So, which one is lying?

[hollywood]

"Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly."-Michael Cohen, February, 2018

"I've had conversations with the president about this. There was no knowledge of any payments from the president and he's denied all of these allegations." -WH Press Secretary Sarah Sanders, March 2018

“They funneled through a law firm, and the president repaid it... That was money that was paid by his lawyer. The president reimbursed that over the period of several months.” -Rudy Giuliani, May 2018.


Trick question, they're probably all lying.

 

[Alpha Poke]

You captured the essence of our govt in your last sentence.

Hopefully, we're getting tired of the status quo.

 

[AC_Exotic]

I think Sanders is the only one being truthful.

Trump is obviously lying. Rudy G. inexplicably outed him of Hannity's show. No I don't watch it but saw the clip on YouTube.

 

[DrunkenViking]

I’m gonna quit being a sarcastic ass real quick and ask an honest question.

Why does anyone care?

 

[Rdcldad]

I’m gonna quit being a sarcastic ass real quick and ask an honest question.

Why does anyone care?

my sentiments exactly

if you’re not sending 400m to iran
weaponizing law enforcement
illegally spying on the opposition candidate

who cares about 120k
to some big titted slut puppy

 

[AC_Exotic]

Bad Trump.

 

[wyomingosualum]

Trick question, they're probably all lying.

Before clicking to open the thread, my first thought was, “All of the above.”

 

[hollywood]

I think Sanders is the only one being truthful.

Trump is obviously lying. Rudy G. inexplicably outed him of Hannity's show. No I don't watch it but saw the clip on YouTube.

Sanders is the only one with any "cover" on this as her statement could be "truthful" in the sense that she was merely relaying what she had been told by Trump, even though the underlying story was a lie. Repeating a "lie" that you believed to be truthful, is not in the same category as generating that lie in the first place. But once she knows that Trump has been lying to her, then she is on notice and future lies can be held against her.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Why does anyone care?

Because we cant' trust someone that tells clumsy lies whenever it's more convenient than addressing reality.

 

[CowboyPhil]

Because we cant' trust someone that tells clumsy lies whenever it's more convenient than addressing reality.

Then you better find some anarchy utopia where there are no politicians to lie.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Then you better find some anarchy utopia where there are no politicians to lie.

There's a big spectrum between anarchy utopia and pathological, daily, clumsy lies and expecting nobody to notice.

 

[Alpha Poke]

There's a big spectrum between anarchy utopia and pathological, daily, clumsy lies and expecting nobody to notice.

Maybe my memory is better, but I don't recall an administration that didn't lie as their default.

 

[HanAholeSolo2.0]

Because we cant' trust someone that tells clumsy lies whenever it's more convenient than addressing reality.

just because you don’t/can’t recognize the strategy doesn’t make it clumsy.

 

[Ostatedchi]

Sanders is the only one with any "cover" on this as her statement could be "truthful" in the sense that she was merely relaying what she had been told by Trump, even though the underlying story was a lie. Repeating a "lie" that you believed to be truthful, is not in the same category as generating that lie in the first place. But once she knows that Trump has been lying to her, then she is on notice and future lies can be held against her.

Wood, why does this matter?

 

[imprimis]

As to Rudy's statement, we know the dems used a law firm to funnel significantly more money through it for a dubious dossier. At least Trump got some pussy out of it.

Edit: Hillary might have gotten some pussy out of her money funnel, too.

 

[Bitter Creek]

I’m gonna quit being a sarcastic ass real quick and ask an honest question.

Why does anyone care?

I was going to ask the exact same question

 

[CBradSmith]

Only reason to care:

GOT EEEMM!!!

 

[Bitter Creek]

remember when the lefties used to tell politicians to get out of their bedrooms

 

[Rdcldad]

As to Rudy's statement, we know the dems used a law firm to funnel significantly more money through it for a dubious dossier. At least Trump got some pussy out of it.

that’s a winner

don’t forget washing state dnc dough back to cank when it comes to moving money

 

[Rdcldad]

remember when the lefties used to tell politicians to get out of their bedrooms

you got a point there

 

[imprimis]

that’s a winner

don’t forget washing state dnc dough back to cank when it comes to moving money

I edited my post after your reply.

 

[Medic007]

Because we cant' trust someone that tells clumsy lies whenever it's more convenient than addressing reality.

Lol. Hillary says Hi! and thanks for the vote!

It's almost to the point of complete cognitive dissonansyskatine in your recent posts.

 

[hollywood]

Wood, why does this matter?

Because there's a number of potential laws that may have been broken in the process. At this point, that may also include if Cohen was reimbursed in a manner that was designed to avoid the reporting requirements within the banking regulations as that could be a felony. (Remember Speaker Hastart was convicted of that felony and did prison time.) This is in addition to the likely violations of campaign finance law, which interestingly enough George Conway (Kellyanne's husband and former Lawyer for Paula Jones against Clinton) spelled out his morning to contradict Giuliani's claims that no laws were broken.

Again, whether he had sex with a porn star (or several) doesn't really concern me. Engaging in a pattern of conduct to hide it, if that conduct violated the law should concern everyone.

 

[CowboyPhil]

How much should it concern us, to say, lying under oath to Congress?

 

[HighStickHarry]

Because there's a number of potential laws that may have been broken in the process. At this point, that may also include if Cohen was reimbursed in a manner that was designed to avoid the reporting requirements within the banking regulations as that could be a felony. (Remember Speaker Hastart was convicted of that felony and did prison time.) This is in addition to the likely violations of campaign finance law, which interestingly enough George Conway (Kellyanne's husband and former Lawyer for Paula Jones against Clinton) spelled out his morning to contradict Giuliani's claims that no laws were broken.

Again, whether he had sex with a porn star (or several) doesn't really concern me. Engaging in a pattern of conduct to hide it, if that conduct violated the law should concern everyone.

Concerns me zero.

 

[CSCOTTOSUPOKES]

As to Rudy's statement, we know the dems used a law firm to funnel significantly more money through it for a dubious dossier. At least Trump got some pussy out of it.

Edit: Hillary might have gotten some pussy out of her money funnel, too.

1) Do you know who originally hired Steele to investigate Trump?

2) Proof of its dubiousness?

 

[Ostatedchi]

Because there's a number of potential laws that may have been broken in the process. At this point, that may also include if Cohen was reimbursed in a manner that was designed to avoid the reporting requirements within the banking regulations as that could be a felony. (Remember Speaker Hastart was convicted of that felony and did prison time.) This is in addition to the likely violations of campaign finance law, which interestingly enough George Conway (Kellyanne's husband and former Lawyer for Paula Jones against Clinton) spelled out his morning to contradict Giuliani's claims that no laws were broken.

Again, whether he had sex with a porn star (or several) doesn't really concern me. Engaging in a pattern of conduct to hide it, if that conduct violated the law should concern everyone.

You realize you sound just like Ken Star when you post that?

 

[AC_Exotic]

Someone remind me ... were we this upset about Obama-people lying?

 

[CowboyJD]

Someone remind me ... were we this upset about Obama-people lying?

Plenty of you were screaming here every day.....so, yes.

 

[AC_Exotic]

Plenty of you were screaming here every day.....so, yes.

I don't like Trump lying. This is a big deal (though not a shock).

 

[CowboyPhil]

I don't like any politicians lying, but have come to the realization that they all do it.

 

[AC_Exotic]

I don't like any politicians lying, but have come to the realization that they all do it.

And they should be held accountable when they do.

 

[Bitter Creek]

I hope he b8nged the shite out of it and even though it seems like he did it and then followed it up by lying about it, I cannot make myself care about it in the grand scheme of things.

The Libs should just be glad that 17YO boys can't vote. They would give him the stamp of approval in the next election.

 

[imprimis]

1) Do you know who originally hired Steele to investigate Trump?

The Clinton Campaign and the DNC.

As testified before Congress:

The Washington Free Beacon originally funded the project through the firm Fusion GPS, a connection the publication’s lawyers revealed for the first time to the House Intelligence Committee on Friday.

The Washington Examiner first reported the connection and the Free Beacon then confirmed it.

The publication stopped funding the project in the spring of 2016. At that point, Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee picked up funding of the project.

The project until that point had focused on researching multiple Republican presidential candidates and was not looking at collusion with Russia, according to the Free Beacon.

The former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele also became involved after the publication stopped funding the project and went on to compile the dossier, which is sometimes known as the "Steele dossier."

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/35...cation-originally-funded-trump-dossier-report

 

[JimmyBob]

Hillary might have gotten some pussy out of her money funnel, too.

Huma tuna, huma tuna, huma tuna - sung to music of boomer sooner - which was stolen from boola boola, boola boola,.......

 

[Medic007]

Huma tuna, huma tuna, huma tuna - sung to music of boomer sooner - which was stolen from boola boola, boola boola,.......

Ugh

 

[wyomingosualum]

1) Do you know who originally hired Steele to investigate Trump?

You pose a question that has an answer you’re not expecting. The answer to your question is that Fusion hired Steele and the Democrats hired Fusion.

The rest of the story is that the Free Beacon originally hired Fusion to research Trump. Steele was not involved in it at this point. Steele only became involved after the Dems picked up the project. So anything that Steele authored can be legitimately disavowed by the anybody except Democrats.

http://freebeacon.com/uncategorized/fusion-gps-washington-free-beacon/

 

[wyomingosualum]

The Clinton Campaign and the DNC.

As testified before Congress:

The Washington Free Beacon originally funded the project through the firm Fusion GPS, a connection the publication’s lawyers revealed for the first time to the House Intelligence Committee on Friday.

The Washington Examiner first reported the connection and the Free Beacon then confirmed it.

The publication stopped funding the project in the spring of 2016. At that point, Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee picked up funding of the project.

The project until that point had focused on researching multiple Republican presidential candidates and was not looking at collusion with Russia, according to the Free Beacon.

The former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele also became involved after the publication stopped funding the project and went on to compile the dossier, which is sometimes known as the "Steele dossier."

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/35...cation-originally-funded-trump-dossier-report

Sorry, I didn’t see you had already addressed this issue.

 

[CSCOTTOSUPOKES]

You pose a question that has an answer you’re not expecting. The answer to your question is that Fusion hired Steele and the Democrats hired Fusion.

The rest of the story is that the Free Beacon originally hired Fusion to research Trump. Steele was not involved in it at this point. Steele only became involved after the Dems picked up the project. So anything that Steele authored can be legitimately disavowed by the anybody except Democrats.

http://freebeacon.com/uncategorized/fusion-gps-washington-free-beacon/

You think because Dems hires Steele that his research is all phony? Even when the intelligence community has widely accepted his work in the past? Lol...mmmkay

 

[wyomingosualum]

You think because Dems hires Steele that his research is all phony? Even when the intelligence community has widely accepted his work in the past? Lol...mmmkay

You’re reading something that I didn’t say. I didn’t say it was all phony. I didn’t say it was partially phony. I don’t know where you’re getting that.

All I was interested in doing was to make sure we all understand that “the Republicans” has nothing to do with the Steele Dossier.