Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Collusion update: "no factual evidence"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    It's like this: Cohen is screwed on 6 of the 8 charges related to tax avoidance and bank fraud. Those could put him away for life on their own. The 7th charge is not quite as solid but still viable. So the prosecution comes to Cohen with a deal: "Plead guilty to this one other charge, and we'll reduce your sentence from 60-years down to 3 or 4." Do you really think Cohen was going to pass up that deal even if he knew the 8th charge was bogus?
    Keep hoping mm. Keeping in mind the prosecution has documents, texts and recordings to confirm cohens pleas I tend think it unlikely he could get away with much in the way of exaggeration. But even if you are correct, Trump has surrounded himself with criminals because he is a criminal. He has no filter, he believes himself above the law. It's just a matter of time.

    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmuddle View Post
    So Cohen is going to be sentenced for something that is not a crime?
    It's like this: Cohen is screwed on 6 of the 8 charges related to tax avoidance and bank fraud. Those could put him away for life on their own. The 7th charge is not quite as solid but still viable. So the prosecution comes to Cohen with a deal: "Plead guilty to this one other charge, and we'll reduce your sentence from 60-years down to 3 or 4." Do you really think Cohen was going to pass up that deal even if he knew the 8th charge was bogus?

    Leave a comment:


  • shunyadragon
    replied
    It is odd that the word collusion is being tossed around like turds in a barnyard fight, but the word does not occur in the orders to the Special Investigation Counsel.

    Leave a comment:


  • rogue06
    replied
    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    So Cohen is going to be sentenced for something that is not a crime?
    Actually, that is not unheard of. He can agree to plead guilty to virtually anything the prosecutors tell him they want him to do and since he plead guilty there won't be any examination of whether the charge has any basis in reality or not.


    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
    Sure he is ... and I have some beach front property in Arizona I can sell you really cheap ...
    Here?
    Last edited by rogue06; 08-22-2018, 01:13 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    You're starting to sound more like MM each day, OBP. WaPo tried valiently? Really! They didn't have to try oh brainwashed one, it was Cohen's own testimony, testimony that the prosecutors claimed to have corroborating evidence of when asked of them by the Judge. Seriously, no wonder you people believe in fake news, it's seems to be the only news that you listen to.
    Are you saying the the Washington Post (Express) is fake news? It's normally first news I see each day (once in a while, I'll catch an NPR update on the radio first).

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Everything done during a campaign is an attempt to influence an election.
    Yep.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Everything done during a campaign is an attempt to influence an election.
    And there are rules about how much can be spent and where. And violations of some of those rules are Felonies.

    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Any convictions to date are unrelated to the Trump campaign, and Cohen was suckered into pleading guilty to something that isn't a crime.
    So Cohen is going to be sentenced for something that is not a crime? Sure he is ... and I have some beach front property in Arizona I can sell you really cheap ...


    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Everything done during a campaign is an attempt to influence an election.
    Duh! Everything done during a campaign in an attempt to influence the election isn't necessarily legal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    The WaPo article I read this morning tried valiantly to make the connection by saying that Cohen's payments were attempts to "influence the election".
    Everything done during a campaign is an attempt to influence an election.

    Leave a comment:


  • JimL
    replied
    Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
    The WaPo article I read this morning tried valiantly to make the connection by saying that Cohen's payments were attempts to "influence the election".
    You're starting to sound more like MM each day, OBP. WaPo tried valiently? Really! They didn't have to try oh brainwashed one, it was Cohen's own testimony, testimony that the prosecutors claimed to have corroborating evidence of when asked of them by the Judge. Seriously, no wonder you people believe in fake news, it's seems to be the only news that you listen to.

    Leave a comment:


  • One Bad Pig
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Any convictions to date are unrelated to the Trump campaign, and Cohen was suckered into pleading guilty to something that isn't a crime.
    The WaPo article I read this morning tried valiantly to make the connection by saying that Cohen's payments were attempts to "influence the election".

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Any convictions to date are unrelated to the Trump campaign, and Cohen was suckered into pleading guilty to something that isn't a crime.

    Leave a comment:


  • oxmixmudd
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Cohen is a weasal who is willing to say anything to keep his head out of the noose.

    Furthermore, the former head of the FEC says that even if Cohen made the payments in question, it was no violation of campaign finance law because it was done to benefit the campaign. Also, Cohen's statement went to rather absurd lengths to avoid directly accusing Trump be name, which is significant.
    They have the evidence from the raid on Cohen's office. They can back up his claims with paper records, texts, and recordings.

    A weasal? While I know what you are trying to say (that Cohen is lying), the evidence is that he is not. So you would support Trump in a violation of the law? You would turn on those that tell the truth about what he as done? Careful lest the great Christian Mountain Man attaches himself to the common philosophy of the cartels, thugs, and thieves that a man that exposes the Felony crimes of a criminal is a 'Rat'?

    And don't forget 'all the presidents men' so far found guilty of Federal Crimes. In addition to Cohen, we have Manafort, Flynn, Gates, and Papadopoulos. We surround ourselves with people we identify with. That bodes very poorly for the innocence of Donald Trump.


    Jim

    Leave a comment:


  • Sparko
    replied
    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
    That's implying that they use a security clearance to benefit a new non-government employer.
    When they take a job in the private sector it is by definition with a non-government employer and they use their security clearance in the job, which they get paid for, which is "profit" for them and the company. That's what private businesses do, make profit.

    They can also work as civilian contractors to government agencies, like Bill the Cat does. I am sure he has a security clearance and he gets paid for his work using it.


    To be clear, I am talking about your comment earlier where you said:

    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

    Further, when Clapper started threatening to sue for having his clearance revoked he was in effect admitting that he is profiting on his access (you can only sue if you can show that you are in some way be hurt by something). That in itself is an abuse and more than enough to justify a revocation of his clearance. Having a security clearance is not some inalienable right and using it to benefit yourself is hardly the act of a patriot.
    Anyone with a security clearance in the private sector would be getting paid for doing a job that requires a security clearance and would by definition be "benefiting himself" because he is making a living with it.
    Last edited by Sparko; 08-22-2018, 08:03 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Related Threads

Collapse

Topics Statistics Last Post
Started by seer, Today, 05:00 PM
0 responses
13 views
0 likes
Last Post seer
by seer
 
Started by seer, Today, 11:43 AM
37 responses
121 views
0 likes
Last Post seer
by seer
 
Started by seanD, Yesterday, 05:54 PM
40 responses
170 views
0 likes
Last Post seanD
by seanD
 
Started by rogue06, 05-14-2024, 09:50 PM
106 responses
462 views
1 like
Last Post rogue06
by rogue06
 
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-14-2024, 04:03 AM
25 responses
130 views
0 likes
Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
Working...
X