WhitewalkerInPhilly Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said: So, Manafort was convicted of election fraud? Stuff like this is what gets me about all you Johnny-come-latelies here at PPP. Not only are you ignorant of the basics but you make shitup. Every so often we get inundated down here with a whole bunch of Gleeful Gator clones because they think the left is gaining some type of upper hand. It won't be long and you guys will crawl back into your holes to gather your strength to come back here to spread more lies and dishonest crap. No, no. It was his *lawyer* who plead guility to the campaign finance law AND paid off the women Trump had extramarital affairs with. It was Manafort who was guilty of bank fraud in the Ukraine...you know, the country invaded by Russia. From these responses, I am drawing a number of things. One, a hatred of Hillary so strong, that people are willing to make up wild ass nonsense. "BUT SHE IS MORE CORRUPT, I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU THINK THE PERSON WHO HAS VISIBILY PROMOTED CRONIES WHO VISIBLY PROFIT FROM DISMANTLING THE SERVICES THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PROTECT IS LESS CORRUPT THAN HILLARY." I don't like her either, but Jesus people, if you can't spot how dangerously corrupt this administration is, I have a bridge to sell you, and all it takes is your Social Security number, mother's maiden name, credit card numbers and bank account information. Also...really guys. We are talking about a man who, even before he was elected, had a track record of screwing over small businesses by quoting them one number for work, and then refusing to pay it. A man who made up random ass, unsubstantiated non-sense with the birther movement and beat that horse until it became IKEA meatballs, and who only years later begrudgingly admitted that it wasn't true. A man who claimed that he saw Muslims celebrating 9/11, had that proven to be untrue, and yet he doubled down on it. A man who has committed extramarital affairs and paid hush money about it. A man who sets records at Politifact for untrue statements. But no...I'm the untruthful one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 1 minute ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: But no...I'm the untruthful one. .... On 8/21/2018 at 9:36 AM, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: Oh, they're not. They just have no problems with supporting someone who is incredibly racist... On 8/21/2018 at 9:54 AM, Deranged Rhino said: Please list the examples, with sources, which makes Trump someone who is "incredibly racist." Anything yet? Or nah? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Just now, Deranged Rhino said: .... Anything yet? Or nah? My guess, nah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 4 minutes ago, joesixpack said: My guess, nah. A full day should be long enough to compile at least a few examples of someone who's "incredibly racist". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 2 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: A full day should be long enough to compile at least a few examples of someone who's "incredibly racist". One would think. I challenged him on it as well, and he didn't respond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 12 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: It was Manafort who was guilty of bank fraud in the Ukraine...you know, the country invaded by Russia. This statement shows you have no idea what Manafort was doing in the Ukraine, whom he represented, or what actually happened in 2014. 14 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: A man who made up random ass, unsubstantiated non-sense with the birther movement... This statement proves you have no idea what you're talking about. The "birther" movement was started by the Clinton campaign during the primary against Obama in '08. It was a dirty trick, typical of the Clinton machine. Trump latched onto it, yes, and furthered it, yes. But he didn't originate it. Clinton did. Facts aren't your friend, WWIP. You keep proving that what you feel is more important to you than actual facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpberr Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 If Congress didn't impeach Clinton who allegedly committed his crimes while in office, I highly doubt they will impeach a President for allegedly crimes before assuming office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 WhiteWalker has the feels... not the facts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted August 22, 2018 Author Share Posted August 22, 2018 1 hour ago, 3rdnlng said: So, Manafort was convicted of election fraud? Stuff like this is what gets me about all you Johnny-come-latelies here at PPP. Not only are you ignorant of the basics but you make shitup. Every so often we get inundated down here with a whole bunch of Gleeful Gator clones because they think the left is gaining some type of upper hand. It won't be long and you guys will crawl back into your holes to gather your strength to come back here to spread more lies and dishonest crap. This is exactly why I started this thread. The two (soon to be three trials) each deserve their own thread in order to somewhat keep the discussions along their own lines. 53 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Here's the deal. I work in the medical field. If someone has a kidney disorder I consult a nephrologist, and not a truck driver. I spent all last night watching a variety of prosecutors voicing their educated opinions on the Cohen stuff. I read a number of different sites with generally differing perspectives. And I listened to Cohen's actual lawyer. The vast vast majority disagree with you and indicated that the story on Cohen's cooperation is far from closed. So so tell me: are you a prosecutor who has actual experience in such matters? Or are you a truck driver? So Dog1960, how is DR's spleen? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Same date as the last revision of Cohen's plea... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Deranged Rhino said: How do we know? By reading the plea deal. This is the deal Cohen made - pleading out to a campaign finance violation (which isn't criminal) You're way off base if you think he has more to offer. DR, I have a question for you., and I am not being sarcastic. I keep seeing the Trump folks saying the campaign violation is not a “ criminal “ offense. Why do you keep saying that? I see that is is usually dealt with administratively and with fines, but I cannot find anywhere that says CFV are not criminal. And if not not a criminal violation.. what kind of violation would it be? Edited August 22, 2018 by plenzmd1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Nanker said: This is exactly why I started this thread. The two (soon to be three trials) each deserve their own thread in order to somewhat keep the discussions along their own lines. So Dog1960, how is DR's spleen? I assumed OMF was treating DR for ED, not because I know something about DR, but because I heard that was the area of OMF's expertise. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 Just now, plenzmd1 said: DR, I have a question for you., and I am not being sarcastic. I keep seeing the Trump folks saying the campaign violation is not a “ criminal “ offense. Why do you keep saying that? I see that is is usually delay with administrativel and with fines, but I cannot find anywhere that says CFV are not criminal. And if not not a criminal violation.. what kind of violation would it be? It's a civil violation, not a criminal violation unless the DOJ wishes to make it criminal. If (and it's a big if) you could prove it against Trump, which they couldn't against John Edwards when they tried, it's not a misdemeanor or felony. There are no legal consequences in terms of jail time or penalties associated with criminal violations. It's just a fine. A fine that many a candidate has been charged with, and paid, without slowing them down. But it SOUNDS bad when you add into the plea that it was an attempt to "influence the election" (by paying hush money - also not illegal - to the women he slept with). That's what the "influence" charge is all about, and it's nonsense from a legal/criminal law standpoint. It's designed entirely to inflame the language used in headlines and cable news programs. That's it. And that's why it won't reach the threshold of the DOJ charging it's criminal in nature rather than a civil matter settled by a fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 PRESIDENT IN A VISE: What needs to be kept in mind at every stage is that this whole investigation is not about Russian meddling. Everyone agrees that they did it and it was wrong. No one needs a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of that. This is part of an effort by the Democrats and their collaborators to overturn a presidential election that they thought they would win. No crime of which either man was pronounced guilty today is as foul as the campaign underway to foil the decision of the American people. Read the whole thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It's a civil violation, not a criminal violation unless the DOJ wishes to make it criminal. If (and it's a big if) you could prove it against Trump, which they couldn't against John Edwards when they tried, it's not a misdemeanor or felony. There are no legal consequences in terms of jail time or penalties associated with criminal violations. It's just a fine. A fine that many a candidate has been charged with, and paid, without slowing them down. But it SOUNDS bad when you add into the plea that it was an attempt to "influence the election" (by paying hush money - also not illegal - to the women he slept with). That's what the "influence" charge is all about, and it's nonsense from a legal/criminal law standpoint. It's designed entirely to inflame the language used in headlines and cable news programs. That's it. And that's why it won't reach the threshold of the DOJ charging it's criminal in nature rather than a civil matter settled by a fine. The Edwards case was VERY different. The people that gave the money to Edwards to give to his lady were not the ones that already pleaded guilty, like Cohen is now. Cohen has already admitted that was the purpose of the payments and will testify to that. They had none of that at Edwards trial. And Edwards wife was dying, so he argued he just didn't want her to know. Trump obviously was trying to influence the election with the payouts of silence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 It wasn't "very" different, Edwards was tried for the same charges they would have to try Trump under if they tried. They won't try it, mind you, which is why this is nonsense to begin with (he's a sitting president, he's not going to be indicted by the DOJ). All it is is spin designed to fool the simple minded. Now people like you, who don't know fact from fiction (or care to) are saying things like "Trump was trying to influence the election"... but leaving out the part about it not being illegal to pay hush money and that it has nothing to do with Russian collusion/conspiracy. Because you don't want to admit that. Admitting that Russia was and remains a bogus narrative designed to undercut an legally elected POTUS and prevent him from being able to execute his policies unencumbered destroys everything you've said for two plus years. Not just you, but many big names in the media, on the Hill, and in think tanks around DC. There's a lot on the line for those people. Their only hope - since they have no evidence to prove any part of the original Russia collusion/conspiracy narrative - is that the folks who have blindly followed their narrative without doing any of their own homework (looking at you oldmanfan) will jump onto this new narrative train without looking back or stopping to ask important questions. You've been had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 4 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: It wasn't "very" different, Edwards was tried for the same charges they would have to try Trump under if they tried. They won't try it, mind you, which is why this is nonsense to begin with (he's a sitting president, he's not going to be indicted by the DOJ). All it is is spin designed to fool the simple minded. Now people like you, who don't know fact from fiction (or care to) are saying things like "Trump was trying to influence the election"... but leaving out the part about it not being illegal to pay hush money and that it has nothing to do with Russian collusion/conspiracy. Because you don't want to admit that. Admitting that Russia was and remains a bogus narrative designed to undercut an legally elected POTUS and prevent him from being able to execute his policies unencumbered destroys everything you've said for two plus years. Not just you, but many big names in the media, on the Hill, and in think tanks around DC. There's a lot on the line for those people. Their only hope - since they have no evidence to prove any part of the original Russia collusion/conspiracy narrative - is that the folks who have blindly followed their narrative without doing any of their own homework (looking at you oldmanfan) will jump onto this new narrative train without looking back or stopping to ask important questions. You've been had. No one pleaded guilty in the Edwards case, Cohen already has. Very different cases Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 You've been wrong on every single prediction made on this issue for over two years now... but this time it's gonna work! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 1 minute ago, Deranged Rhino said: You've been wrong on every single prediction made on this issue for over two years now... but this time it's gonna work! Quote Mr. Cohen acknowledged the illegal payments while pleading guilty to breaking campaign finance laws and other charges, a litany of crimes that revealed both his shadowy involvement in Mr. Trump’s circle and his own corrupt business dealings. He told a judge in United States District Court in Manhattan that the payments to the women were made “in coordination with and at the direction of a candidate for federal office,” implicating the president in a federal crime. “I participated in this conduct, which on my part took place in Manhattan, for the principal purpose of influencing the election” for president in 2016, Mr. Cohen said. To influence the election. Don't remember a witness like that at Edwards trial Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 22, 2018 Share Posted August 22, 2018 21 minutes ago, B-Man said: PRESIDENT IN A VISE: What needs to be kept in mind at every stage is that this whole investigation is not about Russian meddling. Everyone agrees that they did it and it was wrong. No one needs a special prosecutor to get to the bottom of that. This is part of an effort by the Democrats and their collaborators to overturn a presidential election that they thought they would win. No crime of which either man was pronounced guilty today is as foul as the campaign underway to foil the decision of the American people. Read the whole thing. Yep. It's a coup. An attempt to delegitimize the entire administration. If it were an honest attempt at justice, the perpetrators would be more concerned about "President Pence." 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts