Escort says she made up Trump dirt story to help win release from Thai jail

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Krakatoa

Convicted criminals spill the dirt on associates all the time, simply because their desperate to avoid a prison sentence.

It actually makes more "common sense" that she was putting all her cards on the table by telling the truth, when facing a lengthy prison sentence in Thailand... But now is just backtracking in an attempt to avoid the consequences of 'running her mouth'.

Ok, lets summarise what you are saying here....

A woman says she has some dirt on Trump... you believe her and trash Trump.
The same woman admits she lied and even gives her motive for lying.... this time you don't believe her so you can still trash Trump.

Basically, you will believe anything as long as it feeds your irrational hatred of POTUS.

a reply to: UKTruth

You do realize your doing the exact same thing your accusing me of, right?

Or maybe the irony is completely lost on you.

"Basically, you will believe anything as long as it feeds your irrational" infatuation "of [the] POTUS."

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: UKTruth

You do realize your doing the exact same thing your accusing me of, right?

Or maybe the irony is completely lost on you.

"Basically, you will believe anything as long as it feeds your irrational" infatuation "of [the] POTUS."

No, I didn't believe her story and now I definitely don't believe it and have been proven correct NOT to believe it - because she just admitted she was lying.

It's all pretty clear.

a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you consider her claims back then as 'not credible'... yet consider her claims now as obvious truth?

What possible motive does she have to publicly state she was lying? Other than toeing the line.

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you consider her claims back then as 'not credible'... yet consider her claims now as obvious truth?

What possible motive does she have to publicly state she was lying? Other than toeing the line.

She isn't making a claim now. She is admitting her previous claim was false.
She got what she wanted - no need to continue the lie and face questioning from those on a witch hunt in Washington.

I know it must be frustrating for you to have another hope dashed this way, but them's the breaks.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you consider her claims back then as 'not credible'... yet consider her claims now as obvious truth?

What possible motive does she have to publicly state she was lying? Other than toeing the line.

She isn't making a claim now. She is admitting her previous claim was false.
She got what she wanted - no need to continue the lie and face questioning from those on a witch hunt in Washington.

I know it must be frustrating for you to have another hope dashed this way, but them's the breaks.

Seriously. How many times do these baseless accusations against the president need to be proven as lies, whose only purpose was to fire up the anti-Trump crowd to favor the DNC losers?

People, how many times do you need to be shown you have been lied to before you believe the DNC only wants to usurp power over you and everyone else?

(And before you use the "Trump lies too" whataboutisms, I didn't vote for the man, but he is my president now, and piloting the plane we are ALL traveling upon).

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: UKTruth

Why do you consider her claims back then as 'not credible'... yet consider her claims now as obvious truth?

What possible motive does she have to publicly state she was lying? Other than toeing the line.

She isn't making a claim now. She is admitting her previous claim was false.
She got what she wanted - no need to continue the lie and face questioning from those on a witch hunt in Washington.

Why are you avoiding my question of the motivation for telling the truth now?

It should be easy to answer. If you were seriously convinced that she simply wanted to repent for those awful lies she spoke about Donald Trump... lol.

a reply to: Subaeruginosa

I already did answer your question. She lied about having a tape and now she got what she wanted she has admitted she made it up. It's the obvious thing to do. If she kept up the lie she'd be hounded by the FBI for evidence.

Take a step back, fella. You are not thinking straight.
I get it - it was a great hope that many convoluted conspiracy theories had been based on. It's disappointing for you, but It's over.

I am sure you'll find another conspiracy theory that fills the Trump hatred void to chew on.

a reply to: Krakatoa

It's got so bad that even when the person who told the lie admits it was a lie, it triggers a new unfounded conspiracy theory to keep the old conspiracy theory going.
These people are wrapping themselves in knots and can't seem to escape the merry go round. I have genuine pity for some of them.

a reply to: Krakatoa

She said in the interview that she was told by Russian Agents that took her in to custody after landing that if she spoke of Deripaska or Trump again she would spend the rest of her life in prison or worse.

That is just the facts. Would you like audio, video or transcripts or both?

www.cnn.com...

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: Krakatoa

She said in the interview that she was told by Russian Agents that took her in to custody after landing that if she spoke of Deripaska or Trump again she would spend the rest of her life in prison or worse.

That is just the facts. Would you like audio, video or transcripts or both?

www.cnn.com...

And, since she is a proven liar, why do you believe that, but not the "I lied about the tapes" bit?

See, she is totally unreliable as a witness short of having actual tapes (which could also be faked). That is my point here. She lied, one way or the other, so her entire story should be considered bogus and not worthy of believing.

To quote an Star Trek Episode:

a reply to: Krakatoa

Catch up

Leaked tapes allege Russian oligarch planned arrest of escort claiming she had dirt on Trump
www.foxnews.com...

Leaked audio records allegedly show how Oleg Deripaska's associates plotted the arrest of the ‘sex trainers’ who claimed to have ‘RussiaGate’ dirt on him
Link

originally posted by: Extorris
a reply to: Krakatoa

Catch up

Leaked tapes allege Russian oligarch planned arrest of escort claiming she had dirt on Trump
www.foxnews.com...

Leaked audio records allegedly show how Oleg Deripaska's associates plotted the arrest of the ‘sex trainers’ who claimed to have ‘RussiaGate’ dirt on him
Link

Try to understand the timeline please.

1. She was jailed in Thailand for prostitution
2. She makes claims that she has dirt on Trump colluding with Russians
3. She offers to release them to anyone that will ensure her release from the Thai jail
4. She is released from the Thai jail
5. Once freed from the Thai jail, she claims she lied about having that dirt on Trump colluding with Russia
6. She is extradited to Russia
7. She is jailed in Russia for prostitution
8. She is "convinced" by the NKVD to keep her mouth shut about the Russian politicos or face life in prison (or Gulag time)
9. She is released on her own recognizance but ordered to appear for her court date


We are talking about her jail time from 1 - 5, not her jail time from 7 - 9.

Perhaps you need to keep up with what the topic of discussion actually is here?

a reply to: Krakatoa

Surprise, surprise... Not really, the whole "Trump and Russia collusion" has been crumbling for years now. It was made up by the DNC/Hillary to depose a duly elected POTUS.

a reply to: Extorris

"Alledged tapes" doesn't equal to proof, more so when she was released from the Thai prison and she hasn't provided the "proof" she claimed to have. Instead she is admitting she made it up.

It is possible she had some dirt of some Russian oligarchs," but that doesn't equal to "Trump Russian collusion..."

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Extorris

"Alledged tapes" doesn't equal to proof, more so when she was released from the Thai prison and she hasn't provided the "proof" she claimed to have. Instead she is admitting she made it up.

It is possible she had some dirt of some Russian oligarchs," but that doesn't equal to "Trump Russian collusion..."

You are going to have to accept it's very hard for them to let this one go. It was the great hope. The big one. They were sure they'd get Trump this time. Have some compassion - they've been let down so many times, it must be devastating for them.

I have been in the industry myself and honestly I am behind legalizing prostitution. Whether you like it or not - there is a constant demand for sex. Some countries are still conservative and want to play "saints" and therefore ban it completely. I recently published an article about countries where prostitution is legal: www.presspink.com...
I don't think that in the first place this girl should have been in jail. It's a prostitute and not a criminal. And the only one who knows if her statements are correct or false is she, so we can keep on guessing about Trump on and on.

I'm not sure what side is Trump on.

a reply to: Krakatoa

It should be clearly noted that Nowhere in the OP article or any other news release on the matter does she say she made up the claim

She says her and Deripaska struck a deal for her release.
She says there will be no more discussion of the tapes.
She apologizes to Deripaska.
She says that talking about the tapes likely saved her life.
She explains Russian agents threatened her to never speak of the tapes again.

But NOWHERE does she ever say it was a lie.

I have to imagine Trump supporters care about facts or at least they claim to?

Odd that this whole thread is based on a lie.