• Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it. Please report violators.

    DMCA, complaints, and other inquiries:

    [email protected]

Jim Norton makes bold opinion!

Sue Lightning

IS SHE TALKING ABOUT ME?
Forum Clout
116,987

You know what man, I don’t care! Really bold position. I’m not even gonna argue you SHOULD care, most of you don’t. But most of you aren’t on Fox news stumping for a guy you’re gonna vote for.

Also, if he isn’t guilty like you claim, why even TAKE the position of “OKKKK BUT EVEN IF HE IS I JUST DONT CARE MAAAHN!”

I said this in another thread but if this were Biden we would hear on Jim and Sam everyday about how “Yeaaaah man i dont know how people can vote for Biden when he’s on trial maaan its a tough one”

Spineless faggot.
 

Sue Lightning

IS SHE TALKING ABOUT ME?
Forum Clout
116,987
I don't wanna get into this & I really don't care, but is the argument that Trump didn't declare this as election funds? Could you imagine how bad it would be if the hush-money was declared as election funds? I think it's a non-winner either way
No , so the way it went was Cohen paid them off with personal funds and misreporting it. He went to jail over that. But the reason Trump is implicated is because he paid Cohen back, and instead of marking this as a repayment, he marked it as an invoice for legal work / a retainer, which it just …wasn’t
 
Forum Clout
2,512
So do they intentionally not do "Trannies are subhuman freaks and agents of Satan" quote un-quote jokes when he's on Gutfeld because it's almost every night they do that from what I've seen. He does know Republicans think his wife should be in jail or exiled or dead, right?

He's in essence a gay guy with his type of relationship, why not go on a show like that with his wife? Jim's not a conservative. Why do this?
 

Sue Lightning

IS SHE TALKING ABOUT ME?
Forum Clout
116,987
To be fair paying someone "hush money" to go away isn't a crime. It's an NDA.
Don’t make me go into this. Cohen literally went to jail for paying them off. Yes, it is a crime. He broke election law. He paid $130,000 as a “campaign contribution on behalf of someone running for office” and didn’t report it. Illegal. Like all he had to do to make it NOT illegal was declare it for what it was.
 

TorpidSloth

Forum Clout
15,022
Don’t make me go into this. Cohen literally went to jail for paying them off. Yes, it is a crime. He broke election law. He paid $130,000 as a “campaign contribution on behalf of someone running for office” and didn’t report it. Illegal. Like all he had to do to make it NOT illegal was declare it for what it was.
I thought he just paid her off for the shag. It's all just entertainment from this side of the pond tbh
 

Sue Lightning

IS SHE TALKING ABOUT ME?
Forum Clout
116,987
I thought he just paid her off for the shag. It's all just entertainment from this side of the pond tbh
He did, but technically it’s considered a “campaign contribution” because it was paid at the behest of a political candidate. AMI, who owns the National Enquirer, got in the same legal trouble. They were found out to have been buying news stories to help Trump in 2016 (They would buy the rights to the stories just so they wouldn’t be published) and the only reason they avoided prosecution is because they agreed to help the government. But it was the exact same thing. Even though AMI wasn’t literally giving money to Trump to spend on his campaign, they were spending money to help a candidate (not to mention at the orders of said candidate) and then not declaring it as such.

Basically the simple way to avoid the illegality of it is if AMI had 0 connection to Trump and were buying these stories because they just liked him, or if they accurately stated the purpose of the transaction. I mean they literally started an entire shell company to hide the transaction so they knew it wasn’t above board.
 

TorpidSloth

Forum Clout
15,022
He did, but technically it’s considered a “campaign contribution” because it was paid at the behest of a political candidate. AMI, who owns the National Enquirer, got in the same legal trouble. They were found out to have been buying news stories to help Trump in 2016 (They would buy the rights to the stories just so they wouldn’t be published) and the only reason they avoided prosecution is because they agreed to help the government. But it was the exact same thing. Even though AMI wasn’t literally giving money to Trump to spend on his campaign, they were spending money to help a candidate (not to mention at the orders of said candidate) and then not declaring it as such.

Basically the simple way to avoid the illegality of it is if AMI had 0 connection to Trump and were buying these stories because they just liked him, or if they accurately stated the purpose of the transaction. I mean they literally started an entire shell company to hide the transaction so they knew it wasn’t above board.
That doesn't sound like anything worse than any/every politician has done though really.
 
Top