• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donald Trump Played Central Role in Hush Payoffs to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal

Exactice said:
TOTALLY Fair statement......... but..... does seem like a dodge if you ask me?.... But I can respect that. So Ill leave that as it is.
Click to expand...

Why aren't you condemning the Zodiac Killer? Why have you dodged that!? You support the Zodiac Killer!?
 
apdst said:
Link?
Click to expand...

If you're claiming it was undisclosed and therefore a crime, the burden is on you to provide evidence of this.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Yes. They have proof.
Click to expand...

Who has proof? Also sorry WSJ Paywall cant read the link.


With that.. He directed, made calls about it, We know that cohen has stated that. BUT cohen paid for it. Unless the money came from an actual campaign account how can it be a crime? Even if its a crime, MANY candidates have done this inadvertently and intentionally, all faced fines, NO impeachment nor criminal charges?
 
apdst said:
You brought up the not all violations are equal bull****.
Click to expand...

Because you asked why they weren't being treated the same. They weren't being treated the same because they were different types of violations.
 
Deuce said:
If you're claiming it was undisclosed and therefore a crime, the burden is on you to provide evidence of this.
Click to expand...

I knew you were spinning a dry hole...lol
 
apdst said:
He didn't break the law. Obviously, you're ok with Liberals breaking the law.
Click to expand...

You're suggesting Cohen's lawyers are stupid enough to let him plead guilty to something that isn't a crime.
 
Deuce said:
Because you asked why they weren't being treated the same. They weren't being treated the same because they were different types of violations.
Click to expand...

I made a compariso to test your theory.
 
apdst said:
I knew you were spinning a dry hole...lol
Click to expand...

You're the one deflecting constantly with WHAT ABOUT HILLARY WHAT ABOUT HILLARY

The thread is about Trump's payoff of Daniels.
 
Deuce said:
You're suggesting Cohen's lawyers are stupid enough to let him plead guilty to something that isn't a crime.
Click to expand...

He's pleading guilty to campaign finance violations?
 
apdst said:
I made a compariso to test your theory.
Click to expand...

A bad comparison because you're comparing two violations of different severity. Obama's campaign was slow submitting paperwork, and you think that's the same as hiding illegal campaign donations
 
bubbabgone said:
"Taken together, the accounts refute a two-year pattern of denials by Mr. Trump, his legal team and his advisers that he was involved in payoffs to Ms. McDougal and a former adult-film star. They also raise the possibility that the president of the United States violated federal campaign-finance laws.

The Wall Street Journal found that Mr. Trump was involved in or briefed on nearly every step of the agreements. He directed deals in phone calls and meetings with his self-described fixer, Michael Cohen, and others. The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan has gathered evidence of Mr. Trump’s participation in the transactions."
​

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald...-stormy-daniels-and-karen-mcdougal-1541786601

I don't know how new this news is but it sure is a long piece that sounds pretty familiar.
But there it is and I expect the new House will have a lot to say about it.
Click to expand...

Stormy Daniels is going to be performing at a club 5 miles from my house this weekend. I'm thinking of taking a date to see her.
 
Deuce said:
You're the one deflecting constantly with WHAT ABOUT HILLARY WHAT ABOUT HILLARY

The thread is about Trump's payoff of Daniels.
Click to expand...

You mad, bro? :lamo
 
Deuce said:
Why aren't you condemning the Zodiac Killer? Why have you dodged that!? You support the Zodiac Killer!?
Click to expand...

Oh were you asking me? Sorry I missed that. YES I CONDONE THE ZODIAC KILLER?

What was that relevance?

We are discussing campaign finance laws. Supposedly the accusation is TRUMP committed one. Through the pay off of a pornstar.

HRC and OBAMA have both been fined for campaign finance laws as well.

But if you want me to Condone the Zodiac KILLER I CONDONE THE ZODIAC KILLER.........??
 
Deuce said:
A bad comparison because you're comparing two violations of different severity. Obama's campaign was slow submitting paperwork, and you think that's the same as hiding illegal campaign donations
Click to expand...

That was the whole point. :lamo
 
Exactice said:
Oh were you asking me? Sorry I missed that. YES I CONDONE THE ZODIAC KILLER?

What was that relevance?

We are discussing campaign finance laws. Supposedly the accusation is TRUMP committed one. Through the pay off of a pornstar.

HRC and OBAMA have both been fined for campaign finance laws as well.

But if you want me to Condone the Zodiac KILLER I CONDONE THE ZODIAC KILLER.........??
Click to expand...

Yes, fined. Because their violations were not of the same magnitude.
 
Beaudreaux said:
The fact that he's male trash regarding his wedding vows, as Bill Clinton is, is not a revelation. Paying off his sex partners through a NDA is also a common tactic of his that is widely known.

Neither are illegal, but both could be brought before a civil court, as some of his liaisons have, and of course his ex-wives have.
Click to expand...

Reverend Beaudreaux, we don’t need moral men, we need leaders who are tough enough to stand up to our enemies and save from those who would do us harm.
 
Deuce said:
Yes, fined. Because their violations were not of the same magnitude.
Click to expand...

How do we measure magnitude?

Obama did not report $1.8 MILLION dollars in donations. and was fined $375,000

Trump paid off a Pornstar $130,000


Magnitude is measured how now?



The outside difference in severity

Obama, did not report $1.8 million in received money.


Cohen is admitting that he intentional paid of the pornstar to affect the political outcome. BUT was that Trumps intent. or was it for her to just go away REGARDLESS of the outcome to the election.

With that, the encounter happened in 2007 and the media knew about it in 2014 so if it was to be in public it already was? TO prove intent is going to be hard... GL with that one.

cohen admitting does NOT implicate trump as a participating individual.
 
Last edited:
Exactice said:
How do we measure magnitude?

Obama did not report $1.8 MILLION dollars in donations. and was fined $375,000

Trump paid off a Pornstar $130,000


Magnitude is measured how now?
Click to expand...

Correction: The Obama campaign was late reporting certain donations. There was also not any conspiracy to hide those donations. They messed up paperwork, it's not the same thing as deliberately hiding large donations. All of those donations were recorded properly, just not submitted properly. (which is why the FEC found out about them so readily)
 
Deuce said:
Correction: The Obama campaign was late reporting certain donations. There was also not any conspiracy to hide those donations. They messed up paperwork, it's not the same thing as deliberately hiding large donations. All of those donations were recorded properly, just not submitted properly. (which is why the FEC found out about them so readily)
Click to expand...

Sorry added on to my post. realizing that we should "discuss" severity in respect to your statement.!

I agree.. I understand where you are coming from. With that though per my "edited" post proving trump was knowledgeable or had the intent to disrupt the 2016 elections will be VERY hard.

More so with the consistency of multiple NDA's and his track record. The courts would have show intent....
 
Exactice said:
Sorry added on to my post. realizing that we should "discuss" severity in respect to your statement.!

I agree.. I understand where you are coming from. With that though per my "edited" post proving trump was knowledgeable or had the intent to disrupt the 2016 elections will be VERY hard.

More so with the consistency of multiple NDA's and his track record. The courts would have show intent....
Click to expand...

Right, and the thrust of the WSJ article is that they now possess documents showing Trump definitely was knowledgeable. The paywall makes that difficult to assess.
 
Deuce said:
Right, and the thrust of the WSJ article is that they now possess documents showing Trump definitely was knowledgeable. The paywall makes that difficult to assess.
Click to expand...

Yeah sorry! could not get through the pay wall so I cannot comment on the validity of the findings.

So excuse my ignorance on the WSJ paywall.

It will be interesting. BUT here are the things that I question.


1) Cohen himself paid Trump - To established that any of the money came from the campaign, will be even hard
2) Intent to interfere with the outcome. If this affair happened RIGHT before the elections the case would be EXTREMELY credible.... but this happened in 2007 and a media report of it was out in 2012 or 2014 so it was well known it happene
3) Multiple NDA's prior to this specific one. Trump can show consistency of usage. Meaning the courts would have to show his intent to use the NDA to affect the outcome of the 2016 Elections. BUT if there has been a consistent use of NDA's prior to his presidential bid. It would be harder to indicate intent.
4) Cohen has worked and done multiple "Fixers" Even listening to the phone conversation that cohen release... it was pretty vague meaning it sounds like they have done this before.... NOT in relation to the elections....


Anyways.... hope to see some live documents to read to get a better clarification of what they actually found!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom