Cohen Plea Deal Beginning to Look a Lot Like Exoneration for Trump

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok so goven those connections in 2013 that were so string, why did they forgo them on this obvious deal, which we are to believe was part of some nefarious collusion deal, and instead use a public email address?

There is no mention of the email address being either public or private. None. So any conclusion, attendant to that, is baseless.

The article which makes the assumption, also accuses Mueller of lying in Cohen's charging document.

Mueller had nothing to do with the District Court of New York's charging of Cohen. The case is unrelated to the Russian collusion probe.

The article got it wrong. The OP is debunked. The thread is resolved as baseless speculation.

Ok I will adress this.

Here is the charging document discussed in the op.

www.justice.gov...

Very first line in the document.

The special counsel charges:

So you are saying that is not Mueller the special counsel?

Page nine is signed by

Specisal counsel, Robert Mueller.

So despite your claim on two threads, it is in fact you that are debunked. You got it wrong, not the article.

Or are you going to tell me the justice.gov link I provided that Mueller signed is a fake?

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The assumption here is that Cohen didn't have an e-mail address for Putin.

But Trump had already tried to get some face time with Putin back in 2013 and had communicated with Putin.

Trump was trying to get the Trump Tower Moscow deal happening and was talking to Aras Agalarov who was to facilitate the meeting between Trump and Putin through inviting Putin to the 2013 Miss World beauty pageant (run by Trump).

The letter inviting Putin is a matter of record.

Here's a promo photo of Trump, in Moscow at the beauty pageant with Agralov:

So, I'd suspect that Trump did have a direct contact address for Putin.

Under which section of the US Code is any of that a crime?

I wan't saying it was a crime.

I was saying that it is likely that Trump had direct contact details for Putin and explaining why.

Well I’m comforted that Trump did nothing illegal in your estimation. Trump the pre President businessman had every right to contact anyone he wanted. I would hope that President Trump does contact the Russian President along with any other world leader which he chooses. It’s called doing his job.

I thoroughly agree. Trump, in pursuing his business did nothing illegal that we know of.

But Trump did lie when he said that "he had no dealings whatsoever, with the Russians" at all during his candidacy.

He did have dealings, but they were unsuccessful.

To qoute a past President it depends on the meaning of no dealings is. Trump had, by your admission, no successful business deals.

And, do you know how very pathetic this entire thing sounds? Oh, the President lied!!! He lied about having no dealing with the Russians. Really!

The Art of the Deal? Yeah, right.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok so goven those connections in 2013 that were so string, why did they forgo them on this obvious deal, which we are to believe was part of some nefarious collusion deal, and instead use a public email address?

There is no mention of the email address being either public or private. None. So any conclusion, attendant to that, is baseless.

The article which makes the assumption, also accuses Mueller of lying in Cohen's charging document.

Mueller had nothing to do with the District Court of New York's charging of Cohen. The case is unrelated to the Russian collusion probe.

The article got it wrong. The OP is debunked. The thread is resolved as baseless speculation.

Ok I will adress this.

Here is the charging document discussed in the op.

www.justice.gov...

Very first line in the document.

The special counsel charges:

So you are saying that is not Mueller the special counsel?

Page nine is signed by

Specisal counsel, Robert Mueller.

So despite your claim on two threads, it is in fact you that are debunked. You got it wrong, not the article.

Or are you going to tell me the justice.gov link I provided that Mueller signed is a fake?

No, it was my mistake. I was unaware that Mueller had charged Cohen and thought that everyone was referencing the previous charges.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok so goven those connections in 2013 that were so string, why did they forgo them on this obvious deal, which we are to believe was part of some nefarious collusion deal, and instead use a public email address?

There is no mention of the email address being either public or private. None. So any conclusion, attendant to that, is baseless.

The article which makes the assumption, also accuses Mueller of lying in Cohen's charging document.

Mueller had nothing to do with the District Court of New York's charging of Cohen. The case is unrelated to the Russian collusion probe.

The article got it wrong. The OP is debunked. The thread is resolved as baseless speculation.

Ok I will adress this.

Here is the charging document discussed in the op.

www.justice.gov...

Very first line in the document.

The special counsel charges:

So you are saying that is not Mueller the special counsel?

Page nine is signed by

Specisal counsel, Robert Mueller.

So despite your claim on two threads, it is in fact you that are debunked. You got it wrong, not the article.

Or are you going to tell me the justice.gov link I provided that Mueller signed is a fake?

No, it was my mistake. I was unaware that Mueller had charged Cohen and thought that everyone was referencing the previous charges.

Same post I had on the other thread.

Its reasonable, I have made similar mistakes.

I was copying your language being snarky, but honestly it was a very reasonable mistake.

Still, to defend your argument a little, as I said in my OP, this is still based on anonymous sources who claim to have seen material that Cohen used the Russian press email, and we have no proof of that right now.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok so goven those connections in 2013 that were so string, why did they forgo them on this obvious deal, which we are to believe was part of some nefarious collusion deal, and instead use a public email address?

There is no mention of the email address being either public or private. None. So any conclusion, attendant to that, is baseless.

The article which makes the assumption, also accuses Mueller of lying in Cohen's charging document.

Mueller had nothing to do with the District Court of New York's charging of Cohen. The case is unrelated to the Russian collusion probe.

The article got it wrong. The OP is debunked. The thread is resolved as baseless speculation.

Ok I will adress this.

Here is the charging document discussed in the op.

www.justice.gov...

Very first line in the document.

The special counsel charges:

So you are saying that is not Mueller the special counsel?

Page nine is signed by

Specisal counsel, Robert Mueller.

So despite your claim on two threads, it is in fact you that are debunked. You got it wrong, not the article.

Or are you going to tell me the justice.gov link I provided that Mueller signed is a fake?

No, it was my mistake. I was unaware that Mueller had charged Cohen and thought that everyone was referencing the previous charges.

Same post I had on the other thread.

Its reasonable, I have made similar mistakes.

I was copying your language being snarky, but honestly it was a very reasonable mistake.

Still, to defend your argument a little, as I said in my OP, this is still based on anonymous sources who claim to have seen material that Cohen used the Russian press email, and we have no proof of that right now.

My foot is in my mouth up to the knee.

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: chr0naut

Ok so goven those connections in 2013 that were so string, why did they forgo them on this obvious deal, which we are to believe was part of some nefarious collusion deal, and instead use a public email address?

There is no mention of the email address being either public or private. None. So any conclusion, attendant to that, is baseless.

The article which makes the assumption, also accuses Mueller of lying in Cohen's charging document.

Mueller had nothing to do with the District Court of New York's charging of Cohen. The case is unrelated to the Russian collusion probe.

The article got it wrong. The OP is debunked. The thread is resolved as baseless speculation.

Ok I will adress this.

Here is the charging document discussed in the op.

www.justice.gov...

Very first line in the document.

The special counsel charges:

So you are saying that is not Mueller the special counsel?

Page nine is signed by

Specisal counsel, Robert Mueller.

So despite your claim on two threads, it is in fact you that are debunked. You got it wrong, not the article.

Or are you going to tell me the justice.gov link I provided that Mueller signed is a fake?

No, it was my mistake. I was unaware that Mueller had charged Cohen and thought that everyone was referencing the previous charges.

Same post I had on the other thread.

Its reasonable, I have made similar mistakes.

I was copying your language being snarky, but honestly it was a very reasonable mistake.

Still, to defend your argument a little, as I said in my OP, this is still based on anonymous sources who claim to have seen material that Cohen used the Russian press email, and we have no proof of that right now.

My foot is in my mouth up to the knee.

No worries!

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: whywhynot

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Grambler

The assumption here is that Cohen didn't have an e-mail address for Putin.

But Trump had already tried to get some face time with Putin back in 2013 and had communicated with Putin.

Trump was trying to get the Trump Tower Moscow deal happening and was talking to Aras Agalarov who was to facilitate the meeting between Trump and Putin through inviting Putin to the 2013 Miss World beauty pageant (run by Trump).

The letter inviting Putin is a matter of record.

Here's a promo photo of Trump, in Moscow at the beauty pageant with Agralov:

So, I'd suspect that Trump did have a direct contact address for Putin.

Under which section of the US Code is any of that a crime?

I wan't saying it was a crime.

I was saying that it is likely that Trump had direct contact details for Putin and explaining why.

Well I’m comforted that Trump did nothing illegal in your estimation. Trump the pre President businessman had every right to contact anyone he wanted. I would hope that President Trump does contact the Russian President along with any other world leader which he chooses. It’s called doing his job.

I thoroughly agree. Trump, in pursuing his business did nothing illegal that we know of.

But Trump did lie when he said that "he had no dealings whatsoever, with the Russians" at all during his candidacy.

He did have dealings, but they were unsuccessful.

To qoute a past President it depends on the meaning of no dealings is. Trump had, by your admission, no successful business deals.

And, do you know how very pathetic this entire thing sounds? Oh, the President lied!!! He lied about having no dealing with the Russians. Really!

The Art of the Deal? Yeah, right.

Nope nothing that specific to Trump. Just politicians being politicians.

a reply to: 10uoutlaw

It is sad that good americans were duped by this conman.

a reply to: Breakthestreak

No its all russian collusion.

a reply to: whywhynot

We need to encourage her use of special lib glasses,it gives us
something to chuckle over while drinking our coffee*.


*I just finished my hot cocoa with mini marshmallows!

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Breakthestreak

No its all russian collusion.

I genuinely feel sorry for you. I can't imagine going through life this brainwashed.

a reply to: face23785

Thats so funny...

a reply to: face23785

Haha I've come to adore her delusion. It actually brings a smile to my face everytime She posts. It lacks all substance and fact's, if I didnt know better I would think it's a Russian Troll account.

The irony

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Breakthestreak

No its all russian collusion.

Even MSNBC-a-gogo is getting off the "Russian" thing 😸💨

There are 2 things that are very clear here:

1) Mueller's team is not releasing any information. From the get go it has all been speculation, and hearsay, and then shock when Mueller does make a move.

2) With Cohen, this is not Mueller, and we do not know what all is there in the paperwork, due to the fact that much of the information that was released, and what all was there, was blacked out. And what other information that is there, does not say much. We do not know who coconspirator number 1 is. All indications is that it is the President, but until it is out in the open along with the evidence, it is all merely speculation.

a reply to: samuelsson

Yeah thats why my thread from yesterday made it to the front page. Because my posts have no content.

Ah hahahahaha.....

a reply to: xuenchen

No one is getting off the russian thing.

a reply to: Sillyolme

I didnt address your threads did I?

I have made 2, one of them made the front page wich has no bearings on my posting history. But nice deflection

Dont let me stop you from enjoying you're reality You are great it at btw.

Try entering hillary clinton in news.google.com i dare ya

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: xuenchen

No one is getting off the russian thing.

There is no ‘Russian thing’. So sorry. CNN has lied to you and your iq has bought it hook, line and sinker.

A small group of people from a foreign country posting memes and making comments on Facebook is NOT ‘collusion’.

Even if they were asked to do it by Candidate Trump. Even if he was paying them. Still not collusion.

But, so funny to see you (and only you) believe in such publicly acknowledged falsities.

I think 2020 is going to be very very hard for you.

originally posted by: samuelsson
a reply to: face23785

Haha I've come to adore her delusion. It actually brings a smile to my face everytime She posts. It lacks all substance and fact's, if I didnt know better I would think it's a Russian Troll account.

The irony

I used to find it funny. Now it's just sad.