance scale, everything else aside. He's a felon and he is getting his comeuppance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Zimmerman does not like to be portrayed as stupid even to the extent he will blame his device instead of owning said stupidity.

I love the irony of his post.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Zimmerman does not like to be portrayed as stupid even to the extent he will blame his device instead of owning said stupidity.

I love the irony of his post.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Awww, you got me. I am so stupid that I think the word uniformed means you lack information. Paul S clearly has a read on you. Are you getting frustrated Donny is going down? So frustrated that all you have left is spell checking for me. Sad...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Its funny to see we get the statement "We get the government we deserve"

then following that statement some go on to Minimize the POTUS behavior never taking ownership for who voted him or still support him religiously .. then say its the dems's fault he got elected :btu:

Awww, you got me. I am so stupid that I think the word uniformed means you lack information. Paul S clearly has a read on you. Are you getting frustrated Donny is going down? So frustrated that all you have left is spell checking for me. Sad...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
I just thought it was funny that you tried to knock somebody for being uninformed and you can’t even spell the word. And I enjoy pushing your buttons on occasion just for kicks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Yes you are right, a spelling error while typing with Swype on a cellphone clearly places me a step below you on the ignorance scale, everything else aside. He's a felon and he is getting his comeuppance.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Spelling and Punctuation are pretty important when you're trying to assert your intellectual Superiority

Doesn’t matter if it was linked to campaign funds or private cash. If the payoffs were intended to influence the election, which Cohen said they were, and they were directed by Trump, which Cohen says they were under oath, then Trump quite likely is looking at a clearly impeachable offense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not trying to be a wise-azz, asking a sincere question.

It's not a crime for an average Joe to write a big check to make something embarrassing go away, right? Clinton wrote a big fat check to one of his accusers.

But it might be a crime for Trump to do it, because he was campaigning? If part of his motive was making this skank keep quiet during the run-up to the election, that's the crime? But it would have been OK if he did it the day after the election?

Doesn't every commercial every candidate releases, attempt to influence the outcome of an election?

Jim, you are correct it's not a crime to write the check to the woman. The issue is that the timing was during the run up to the election. I think one month before the election. So if Trump wrote the check 3 years prior and prior to his announcing his candidacy there would not be a legal issue. I think also that part of the issue is they didn't declare it so it is a campaign finance violation. The same with the National Enquirer money. It is being viewed as a way to help the campaign but not being declared which is a campaign violation of some sort. I have no idea what would have happened if was the day after the election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is an explanation of what Cohen did and what he should have done, that I think is correct.
Trump is angry at Michael Cohen, of course, because Cohen just pleaded guilty to (among other things) making an illegal contribution to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign by paying hush money to Stormy Daniels just before the election. Moreover, Cohen told the judge in the case that he did so “in coordination with and at the direction of” Trump.

Cohen’s actions were illegal because individuals may only contribute a limited amount of money or in-kind services to political campaigns. During the 2016 election, the maximum was $5,400. Cohen fraudulently obtained a home equity loan and then wired $130,000 of it to the lawyer representing Daniels on October 27, 2016.

What Trump certainly doesn’t understand, and what makes his tweet extra-wonderful, is that the problem with Cohen isn’t just that he (in Trump’s mind) betrayed Trump. It’s that Cohen is genuinely a terrible lawyer.

J.P. Morgan famously said, “I don’t know as I want a lawyer to tell me what I cannot do. I hire him to tell me how to do what I want to do.” But what Cohen managed to do was fail in both ways. He didn’t tell Trump that Trump couldn’t pay off Daniels using Cohen himself as a conduit — but he also failed to advise Trump that there was a way to do it that would have been totally legal.

Here’s how.

Donald Trump (and only Donald Trump) could legally donate an unlimited amount of money to his campaign, because he was the candidate. Therefore, he would have been in the clear if he had made an in-kind donation to his campaign by paying Daniels directly with his own money. He could also have used money raised by his campaign, including his own contributions, to pay Daniels. (Trump’s campaign took in a total of $333 million, with $66 million of that coming from Trump himself.)

In either case, Trump’s campaign would be required to disclose the expenditure. But according to the Federal Election Commission’s rules, campaign contributions and expenditures made after October 27, 2016 did not have to be disclosed until December 8. So if Trump could have put Daniels off just one more day, there would have been no public paper trail until a month after the election. And even then, the disclosed payment might not by itself expose the wrongdoing.

Jim, you are correct it's not a crime to write the check to the woman. The issue is that the timing was during the run up to the election. I think one month before the election. So if Trump wrote the check 3 years prior and prior to his announcing his candidacy there would not be a legal issue. I think also that part of the issue is they didn't declare it so it is a campaign finance violation. The same with the National Enquirer money. It is being viewed as a way to help the campaign but not being declared which is a campaign violation of some sort. I have no idea what would have happened if was the day after the election.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess that makes sense in the sense that he might have to declare all campaign-related expenses. But there's a good chance he would have done the same exact thing even if he wasn't running for POTUS, right? So does the criminal question come down to this...was it a campaign issue, or a personal (private issue)? How about if he pays his home electric bill with his own money. If he didn't pay it, that could become fodder for the press during the election, right? So does he have to declare the money he's using to pay his electric bill for his home, since you could argue that paying it, has an impact on the election?

I don't think it's rare for people who are (1) uber wealthy, and (2) devoid of morals, to pay hush money to people they wrong. If he used campaign money and didn't declare it, that seems pretty bad. If he used his own money to make a private issue go away, but part of his motivation was to avoid damaging his campaign...that doesn't seem like a big deal to me. At that level, at this point in history, there's almost no distinction between his personal matters and campaign matters. Especially for this guy.

I guess that makes sense in the sense that he might have to declare all campaign-related expenses. But there's a good chance he would have done the same exact thing even if he wasn't running for POTUS, right?
So when we wasn't running why didn't he? Ding ding ding

Also look at the timing of the hush money and his grab em debacle...

So when we wasn't running why didn't he? Ding ding ding

Also look at the timing of the hush money and his grab em debacle...

So anything a candidate does to even potentially protect his image, must be declared. Again, that's almost everything.

I have no problem believing that part of the motivation for the payoff, was the election. But if he used his own money, then it looks like a nothingburger, with extra zilch on the side. If he used money to hire political consultants or to rent a campaign office, that's obvious campaign stuff.

Where's the line drawn between what's campaign-related, and what's personal business? EVERYTHING is potentially a campaign issue, especially with this guy.


This guy has done much, much worse.

Jim, to answer your question it is a campaign Finance issue. Nothing to do with the legality of paying hush money which I'm sure happens all the time to various people. Now let's not forget that what happened between President Trump and Stormy Daniels is not illegal. If he was paying her hush money related to any illegal act that would be a different issue.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So when we wasn't running why didn't he? Ding ding ding

Also look at the timing of the hush money and his grab em debacle...

Is anyone saying he diverted campaign contributions to the payoff? Or is it accepted that he used his personal money?

Jim, to answer your question it is a campaign Finance issue. Nothing to do with the legality of paying hush money which I'm sure happens all the time to various people. Now let's not forget that what happened between President Trump and Stormy Daniels is not illegal. If he was paying her hush money related to any illegal act that would be a different issue.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

"it is a campaign Finance issue"

Then everything a candidate does, from the moment he declares to the moment the polls close, is a campaign issue.

"If he was paying her hush money related to any illegal act that would be a different issue."

Agreed. It would also be different if he used campaign money for the payoff. Is anyone suggesting he did?

What bothers m most is that he had an affair with a disgusting skank while he was married with kids. If he paid her off with his own money, I could care less that he didn't itemize that expense on a campaign form. If that's a crime, and an impeachable offense, he'll have to answer for it, especially if the democrats take the house. But on the spectrum of possible campaign finance fraud, that's about as benign as it gets. When I think of campaign fraud, I assume it's diverting campaign funds for personal use like the GOP representative Duncan Hunter just got indicted for, he and his wife committed an actual fraud and should go to prison. If Trump used his own money but didn't disclose it because it could possibly influence the campaign, then he has to disclose everything he does. Everything. Every move he makes, is a potential weapon to use against him. You can't ask him to disclose every move he makes.

No crime was committed till they tried to hide it.
Trump could have paid her himself or used campaign funds to pay her, either would have been legal.
Cohen could not pay it, nor could some corporate entity.

Just read this elsewhere

Testifying under oath on Tuesday, Mr. Cohen said he arranged the payment “for the principal purpose of influencing the election,” and told the judge he knew at the time that he was doing so in violation of campaign finance laws.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Just read this elsewhere

Testifying under oath on Tuesday, Mr. Cohen said he arranged the payment “for the principal purpose of influencing the election,” and told the judge he knew at the time that he was doing so in violation of campaign finance laws.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
The big open question is if the paper trail shows Trump understood it was a violation as well.

The big open question is if the paper trail shows Trump understood it was a violation as well.

What difference does it make if he knew it or not? A violation is a violation. Ignorance isn't a defense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What difference does it make if he knew it or not? A violation is a violation. Ignorance isn't a defense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

this is why the Clinton's have perfected and so frequently used the phrase ....."I don't recall" :D

No crime was committed till they tried to hide it.
Trump could have paid her himself or used campaign funds to pay her, either would have been legal.
Cohen could not pay it, nor could some corporate entity.

First, I heard it was a crime if the intent was to impact the election. Now it has to do with Cohen's role?

Trump could take campaign contributions, and use it to pay off his mistress, that's not fraud? That's a legit use of campaign contributions?

What does Cohen's role have to do, with determining whether or not it was a crime?

Not easy to follow...

First, I heard it was a crime if the intent was to impact the election. Now it has to do with Cohen's role?

Trump could take campaign contributions, and use it to pay off his mistress, that's not fraud? That's a legit use of campaign contributions?

What does Cohen's role have to do, with determining whether or not it was a crime?

Not easy to follow...
Donald Trump (and only Donald Trump) could legally donate an unlimited amount of money to his campaign, because he was the candidate. Therefore, he would have been in the clear if he had made an in-kind donation to his campaign by paying Daniels directly with his own money. He could also have used money raised by his campaign, including his own contributions, to pay Daniels. (Trump’s campaign took in a total of $333 million, with $66 million of that coming from Trump himself.)

I think being a crime or not is the reason Mueller dumped this on the Southern District of NY.
He's not really interested in a "it's not the crime, it's the coverup" issue.

Spelling and Punctuation are pretty important when you're trying to assert your intellectual Superiority

Pointing out where people's statements on a public forum are wrong is not trying to assert intellectual superiority. It is the point of the forum. If you guys don't like it, stop being wrong so much.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pointing out where people's statements on a public forum are wrong is not trying to assert intellectual superiority. It is the point of the forum. If you guys don't like it, stop being wrong so much.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You're wrong, haven't you heard, Truth isn't Truth and A Crime is not Crime.
Therefore no one can be wrong, they just have alternative facts and everyone gets a Neoliberal participation award.

Donald Trump (and only Donald Trump) could legally donate an unlimited amount of money to his campaign, because he was the candidate. Therefore, he would have been in the clear if he had made an in-kind donation to his campaign by paying Daniels directly with his own money.
Even if Trump paid out of his own pocket he would still have to disclose it.

What difference does it make if he knew it or not? A violation is a violation. Ignorance isn't a defense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
For Trump to be looking at a criminal vs civil complaint I believe he would have had to known what he was doing was illegal. Cohen's council seems to be pretty confident he did...we'll see.

Pointing out where people's statements on a public forum are wrong is not trying to assert intellectual superiority. It is the point of the forum. If you guys don't like it, stop being wrong so much.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That was sarcasm, I don’t really think you are intellectually superior to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Pointing out where people's statements on a public forum are wrong is not trying to assert intellectual superiority.

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

but it sure does make the liberals pissy...:laugha:

I Zimmerman really still embarrassed about being Stupedd?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Here is an explanation of what Cohen did and what he should have done, that I think is correct.
Trump is angry at Michael Cohen, of course, because Cohen just pleaded guilty to (among other things) making an illegal contribution to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign by paying hush money to Stormy Daniels just before the election. Moreover, Cohen told the judge in the case that he did so “in coordination with and at the direction of” Trump.

Cohen’s actions were illegal because individuals may only contribute a limited amount of money or in-kind services to political campaigns. During the 2016 election, the maximum was $5,400. Cohen fraudulently obtained a home equity loan and then wired $130,000 of it to the lawyer representing Daniels on October 27, 2016.

What Trump certainly doesn’t understand, and what makes his tweet extra-wonderful, is that the problem with Cohen isn’t just that he (in Trump’s mind) betrayed Trump. It’s that Cohen is genuinely a terrible lawyer.

J.P. Morgan famously said, “I don’t know as I want a lawyer to tell me what I cannot do. I hire him to tell me how to do what I want to do.” But what Cohen managed to do was fail in both ways. He didn’t tell Trump that Trump couldn’t pay off Daniels using Cohen himself as a conduit — but he also failed to advise Trump that there was a way to do it that would have been totally legal.

Here’s how.

Donald Trump (and only Donald Trump) could legally donate an unlimited amount of money to his campaign, because he was the candidate. Therefore, he would have been in the clear if he had made an in-kind donation to his campaign by paying Daniels directly with his own money. He could also have used money raised by his campaign, including his own contributions, to pay Daniels. (Trump’s campaign took in a total of $333 million, with $66 million of that coming from Trump himself.)

In either case, Trump’s campaign would be required to disclose the expenditure. But according to the Federal Election Commission’s rules, campaign contributions and expenditures made after October 27, 2016 did not have to be disclosed until December 8. So if Trump could have put Daniels off just one more day, there would have been no public paper trail until a month after the election. And even then, the disclosed payment might not by itself expose the wrongdoing.
Why does your opinion matter here?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think being a crime or not is the reason Mueller dumped this on the Southern District of NY.
He's not really interested in a "it's not the crime, it's the coverup" issue.

Baby needs new shewz
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I Zimmerman really still embarrassed about being Stupedd?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Little man, you can hide behind the computer screen in your basement an be a tough guy but I have no more time for your jackasstical behavior.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

That was sarcasm, I don’t really think you are intellectually superior to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You should look at the post you made. There is nothing in it that implied that you think I am intellectually Superior. You weren't being sarcastic, you were being a sea dangle.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Doesn’t matter if it was linked to campaign funds or private cash. If the payoffs were intended to influence the election, which Cohen said they were, and they were directed by Trump, which Cohen says they were under oath, then Trump quite likely is looking at a clearly impeachable offense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

All campaign funds are for the purpose of influencing an election. I don't understand what you are getting at here. If the money was not a campaign finance violation, then what violation exists?

Mark Levin, referring to the federal campaign laws, says that a campaign expenditure is solely for campaign activity. A candidate who spends his own money or even corporate money for an event that occurred not as a result of a campaign is not a campaign expenditure.

The event for which the expenditure was made in this case occurred before the campaign. The expenditure, itself, is not a violation. Neither was the "event." Now if the "event" is construed as being the suppression, the hushing, of the original event, then, regardless of what Cohen said, Trump can reasonably and legitimately say that it was to hide the affair from his wife, or family.

Little man, you can hide behind the computer screen in your basement an be a tough guy but I have no more time for your jackasstical behavior.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you don’t have time then why are you posting?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why does your opinion matter here?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Why does yours
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Baby needs new shewz
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Is English your first language
What are you trying to say
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Everyone lighten up a little please



What difference does it make if he knew it or not? A violation is a violation. Ignorance isn't a defense.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device


Maybe he did not have the *Intent*

Maybe he did not have the *Intent*

Good point, if intent is used in determining sentences (which I would think it is???). Conspiracy is used in sentencing and that is why I believe Cohen was charged w/conspiracy.

Prosecution is suggesting they have evidence of intent.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

For all of us want-a-be attorneys, I think it will eventually be determined by congress and not in front of the courts. You listen to Fox or Trump who just spits out whatever comes out of Fox and it’s not a crime. Of course the other networks seem to believe there was intent and a crime. I can’t see Mueller bringing charges against a sitting president, not without an iron clad case, so the report will go to congress. If the mid terms flip things and the report is daming, then it’s probably a resignation ahead of impeachment.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As if the week wasn’t bad enough for DJT, learning the long time family accountant was given immunity in exchange for testimony, probably means Donald’s golf game is really going to suffer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

As if the week wasn’t bad enough for DJT, learning the long time family accountant was given immunity in exchange for testimony, probably means Donald’s golf game is really going to suffer.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
No we’ll just see more random conspiracies like regulating Google.

Regulating Google searches hahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahhaha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

No we’ll just see more random conspiracies like regulating Google.

Regulating Google searches hahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahhahahahahhaha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

THAT.....is the LAMEST attempt at a troll I've ever seen. You're losing your touch. :laugha::laugha::laugha:

I bet you can GOOGLE up some pointers on how to up your trolling skills. :cputin:

It would take extra credit just to bring the grade on that one up to a D- :smash::smash:

His best is driving him crazy, Sessions was reemed on tweeter for bringing charges against two of his earlier supporters. Between that and his requesal in the Russia probe, he has become a thorn in his side.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

His best is driving him crazy, Sessions was reemed on tweeter for bringing charges against two of his earlier supporters. Between that and his requesal in the Russia probe, he has become a thorn in his side.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Some say the attention the McCain funeral has been given has driven Trump crazy.

Just today Trump said the Gov response to Maria was fantastic. When are some people going to realize he's a danger? Like I think about this mental condition and a serious international event...not confident.

Some say the attention the McCain funeral has been given has driven Trump crazy.

Just today Trump said the Gov response to Maria was fantastic. When are some people going to realize he's a danger? Like I think about this mental condition and a serious international event...not confident.

Does it ever occur to you that your arguments and protestations have not been very convincing to us dummies who just can't see the reason and logic in your abusive, extravagant, hearsay, ad hominem attacks on Trump--such as the one you're expressing here?

And we are not convinced by repetition of talking points or of left wing characterizations.

Actually, you invite us to see in you that bombastic, lying buffoon character you paint Trump to be.

The despot in training was upset that the justice department is looking to prosecute two Republicans and that they did not take into account the fact they were Republicans. Sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The despot in training was upset that the justice department is looking to prosecute two Republicans and that they did not take into account the fact they were Republicans. Sad
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I posted this in the Hillary email thread and this was before the current tweet

some here are still worried about her e mails while the POTUS is attacking any department or persons all while promoting false narratives and make believe enemies... all to build an argument So that HE Trump can shut those critics down . while the GOP looks the other way


Funny how people refuse or are unable to connect the dots when it comes to Trump Heard one evangelical leader state Trump was more moral than Hillary