[Hong Wu]

I dunno, does sound like Trump may have cheated on his wife ten years ago. Not ideal. If Democrats want to get him on the stand and then try to impeach him for perjury over it that'd be interesting.

[Crantag]

Today Trumps lawyer admitted to paying a hooker $130,000.

“I am Mr. Trump’s longtime special counsel and I have proudly served in that role for more than a decade,” Cohen said in a statement Tuesday night, which was first reported by the New York Times. “In a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford. Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford...."

Something else for Mr Mueller to investigate. No matter how dirty you think Trump is....he's much more filthy

I don't know nor care whether the statement is true, but I will say categorically that the statement is not credible.

Any such official statement is specifically calculated from this cabal, with the truth being irrelevant. Regardless of any basis of the statement in reality, what it reflects is merely what the Trump cabal has decided it would be most convenient for the facts to accord with.

Why that is, I do not know. The 'why' in it could well be because it is truthful and he doesn't want to be caught in a lie in it. Or, maybe it is some other alternative.

The overriding point is nothing which they say is credible because they routinely produce lies, and do so with considerable intent.

[Ter]

I thought the investigation was about the collusion with Russia.
It seems they are now investigating everything about everyone connected to Trump, who farted at the dining table twelve years ago, who did not declare a profit from a sale in 1991, and so on.

Does it also mean they will continue investigating till they find something, anything about anyone, or can they stop at a certain moment and conclude there was no collusion ?

[Godstud]

Having a criminal President is something you want, @Ter? If he's broken laws and is a criminal, will you still want him to lead your country? Why?

[blackjack21]

He got good advice from his attorneys though seeing as how he and his supporters are pathological liars; trump lies to you and you lie to yourself and anyone who will listen.

My support for Trump actually has very little to do with Trump. I've told you why I support him. If you choose to ignore that, it's your choice.

Yet the multiple investigations into the multiple trump scandals continues unabated.

They're going nowhere. Already, the IG is holding up sentencing Flynn, because the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn didn't think he violated the law, but Mueller put the screws to him anyway. He'll probably never get anything on Carter Page, because of the fraudulent FISA applications. Manafort is his only serious prosecution, and it has nothing to do with Russia or the 2016 election. Since the special prosecutor was appointed without specifying a violation of the law to investigate, even that might blow up on these guys.

Today Trumps lawyer admitted to paying a hooker $130,000.

She's a porn star, not a hooker. So what? Why should anybody care about this?

Something else for Mr Mueller to investigate. No matter how dirty you think Trump is....he's much more filthy

Even if that's true, who cares? It didn't involve Trump or his campaign, and it is not against the law.

I dunno, does sound like Trump may have cheated on his wife ten years ago. Not ideal. If Democrats want to get him on the stand and then try to impeach him for perjury over it that'd be interesting.

Whether he cheated on his wife is immaterial. On what basis would Trump be compelled to testify on something like this? First of all, if it happened, it happened over 10 years ago. Second, there is no allegation of rape or anything illegal. Third, the payment, if it did occur, was to prevent her from making public statements about it during the campaign. Non-disclosure agreements are lawful as long as they aren't concealing some other unlawful activity. Again, we're dealing with something that doesn't involve a violation of the law.

[Hong Wu]

Ragestud's instincts for detecting criminality in American public figures were honed by all those years in Canada and Thailand. Why are you a criminal Ter?

[blackjack21]

Ragestud's instinct for detecting criminality in American public figures have been honed by all those years in Canada and Thailand.

Even if Trump contracted with a prostitute 10 years ago, it still doesn't matter. It's way beyond the statute of limitations, so it is improper to investigate it. If these people could prove Trump jaywalked or broke the speed limit they'd want him impeached. It has nothing to do with the law. It has to do with the fact that Trump is not part of the establishment's goals for the future.

[Hong Wu]

Whether he cheated on his wife is immaterial. On what basis would Trump be compelled to testify on something like this? First of all, if it happened, it happened over 10 years ago. Second, there is no allegation of rape or anything illegal. Third, the payment, if it did occur, was to prevent her from making public statements about it during the campaign. Non-disclosure agreements are lawful as long as they aren't concealing some other unlawful activity. Again, we're dealing with something that doesn't involve a violation of the law.

That's one reason why I said they would have to get him in the stand and make it legally material.

I think there is probably going to be scandal fatigue re: Trump at some point. It all seems very predictable, if you throw everything at someone and nothing sticks they get the "Teflon" effect. Teflon Trump is going to be a monster of their own making to be sure.

[Stormsmith]

TER

Mueller has a broad spectrum of things to investigate, starting with collusion to money laundering. Plus, there are a number of senate and congressional investigations.

[colliric]

Today Trumps lawyer admitted to paying a hooker $130,000.

“I am Mr. Trump’s longtime special counsel and I have proudly served in that role for more than a decade,” Cohen said in a statement Tuesday night, which was first reported by the New York Times. “In a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford. Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford...."

Something else for Mr Mueller to investigate. No matter how dirty you think Trump is....he's much more filthy

Response: Troopergate.

[4cal]

I thought the investigation was about the collusion with Russia.
It seems they are now investigating everything about everyone connected to Trump, who farted at the dining table twelve years ago, who did not declare a profit from a sale in 1991, and so on.

Does it also mean they will continue investigating till they find something, anything about anyone, or can they stop at a certain moment and conclude there was no collusion ?

Its about the 2016 campaign and Russian influence in such. When multiple federal crimes are unearthed during the investigation, they are brought into the light. What is this now, the 8th or 9th allegation of federal criminal activity (tax evasion—I doubt that the Lawyer announced his $130,000 gift to the woman in question). I wonder how long in the pokey he will have to sit before he rolls on the Cheeto?

One may recall that Kenneth Starr’s investigation started as a view into a land deal called Whitewater and ended up with Monica Lewinsky…..Mueller and his dogged investigators are on firm ground if they wish to pursue this (which they are duty bound to do so).

[4cal]

That's one reason why I said they would have to get him in the stand and make it legally material.

I think there is probably going to be scandal fatigue re: Trump at some point. It all seems very predictable, if you throw everything at someone and nothing sticks they get the "Teflon" effect. Teflon Trump is going to be a monster of their own making to be sure.

he he he….I guess your fantasy that the public will get tired of scandals is what you have to console you.

[4cal]

Even if Trump contracted with a prostitute 10 years ago, it still doesn't matter. It's way beyond the statute of limitations, so it is improper to investigate it. If these people could prove Trump jaywalked or broke the speed limit they'd want him impeached. It has nothing to do with the law. It has to do with the fact that Trump is not part of the establishment's goals for the future.

Yawn!

The payoff happened in 2016 so, if not properly reported to the FEC or the IRS…the crime is nice and fresh.

The cover-up is always worse than the crime.

[blackjack21]

The payoff happened in 2016 so, if not properly reported to the FEC or the IRS…the crime is nice and fresh.

Paying someone to remain silent isn't a crime. I'm not saying it shouldn't be; however, the fact remains that it is not a crime.

The cover-up is always worse than the crime.

Covering up something that is not a crime is also not a crime. Nobody has filed a criminal charge against Trump.

[4cal]

Paying someone to remain silent isn't a crime. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be; however, the fact remains that it is not a crime.

It is if the taxes are not reported. It is if it is mis-characterized as a gift on said taxes. It is if it was paid for out of campaign funds or is judged to be a campaign expense and not reported. This is the tip of a very large iceberg.

Covering up something that is not a crime is also not a crime. Nobody has filed a criminal charge against Trump.

Yet….the noose is tightening. You should be a good little rat and jump off the sinking ship.

[Hong Wu]

I think it's been well argued that the public does indeed have scandal fatigue, particularly if nothing comes of each successive scandal.

I still think Trump is going to get past 50% approval rating and the salt when that happens will be historic.

The Democrats should of course be focused on solving the problems that made them lose purple states, not speaking to their base about Russians. The fact that they are making this error most likely points to them being forced to make the error because some powerful Dems did things they shouldn't and now they are being forced to go all-in on a terrible conspiracy theory at a terrible time for themselves. Sad!

[Hong Wu]

@4cal serious question. What do you think Trump did to collude with the Russians?

If it was the Wikileaks, that didn't actually involve Trump in a clear way -- Wikileaks just got the stuff and put it on the internet. If Trump was involved with that, you'd have a hard time getting Wikileaks to testify. It doesn't seem like they're even a group of interest in the investigation.

If it was hacking votes, that didn't happen according to DHS.

If it was the relatively small amount of money spent on ads by Russians, some of which were pro-Black Lives Matter and so-on, you'd be saying that Trump turned to the Russians for having more ads instead of relying on his considerable wealth, his campaign and so-on.

If it was Russian internet trolls spreading memes about Harambe and Seth Rich, it's also unclear whether that requires Russians to do or why Trump or his campaign would employ Russians to do such a thing, or even if such a thing is illegal since groups like Shareblue are openly about trolling the internet for Democrats. So like, Trump might be accused of doing something that the other side is openly doing but you're hoping the paid trolls were of Russian nationality and had the blessing of Putin? It's all pretty silly.

So I'm seriously asking you, can you make a coherent accusation of what the Russian collusion was and why it would be punishable? Because I don't get the impression that you can.

[Stormsmith]

The D!emocrats should of course be focused on solving the problems that made them lose purple states, not speaking to their base about Russians. The fact that they are making this error most likely points to them being forced to make the error because some powerful Dems did things they shouldn't and now they are being forced to go all-in on a terrible conspiracy theory at a terrible time for themselves. Sad!

Whoa! Let's see if I've got this correctly: you're good on spending plus $1,000,000,000 on a wall that won't stop a declining number of wannabe lawn mowers moving under it in the estimated 750 tunnels, but you want to drop looking into cyber crime that China, Russia, potentially ISIS, and God knows who else are using that would allow them to muck with your banks, your hydro stuctues, various shock exchanges, traffic systems including airports, etc?

[blackjack21]

It is if the taxes are not reported. It is if it is mis-characterized as a gift on said taxes. It is if it was paid for out of campaign funds or is judged to be a campaign expense and not reported. This is the tip of a very large iceberg.

Well, if the porn star didn't report it on her taxes, or misreported it, I'm sure the IRS will get after her at some point. Anwyay, the payment apparently came from Trump's attorney, not from Trump or the campaign.

Yet….the noose is tightening. You should be a good little rat and jump off the sinking ship.

You've caught him not committing a crime. Wow! That's a shocker.

[Sivad]

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2018/02/12/dhs-statement-nbc-news-coverage-election-hacking

WASHINGTON - Today, Jeanette Manfra, National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) Assistant Secretary for the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications, released the following statement regarding the recent NBC news coverage on the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to combat election hacking.

“Recent NBC reporting has misrepresented facts and confused the public with regard to Department of Homeland Security and state and local government efforts to combat election hacking. First off, let me be clear: we have no evidence – old or new - that any votes in the 2016 elections were manipulated by Russian hackers...

DHS lied to the states to begin with -

California Secretary of State Alex Padilla released this statement:
“Last Friday, my office was notified by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that Russian cyber actors 'scanned' California’s Internet-facing systems in 2016, including Secretary of State websites. Following our request for further information, it became clear that DHS’ conclusions were wrong.”

“DHS confirmed that Russian scanning activity had actually occurred on the California Department of Technology statewide network, not any Secretary of State website. Based on this additional information, California voters can further rest assured that the California Secretary of State elections infrastructure and websites were not hacked or breached by Russian cyber actors.”

“Our notification from DHS last Friday was not only a year late, it also turned out to be bad information. To make matters worse, the Associated Press similarly reported that DHS has reversed itself and 'now says Russia didn’t target Wisconsin’s voter registration system,' which is contrary to previous briefings.”


I'm loving every minute of this retarded farce. The fake news and the deep state just can't stop showing their asses at every turn.