Page 3 of 43 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 430

Thread: Another Porno Star

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~ View Post
    So you are saying you would be fine with prosecuting Hillary for lying to the FBI, destruction of evidence in a Federal investigation and mishandling classified documents? The head of the DNC for for rigging the primary for Hillary, Donna Brazile for election tampering by giving Hillary the debate questions, Comey and Rosenstein for willfully misleading a FISA court and Obama for his possible conspiracy in all this?

    Sure you are.

    Like I said, only when it suits you.
    Due process does not refer solely to prosecution. In this case, everything you know for a clear and obvious fact that Hilary Clinton did she has been investigated for and not charged with - that you disagree with the result does not necessarily mean she has not received due process.

    As for Donna Brazile, she could literally have burned the votes cast for Bernie Sanders and she wouldn't have committed election tampering, because the primary nomination is not an election.

    As for the rest, you should put as much stock in a Republican Congressperson's memo alleging Obama's collusion with Comey as you would a Democratic Congressperson's memo alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. Unbiased people, like me, view both with skepticism.
    Hasta pronto, porque la vida no termina aqui...
    America, stop pushing. I know what I'm doing.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In amazement
    Posts
    3,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Androidpk View Post
    So you were okay with Hillary being investigated by the FBI but you're not okay with Trump being investigated by the FBI? Sounds like you need to practice what you preach.
    If the FBI was investigating Trump on evidence not tampered with and without decent bias, then it might be ok, but it isn't. It's so badly tainted and biased that even if Mueller did find something really juicy on Trump himself, the evidence is unlikely to stand up in anything other than a kangaroo court. Also, Hillary publicly admitted to her crimes and yet has not been prosecuted. We have military personnel in military prison because they self reported mishandling one piece of information just one time and yet she is walking around free.
    I asked for neither your Opinion,
    your Acceptance
    nor your Permission.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In amazement
    Posts
    3,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Latrinsorm View Post
    Due process does not refer solely to prosecution. In this case, everything you know for a clear and obvious fact that Hilary Clinton did she has been investigated for and not charged with - that you disagree with the result does not necessarily mean she has not received due process.

    As for Donna Brazile, she could literally have burned the votes cast for Bernie Sanders and she wouldn't have committed election tampering, because the primary nomination is not an election.

    As for the rest, you should put as much stock in a Republican Congressperson's memo alleging Obama's collusion with Comey as you would a Democratic Congressperson's memo alleging Trump's collusion with Russia. Unbiased people, like me, view both with skepticism.
    Thank you Captain Semantics for the tap dancing around the facts and dismissing a summary of what people already knew. You are clearly not unbiased, self deluded, yes, unbiased, no.
    I asked for neither your Opinion,
    your Acceptance
    nor your Permission.

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~ View Post
    If the FBI was investigating Trump on evidence not tampered with and without decent bias, then it might be ok, but it isn't.
    Says who? Trump and his meat puppets?

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    In amazement
    Posts
    3,238

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Androidpk View Post
    Says who? Trump and his meat puppets?
    I have been over this multiple times with you moron but your dope addled, mush headed liberally retarded brain continues to be dismissive of anything that does not fit your narrative. So, rather than get into it again over the same information I have posted to you over and over again, I am going to treat you like the entitled bratty child you are.

    Says me and that's all the explanation you need.
    I asked for neither your Opinion,
    your Acceptance
    nor your Permission.

  6. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~ View Post
    I have been over this multiple times with you moron but your dope addled, mush headed liberally retarded brain continues to be dismissive of anything that does not fit your narrative. So, rather than get into it again over the same information I have posted to you over and over again, I am going to treat you like the entitled bratty child you are.

    Says me and that's all the explanation you need.
    So you got nothing but personal attacks. Gotcha.

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ~Rocktar~ View Post
    If the FBI was investigating Trump on evidence not tampered with and without decent bias, then it might be ok, but it isn't. It's so badly tainted and biased that even if Mueller did find something really juicy on Trump himself, the evidence is unlikely to stand up in anything other than a kangaroo court. Also, Hillary publicly admitted to her crimes and yet has not been prosecuted. We have military personnel in military prison because they self reported mishandling one piece of information just one time and yet she is walking around free.
    It is not a crime to mishandle classified information unless certain other specific criteria are met. There are two possibilities here:
    1) the "ban marijuana" Department of Justice and the "Patriot Act" FBI are in the bag for Democrats and no one (least of all Republicans) noticed until two years ago, or
    2) you somewhat overestimate your legal knowledge.
    Thank you Captain Semantics for the tap dancing around the facts and dismissing a summary of what people already knew. You are clearly not unbiased, self deluded, yes, unbiased, no.
    The law often rests on semantics, what with being written words.
    Hasta pronto, porque la vida no termina aqui...
    America, stop pushing. I know what I'm doing.

  8. #28

    Default

    Adult film star Stormy Daniels sued Donald Trump Tuesday, alleging that he never signed the nondisclosure agreement that his lawyer had arranged with her.

    The civil suit, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court and obtained by NBC News, alleges that her agreement not to disclose her "intimate" relationship with Trump is not valid because while both Daniels and Trump's attorney Michael Cohen signed it, Trump never did.

    More...
    The agreement requires arbitration for any disputes. Arbitration will be hidden from public view. Trump's lawyer is trying to force her into arbitration, and he will probably succeed.

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ClydeR View Post
    The agreement requires arbitration for any disputes. Arbitration will be hidden from public view. Trump's lawyer is trying to force her into arbitration, and he will probably succeed.
    Doesn't matter what the agreement says if it's ruled invalid/void because Trump never signed it.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ClydeR View Post
    Cohen's story has the ring of truth. Yes, it rings true. Anybody who has ever hired a lawyer knows that's the sort of generous thing they do for you. If it had been a payment from, or on behalf of, the Trump campaign, then that would have been a violation of campaign finance laws.



    I totally called it!

    President Trump's personal lawyer Michael Cohen said he transferred $130,000 to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels from his home equity line as scrutiny rises over the reported nondisclosure payment from October 2016.

    More...

    NBC News reported earlier Friday that Cohen used his Trump Organization email to negotiate and arrange the payment to Daniels, Her attorney, Michael Avenatti, told NBC News that the fact that Cohen used his Trump Organization email instead of his personal one suggests that the money may have come from a Trump Organization bank account.

    Cohen rejected Avenatti's claim, telling ABC News that the emails back up his previous accounts of the payment to Daniels.

    That's generosity. Trump's lawyer mortgaged his own house to make the payment, never expecting anybody to reimburse him. It's the sort of thing any lawyer would do for a client.
    I'm going to a town that has already been burnt down.
    I'm going to a place that has already been disgraced.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •