National Enquirer chairman to accept Immunity in exchange for information

[Hijinx]

I would imagine many papers get stories and hold them until they have real meaning.
I believe that if the stories the Enquirer bought and they held ,became real stories and they could sell papers with them, they would have released them soon enough.

It is amazing that the Mueller team cannot get evidence without giving immunity or threatening prison.
Are they getting real evidence? Or are they merely using extortionist methods to get lies.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

I would imagine many papers get stories and hold them until they have real meaning.
I believe that if the stories the Enquirer bought and they held ,became real stories and they could sell papers with them, they would have released them soon enough.

It is amazing that the Mueller team cannot get evidence without giving immunity or threatening prison.
Are they getting real evidence? Or are they merely using extortionist methods to get lies.

That's not what was happening though. The CEO was a friend of Trump and bought stories abuot Trump with the sole purpose of not releasing the story.

Giving immunity and threatening prison is a very common practice.

 

[vraiblonde]

Giving immunity and threatening prison is a very common practice.

Normally one would have committed a crime of some form first, though.

What crime was committed by the Enquirer guy?

 

[Hijinx]

That's not what was happening though. The CEO was a friend of Trump and bought stories abuot Trump with the sole purpose of not releasing the story.

Giving immunity and threatening prison is a very common practice.

I guess that makes it right then.

 

[This_person]

Normally one would have committed a crime of some form first, though.

What crime was committed by the Enquirer guy?

Sappy's question is unusually pertinent: What was he given immunity for? Now, The Sapster means, "what is the motivation for giving immunity", but the real question is, immunity against what crime?

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Normally one would have committed a crime of some form first, though.

What crime was committed by the Enquirer guy?

Why don't you ask someone who is actually a part of the investigation?

I guess that makes it right then.

You wouldn't give 2 ####s if it was some drug dealer, but now you care?

 

[Sapidus]

Sappy's question is unusually pertinent: What was he given immunity for? Now, The Sapster means, "what is the motivation for giving immunity", but the real question is, immunity against what crime?

Most likely something uncovered in Cohens office we will know about soon enough.

 

[vraiblonde]

Why don't you ask someone who is actually a part of the investigation?

Because I don't know anyone who is part of the investigation and I thought you might have heard on the news or somewhere.

 

[This_person]

Most likely something uncovered in Cohens office we will know about soon enough.

A cursory look into it shows that they corroborated Cohen's story about Cohen's campaign-law violation. The obvious presumption is that they were given immunity from being accessories to that crime, which still is nothing about any other story.

 

[MiddleGround]

You're all over the place, per usual... Bless your heart!

The usual 'convenient' story bending from board mommy.

And your reading comprehension skills are all over the place, per usual.

Bless your heart.

And.. the usual response. "It's not my lying problem.. it is YOUR reading problem."

Caught yet again!

 

[Sapidus]

The usual 'convenient' story bending from board mommy.



And.. the usual response. "It's not my lying problem.. it is YOUR reading problem."

Caught yet again!

It doesnt count until she calls you a "retard" in frustration for calling her on her hypocrisy