Russia Investigation Heating Up

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by time4fun

\

Erm, I think you need to go re-read Cohen's testimony. Trump was directly implicated in several crimes.

---

With zero evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfster

With zero evidence.

---

You think Cohen pled guilty because they had zero evidence?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

But Androidpk says we can't believe anything Cohen said unless we have another witness to corroborate his testimony. Dem's the rules!

---

Federal investigators found Cohen's testimony and evidence credible. Are you saying we can't trust the FBI and DOJ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Androidpk

You think Cohen pled guilty because they had zero evidence?

---

None came out today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfster

With zero evidence.

---

What are you talking about? He literally brought reimbursement checks from Trump for the Stormy Daniels payments.

Seriously, did you actually watch his testimony?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by time4fun

What are you talking about? He literally brought reimbursement checks from Trump for the Stormy Daniels payments.

Seriously, did you actually watch his testimony?

---

Checks, yes. Cant prove that it's not for a retainer. All it proves is he got paid.

I'm anti Trump - but there wasn't any real evidence. The financial records may have something in them, but we can't see them obviously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Androidpk

Federal investigators found Cohen's testimony and evidence credible. Are you saying we can't trust the FBI and DOJ?

---

So you go from "I'd be cautious about trusting his word as well. But if his testimony matches up with the testimony of others" to "Wellllllllll.....as long as federal investigators found parts of Cohen's testimony credible then surely we can believe everything he says!"

Can't possibly imagine why earlier I said you're just trying to sound like a centrist by playing both sides here, but in just a matter of hours you can't help it and completely contradict yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfster

Checks, yes. Cant prove that it's not for a retainer. All it proves is he got paid.

I'm anti Trump - but there wasn't any real evidence. The financial records may have something in them, but we can't see them obviously.

---

Um, if there were a retainer...don't you think Trump and his lawyers would have provided it by now? There was very clearly no retainer, or- candidly- Cohen wouldn't have been indicted on the election fraud charges.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by time4fun

Um, if there were a retainer...don't you think Trump and his lawyers would have provided it by now? There was very clearly no retainer, or- candidly- Cohen wouldn't have been indicted on the election fraud charges.

---

I for one am glad time4fun is back. It was getting a bit boring laughing at Androidpk's nonsense all of the time. We get to sit back and laugh at time4fun make a fool of herself for a while. Gotta keep things fresh, y'know?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by time4fun

Um, if there were a retainer...don't you think Trump and his lawyers would have provided it by now? There was very clearly no retainer, or- candidly- Cohen wouldn't have been indicted on the election fraud charges.

---

Trump and team has nothing to gain by providing any information. Granted, Twitter and Guiliani can't help but to keep going. Still. There's no reason for him to produce any documentation. He's not under indictment.