4cal wrote:Paying hush money is enough to get censure in the very least.
Non-disclosure agreements are common. Paying money is consideration for the agreement. It's what makes the agreement binding. This is pretty basic contract law.
4cal wrote:A lot depends on who controls Congress.
Well, that's not saying much, because what you are ultimately saying is that a legal basis for censure or impeachment isn't what's important. What's important is who is making the charge, not who is being charged.
4cal wrote:Trump is so toxic and the Repugs are doing such a terrible job, the Dems could very well win one or both Houses.... If that happens, let the investigations begin.
It's very unlikely. The Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, and while they impeached Clinton, they weren't successful in removing him from office. "Toxic" means nothing.
4cal wrote:Again, the hush money can be constrewed{sic} as being a campaign "expense"....if not reported...bingo; it's a crime.
That is spelled as "construed." The problem is that it wasn't paid by Trump or the campaign. In order for it to be construed as a campaign expense, Trump's attorney has to submit an expense to the campaign and receive reimbursement.
4cal wrote:Then there is the IRS problems the Attorney can run into.
Such as? Anyone can purchase anything they want. There is nothing unlawful about paying consideration on a contract. That's standard offer and acceptance.
4cal wrote:Keep on pretending it doesn't indict Trump...you lock him up in a cell for a few days and we'll see where his loyalties lay.
Indict him for what? You need a crime. You can't just lock someone up without cause, and certainly not the president of the United States.
4cal wrote:You finally told the truth.
Yes, but I have worked on legal compliance expert systems, distilling law into bits and bytes. I've also prosecuted patents. So I do know a little something.
4cal wrote:Prostitution isn't the issue, the hush money is.
I have a non-disclosure agreement too. I get paid not to tell you non-public things about what I do for a living. I'm okay to tell you things that are publicly available, but I can be fired if I tell you the non-public things. Part of my compensation is to not tell you things. So I get paid hush money. What about that makes you think you could prosecute me for that? Do you know part of why I can't tell you some things? Do you know who stipulates that as our customer? Could it be three letter agencies that like to spy on people? I've plainly said that I work on mass storage projects. For example, CERN uses the software I work on. They research things like the Higgs Boson, or God particle as some people call it. Yahoo Flickr uses the software I work on. They store exabytes worth of pictures and video. I'm sure there are people who use our software to stream pornography too. Then, there are governments who use mass storage solutions for a number of different things.
4cal wrote:Trump banged a prostitute a few months after having his 3rd son and engineered this scheme to ensure her silence.
Anyone with two brain cells can figure out what what the more likely scenario is.
Anyone with two brain cells can figure out that there is no prosecutable crime there. Consequently, it is inappropriate to use taxpayer funds to conduct criminal investigations into alleged acts that even if proven would not lead to a criminal conviction. Trying to use taxpayer funds to uncover something that someone might find embarrassing is unlawful. It is called blackmail under color of law.
4cal wrote:Once more, the investigation into Russia's meddling in the 2016 election is but one of the many scandals Trump has engaged in.
"Scandals" are meaningless unless there is a high crime or misdemeanor involved.
4cal wrote:Comedic.
I don't follow. You think it's funny, so that's your angle?
4cal wrote:Hmm...someone doesn't know how taxes work.
Again, I don't follow.
4cal wrote:No. He validates the worst of humanity. "If a sleezeball like that can be President, there is hope for me".
I don't think that's the case. I think they hate the establishment. That's why they chant, "lock her up!" and "drain the swamp" at his rallies.
4cal wrote:And you see where he has attracted wife beaters, shady attorneys, spokespeople who have no conviction, men who have no principles, and those with who just cannot stomach the loser any longer usually just resign
The lack of a complete sentence aside, what are you trying to establish? I've heard these reports about so and so beat his wife. So what? An employer, absent a public morals clause, can't just fire someone because someone else accused them of wrongdoing. Serving the president is an at will employment, so the president can fire anyone who serves at his pleasure any time he wants.
4cal wrote:Mueller's investigation into Russia's meddling continues unabated.
Well, he seems to lack curiosity about how the dossier was funded by Hillary Clinton and that the State Department was feeding information to Steele, which found itself in the dossier, which was submitted to the FBI and then the FISA court, or FISC.
4cal wrote:Along with his investigation into the numerous other scandals of the pervert in the White House.
Being a pervert isn't a crime. Clinton was a pervert, and so was Obama.
4cal wrote:Really, why do you guys continue to support this clown?
To let the establishment know that we think they are the worst of the worst and we don't want them running the United States anymore.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden