So specific that you know they strong armed him to get it, but it's not going to work.
And Obama did the same thing so don't even dream that we let you continue doing this and letting Liberal criminals like @HillaryClinton off for even worse and far more dangerous crimes.
-
-
-
We don't have new executive orders regarding military tribunals for nothing. Tick Tock
@HillaryClinton
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
How could it not be obvious to everyone what's going here? According to the former chairman of the FEC, Bradley Smith, a hush payment like the one to Stormy Daniels does not constitute a campaign finance violation, even if part of the intent was to avoid negative press- 1/4
-
press coverage that might negatively affect electoral prospects: "When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a
-
campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason." In an earlier article in the Wall Street Journal, he also said this: "If paying hush money is a campaign expense, a candidate would be required to make
-
that payment with campaign funds. How ironic, given that using campaign funds as hush money was one of the articles of impeachment in the Watergate scandal, which gave rise to modern campaign-finance law." What CLEARLY happened here is that in order to get a reduced sentence,
-
Michael Cohen agreed to plead guilty to a campaign finance violation even though what he did was NOT a campaign finance violation. And it is quite obvious that the only reason they wanted him to do this was because getting Cohen to plead guilty to a campaign finance violation
-
gives the appearance that Trump is implicated in that crime. It's the same reason Cohen and others are using the language they are, saying the payments were to "influence the election". The intent is to create the impression of a connection to the so-far nonsense idea that
-
Trump colluded with Russia to "influence the election". What they really mean is that Cohen paid someone, in part, NOT to attempt to negatively influence the election and they want people to interpret THAT as being the attempt to influence the election.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is totally wrong what the prosecutor did. There is no campaign violation here. Even the head of the FEC stated that.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You should know better WSJ, this was a script written by the Mueller team, no substance or election fraud, Mueller team is desperate they know they are in trouble because President Trump is exposing the corruption in Washington and many heads are going to roll.
-
Omg ur hilarious!!! U and everyone else that lives in an alternative reality are about to learn a lessonpic.twitter.com/aDqU2xSegL
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Cohen signed what the prosecutors (from Mueller’s team) put in front of hiim in order to get the plea bargain deal.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Fake news
-
Womp womp
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This will be a nothing burger.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The notion that Trump cannot be indicted is incorrect. NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.
-
https://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/obama-2008-campaign-fined-375000-085784 … Obama was found guilty of the samething. He broke campaign finance laws and was simply given a fine, just like Trump will simply be given a fine. Sorry to burst your bubblepic.twitter.com/Z1DWh3Ju2m
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.