Trump is the WWE and Mueller is The Undertaker

[BananaStand]

Fuck off with this nonsense. Everyone knows the point of paying someone in cash is that it doesn't leave a paper trail.

Except there is a paper trail...

[Poopadoop]

Except there is a paper trail...

Ya of course everyone knows it's physically impossible to give someone cash without writing it down. How silly of me.

Just today I went to the store, bought some gum, and the clerk offered me a receipt. I said 'no thanks' and he called the cops on me for refusing to confirm our transaction with a paper trail.

[BananaStand]

Ya of course everyone knows it's physically impossible to give someone cash without writing it down. How silly of me.

Just today I went to the store, bought some gum, and the clerk offered me a receipt. I said 'no thanks' and he called the cops on me for refusing to confirm our transaction with a paper trail.

what are you even saying here? Are you denying that the paper trail exists? Are you saying Cohen DIDN"T send Trump monthly invoices for $35,000?

[Poopadoop]

what are you even saying here? Are you denying that the paper trail exists? Are you saying Cohen DIDN"T send Trump monthly invoices for $35,000?

Lol you don't even know what you're talking about.

It's like trying to argue with a child.

"This is wrong."
"But that!"
"That is irrelevant."
"But this!"

And so on.

[BananaStand]

Lol you don't even know what you're talking about.

Enlighten me.

Do the invoices exist? Or don't they?

[Poopadoop]

Enlighten me.

Listen carefully because i'm not going to keep explaining this to you over and over again. You might want to get your dictionary out for the bigger words.

Here was my 'reason for impeachment that we know about no. 1':

1. Trump tried to get Cohen to pay SD with cash. So his first instinct was to be greasy and not leave a paper trail.
2. Cohen was the one who insisted it be done above board, so as to give it at least the air of legitimacy should it ever come up in, say, a courtroom.

You seem to be trying to argue, for whatever reason, that cash doesn't mean cash it means checks, securities, bonds, whatever. If you actually believe this then you are mistaken.

You also seem to be saying that Trump suggesting to his lawyer to pay a porn star off, with cash, weeks before the election is just a coincidence and had nothing to do with helping his campaign.

My riposte is good luck getting a jury to believe that.


My 'reason for impeachment that we know about no. 2' was that Trump and his kids are now being charged with misappropriating funds from his own charity. Cohen has been subpoenaed in this regard and is a willing cooperator, so by appearances has some inside knowledge.

Your counterargument to this seems to be that Trump isn't responsible for what his kids do. Of course, no-one (obviously) says that he is being charged for what his kids did.

Clearly the prosecutor believes there is a good case that all of them, separately, used the Trump Foundation to appropriate funds from.

That would be (very) illegal.

You cannot run a charity and then use the proceeds of that charity for yourself. That's what he and his kids have been doing (allegedly), and if they are guilty, it's not like jaywalking. It's a serious crime. It would in fact fall under 'high crimes and misdemeanors'.

[BananaStand]

Listen carefully because i'm not going to keep explaining this to you over and over again. You might want to get your dictionary out for the bigger words.

No, you listen carefully, because your little diatribe here is missing a lot of FACTS

Here was my 'reason for impeachment that we know about no. 1':

This oughtta be good.

1. Trump tried to get Cohen to pay SD with cash. So his first instinct was to be greasy and not leave a paper trail.
2. Cohen was the one who insisted it be done above board, so as to give it at least the air of legitimacy should it ever come up in, say, a courtroom.

This is not a crime. There's no law requiring a paper trail. And Trump could have any number of plausible reasons for not wanting to leave one. Furthermore, why do you think it would be better if Trump knew, off the top of his head, how best to handle a situation like this. And Cohen corrected him about an eighth of a second later. That's what lawyers are for. You need to explain this to me with more words now because I really have no idea why you think this is credible support for impeachment.

You seem to be trying to argue, for whatever reason, that cash doesn't mean cash it means checks, securities, bonds, whatever. If you actually believe this then you are mistaken.

Fine. Let's say he meant small, pre-circulated, unmarked, non-sequential currency delivered discreetly in a pizza box. What's the problem?

You also seem to be saying that Trump suggesting to his lawyer to pay a porn star off, with cash, weeks before the election is just a coincidence and had nothing to do with helping his campaign.

Umm, she chose the timing, not Trump. Read the statement from the justice department on this. Trump paid her when he did, because she had a second offer for her story. Also, the first woman tried to sell her story in August 2015. More than a year before the election.

My riposte is good luck getting a jury to believe that.

Why would it be a question of fact for a jury? Where is the crime for which Trump can be charged in any the above?

My 'reason for impeachment that we know about no. 2' was that Trump and his kids are now being charged with misappropriating funds from his own charity. Cohen has been subpoenaed in this regard and is a willing cooperator, so by appearances has some inside knowledge.

Trump is most definitely not being charged. We've been over this. A sitting president cannot be charged with a crime. You may be confused here. Maybe you're thinking of a civil, not criminal case. In which case, who cares? Or maybe you're mistaken about Trump being a part of this at all. In which case, who cares? Seems to me that CNN would be screaming about this non-stop if it were credible at all. Yet the loudest voice on this one seems to be YOU.

Clearly the prosecutor believes there is a good case that all of them, separately, used the Trump Foundation to appropriate funds from.

Great, I'll be watching MSNBC to hear all about it.

That would be (very) illegal.

Maybe. Though, good luck proving it. Like if Ivanka took a flight somewhere and went shopping, out to dinner, to a club, etc. but then the next day did charity business before going home....then the flight can be charged as a charity expense, even though she could have stayed home and had the meeting on skype. Egregious yes, criminal no. Have fun.

You cannot run a charity and then use the proceeds of that charity for yourself. That's what he and his kids have been doing (allegedly), and if they are guilty, it's not like jaywalking. It's a serious crime. It would in fact fall under 'high crimes and misdemeanors'.

You have to prove intent. You have to prove that the billionaires who run a charity are really cheap fucks who purposefully used it as a piggy bank. If we're just talking about misfiled paperwork and misapplied tax treatments, and stupid administrative stuff like that (which is what this sounds like), then it is exactly like jaywalking.

[BananaStand]

1. Trump tried to get Cohen to pay SD with cash. So his first instinct was to be greasy and not leave a paper trail.
2. Cohen was the one who insisted it be done above board, so as to give it at least the air of legitimacy should it ever come up in, say, a courtroom.

It actually shocks me that you think this is an impeachable offense.

I'm seriously asking you here. What is wrong with this?

[BananaStand]

It's like trying to argue with a child.

Why are we arguing?

I'm just trying to find out what exact crime you think Trump committed, and why?

I'm trying to find out what evidence you think exists, or doesn't exist.

I'm simply looking for simple answers to simple questions.

This is called discussing. The fact that you see it as arguing shows how insecure and fragile you ego really is.

Are you really afraid of what might happen if we volley the facts back and forth a bit and settle on what is plausible and what isn't? Are you that deathly afraid of potentially finding out that maybe Trump isn't fucked?

baby want a bottle now?

[Poopadoop]

Why are we arguing?

I'm just trying to find out what exact crime you think Trump committed, and why?

I'm trying to find out what evidence you think exists, or doesn't exist.

I'm simply looking for simple answers to simple questions.

I'm providing them and you're not listening, so this is pretty disingenuous really.

The fact that you see it as arguing shows how insecure and fragile you ego really is.

Maybe you can explain that, and how it makes you feel, to your angry cunt counsellor.

Are you really afraid of what might happen if we volley the facts back and forth a bit and settle on what is plausible and what isn't? Are you that deathly afraid of potentially finding out that maybe Trump isn't fucked?

Ask him/her about projection and what that means. It could be very enlightening, really.

baby want a bottle now?

Your bottle ran out and you want another? Is that what you're saying?