Cohen’s pleas concocted by prosecutors to snare Trump
- Thread starter anatta
- Start date
I'll save this as another of your laughably stupid predictions snowflake. You never seem to get tired of looking like a moron.
What goes around comes around. They thought they could change the Senate rules to get their way during Obama's Reign of Error, and it came back to bite them big time, didn't it?
It's like they don't think the rules apply to them.
What's amusing about leftist idiots like Jarod is that they support hypocrites and liars, then whine when they think someone else is one when they lose elections. They are poor losers and even worse winners.
So Jeremiah is lying?
Pres. Obama's Former Pastor His Camp Offered Me $150k to Shut the Hell Up!
http://www.tmz.com/2012/05/13/president-barack-obama-former-pastor-jeremiah-wright-bribe/
[/img]Remember this imbroglio?
Obama’s 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission for campaign reporting violations — one of the largest fees ever levied against a presidential campaign. The major sticking point for the FEC appeared to be a series of missing notices for nearly 1,300 contributions totaling more than $1.8 million — an issue that lawyers familiar with the commission’s work say the FEC takes seriously. The notices must be filed on contributions of $1,000 or more that are received within the 20-day window of Election Day.
More than half of those contributions were transferred from the Obama Victory Fund,a joint committee between the campaign and the DEMOCRAT National Committee.
The fine resulting from the settlement agreement was paid, with $230,000 coming from the Obama campaign’s coffers and the remainder from the DNC.
The document outlined other violations, such as erroneous contribution dates on some campaign reports. The Obama campaign was also late returning some contributions that exceeded the legal limit.
https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784
But that was different...
Obama’s 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission for campaign reporting violations — one of the largest fees ever levied against a presidential campaign. The major sticking point for the FEC appeared to be a series of missing notices for nearly 1,300 contributions totaling more than $1.8 million — an issue that lawyers familiar with the commission’s work say the FEC takes seriously. The notices must be filed on contributions of $1,000 or more that are received within the 20-day window of Election Day.
More than half of those contributions were transferred from the Obama Victory Fund,a joint committee between the campaign and the DEMOCRAT National Committee.
The fine resulting from the settlement agreement was paid, with $230,000 coming from the Obama campaign’s coffers and the remainder from the DNC.
The document outlined other violations, such as erroneous contribution dates on some campaign reports. The Obama campaign was also late returning some contributions that exceeded the legal limit.
https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784
But that was different...
So, he doesn't pay her off to save his family right after the incident. He waits until the end of his campaign to do so.
Surely, Shirley, even you can't be that stupid.
I have lots of amusing details about Comrade Brad. I wish I could share them with you.
Checkmate!
reagansghost
eternal
Remember this imbroglio?
Obama’s 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission for campaign reporting violations — one of the largest fees ever levied against a presidential campaign. The major sticking point for the FEC appeared to be a series of missing notices for nearly 1,300 contributions totaling more than $1.8 million — an issue that lawyers familiar with the commission’s work say the FEC takes seriously. The notices must be filed on contributions of $1,000 or more that are received within the 20-day window of Election Day.
More than half of those contributions were transferred from the Obama Victory Fund,a joint committee between the campaign and the DEMOCRAT National Committee.
The fine resulting from the settlement agreement was paid, with $230,000 coming from the Obama campaign’s coffers and the remainder from the DNC.
The document outlined other violations, such as erroneous contribution dates on some campaign reports. The Obama campaign was also late returning some contributions that exceeded the legal limit.
https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784
But that was different...
oh wow, that's a real blockbuster
thanks for the heads up!
reagansghost
eternal
do you have Legionaire's disease perchance?
Using that logic a candidate who buys a new suit so they'll look better on TV is guilty of election fraud.
Loser.
^Ruh roh, folks.
New winner of the "Stupid Post of the Day".
Remember this imbroglio?
Obama’s 2008 campaign was fined $375,000 by the Federal Election Commission for campaign reporting violations — one of the largest fees ever levied against a presidential campaign. The major sticking point for the FEC appeared to be a series of missing notices for nearly 1,300 contributions totaling more than $1.8 million — an issue that lawyers familiar with the commission’s work say the FEC takes seriously. The notices must be filed on contributions of $1,000 or more that are received within the 20-day window of Election Day.
More than half of those contributions were transferred from the Obama Victory Fund,a joint committee between the campaign and the DEMOCRAT National Committee.
The fine resulting from the settlement agreement was paid, with $230,000 coming from the Obama campaign’s coffers and the remainder from the DNC.
The document outlined other violations, such as erroneous contribution dates on some campaign reports. The Obama campaign was also late returning some contributions that exceeded the legal limit.
https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784
But that was different...
^Folks, this is classic desperation.
Flounder, shitstain, flounder.
Ruh roh, people.
^Stupid Post of the Day followed up by a close second place! Same idiot, no less!
Remember when a DEMOCRAT running for president paid a woman $700 K hush money?
The jury returned a not guilty verdict on the key charge in the federal campaign corruption trial against Mr. Edwards – that the former Democratic presidential candidate allegedly helped to illegally funnel over $700,000 in hush money from heiress Rachel “Bunny” Mellon. The jury deadlocked on the five other counts against him, and Judge Catherine Eagles declared a mistrial.
The verdict came on the ninth day of deliberations at the federal courthouse in Greensboro, N.C., as a diverse jury attempted to weigh the prosecution’s contention that Edwards illegally used campaign donations to hide a mistress, Rielle Hunter, and a love child from voters and his ailing wife. The long deliberations, with the jury asking the judge for dozens of exhibits, suggested that jurors were struggling with complex and often vague campaign laws that require prosecutors to prove “intent” to break election law.
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0531/Is-John-Edwards-verdict-the-last-straw-for-campaign-finance
The jury returned a not guilty verdict on the key charge in the federal campaign corruption trial against Mr. Edwards – that the former Democratic presidential candidate allegedly helped to illegally funnel over $700,000 in hush money from heiress Rachel “Bunny” Mellon. The jury deadlocked on the five other counts against him, and Judge Catherine Eagles declared a mistrial.
The verdict came on the ninth day of deliberations at the federal courthouse in Greensboro, N.C., as a diverse jury attempted to weigh the prosecution’s contention that Edwards illegally used campaign donations to hide a mistress, Rielle Hunter, and a love child from voters and his ailing wife. The long deliberations, with the jury asking the judge for dozens of exhibits, suggested that jurors were struggling with complex and often vague campaign laws that require prosecutors to prove “intent” to break election law.
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0531/Is-John-Edwards-verdict-the-last-straw-for-campaign-finance
Answer the question if you can, DEMOCRAT.
I'll understand if you can't, of course.
Loser.
I think the claim is that if money is spent to influence election results it violates campaign finance laws if not reported. I think very few people know enough about campaign finance laws to have an informed opinion about this.
There is nothing illegal about talking to Russians which makes me wonder why so many of Trump's associates lied about their contacts with them.
Remember Citizens United, DEMOCRATS?
The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which allowed freer flow of campaign funds in the political system – appears to set a high bar for what constitutes illegal behavior in the realm of campaign funding.
“The fact is, we’re going to see many fewer cases brought of this kind, largely because the Supreme Court has said we want more deregulation in this area, more freedom from government regulations,” legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who has written extensively about Citizens United for the New Yorker magazine, said on CNN.
At its core, the case is about whether Edwards, once a rising star in Democratic politics, “willfully” took and concealed the money to protect his presidential campaign. Some legal analysts say the government’s unusual decision to bring criminal charges against Edwards even after the formal civil-elections body, the FEC, failed to come to any conclusions about whether the donations were illegal could have chilled American politics.
One of your own was acquitted after paying $700,000 in hush money during a campaign. Manylegal experts said no prosecution should have been brought in the first place.
Think hard, DEMOCRATS.
The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which allowed freer flow of campaign funds in the political system – appears to set a high bar for what constitutes illegal behavior in the realm of campaign funding.
“The fact is, we’re going to see many fewer cases brought of this kind, largely because the Supreme Court has said we want more deregulation in this area, more freedom from government regulations,” legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, who has written extensively about Citizens United for the New Yorker magazine, said on CNN.
At its core, the case is about whether Edwards, once a rising star in Democratic politics, “willfully” took and concealed the money to protect his presidential campaign. Some legal analysts say the government’s unusual decision to bring criminal charges against Edwards even after the formal civil-elections body, the FEC, failed to come to any conclusions about whether the donations were illegal could have chilled American politics.
One of your own was acquitted after paying $700,000 in hush money during a campaign. Manylegal experts said no prosecution should have been brought in the first place.
Think hard, DEMOCRATS.