It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Cohen Trump tape leaked

page: 7
29
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 03:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist


Not to mention who on earth would ever want to hire this clown as an attorney, when you cant be sure if he is secretly taping your conversations for blackmail leverage?


Sorry here, I am confused. Are we talking about Cohen who recorded Trump? If so then the answer to your question is the guy who called Cohen a ''good guy''. Trump.



Or the guy who a few weeks ago called him an "Honest, honorable lawyer" -- RUDY




posted on Jul, 27 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Skyfloating


This was not an illegally obtained tape. It was legally recorded (According to NY laws)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:39 AM
link   
July 29, 2018

The tape heard by the public was NOT an original. Experts say that it's a duplicate that has been "tampered" with.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

Why is this not surprising?



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 09:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
July 29, 2018

The tape heard by the public was NOT an original. Experts say that it's a duplicate that has been "tampered" with.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

Why is this not surprising?


Because it's Fox News. Of course it's a duplicate that is incomplete. That does not alter the fact that the conversation took place. Trump himself affirms it.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

But it is wholly irrelevant. Whether it is actually him or not, no laws were broken based on the content of that tape. In fact, Cohen's tapes helped Trump a lot with that degenerate hooker Stormy whatever-her-name-was. It specifically has Cohen on tape admitting it was PERSONAL MONEY not campaign funds used

Besides, even if you get lucky and find 1 campaign finance violation out of a million transactions nothing will come of it. Even if by some miracle you managed to get a criminal case from it (as opposed to the typical civil fines, etc.. see John Edwards) our Congress will still not impeach Trump.

You are stuck with him til 2020 at a bare minimum. However, he will likely run in 2020 and if so he will be reelected. Thankfully our control of the WH, both houses of Congress, SCOTUS and state governments ensures no plan against Trump will work even in the worst case scenario.

But again it all comes back to this: This tape, like the other crap people like you push, is meaningless. There's nothing incriminating (legally) and none of us care about the ethical/moral crap. We're MORE THAN WILLING to ignore Trump's moral shortcomings because the alternatives are FAR WORSE.

Any democrat is 1000x worse than Trump ever could be. So when he said he could shoot someone and not lose any voters? He's pretty much right.

What Trump has done for gun rights/free speech alone is worth its weight in gold. I'd vote for him just on those two points. And that is ignoring a whole hell of a lot of his accomplishments (including securing the SCOTUS for us for a generation or more, shutting down socialist/"progressive" policies before they even had a chance
Winning)
edit on 7/29/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: DoubleDNH

It isn't surprising at all. But what does it matter anyways? Even if the tape is real, it doesn't harm Trump in the slightest. It isn't a crime to pay off some liar (or even someone telling the truth) in order to keep their story quiet. Not a crime.

No crimes were "caught" on this audio recording, and even if they would've been (they weren't, but even IF..) this tape was illegally recorded/obtained and any half-way decent attorney would make light work of it.

Zero crimes committed based on this tape (assuming it is even genuine)

Believe me when I say Trump will walk away from this like he has every other single attempt to discredit him. I would ignore those feverishly predicting Trump's impeachment/indictment, since they've been predicting this for 2 years and have not been right one single time.

Meanwhile, those of us (myself included) indicating "Trump will walk away from this like he has every other single attempt to discredit him." have continually been proven right in our intelligent predictions.

There are two narratives, but only one has been discredited/disproven at every turn: democrats
edit on 7/29/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:42 PM
link   


Any democrat is 1000x worse than Trump ever could be. So when he said he could shoot someone and not lose any voters? He's pretty much right.


Is this anything like your "purge"?
edit on 29-7-2018 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns


our Congress will still not impeach Trump.


Keep repeating that to yourself until you really believe it. All the tape does is prove, once again, that every time Trump denies something he's lying. There are much more serious things he has been lying about to the American public and their elected officials.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: olaru12
Is this anything like your purge?


I think you misquoted me there

I never wrote that, not in the OP you initially quoted nor the modified text (which I assume is a reply?)

By "purge" I mean it in the literal sense: purging the ranks of government, removing DEEPSTATE traitors, unelected bureaucrats, etc. I also mean it in the sense of purging (aka removing) all bulk/fluff/regulations and unconstitutional laws (those giving the government more authority than expressly provided by the Constitution), etc

Basically, anything that stands in the way of individual liberty/freedom/self-determination should go the way of the dinosaur (quickly and without a second thought). Any power the government has "assumed" or granted itself should also follow that path.

Repeal without a replacement.
edit on 7/29/2018 by JBurns because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: DJW001

Eh, what you just tried to do is a logical fallacy known as: Affirming the consequent

Affirming the consequent won't make your baseless assertion true.

And it does not prove he is lying. The fact the payments were made is undisputed. It is NOT uncommon for women to lie about sleeping with a rich/successful person. It is NOT uncommon to pay those people to keep their mouths shut either, since mere accusations are all it takes to ruin a reputation.

It doesn't prove he lied about anything. It also doesn't prove the allegations of sexual activity are true. It merely proves (which he doesn't deny) that they were paid from personal funds to keep their lies to themselves and not ruin his reputation.

For someone like President Trump, said damage could amount to millions of dollars. So a couple hundred grand (pocket change, for him) is worth it to legally bind these people not to tell their lies to others.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: carewemust
July 29, 2018

The tape heard by the public was NOT an original. Experts say that it's a duplicate that has been "tampered" with.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

Why is this not surprising?


Because it's Fox News. Of course it's a duplicate that is incomplete. That does not alter the fact that the conversation took place. Trump himself affirms it.


Correct. But the tape is missing content. Just like FISA warrant(s) is redacted. What's MISSING is what the American people need to HEAR and SEE, respectively.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns




Basically, anything that stands in the way of individual liberty/freedom/self-determination should go the way of the dinosaur (quickly and without a second thought). Any power the government has "assumed" or granted itself should also follow that path.


How would you propose to [quickly andwithout a 2nd thought] accomplish this without somekind of purge.



posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: JBurns


Eh, what you just tried to do is a logical fallacy known as: Affirming the consequent

Affirming the consequent won't make your baseless assertion true.


False. It is simply an observation.


And it does not prove he is lying. The fact the payments were made is undisputed.


Now that there is proof to the contrary.




posted on Jul, 29 2018 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: matafuchs



He Is the One..........)







new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join