Justice Department preparing for Mueller report as early as next week

Admittedly that's what this all comes down to - the porn star. Was this a campaign finance violation, which is a debated topic. Trying to prove motivations can be difficult.

 

Can be...except that the attorney who committed felony admitted to the motivation under oath...and the person who directed him to commit that felony lied about its existence for years.

 

If it was a felony, John Edwards would have been convicted and the entire point of legal advice is get accurate counsel from your legal professional, which Cohen is, and Trump isn't.

 

An accusation... but no direct evidence, just supposition and conjecture.

Indeed - he unquestionably committed felonies while in office -- direct evidence.
Yet, you opposed his impeachment.

Why did you oppose an impeachment in the presence of direct evidence, but support one with total absence of same?

 

I believe the likelihood is extremely high that that payment would have been made whether the Donald was running for office or not. What was the lawyer's advice to DT before the payment was made? If this is all that's left after the dust settles...

 

Please read my post.. all your questions were answered..

Curious what you base your conjecture about my stance on Willie came from?

No, I'm really not... made up, like 84.7% of your posts

 

Nowhere did you address my question, or the points I made.
But, you know that.

You want to impeach a President based on nothing more than an accusation.

 

1. Your spin attempts are laughable...Bur covers his butt by alluding to things that are a bit fishy....and only a fool would think that Trump, who demonstrated throughout his public career that he's in total control of his projects, would NOT be in the loop regarding the questionable actions of his family and staff. Remember, he's saying "nothing on Trump" NOW...but he knows damned well something is coming down the pike that won't be excusable.

2. More smoke that you readily grasp as proof of your beliefs. Bur on one hand says "no proof" and then turns around and says "but he's not off the hook" and then says "we may never know". GMAFB! Bur may be able to blow smoke up the backsides of Maga hatters, but not anyone with a GED who can read more than one news source and understand the concept of "critical thinking".

3. Regurgitating the Orange Oaf's myopic, self serving blather doesn't make it true because the devil is in the details, as Bur himself states.

 

Thanks for confirming the witch hunt, a FISA warrant is supposed to based on real evidence, not kooky left wing conspiracy theories.

 

No, the nut left will say since there is no evidence of collusion, it was obviously covered up. You can't make this stuff up......

 

FISA warrant? Lol... good, stay focused on that ....

 

You just don't get it, do you? Lawyers choose their words carefully as to avoid being caught wrong....albeit past, present or future. As I demonstrated to another poster, Bur is leaving the door open for future condemnations that can be proven true, so he can always say "well, at the time we had no conclusive evidence towards guilt".