What are these people so afraid of having exposed by this president? This effort by The Swamp goes beyond getting Trump for winning in 2016 or even venting their personal hatred for him. They don’t want their treasonous activities, including the truth of this phony investigation, being discovered by the American people. That’s my guess.
This guy explains it all.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_aevtHHULag
If you dont like youtube, then the whole GD thing is about counter politics to cover up the out and out treason committed by the last administration.
Money is fungible. While the funds COULD have come from campaign funds, not all of Donald J. Trump’s capital was dedicated to the campaign for President. For all anybody knows, this could have come out of his personal household petty cash, much as the payment for a kitchen cook or other staff.
And since when does payment of any sum to anybody have to constitute that it was “for services rendered”? Does giving a beggar on the street a dollar bill make that beggar some kind of personal servant? Tribute is paid to these various hangers-on simply to make them go away, and stop their begging.
In any number of instances, the members of both the House and the Senate have availed themselves of a various number of “slush funds” to pay off attempted blackmail, for hush money to keep a potential scandal from boiling over, and most of the time, it works. So many of the members of Congress do not come with clean hands, either, and for them to accuse the President of mismanagement of funds NOT their own, is hypocrisy of highest order. Even those who have never participated in disbursing these funds for less than honorable purposes, are complicit in their tacit agreement to allow the system to continue.
Wealthy men of every strip have been in circumstances where they had to cover over distasteful situations by the payment of cash sums, to make the problem “go away”.
NADLER'S INCIPIENT ALZHEIMERS?
freebeacon.com BY: Jack Heretik, August 26, 2018
NY Democrat Jerry Nadler was confronted about his comments–made during former President Bill Clinton's impeachment–saying a president can't commit obstruction of justice. NBC's MTP's Chuck Todd asked Nadler about his past comments, in which he was defending Clinton during the impeachment proceedings against him.".......back in 1999, during the debate about whether or not Bill Clinton obstructed justice, you said at the time you were not convinced that a president could obstruct justice," Todd said. "Do you feel that way, that it's not one of the quote ‘might not be impeachable,’ put it this way, that obstruction of justice might not be an impeachable offense?"
A DEMOCRAT-INDUCED MEMORY---- "Well, I don't remember saying that, but if I said it, I said it, but no, I don't agree with that today. A president, anybody can obstruct justice," Nadler said. "Obstruction of justice under certain circumstances might be an impeachable offense. Remember, there is a very big difference between a crime which may or may not be impeachable and an impeachable offense which doesn't have to be a crime."
=================================
Nadler has been a member of Congress since 1992 and was part to the Clinton impeachment proceedings. In a 1998 floor speech, Nadler said Clinton perjuring himself was not an impeachable offense."Perjury is a serious crime and, if provable, should be prosecuted in a court of law. But it may or may not involve the president’s duties and performance in office. Perjury on a private matter, perjury regarding sex, is not a great and dangerous offense against the Nation. It is not an abuse of uniquely presidential power. It does not threaten our form of government. It is not an impeachable offense," Nalder said.
At the time Nadler said Clinton's perjury with regard to a private sexual affair did not threaten the Constitutional order; it is a crime but was not an impeachable offense. Perjury regarding an attempt by a president to subvert the Constitutional order, to aggrandize power probably, would be an impeachable offense."
======================================
That was then:
Nadler defended Clinton "eloquently," arguing the lewinskied Clinton shouldn't be impeached for lying to conceal his affair with an intern.
This is now:
incoming chair Nadler is itching to impeach Trump using discredited witnesses like porn star Stormy Daniels and her sleaze lawyer Michael Avenatti.
Here is the thing.....this ongoing coup against DJT is not about him, it is about us, the people who elected him. The swamp considers his election as POTUS an uprising by the people against them, the swamp. They are forcing us into submission.