• 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!

Why the National Enquirer cooperation deal is a VERY big problem for Donald Trump

D_NATURED said:
Are you arguing that false "facts" being disseminated on Facebook and elsewhere, shown to be orchestrated by Russians, didn't change anything? How do you know that? Are you magic?

Do you not believe that facts are VITAL to a functioning democracy and, by default, a corrupted information stream is harmful? Can people be expected to vote correctly, in your opinion, when they are forced to consume bull**** as "truth"? Or, is that just the status quo for conservatives? This is another case of astonishingly, stupidly naïve denials by conservatives. Would you accept it as irrelevant if the Russians had worked for Clinton? Of course not. You'd be hysterical.

Don't let your personal ambivalence to facts become an assumption for all America. Some of us still care.




I think Trump and Putin believe it too.
Click to expand...

The people affected by any such ads wouldn't have voted for Trump regardless.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Why the National Enquirer cooperation deal is a VERY big problem for Donald Trump

180823-american-media-trump-feature.jpg

CEO David Pecker of AMI and Donald Trump



The blue above. That is a criminal campaign finance violation and a felony. Both Micheal Cohen and AMI have testified that Individual-1 (Donald Trump) was a co-conspirator.
Click to expand...

Bull**** and bull****. His money , to prevent lying, blackmailing ho's from screwing up his marriage, or any other reason, constitutes NO CRIME, despite the Fake News/Lying Left/Lie-o-crat's latest Straw Grasp.

ALL CAMPAIGN EXPEDITURES are DESIGNED TO "INFLUENCE THE ELECTION"...der...and there is no proof that Trump did not use his OWN MONEY ANYWAY.


What happened to "RUSSIAN COLLUSION"...
 
Last edited:
D_NATURED said:
Are you arguing that false "facts" being disseminated on Facebook and elsewhere, shown to be orchestrated by Russians, didn't change anything? How do you know that? Are you magic?

Do you not believe that facts are VITAL to a functioning democracy and, by default, a corrupted information stream is harmful? Can people be expected to vote correctly, in your opinion, when they are forced to consume bull**** as "truth"? Or, is that just the status quo for conservatives? This is another case of astonishingly, stupidly naïve denials by conservatives. Would you accept it as irrelevant if the Russians had worked for Clinton? Of course not. You'd be hysterical.

Don't let your personal ambivalence to facts become an assumption for all America. Some of us still care.




I think Trump and Putin believe it too.
Click to expand...

Should it be illegal for foreigners to post informatiom on American websites?
 
apdst said:
It's only a crime if they "knowingly" violated FEC regulations. The law specifically states, "knowingly and willfully".
Click to expand...

Like Obama HIDING his donations....
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Yet only one of them has been charged with (and convicted of?) that act.
Click to expand...

Come on ttwtt, you know perfectly well that law enforcement is loathe to charge a sitting POTUS. You've made a meaningless rebuttal.

From what I've read, the SC hasn't even decided if a sitting POTUS can be charged with a crime by law enforcement. You seem to be well informed on these matters, is this correct?
 
Last edited:
JustHanging said:
Come on ttwtt, you know perfectly well that law enforcement is loathe to charge a sitting POTUS. You've made a meaningless rebuttal.

From what I've read, the SC hasn't even decided if they can or not...you seem to be well informed on these matters, is this correct?
Click to expand...

Not to mention, the LACK of an ACTUAL CRIME is kind of an "issue" with that, too.
 
WCH said:
One would need to be an idiot to think it would have changed the election results at all. Of course those same idiots believe Russia did.
Click to expand...

That's true. You citizens of Trump Fan Nation would have voted for him even if he shot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. Just as he said.
 
WCH said:
One would need to be an idiot to think it would have changed the election results at all. Of course those same idiots believe Russia did.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the CIA, the FBI, other branches of law enforcement all agree Russia interfered. But you personally know it could not possibly have changed the election results.


Any chance you can hook us up with your connections at the top of the CIA, FBI, etc.? I'll be honest WCH, after reading a lot of your posts, I had no idea those people would want to hang around with someone like you and discuss top secret classified information.
 
Last edited:
JustHanging said:
Come on ttwtt, you know perfectly well that law enforcement is loathe to charge a sitting POTUS. You've made a meaningless rebuttal.

From what I've read, the SC hasn't even decided if they can or not...you seem to be well informed on these matters, is this correct?
Click to expand...

You are not addressing my point - I was comparing the treatment of Cohen and Pecker (AMI) by the DOJ. They were said to have both done the same thing on behalf of the Trump campaign.
 
Grokmaster said:
Not to mention, the LACK of an ACTUAL CRIME is kind of an "issue" with that, too.
Click to expand...

What are you babbling about? That has nothing to do with what we were discussing.

Go back, reread the posts, and try again. Thank you.
 
JustHanging said:
Yeah, the CIA, the FBI, other branches of law enforcement all agree Russia interfered. But you personally know it could not possibly have changed the election results.


Any chance you can hook us up with your connections at the top of the CIA, FBI, etc.? I'll be honest WCH, after reading a lot of your posts, I had no idea those people would want to hang around with someone like you and discuss top secret classified information.
Click to expand...

That's because like most things, you don't know **** about me.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
You are not addressing my point - I was comparing the treatment of Cohen and Pecker (AMI) by the DOJ. They were said to have both done the same thing on behalf of the Trump campaign.
Click to expand...

My bad. Now that you've explained it, I can see the point you were trying to get across.

EDIT: Was I correct about the SC not having decided if a sitting POTUS can be charged with a crime by law enforcement?
 
WCH said:
That's because like most things, you don't know **** about me.
Click to expand...

:lamo

I do know for a fact that you don't have connections with the top people in the CIA and FBI who discuss top secret classified information with you.

But you're trying to pretend you do? Thanks for the laughs today WCH.

:lamo
 
JustHanging said:
:lamo

I do know for a fact that you don't have connections with the top people in the CIA and FBI, and that they don't discuss top secret classified information with you.

But you're trying to pretend you do? Thanks for the laughs today WCH.

:lamo
Click to expand...

Prove it.
 
WCH said:
The people affected by any such ads wouldn't have voted for Trump regardless.
Click to expand...

Oh, so you think you ARE magic. Actually, what you are is naive or ignorant to believe that the Russians would put so much effort into something that doesn't work.
 
~ "Former FEC Commissioner Hans Von Spakovsky debunked the argument that President Donald Trump broke campaign finance laws by paying women he allegedly had affairs with prior to becoming president.

The president’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, was sentenced to three years in jail on Wednesday for a litany of crimes, including making an illegal campaign contribution amounting to $130,000 to Stormy Daniels, who alleges she slept with Trump in 2006, so she would keep quiet about the affair.

Despite the guilty plea, Spakovsky said that Trump should not be worried because it would have to be a “campaign-related expense” for the contribution break any campaign finance laws."



https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/for...-and-trump-didnt-violate-campaign-finance-law
 
Rogue Valley said:
Why the National Enquirer cooperation deal is a VERY big problem for Donald Trump

180823-american-media-trump-feature.jpg

CEO David Pecker of AMI and Donald Trump



The blue above. That is a criminal campaign finance violation and a felony. Both Micheal Cohen and AMI have testified that Individual-1 (Donald Trump) was a co-conspirator.
Click to expand...

Both of these quotes are from the OP

"First, AMI admitted that, in coordination with Trump's presidential campaign, it had paid McDougal $150,000 in the run-up to the election for the exclusive rights to her story that she had an affair with Donald Trump a decade earlier."

And

"AMI admitted that it made the $150,000 payment in concert with a candidate's presidential campaign, and in order to ensure that the woman did not publicize damaging allegations about the candidate before the 2016 presidential election."

How do those two quotes jive with each other.

Was the payment for her story, or was the payment to keep her quiet?
 
WCH said:
Don't care...next.
Click to expand...

You're guy ****s porn stars. Your guy ****s porn stars. He cheats on his wife, covets his daughter and ****s porn stars.

I am sure you care. But, nice try pretending that you don't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom