Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[LarryBnDC]

This is wild. Shit is rolling out that make collusion with Russia seem like small potatoes. We’re seeing the unwinding of a massive criminal conspiracy and conspiracies start at the top. The campaign, the election and inauguration all a massive grift.

What will the GOP do now? What does Pecker have on them?

I imagine there is video of Lindsey Graham swimming naked with a manatee in pink tutu.

https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/727604522156228608?s=20

[Yankguy1]

Benghazi!!!  Clinton Foundation!!!

[REDSTATEWARD]

Benghazi!!!  Clinton Foundation!!!

Lock Her Up!

[facilitatorn]

Sarah HuckaSanders? KellyAnne Conwoman? Ivanka? KT McFarland? Kirsten Nielsen? Putin’s lawyer lady? They already have Butina, so you can’t be talking about her. Linsey Graham? Spell it out Red. Leaving us in suspense about who to lock up next is almost deplorable.

It is nice to see someone come out and publicly confirm what I’ve known for a long time and have been trying to tell you all.

http://mobile.twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/1073279534118682625?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1073279534118682625&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailykos.com%2Fstory%2F2018%2F12%2F13%2F1818984%2F-Video-from-Noel-Casler-you-won-t-want-to-miss-Worked-on-Apprentice-Pagent-shows-My-oh-my

Please watch the video. Cheers!

[REDSTATEWARD]

Why can't you pay hush money to porn stars, waitresses, male flower sellers on the street, or anyone else?
'Consenting adults'...unless there's extortion involved?

...if you use your own money.

Did Trump use his own money?

Trump likely could have gotten away with paying the hush money by reporting it.  Which defeats the purpose of hush money.  He probably shouldn't have cheated on his wife.

The only candidate ever charged with campaign finance violations over hush money was John Edwards and the trial ended in acquittal and was roundly criticized by the media as a waste of time. The furor over Trump has no legal basis but is purely political.

[Yankguy1]

The most political guy here HATES politics. 

[whiskeypriest]

Why can't you pay hush money to porn stars, waitresses, male flower sellers on the street, or anyone else?
'Consenting adults'...unless there's extortion involved?

...if you use your own money.

Did Trump use his own money?

Not when associated with a political campaign. Does not matter whose money it is.

[facilitatorn]

The most political guy here HATES politics.

But loves using false equivalence to feebly attempt to cover his sorry ass, not that it ever works.

http://mobile.twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/1073279534118682625?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1073279534118682625&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.dailykos.com%2Fstory%2F2018%2F12%2F13%2F1818984%2F-Video-from-Noel-Casler-you-won-t-want-to-miss-Worked-on-Apprentice-Pagent-shows-My-oh-my

Aderol(tm) is a hell of a drug, especially if one massively exceeds recommended dosages.

No wonder Individual 1 was so amped to get a pusher in as Surgeon General and that fatal ODs have spiked under his administration.

[facilitatorn]

Kushner, really?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c12c616e4b0f60cfa277b93

His main qualification I guess is that he already has a criminal defense team engaged which is necessary for any Chief of Staff candidate for this White House.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Why can't you pay hush money to porn stars, waitresses, male flower sellers on the street, or anyone else?
'Consenting adults'...unless there's extortion involved?

...if you use your own money.

Did Trump use his own money?

Trump likely could have gotten away with paying the hush money by reporting it.  Which defeats the purpose of hush money.  He probably shouldn't have cheated on his wife.

The only candidate ever charged with campaign finance violations over hush money was John Edwards and the trial ended in acquittal and was roundly criticized by the media as a waste of time. The furor over Trump has no legal basis but is purely political.

And that was quite upsetting to the Heritage Foundation, who vehemently argued that he had violated the campaign finance laws. Found here: https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/why-john-edwards-guilty

Misinformed critics of the government’s prosecution claim that such gifts of funds are not covered by campaign-finance law. But federal law limits the amount that a donor can contribute to a federal candidate. That amount was $2,300 in 2008, when Edwards was a candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination. The law defines “contribution” to include a gift or “deposit of money or anything of value made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office.”

Most important, FEC regulations state that the payment of a personal expense by any person other than the candidate is considered a contribution to the candidate, unless the payment would have been made irrespective of the candidacy. As the FEC said in a prior advisory opinion, the key question is, “Would the third party pay the expense if the candidate was not running for Federal office?”

The testimony of government witnesses makes it pretty clear that the payments by these donors would not have been made if Edwards had not been running for office. Edwards is a multimillionaire; he could easily have afforded to make the payments (including legally obligated child support) out of his personal funds. But such personal payments would have blown up his candidacy and made it impossible to hide what he clearly wanted to keep hidden. The payments by his maxed-out campaign contributors were clearly intended to “influence” the 2008 presidential election by keeping Edwards in the race and protecting his reputation.

However, there are vastly different circumstances, as well illustrated in this piece:

https://abovethelaw.com/2018/12/stop-comparing-donald-trumps-campaign-finance-fraud-with-john-edwardss-case/

John Edwards did have co-conspirators rolling on him. But the prosecution could not show that either Edwards, or anybody on his staff, solicited campaign contributions specifically for the purposes of paying off his mistress, Rielle Hunter. There was no tape of Edwards telling his lawyer to make it “cash.” There was no tape of Edwards pretending to know nothing about the hush money payments that he himself ordered.

The key witness against Edwards was a junior staffer named Andrew Young. Young testified to a devious scheme he helped Edwards execute. But, crucially for distinguishing purposes, Young could not testify to giving Edwards the money to execute his expensive cover-up. From the Daily Beast:

In a stunning revelation, the witness alleged the multimillionaire Edwards first asked him for a loan knowing that the Youngs had recently come into a windfall of some $400,000 on the sale of their home. Asked for his response to Edwards by the prosecutor, Young replied, “I said, ‘No, sir.’ We needed that money to build our new house.” And, Young added, “We always had trouble getting reimbursed from the office. Giving him two or three hundred dollars once in a while was one thing, but …” His voice trailed off and the point was made. (To hear Young tell it, Edwards rarely dipped into his own pocket—not even the day Young drove the lovers to a clinic to get their shots prior to their alleged trip to Africa.)

According to Young, after he turned down Edwards’s request for a loan the senator instructed him to approach a dear friend, David Kirby, and ask for money. That didn’t work. Young says he and Edwards discussed the idea of asking über-wealthy Texas lawyer Fred Baron for financial help since he had been generous in the past. The senator nixed that idea, said Young, saying Baron was too close to his political rivals—Bill and Hillary Clinton—and, besides, Baron was “too much of a gossip.”

Then, serendipitously, a note from one of Edwards’ richest donors arrived offering help. Rachel “Bunny” Melon wanted John to be the next president so he could “rescue America.”

Compare that to Michael Cohen’s ADMISSION that he loaned Trump the money to pay off Stormy Daniels.

John Edwards’s main defense was that he didn’t know he was using “campaign” money when he paid off Hunter. He argued that he did not know that the “serendipitous” donation Young testified to was “campaign” money. I find that argument to be bollocks, but Trump cannot credibly make the same claim. That’s in part because of the OTHER co-conspirator who kind of rolled on Trump today.

 
2. THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER WAS PART OF THE HUSH MONEY SCHEME

You might remember that the National Enquirer actually broke the story about John Edwards’s sordid affair. The publication did not break the story on Trump’s affairs, because they were in on it.

American Media Inc., the publisher of the National Enquirer, has finally officially admitted to that, today. From Talking Points Memo:

After Michael Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York announced that prosecutors had previously reached an agreement not to prosecute the National Enquirer’s parent company over its payment to kill Karen McDougal’s story about her alleged affair with President Trump.

As part of the agreement, American Media, Inc., admitted that it paid McDougal $150,000 in an attempt to influence the 2016 election, according to a statement from the U.S. attorney’s office.

“The Office also announced today that it has previously reached a non-prosecution agreement with AMI, in connection with AMI’s role in making the above-described $150,000 payment before the 2016 presidential election,” the U.S. attorney’s office said in a statement on Cohen’s sentencing. “As a part of the agreement, 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. AMI further admitted that its principal purpose in making the payment was to suppress the woman’s story so as to prevent it from influencing the election.”

You can tell me all you want that Donald Trump was too stupid to know that Michael Cohen’s money was a campaign contribution, but you cannot credibly say that Trump didn’t know the National Enquirer’s money was not a contribution, or that he didn’t recognize catching-and-killing McDougal’s story was an “in-kind” contribution.

So that means Trump is left with arguing that he didn’t know that the Enquirer was paying off mistresses on his behalf which… MAKES NO GODDAMN SENSE.

 

Not that you will read them, nor admit you understand them, should someone read them to you.

[whiskeypriest]

Why can't you pay hush money to porn stars, waitresses, male flower sellers on the street, or anyone else?
'Consenting adults'...unless there's extortion involved?

...if you use your own money.

Did Trump use his own money?

Trump likely could have gotten away with paying the hush money by reporting it.  Which defeats the purpose of hush money.  He probably shouldn't have cheated on his wife.

The only candidate ever charged with campaign finance violations over hush money was John Edwards and the trial ended in acquittal and was roundly criticized by the media as a waste of time. The furor over Trump has no legal basis but is purely political.

Of course both the Enquirer and Cohen have admitted the two things the government could not prove.against Edwards: that the hush money was paid for political purposes and that Trump was.aware of and directed the activity specifically for political purposes. But don't let the idea that individual cases stand or fall on their own facts trouble you.

The legal basis of the Edwards charges: that Hush money paid for campaign purposes is subject to campaign finance regulations - was not the reason the government must. Case went to trial, and to a jury, which deadlocked on all but one claim. It was the facts that resulted in Edwards's acquittal,  or the idea that hush money paid in connection to a campaign was not a campaign contribution.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Why can't you pay hush money to porn stars, waitresses, male flower sellers on the street, or anyone else?
'Consenting adults'...unless there's extortion involved?

...if you use your own money.

Did Trump use his own money?

Trump likely could have gotten away with paying the hush money by reporting it.  Which defeats the purpose of hush money.  He probably shouldn't have cheated on his wife.

The only candidate ever charged with campaign finance violations over hush money was John Edwards and the trial ended in acquittal and was roundly criticized by the media as a waste of time. The furor over Trump has no legal basis but is purely political.

Of course both the Enquirer and Cohen have admitted the two things the government could not prove.against Edwards: that the hush money was paid for political purposes and that Trump was.aware of and directed the activity specifically for political purposes. But don't let the idea that individual cases stand or fall on their own facts trouble you.

As the writer in the piece I linked above put it so well: It’s also a surface-level analysis that ignores key differences between the Edwards case and the mounting evidence against Donald Trump. Comparing the two is like saying “Fran is sitting there drinking her third cup of coffee right now, so why are you on my case?” as you ram two lines up your nose in the break room.

[barton]

I imagine there is video of Lindsey Graham swimming naked with a manatee in pink tutu.

Anyone who can get their manatee into a tutu has my vote.   

[barton]

Noel Casler stand-up act is good stuff.   A little wobbly on takeoff but when you score big laughs with an incest joke you've definitely won the audience.   

[LarryBnDC]

Benghazi!!!  Clinton Foundation!!!

Lock Her Up!

Drip, drip, drip...