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.

 

Judge Napolitano: Prosecutors have evidence the president committed a felony

page: 1
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Appearing on Fox news with Shepard Smith, the Fox news senior judicial analyst explained that New York prosecutors have evidence that President Trump committed a felony by paying Michael Cohen to pay women to keep them quiet during the 2016 election.



Judge Napolitano's explanation begins around the 3:45 mark.



+21 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:32 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

What's the felony? An NDA? That's not a crime... Stormy Daniels just lost a case against Trump and has to pay nearly $300,000 to him...



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

Eh.... I think he's still too useful to them.

He'll stay, no charges for now.


+18 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:33 PM
link   
Judge Nap is the biggest never Trumpers in the country. Shepherd hates Trump too. Total BS report.


+4 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:39 PM
link   
a reply to: links234


lol. They couldn't do anything about Obama's mismanagement of campaigne funds, so a precident has been set.

edit on 12-12-2018 by highvein because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: whywhynot
Judge Nap is the biggest never Trumpers in the country. Shepherd hates Trump too. Total BS report.


Eh. Gateway pundit and breibart get more stars and flags because of their message rather supporting evidence.

This could very well be in the same boat, wouldn't surprise me a bit...

Then again it's content that convinces me more than the headline.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:43 PM
link   
The law stating a sitting President cannot be indicted needs to be changed.
I think it could be during this administration.




+7 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

Same crap. A quote, "We don't know what they know."

To me this screams of more political games than it does application of law.

When the evidence comes out, we'll know.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: links234

Same crap. A quote, "We don't know what they know."

To me this screams of more political games than it does application of law.

When the evidence comes out, we'll know.


It screams entertainment media selling what people want to hear in lieu of actual journalism.

But I haven't seen much journalism in recent years, so it's hard to measure.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   
The claim is Trump is guilty because he ordered Cohen to commit a crime.

Apparently all they have is Cohen's "version" of the story 😀

Next they'll claim somebody smoked root beer.

"Looks like everything Cohen did with Trump was a set-up"
"Wonder who bought him off?"



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I've been thinking about this. It seems as though journalism as given way to avatars, or cult of personalities.

More profitable.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: whywhynot
Judge Nap is the biggest never Trumpers in the country. Shepherd hates Trump too. Total BS report.


I use to love the Judge, I really did but it seems he has let his personal views warp the truth, he use to not be that way.

I was hugely hugely anti Trump, and im still not a huge fan, but the guy has done some good things .

Is he a scum bag for cheating on his wife? yes
Is he a scum bag for paying the women to keep quiet? Yes

Does that make him a felon? No it doesnt, and the judge needs to stop letting his personal issues "Trump" the truth.

Now if Trump HAS done things that are serious violations he should be prosecuted as should anyone else, but i dont see anything ever been done about any of these people, Clintons, Trumps, or any criminal activity by any heads of state.

They know if they did actually charge ANYONE the whole thing would come down like a house of cards, and they cant afford that


+16 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

So 289 congressmen committed felonies as well.

Interesting.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234
Appearing on Fox news with Shepard Smith, the Fox news senior judicial analyst explained that New York prosecutors have evidence that President Trump committed a felony by paying Michael Cohen to pay women to keep them quiet during the 2016 election.



Judge Napolitano's explanation begins around the 3:45 mark.


What’s clear is that some are willing to abuse the justice system to overthrow a sitting president.



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CriticalStinker

I've been thinking about this. It seems as though journalism as given way to avatars, or cult of personalities.

More profitable.


Or people are only open to what they want to hear.

Consumerism has entered the news realm.

I'm not saying we should eat up every story, but if there's a dry (no buzz word) article, maybe it's worth a read.

I saw an interesting piece on what happened after networks abandoned no advertisement news hours for the commercial driven media.
edit on 12-12-2018 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Or people are only open to what they want to hear.


By our very nature. It takes an extra cognitive step not to.




I saw an interesting piece on what happened after networks abandoned no advertisement news hours for the commercial driven media.


That sounds fairly interesting. Have a link?


+19 more 
posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 09:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
The law stating a sitting President cannot be indicted needs to be changed.
I think it could be during this administration.



Why don't we just change the law then so a sitting President has no power at all and could just be tied up with frivolous lawsuits for his entire term because the losers of the election are butthurt about it?

Sounds fabulous!

Just... LOL
edit on 12-12-2018 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 10:08 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

Possibly someone should tell the TV personality that entering into a private contract and using private money to do it is not a crime and never will be.

Or if we believe the "before" Cohen, he used his own personal money to enter into a private contract for his client and then was repaid?

I forget what version of Cohen's story we are on now, to be honest.

If someone could possibly post the law or statute which says that a Presidential candidate can not make a private contract while running for office I would appreciate that, so we can debate it.

Or in this case, the law or statute that states that a Presidential candidate's lawyer cannot conduct private business matters for his client while they are running...

Or, to be honest, why doesn't Trump just say he had a Bimbo Eruption and handled it?

Seemed to work well for Bill Clinton.. his lawyers were bragging about how many he had.

Which is sick, since one of Bill's "Bimbo Eruptions" was a rape allegation that he had to eventually pay $850,000 to get a NDA on after a Supreme Court ruling on and the other was a sexual harassment...

But hey! Post the Campaign Law on that please...

Thanks in advance...


edit on 12-12-2018 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Forgive me, I'm not going to be able to provide the piece itself... And in all fairness, I'll have to do some digging to back up my claim.

I'll look into this more tomorrow and get back to you.

But for now, here's a good example of old FCC regulations.

Granted, I can see flaws with it... But I think we can all agree somewhere things derailed when six entities control the vast majority of media.


edit on 12-12-2018 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2018 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: links234

So no collusion??

Ok so the SDNY will likely go afterTrump based on campaign finance laws, unless Trump can prove he pays women to keep shut regularly.

Let’s say Trump can’t prove that - he can’t be indicted so there is no immediate legal impact.

The question then becomes will it be so “politically devastating” as people like Horowitz claim, that Trump supporters don’t vote for him in 2020, assuming Trump runs for re-election?? Or have people still had it with bureaucracy and the DS so much that they’ll overlook these “financial missteps” Trump directed in order to not negatively influence his campaign??

Because supporters were under the impression the investigation was to uncover Russian collusion (not a crime - should we change that law too in order to bag the “bad orange man”?)




top topics



 
21
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join