• 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!

NYT reveals six more checks written by Trump to Cohen

So according to the NYT...there WAS no violation of campaign finance laws as whatever agreement tha was made was paid for by Trump out of pocket?

So far, idiot leftists have managed to debunk both campaign finance violations AND Russian collusion. Who knew they were on Team Trump all along?
 
VanceMack said:
So according to the NYT...there WAS no violation of campaign finance laws as whatever agreement tha was made was paid for by Trump out of pocket?

So far, idiot leftists have managed to debunk both campaign finance violations AND Russian collusion. Who knew they were on Team Trump all along?
Click to expand...

Reference please! Post the quote and the author and identify is Op-ed or Ed page piece.
 
jnug said:
if Weisselberg is under subpoena it would not be wise to put himself in contempt of Congress, particularly if they are asking him to testify to things for which he already has limited immunity. But you go ahead and live with that fantasy as well. Do you really think Trump would see Weisselberg refusing to testify as some sort of victory?

The country already does not believe Trump. Weisselberg refusing to testify or taking the 5th does not help Trump in any way. It hurts him.

That is Trump's real issue going forward. There are legal dangers that he faces from prosecutors and political dangers he now faces from Congress. When the GOP controlled the House, there were only legal dangers for Trump to face. Those legal dangers were not much of a threat to him as long as federal prosecutors stuck to the Justice Department guideline regarding indicting a sitting President. Worth pointing out that Trump now not only faces Congressional Oversight, but State Charges and the Justice Dept guideline itself sits on very thin logic.
Click to expand...

Weisselberg could do a Comey thing and refuse to give some answers.
 
jnug said:
Weisselberg will surely appear under penalty of perjury. In fact, Congress may grant him limited immunity.

You boys are getting desperate now. Your arguments are going from specious to incoherent.
Click to expand...

The incoherence seems to be coming from your end:

1. Weisselberg was signing the checks to Cohen. At some point he stopped. The question asked, and to which I responded was 'why.'

2. Being called before Congress has nothing to do with 'why.'
 
cabse5 said:
Weisselberg could do a Comey thing and refuse to give some answers.
Click to expand...

Too much water over the dam. That won't fly either. Plus the Dem Congress is hiring Ex-Federal prosecutors to frame their questioning. Good luck to Weisselberg if he goes that way. An accountant not remembering is a FAIL. He will be asked about his accounting records. I don't know or I don't remember will buy him nothing.
 
jnug said:
Reference please! Post the quote and the author and identify is Op-ed or Ed page piece.
Click to expand...
Taking the OP at its face value,

The New York Times has acquired..........
 
Athanasius68 said:
The incoherence seems to be coming from your end:

1. Weisselberg was signing the checks to Cohen. At some point he stopped. The question asked, and to which I responded was 'why.'

2. Being called before Congress has nothing to do with 'why.'
Click to expand...

I just reread your post #45 to remind myself. You didn't ask any question. Look up incoherent in the dictionary and get back to me.
 
VanceMack said:
Taking the OP at its face value,

The New York Times has acquired..........
Click to expand...

ah...haaaaaa...ha.ha.haaaa..ah..ah..ah...ha.ha.ha.ha.ha.
 
jnug said:
Too much water over the dam. That won't fly either. Plus the Dem Congress is hiring Ex-Federal prosecutors to frame their questioning. Good luck to Weisselberg if he goes that way. An accountant not remembering is a FAIL. He will be asked about his accounting records. I don't know or I don't remember will buy him nothing.
Click to expand...

The DOJ just did something very similar to congress and congress didn't do anything.
 
jnug said:
ah...haaaaaa...ha.ha.haaaa..ah..ah..ah...ha.ha.ha.ha.ha.
Click to expand...
I kept expecting the sneeze. You must have stifled it. What a shame. I hate when that happens.

I can tell you think you are on to something very clever.
 
tres borrachos said:
Being on retainer with Trump and Hannity isn't an answer. Please try again.
Click to expand...

Well, if the question is "he was a big lawyer" then yea, it absolutely is. Many people wanted him to be his lawyer, so he could charge as much as they were willing to handle.
 
DarkWizard12 said:
Well, if the question is "he was a big lawyer" then yea, it absolutely is. Many people wanted him to be his lawyer, so he could charge as much as they were willing to handle.
Click to expand...

Please post a list of the "many" people who wanted him to be "his" lawyer. With a legitimate link. Thanks in advance.
 
VanceMack said:
I kept expecting the sneeze. You must have stifled it. What a shame. I hate when that happens.

I can tell you think you are on to something very clever.
Click to expand...

I might be onto something very clever but if you read that piece in the OP to be the NYT's stating that "there WAS no violation of campaign finance laws" you are just on something or have a reading deficiency. There is no logical foundation for your contention.
 
Mycroft said:
Weisselberg has already talked to Mueller. And guess what...he hasn't been charged with anything.

That should tell you something.
Click to expand...

The reason why Weisselberg hasn’t been charged with anything is because he is cooperating. I think he has immunity as long as he fully cooperates. Try to follow along with the rest of us.
 
cabse5 said:
The DOJ just did something very similar to congress and congress didn't do anything.
Click to expand...

Please explain! What was similar and who are you talking about. DOJ is a dept.
 
Superfly said:
Would there be a need for a retainer if Cohen worked full time for DJT, though, and only DJT? He was only in his employ, the way I read it, so I don't know if he would even need a retainer for an attorney that works for him and only him.
Click to expand...

Could be, yes. We have read that Trump was invoiced by Cohen, that much we do know. I wonder in what manner Trump paid his others personal lawyers.
 
Mycroft said:
So...denying wrongdoing makes someone guilty? LOL!!

The payments are irrelevant. This was not a campaign violation.
Click to expand...
You are in denial. There’s already sufficient information available in the public forum to render claims of Trump’s innocence incredible.

Still, I’d be very surprised if Trump ever spends a second in jail over this.
 
jnug said:
Please explain! What was similar and who are you talking about. DOJ is a dept.
Click to expand...

The DOJ would be Comey and Rosenstein. They sent redactions and refused to answer some questions posed from congress.
 
jnug said:
I might be onto something very clever but if you read that piece in the OP to be the NYT's stating that "there WAS no violation of campaign finance laws" you are just on something or have a reading deficiency. There is no logical foundation for your contention.
Click to expand...
Oh no. I get that they THOUGHT they were onto something illegal, just as I get that idiot leftists everywhere think that every new revelation is the smoking gun leading to impeachment that they have been jerking themselves off to since before Trump was even sworn in. But the facts kick their theory right squarely in the balls, and the harder the try, all they do is make themselves look more pathetic.
 
Two points for clarification:
Wasselberg has limited immunity. That is not the same thing as a cooperation agreement. Useful to prosecutors but not a cooperation agreement.....YET! He is cooperating under limited immunity.

Trump was named as having instructed Cohen as part of Cohen's guilty plea. However if memory serves me, Cohen was charged with and plead guilty to "the crime" itself, not conspiracy to commit the crime. Hence, there is no un-indicted coconspirator at this moment. A conspiracy is certainly implied from the plea documents and the groundwork has been laid for a charge of conspiracy but not as yet made. Media has taken the liberty to describe that step as already taken and its not been taken as yet.

No conspiracy charge has as yet been made in any single case springing from the Mueller probe either by SDNY or in any other federal court. It is my opinion that it is purposefully so. All of the prosecutors involved in all of these cases are fully aware that an actual conspiracy charge against a named Trump associate or Trump himself or Trump family member will cause Donald's head to explode. IMO, if we see conspiracy charges made that spring from the Mueller probe or that are campaign related, they will all come at once and all at the very end when it won't matter if DonDon's head explodes or not.

We may likely see conspiracy charges in the NY State probes into Trump Foundation, Trump State Tax charges or other activities. But I seriously doubt we will see actual conspiracy charges in any of these other federal cases until the very end.
 
jnug said:
I just reread your post #45 to remind myself. You didn't ask any question. Look up incoherent in the dictionary and get back to me.
Click to expand...

You asked the question-- why did he stop signing Cohen's checks.
 
HumblePi said:
I can only assume they were all in the possession of Michael Cohen and turned over to prosecutors. New York Times doesn't divulge their sources, but they seem to be on the cutting edge over other media outlets when it comes to leaked materials.
Click to expand...

If you think that, you don-t know how checks work.
 
Risky Thicket said:
The reason why Weisselberg hasn’t been charged with anything is because he is cooperating. I think he has immunity as long as he fully cooperates. Try to follow along with the rest of us.
Click to expand...

He was given immunity in the SDNY case against Cohen. There is no indication he's been given immunity by Mueller.
 
jnug said:
Two points for clarification:
Wasselberg has limited immunity. That is not the same thing as a cooperation agreement. Useful to prosecutors but not a cooperation agreement.....YET! He is cooperating under limited immunity.

Trump was named as having instructed Cohen as part of Cohen's guilty plea. However if memory serves me, Cohen was charged with and plead guilty to "the crime" itself, not conspiracy to commit the crime. Hence, there is no un-indicted coconspirator at this moment. A conspiracy is certainly implied from the plea documents and the groundwork has been laid for a charge of conspiracy but not as yet made. Media has taken the liberty to describe that step as already taken and its not been taken as yet.

No conspiracy charge has as yet been made in any single case springing from the Mueller probe either by SDNY or in any other federal court. It is my opinion that it is purposefully so. All of the prosecutors involved in all of these cases are fully aware that an actual conspiracy charge against a named Trump associate or Trump himself or Trump family member will cause Donald's head to explode. IMO, if we see conspiracy charges made that spring from the Mueller probe or that are campaign related, they will all come at once and all at the very end when it won't matter if DonDon's head explodes or not.

We may likely see conspiracy charges in the NY State probes into Trump Foundation, Trump State Tax charges or other activities. But I seriously doubt we will see actual conspiracy charges in any of these other federal cases until the very end.
Click to expand...

Cohen was charged pertaining to his role in a conspiracy with Individual 1 regarding electionlaw. The reasonable assumption is that Individual 1 is Trump.

The reason why Mueller hasn't charged a Manafort or a Flynn or a Papadapolous or a Stone for their role in a conspiracy to fix the 2016 election, isn't because Mueller is concerned Trump's head will explode. It's far more simpler and more obvious a reason: there was no conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia to fix the 2016 election.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
You are in denial. There’s already sufficient information available in the public forum to render claims of Trump’s innocence incredible.

Still, I’d be very surprised if Trump ever spends a second in jail over this.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

Before you decide on innocence or guilt, you should try to find a crime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom