• 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!

Publisher of National Enquirer admits paying hush money to help Trump ahead of 2016 election

trouble13 said:
I'm not going to say Cohen should of fought it because I dont know what kind of a sweetheart deal that came with his guilty plea. I will say if he would of fought it he would of beat it. What he did was not a crime.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

If it wasn't a crime then he couldn't have plead guilty to committing it boyo
 
trouble13 said:
What prevents someone innocent from pleading guilty?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Lack of evidence suggesting they committed a crime.

This is different than what you quoted, though, which is attempting to plead guilty to something that allegedly isn't a crime, which isn't possible, because obviously if there is no crime then there is nothing to plead guilty to.
 
trouble13 said:
You're rationalizing it using the least damaging assumption possible, which I am good with btw. I feel the same way and I extend that same benefit of doubt to Trump. That's the difference one is being given the benefit of doubt and the other is not. Either we assume the best about both or we assume the worst about both and drag both of them into s court.
Click to expand...

Not sure that 'assume' is the right word here when Cohen has already pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations at the direction of Mr Trump, and that Pecker has admitted the same and copped an immunity deal. These are now matter of public record, not 'assumptions'.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Lack of evidence suggesting they committed a crime.

This is different than what you quoted, though, which is attempting to plead guilty to something that allegedly isn't a crime, which isn't possible, because obviously if there is no crime then there is nothing to plead guilty to.
Click to expand...
The prosecution is alleging a crime we determine if there was one in a court of law. Prosecutors are wrong at times and this is one of them

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
uptower said:
Not sure that 'assume' is the right word here when Cohen has already pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations at the direction of Mr Trump, and that Pecker has admitted the same and copped an immunity deal. These are now matter of public record, not 'assumptions'.
Click to expand...
Without more than their opinions it is assumptions. Based on their opinions perhaps but people are trying to convict him on some very subjective circumstances.

Imagine people removing Obama from office based on birthers assumption that he wasnt native born. In order to impeach or prosecute you need evidence.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Without more than their opinions it is assumptions. Based on their opinions perhaps but people are trying to convict him on some very subjective circumstances.

Imagine people removing Obama from office based on birthers assumption that he wasnt native born. In order to impeach or prosecute you need evidence.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Plenty of evidence. These past few threads are full of evidence. Unfortunately they are also full of assertions from Trump's supporters that it's all 'subjective opinion'. Doesn't work that way.
 
trouble13 said:
It is an appropriate comparison. Neither Obama nor Clinton are squeaky clean and the fact that neither of them were charged that people are clamoring for Trump to be charged is the point. Charge all of them or none of them.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That is your opinion that they aren’t squeaky clean. There is no criminal indictment or charge that’s been brought against them so for now they are innocent. To say otherwise is merely your opinion. And if you wanna start another thread on why Obama should be charged (with what, exactly?) go right ahead. You’re free to do that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Without more than their opinions it is assumptions. Based on their opinions perhaps but people are trying to convict him on some very subjective circumstances.

Imagine people removing Obama from office based on birthers assumption that he wasnt native born. In order to impeach or prosecute you need evidence.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What do you think SDNY and mueller are doing????????? Collecting and gathering EVIDENCE...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
uptower said:
Plenty of evidence. These past few threads are full of evidence. Unfortunately they are also full of assertions from Trump's supporters that it's all 'subjective opinion'. Doesn't work that way.
Click to expand...
What is your smoking gun?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
PoliSciXtina said:
That is your opinion that they aren’t squeaky clean. There is no criminal indictment or charge that’s been brought against them so for now they are innocent. To say otherwise is merely your opinion. And if you wanna start another thread on why Obama should be charged (with what, exactly?) go right ahead. You’re free to do that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Live by your own sword or die by it but as of right now there in no criminal indictment of Trump either. You wanna declare all of them topics out of bounds for discussion or are you more comfortable picking and choosing? It wasnt rhetorical but you dont need to bother to answer. I'm feel pretty safe in assuming your position.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
PoliSciXtina said:
What do you think SDNY and mueller are doing????????? Collecting and gathering EVIDENCE...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Lay it out and I will be the first to abandon my position. Show me the money

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
We agree that it depends on the purpose. The purpose being to silence those women (again we agree) that is not a campaign expenditure (we disagree)

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

The original article quoted: "AMI worked "to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations" about Trump ahead of the 2016 election."
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Lack of evidence suggesting they committed a crime.

This is different than what you quoted, though, which is attempting to plead guilty to something that allegedly isn't a crime, which isn't possible, because obviously if there is no crime then there is nothing to plead guilty to.
Click to expand...

But a cover up can be a crime even if the thing being covered up was not a crime.
 
AncientGeek said:
The original article quoted: "AMI worked "to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations" about Trump ahead of the 2016 election."
Click to expand...
That is an opinion being sold as a fact. The only thing we know is that they were offered money not to talk about their relationship with trump. Mot sure if McDougal had said anything but Daniel's has certainly violated her agreement

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
Media bias is a crime?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You mean the judges who have been handing down all these sentences are all biased CNN Reporters? Thank you for that information.
 
trouble13 said:
Lay it out and I will be the first to abandon my position. Show me the money

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Mueller’s team has indicted or gotten guilty pleas from five former Trump advisers, 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. Seven of these people (including now all five former Trump aides) have pleaded guilty.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...nts-grand-jury

Don't you just love it when you decide to go on a witch hunt, step out the front door and find witches landing all over your lawn?
 
trouble13 said:
That is an opinion being sold as a fact. The only thing we know is that they were offered money not to talk about their relationship with trump. Mot sure if McDougal had said anything but Daniel's has certainly violated her agreement

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Please read the article:
"As a part of the agreement, AMI admitted that it made the $150,000 payment in concert with a candidate’s presidential campaign, and in order to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations about the candidate," according to a statement by the U.S. Attorney's Office in New York.
 
AncientGeek said:
Mueller’s team has indicted or gotten guilty pleas from five former Trump advisers, 26 Russian nationals, three Russian companies, one California man, and one London-based lawyer. Seven of these people (including now all five former Trump aides) have pleaded guilty.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...nts-grand-jury

Don't you just love it when you decide to go on a witch hunt, step out the front door and find witches landing all over your lawn?
Click to expand...
150,000 estimated were persecuted by the Spanish inquisition. That's the company you want to keep?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
150,000 estimated were persecuted by the Spanish inquisition. That's the company you want to keep?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Damn, I just love the smell of a No True Scotsman Fallacy in the morning. LMAO.
 
AncientGeek said:
Please read the article:
"As a part of the agreement, AMI admitted that it made the $150,000 payment in concert with a candidate’s presidential campaign, and in order to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations about the candidate," according to a statement by the U.S. Attorney's Office in New York.
Click to expand...
I have read it. Is your position that if AMI plead guilty it means everyone they implicated is also guilty?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
 
trouble13 said:
150,000 estimated were persecuted by the Spanish inquisition. That's the company you want to keep?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You think prosecuting criminals is persecution?
 
trouble13 said:
I have read it. Is your position that if AMI plead guilty it means everyone they implicated is also guilty?

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Evolution of the talking points koolaide:
1. "I didn't do it."
2. "I didn't tell Cohen to do it."
3. "It's not a crime."

Which is it?
 
AncientGeek said:
Evolution of the talking points koolaide:
1. "I didn't do it."
2. "I didn't tell Cohen to do it."
3. "It's not a crime."

Which is it?
Click to expand...

It's actually number 4.... I need another 130 thousand bucks so I can try to buy off a judge. LOL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom