Aren't these the same "news" outlets that talk about aliens living among us and the lochness monster? |
Dp- no. That is not what they are talking about. |
Trump's lawyer is arguing that in a democracy the only way to get elected is to "influence the election." Plus, 1st Amendment rights of both Trump to advocate for himself and the National Inquirer to support whomever they want in the manner they choose. Ted Cruz and his father really ought to be suing the National Inquirer for libel. The legality of the coordination hinges on the payment arrangement between Trump and the National Inquirer. Trump initially reimbursed the NI for killing stories. But then he stopped paying them and NI was eating the costs for killing stories. That's an illegal campaign contribution. |
This is real answer here. The media loved and still loves, covering Trump. He brings the outrage and clicks. For the past 4 years there as been a minimum of 4 articles per day in WaPo on Trump, sometimes topping a dozen! It is all free advertising and the media won't admit they have been the ones keeping Trump alive. |
I will readily admit that I consumed a lot more "news" during the Trump years. He was always doing something shocking and disturbing, so of course I would read about it or watch CNN or the NewsHour. Under Biden? There's a lot less drama and I can focus on other things in my life. The media hates this. |
I have been wondering how this is relevant to the Stormy Daniels pay-off scheme. Is it establishing a pattern of illegal behavior? |
I wonder why they don't. Bootlicking aside, this could be quite the windfall for Cruz. |
You’re halfway there. That they cover Trump isn’t the problematic part, it’s that they don’t convey the actual danger and damage. About 80% of the it’s a winky, “can you believe this guy but boys will be boys” article about whatever crime Trump has commit. The media reports on Democrats in such a fashion that they’re brought to heel but, oh, let’s say the GOP refusing to seat Obama’s nominee because nine months out is “too close to the election” but the GOP installing a handmaiden as people are voting is somehow acceptable? A few op eds talked about it, but it was never treated as the mess it was. |
Yes and also Trump booking the payments as legal fees for his business was fraud and not reporting them as campaign contributions was fraud. All of this has been established in Cohen’s prosecution by DOJ (while Trump was President) and Pecker’s agreement with the FEC to pay fines for making illegal campaign contributions. All that is left is to apply the same facts and standards to the co-conspirator who was the one who personally and politically benefited from the fraudulent scheme. |
There were rumors years ago that Pecker’s safe full of Trump stories also held a lot of blackmail worthy information on certain political figures. Unbend the knee and the real tea gets spilled. Who knows. |
And if Hillary had won it would have been 4 years of breathlessly covering her administration’s “scandals” + 4 years of WHAT WILL TRUMP DO NOW, where is Trump, are you running again in 2020/2024/whatever??? 4 years of his campaign rallies, 4 years of him calling into the Today show daily with his grievances. The media loves Trump because he brings the drama and the ratings. |
One of the fake stories they planted was that Ted Cruz had five mistresses. This demonstrates that Trump and Cohen understood that allegations of infidelity would have a negative effect on a candidate, and that by paying Stormy Daniels and killing her story Cohen was making an illegal contribution to Trump's campaign. Trump is on trial for falsifying business records in attempt to cover up that crime. |
It’s really under appreciated that Trumps DOJ prosecuted Cohen for this very same scheme. Trump is now complaining that it didn’t happen/it’s not illegal/ he’s being unfairly targeted, but he did nothing at all to stop the prosecution of Cohen. |
It proves a conspiracy. From this thread on reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1cbd3cn/trump_hushmoney_trial_witness_drops_bombshell/, “itsatumbleweed” says “I may be mistaken, but Pecker basically entirely confirmed the conspiracy to affect the election. The relevant law: Election Law 17-152 prohibits conspiracies to promote a candidate’s election through unlawful means. Since he was falsifying paperwork to make these payments, he was part of a conspiracy to promote his election using unlawful means. That makes the falsified documents felonious. If Pecker's testimony is viewed as truthful, this pretty much does it.” Which “waffle299” adds to with: “No softening language is needed. He testified to: A conspiracy (him, Trump, Cohen) To help elect Trump (favorable press) And trash his opponents (made up stories) At the direction of Trump (Cohen directed and reviewed stories) While keeping the conspiracy secret (knowledge of guilt) That's campaign interference. Cohen will be up later to explain: Campaign funds were used (felony campaign funding violation ( Multiple times (each indictment) Funneled through Cohen (conspiracy) To conceal the source of the cash (knowledge of guilt) For which Cohen was paid (motive, disarm defense) And went to jail for (disarm defense, convey the stakes)” In other words the dunking on Ted Cruz and his father, while fun and meme worthy, is part of the proof that Donald Trump engaged in the crime he is accused of. |
No, they did not. They prosecuted for things completely unrelated to Trump and then threw in a guilty plea for this just to fool people. |