The Official "Damned Trump" Thread

[Fake Messiah]

Ivanka Trump once promised that if her father was elected, she would ensure paid family leave was a staple in every workplace, and Donald Trump promised the program would finance itself.

Two years later, the Trump administration is no closer to accomplishing this goal than they were when Ivanka and her father told prospective voters and working parents that they could be trusted to deliver on paid leave and thus deserved their votes.

Ivanka Trump, who was an executive at the Trump Organization before joining her father’s administration, asserted that the company provided paid family leave to all of its workers. But that turned out not to be true.

https://thinkprogress.org/ivanka-trump-p...ba159/amp/

[Fireball]

Quelle surprise, the chump family is a bunch of lying shits. If only the stupes in the US were a little less stupid. Though I'll have to admit that Hilary is only about 10% better. YMMV, it's a completely subjective assessment.

[Pat Mustard]

And with the Cohen sentencing hearing we have the first proofs that Dumbfuck broke the law to get elected (specifically Stormy Daniels payments).

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/12/07...-felonies/

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I suspect that dangling the possibility of pardons before the fact is going to be found to amounting to witness tampering, leading more or less to obstruction charges.  This is going to wind up being Trump's biggest legal problem.

Boru

[Maketakunai]

And with the Cohen sentencing hearing we have the first proofs that Dumbfuck broke the law to get elected (specifically Stormy Daniels payments).

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/12/07...-felonies/

Next time read the article... It says quite clearly that they're just talking out of their psuedo-journalistic asses because their source material is heavily redacted or under seal. I am paraphrasing, of course, but the verbiage is accurate

However, it DOES include a link to a court document that (as far as their claim that it alleges a Trump crime) any thinking person can discredit fairly easily. 

1. The submission alleges that one of Cohen's crimes was covering up Donald Trump's infidelity actually had some kind of impact on the election, but that's simply unfounded and wishful thinking. The evidence shows otherwise. During the campaign, the media covered every crime (real or imagined) that Donald Trump had ever committed, including allegations of mafia ties, alleged racial discrimination, allegations of rape, marital rape, and more going all the way back to the 1970's! CNN and MSNBC gleefully replayed audio for weeks of the man saying he liked to grab women by the pussy, and he still won the election fair and square. 

2. And here's the problem they have with saying Trump committed a crime by paying Cohen back the money he paid to Stormy Daniels. It was his own personal money, and candidates can spend as much of their own personal money as they want to to get elected, even if it involves spending money to cover up a non-crime with a perfectly legal Non Disclosure Agreement.

[downbeatplumb]

And with the Cohen sentencing hearing we have the first proofs that Dumbfuck broke the law to get elected (specifically Stormy Daniels payments).

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/12/07...-felonies/

Next time read the article... It says quite clearly that they're just talking out of their psuedo-journalistic asses because their source material is heavily redacted or under seal. I am paraphrasing, of course, but the verbiage is accurate

However, it DOES include a link to a court document that (as far as their claim that it alleges a Trump crime) any thinking person can discredit fairly easily. 

1. The submission alleges that one of Cohen's crimes was covering up Donald Trump's infidelity actually had some kind of impact on the election, but that's simply unfounded and wishful thinking. The evidence shows otherwise. During the campaign, the media covered every crime (real or imagined) that Donald Trump had ever committed, including allegations of mafia ties, alleged racial discrimination, allegations of rape, marital rape, and more going all the way back to the 1970's! CNN and MSNBC gleefully replayed audio for weeks of the man saying he liked to grab women by the pussy, and he still won the election fair and square. 

What you are saying here is not that he didn't commit a crime by paying money to subvert an election, but that it didn't matter because Trump voters would have voted for him anyway.

This is a bit like saying shooting a man with cancer is not a crime because they were going to die anyway.

2. And here's the problem they have with saying Trump committed a crime by paying Cohen back the money he paid to Stormy Daniels. It was his own personal money, and candidates can spend as much of their own personal money as they want to to get elected, even if it involves spending money to cover up a non-crime with a perfectly legal Non Disclosure Agreement.

The money does not have to come from the campaign funds to be a crime. The payment itself is the crime.

What you have to decide is what level of criminal will you tolerate in your president.


I think that you are one of those who would excuse him anything. After all what was known before he even became a candidate was enough to make him unsuitable.

[Angrboda]

I think the question of the payoffs to the women revolves around intent, rather than whether it was an effective maneuver or not. All that is necessary is that Trump believed these expenditures were illegal because they violated campaign finance rules, and there is some evidence that this is the case, specifically his conversations with, I believe, David Pecker, regarding killing the Karen McDougal story. It's also possible that Cohen knows additional things relating to the question which haven't been revealed. So intent does matter in this case, and whether it was intended to influence the election. And the appearance is that this was his intent. If Trump did kill these stories to influence the election, it's laughable to say that Trump won the election "fair and square." That would simply not be true.

[Pat Mustard]

And with the Cohen sentencing hearing we have the first proofs that Dumbfuck broke the law to get elected (specifically Stormy Daniels payments).

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2018/12/07...-felonies/

Next time read the article...

I read the article, thankyou very much. Next time check to see if your bullshit isn't also gibberish.

---

I think the question of the payoffs to the women revolves around intent, rather than whether it was an effective maneuver or not.  All that is necessary is that Trump believed these expenditures were illegal because they violated campaign finance rules, and there is some evidence that this is the case, specifically his conversations with, I believe, David Pecker, regarding killing the Karen McDougal story.  It's also possible that Cohen knows additional things relating to the question which haven't been revealed.  So intent does matter in this case, and whether it was intended to influence the election.  And the appearance is that this was his intent.  If Trump did kill these stories to influence the election, it's laughable to say that Trump won the election "fair and square."  That would simply not be true.

Actually all that is necessary was that whether he believed that he had to pay off the women to protect his candidacy. And frankly given the timing, the clandestine nature of the payments and the people he had doing the paying, it is obvious that Dumbfuck was buying silence to protect his candidacy.

[Amarok]

Something does not need to succeed to be criminal

[Fake Messiah]