Post #1132 by Umm on the US Policy board

Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (114)

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

No. of Recommendations: 1

"Dershowitz covered this yesterday."

He "covered it" by giving you an illogical line of thinking that you lapped up because you wanted to.

"Literally no one has ever put on an accounting form "$X - Payoff for my lawyer bribing a couple of hookers"."

<sarcasm>Right. The only options were putting in an accounting description that says "$X - Payoff for my lawyer bribing a couple of hookers" or working with a lawyer, and an outside organization to set up an elaborate scheme with multiple payments. </sarcasm>

Dershowitz gave you a fallacy of false choice and you swallowed it.

"If Bragg thinks he can claim a crime was committed for purposes of the election, he loses because the FEC will testify there was nothing there either."

You know of all of the evidence Bragg has?

Remember, Cohen has recordings and emails and such. What if one of them shows Trump clearly saying this needs to be done for purposes of the election?

Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!

Print the post

Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (114)

Prev | Next

Announcements

US Policy FAQ

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

A community forum supporting civilized, and highly helpful, self-educating investors that come together for Shrewdness and merry spirits. These message boards closely follow the look and feel of the old message boards at boards.fool.com prior to the boards redirected to discussion.fool.com. Shrewd'm is not affiliated with the comprehensive and excellent investment website, The Motley Fool (TMF), in any way. The Shrewd commmunity here has owed, and continues to owe, gratitude to The Motley Fool for nurturing a culture of jovial irreverence towards Wall St, and that tradition will continue here.