why is Trump investigated and not obama?

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit

originally posted by: olaru12

originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: olaru12

" Because trump turned the spotlight on himself when he laundered money with the commies. "


Ah , just gotta Call You Out on that one . You just talkin' Out your Butt here or do you have some Linked Proof to that ? .....Hmm.......

It was in the article I included, but here's a few more.

www.vox.com...

www.usnews.com...

www.rollingstone.com...

www.businessinsider.com...

www.usatoday.com...

Hmm... OK , Any Non LEFT Wing Links here , or we just takin' FAKE NEWS ?

I must be psychic....how did I know that would be your response? Old number....19

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Slanter
... what? You mean the time that one of Obama's friends offered to pay reverend Wright $150,000 to shut up? You know why nothing ever came of that? Because it didn't happen. He didn't receive any money. Obama asked him, personally, to stop saying stupid things until after the presidency and he did.

All this information is in the link you posted, but it's all presented in a way to make it seem nefarious.

This is the equivalency? "Well, A friend of Obama's once offered money to shut up Obama's pastor from saying stupid things, but no money was actually exchanged, So obviously it should be fine for a candidate to pay off porn stars to shut up about multiple affairs before an election."

A non-disclosure agreement is a legal contract. Offering hush money isn't.

Then Obama's friend should be penalized for offering hush money, because as has been said in previous posts, Obama had nothing to do with it. Or, his friends are better liars than Trump's friends (because all of politics is corrupt).

Yes, an NDA is a legal document. But, the money offered with the NDA can't come from campaign financing, which is one of the allegations brought against Trump & co.

Maybe you can answer this. If Trump had "billions" before he ran, does his running automatically make all his billions part of the "campaign"? If so, then anything he bought or spent money on would fall into this category, and anyone who ever ran for office is just as guilty. Is that how it works?

a reply to: WeRpeons

So you believe the Mainstream Media is after Trump because he's not a very sympathic person, and not because they play a deep role in the political games?

Man it must be cold out there in Wonderland.

I think Trump's campaign violations are very similar to those by Obama when he was fined $375K (from his 2008 run). Both are about illegal use of campaign funds.

www.politico.com...


www.washingtonpost.com... 9e-dd8773594efc_story.html?utm_term=.576ab6995d1f

a reply to: theantediluvian

Assuming that the person who approached Wright was on the level, there's no proof that Obama or anyone in his campaign knew anything about it. More importantly, no money was ever exchanged so there's no possibility of a violation.

Obama knew about it. That's why he paid Jeremiah Wright a personal visit shortly after he rejected the bribe.

a reply to: narrator

Yes, an NDA is a legal document. But, the money offered with the NDA can't come from campaign financing, which is one of the allegations brought against Trump & co.

This is where it gets sticky. The money didn't come from campaign funds, it came from a personal trust. The problem with the way the campaign finance laws are written is that they consider any PERSONAL money you spend as campaign money if THEY think you spent it on something election related, whether you did or not.

a reply to: vinifalou


Don't read in between the lines.
My point was Trump created his illegal problems himself. If he had questionable illegal dealings, he should have never ran for president. Now that he's on a pedestal of public and world opinion, his rude remarks and firings have ruffled many feathers. Piss people off enough, they're going to want revenge. Trump has said he's a "counter puncher," but many times he's punched without being punched. Calling two women who he had affairs with liars, and denying the pay-off ruffled their feathers and they made their anger known in public. Throw your once-close attorney under the bus, he's going to seek revenge. Deny a foreign adversary was involved influencing America's elections, after evidence was presented, just adds fuel to the fire for more public attention, questions and investigations as to why a president would defend such an attack on our elections.

If you want someone that doesn't feel like he has to be respectful, ignore America's basic values, or attack the constitutional rights of the press, protecting and complimenting tyrannical leaders, than he's created his own negative attention, public concerns and questions regarding his personal connections and legalities.

a reply to: Aallanon

mayabe cuz the stories are bullschitt

a reply to: Sillyolme

The ones about Trump? I agree

a reply to: Irishhaf

It's a nail in the coffin, Not the whole case.

a reply to: Aallanon

Oh the stories about trump are true all right.

a reply to: Sillyolme

You really are too smart to act this stupid

originally posted by: narrator

originally posted by: Propagandalf

originally posted by: Slanter
... what? You mean the time that one of Obama's friends offered to pay reverend Wright $150,000 to shut up? You know why nothing ever came of that? Because it didn't happen. He didn't receive any money. Obama asked him, personally, to stop saying stupid things until after the presidency and he did.

All this information is in the link you posted, but it's all presented in a way to make it seem nefarious.

This is the equivalency? "Well, A friend of Obama's once offered money to shut up Obama's pastor from saying stupid things, but no money was actually exchanged, So obviously it should be fine for a candidate to pay off porn stars to shut up about multiple affairs before an election."

A non-disclosure agreement is a legal contract. Offering hush money isn't.

Then Obama's friend should be penalized for offering hush money, because as has been said in previous posts, Obama had nothing to do with it. Or, his friends are better liars than Trump's friends (because all of politics is corrupt).

Yes, an NDA is a legal document. But, the money offered with the NDA can't come from campaign financing, which is one of the allegations brought against Trump & co.

To add, it also had zero to do with any Obama actions. Trumps payments were directly related to his actions.

a reply to: Aallanon

We will see who the stupid ones are eventually. But I can tell you right now that you are living in a fantasy world.
Trump is in big big trouble because he is a crook. You refuse to see it. You keep coming on here every day crying about how the media is not fair wah wah wah.... It is fair and he is being correctly portrayed. You may not agree with it but too bad
because its all true. You are believing his lies and he lies constantly.

a reply to: Sillyolme

The only analogy I find that applies is the Nazis

In 1940 Germany the German powers that be were acting within the law.

It doesn't make it right.

You are backing the wrong side and I feel you know it.

double post

Crackpot is the key word there. Since when do listen to crackpots? Because another crackpot went on Fox news and said so?

Fox is a tabloid. If said crackpot was offered hush money show us an nda because Stormy had one Hearsay isn't admissible in a court of law.

a reply to: Aallanon



What I find ironic in a spectacular way, is that the two biggest businesses in Washington DC are gift shops and escort services, I think it has something to do with the proximity to senators and congressmen.

a reply to: Aallanon

It's like the public smoking ban and gun control laws of Nazi era Germany. If you support the oppressive socialist regime you get away with anything, if you go against them they use any any little infraction and dig deep to find it. They use anything they can to try to shut you down and arrest you.