Anonymous wrote:For as bad as the Hannity interview was, this Washington Post follow on was actually worse

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/transcript-giuliani-interview-with-the-washington-post/2018/05/03/a35c4a3c-4e9b-11e8-af46-b1d6dc0d9bfe_story.html

And yet, somehow, both Rudy and Trump think this is winning.

Cohen is totally under the bus.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump just literally tweeted that he did reimburse Cohen to execute the NDA, via a “monthly retainer” that was “not” with campaign monies.

Tantrump tweets:

Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are.....

...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,......

...despite already having signed a detailed letter admitting that there was no affair. Prior to its violation by Ms. Clifford and her attorney, this was a private agreement. Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll in this transaction.

Is he exploding or this is some brilliant strategy.

Will his trumpkins follow him to ditch to believe that they paid any accuser $130K for just falsely claim that she had affair with the orange one? Is he that weak? Apparently he does not settle. If he did this why did he claim he did not know about this? What about Karen McDuggal? Was that also a harasser?

My head is spinning with all the lies and cover-ups. But then I guess I am not as smart as trumpkins to digest all these burned truth.

Anonymous wrote:This is what we've come to folks - a porn star is more honest and has more integrity than the POTUS. This country has really fallen far. It's not abortion or gays that have brought this country down, but the people who put Trump in office.

Anonymous wrote:Trump just literally tweeted that he did reimburse Cohen to execute the NDA, via a “monthly retainer” that was “not” with campaign monies.

Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer, not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign, from which he entered into, through reimbursement, a private contract between two parties, known as a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA. These agreements are.....

...very common among celebrities and people of wealth. In this case it is in full force and effect and will be used in Arbitration for damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was used to stop the false and extortionist accusations made by her about an affair,......

...despite already having signed a detailed letter admitting that there was no affair. Prior to its violation by Ms. Clifford and her attorney, this was a private agreement. Money from the campaign, or campaign contributions, played no roll in this transaction.

Anonymous wrote:Rudy and Trump seemed to be focused on where the money came from.

The issue is not whether money came FROM the campaign. It’s whether the payment to silence Stormy amounted to a secret contribution TO the campaign.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:4 pages and no one's defending Trump? What time is it in Russia?

Oh I think the poster on the last page who called this a "nothingburger" was a feeble attempt to defend 45. Just not very articulate.

Structuring payments to be under $10k is a money laundering violation. It's business as usual for Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You mean a billionaire mogul slept with porn stars and playboy models? I’m shocked, shocked I tell you. Honestly a majority of America doesn’t give a $hit. Who he slept with as a private citizen isn’t my business. All that took place before the Presidency and last I checked it’s not illegal to have sex with people who were both willing participants.

Who cares about his sex life - not me. But by taking this attitude you Republicans have forever lost your voice to opine on the sex lives of others whether Democratic politicians or everyday Americans. No more governing based on supposed biblical principles. Get your laws out of our bedrooms and off our bodies.

What’s at stake here are the standards of ethics for our politicians. Trump is destroying the rule of law and democratic ideals. You are excusing his breaking of laws, thereby showing us your acceptance of a thug as your leader.

That you can say the bolded with a straight face is amazing. A KKK member, a man who literally killed a woman, a rapist, a woman who gave Pakistanis access to our classified info, a man who paid off a terrorist organization, a woman who laundered millions through her foundation. Look in the mirror

Oh lordy, you really want to go into the challenge of which party has the least ethics? Shall we parade out all the Republican hall of shame politicians for you?

You can if you choose. I just think it's hilarious that suddenly the 'rule of law' is important to liberals. Did you see that Zuckerberg hired Eric Holder's law firm to police 'hate speech' on Facebook? LOL. He's appointed himself 'head liberal good guy". Oh, he's also planning to take over on-line dating through Facebook but neglects to mention that one of his employees used personal and private Facebook information to stalk women.

You're bringing up Zuckerberg? He's a businessman, not a politician. I thought you conservatives were pro-business. He can do what he wants with his business, right? If you don't like his business, don't use it. I personally give no f's about him or his business as long as he's not breaking the law.

To the other point, if I hear you correctly, it seems you are saying that "rule of law" is not important to anyone in this country. So that's where we're at. Lawlessness. And you're fine with it.

A businessman who has thrown himself heavily into politics and is using his company as a political bully pulpit. And my guess? Given his arrogance, he will soon go too far and find himself in legal hot water. Given his employee had access to users personal proprietary information and used it in a criminal way, he's already on thin ice.

I find it hilarious that you are talking about the 'rule of law', while liberals constantly want laws broken, when those laws suit them. You did not hear me correctly; you heard your own party shouting in your ear. I suggest you learn about the psychological term 'projection'.