Trying to silence the press? rumpf’s Lawyer Warns Scarborough: ‘Better Have Proof’

B

Bill

Malarkeyville
rumpf’s Lawyer Warns Scarborough: ‘Better Have Proof’ For Your ‘Big Mouth’

President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer warned Joe Scarborough that he “better have proof” to back up the claim that Trump himself leaked his tax returns to the journalist David Cay Johnston.

Michael Cohen, a longtime Trump associate and fixture on cable television, warned the MSNBC host after Scarborough said Trump had "cherry picked" a return to leak in order "to distract from Russia hearings and the Trumpcare meltdown."

Scarborough – known in the past for his connections to Trump’s inner circle, and to the President himself – made the charge on his on his Twitter account Wednesday:

Joe Scarborough
✔
@JoeNBC

This one tax return is not bad for him because he cherry picked one return from over a decade ago and had it leaked to the press.
https://twitter.com/x/status/841825526130049024
…
4:54 AM - 15 Mar 2017

6,363 6,363 Retweets
12,168

More @ source
 
Lol, so demanding Trump have proof of his wiretapping is not silence, but demanding proof of Joe is silence.

Stupid move on Trumps part.
 
Darth Omar said:
How about everyone on both sides prove everything; and if not, shut up about it.
Click to expand...
The claims being made about trump's conflicts of interest are easily disproved by trump himself. Why won't he, at the very least, release a list of his foreign business dealings? Followed by a list of his foreign creditors.

It's really very simple.
 
Next they will tell us Scarborough is a "conservative"

I guess by commie lib standards he is. But he is a lefty through and through

If Trump did "leak" the return, then you guys were played
 
Althea said:
The claims being made about trump's conflicts of interest are easily disproved by trump himself. Why won't he, at the very least, release a list of his foreign business dealings? Followed by a list of his foreign creditors.

It's really very simple.
Click to expand...

After Hillary and the Clinton Foundation?

Please.
 
the show is pretty much unwatchable.too much drama from Mika staring at the camera or shaking her head.
Halperin is a tool, and that Steve guy a vocal Hillary supporter.
Then they got the neocon guy from Foreign affairs..blech and Eugene Robinson from WaPo
 
Teflon Don said:
Next they will tell us Scarborough is a "conservative"

I guess by commie lib standards he is. But he is a lefty through and through

If Trump did "leak" the return, then you guys were played
Click to expand...

Leaking one year(prob his best year) over 10 years old??? :rofl2: I wouldn't waste any time reading it & certainly draw any conclusions from it......

There are good reasons he didn't release, I mean leak the latest.......
 
Bill said:
Leaking one year(prob his best year) over 10 years old??? :rofl2: I wouldn't waste any time reading it & certainly draw any conclusions from it......

There are good reasons he didn't release, I mean leak the latest.......
Click to expand...

lol....but you have no problems drawing conclusions out of thin air......
 
Charity watchdog: Clinton Foundation a ‘slush fund’
NYP 4/26/15

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

Story continues at http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/

Story also includes.....
"The nonprofit came under fire last week following reports that Hillary Clinton, while she was secretary of state, signed off on a deal that allowed a Russian government enterprise to control one-fifth of all uranium producing capacity in the United States. Rosatom, the Russian company, acquired a Canadian firm controlled by Frank Giustra, a friend of Bill Clinton’s and member of the foundation board, who has pledged over $130 million to the Clinton family charity.

The group also failed to disclose millions of dollars it received in foreign donations from 2010 to 2012 and is hurriedly refiling five years’ worth of tax returns after reporters raised questions about the discrepancies in its filings last week."
 
Stretch said:
Charity watchdog: Clinton Foundation a ‘slush fund’
NYP 4/26/15

The Clinton Foundation’s finances are so messy that the nation’s most influential charity watchdog put it on its “watch list” of problematic nonprofits last month.

The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid.

The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends.

Story continues at http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/

Story also includes.....
"The nonprofit came under fire last week following reports that Hillary Clinton, while she was secretary of state, signed off on a deal that allowed a Russian government enterprise to control one-fifth of all uranium producing capacity in the United States. Rosatom, the Russian company, acquired a Canadian firm controlled by Frank Giustra, a friend of Bill Clinton’s and member of the foundation board, who has pledged over $130 million to the Clinton family charity.

The group also failed to disclose millions of dollars it received in foreign donations from 2010 to 2012 and is hurriedly refiling five years’ worth of tax returns after reporters raised questions about the discrepancies in its filings last week."
Click to expand...
NY Post? Why not just go to a site that rates charities? That way, you can find trumpco.
 
Joe is absolutely correct.

Trump released this partial return, the best he can show in the last 20 years, to save face...
If Trump didn't want this released, or it contained embarrassing information, he would have called it a "fake"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top