Add Another Crime to the Pile - Trump Inauguration Spending Under Criminal Investigation

Can’t stop all the #winning!

Trump Inauguration Spending Under Criminal Investigation by Federal Prosecutors - WSJ

The investigation partly arises out of materials seized in the federal probe of former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen’s business dealings, according to people familiar with the matter.

In April raids of Mr. Cohen’s home, office and hotel room, Federal Bureau of Investigation agents obtained a recorded conversation between Mr. Cohen and Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a former adviser to Melania Trump, who worked on the inaugural events. In the recording, Ms. Wolkoff expressed concern about how the inaugural committee was spending money, according to a person familiar with the Cohen investigation.

So we got a little mo quid-pro-quo.


1 Like

Damn - the hits just keep coming.

Mr. Law and Order - yeah, right.

Process crimes!

Take a good guess who was involved with that.

The committee responsible for organizing President Donald Trump’s inaugural events paid a friend of first lady Melania Trump $26 million, part of more than $90 million the group spent on the festivities, according to a tax form filed to the IRS earlier this month and released Thursday.

Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, a New York society events planner, also serves as a senior advisor to the first lady, although she is not paid for her White House work. The inaugural committee reported paying $26 million to WIS Media Partners, a limited liability company that Wolkoff set up in late 2016.

These arrangements were made when he was a private citizen, before he was sworn in. Why are they picking on poor Trumpy bear??

1 Like

Hmmmm. That’s the same woman who, in the WSJ article, expressed concerns about how the money was being spent. She may actually have said the words to flag the investigation by calling out questionable behavior.

I want to see where this one leads.

Yeah. We cant allow that sort of thing.

But, but, Clinton!!

You’re welcome to start a thread about Clinton. This one is about Trump’s inaugural spending.

What does that have to do with this?

It was the same sort of thing under Democrats, only no one even thought of prosecuting there.
Just a footnote in the papers.

Some Presidents you “get”, others you just kind of let it go.

“Yes, pursue all 3 and promptly - and get other names of the 100,000 or more [dollar contributors]. Ready to start overnights right away - give me the top 10 list back, along with the 100.”[2][4] A Washington Post report stated that: "Clinton personally authorized a variety of perks for top party contributors, including golf games and morning jogs with him and overnight stays in the Lincoln Bedroom …

Wouldnt you be yelling clinton at the top of your lungs of you were a trumpybear hugger?

Need to scream out the silence…

1 Like

russian caterers?

Ones a controversy and the other is against the law…


1 Like

As someone said, what does that have to do with this?..or anything else, really.

This family’s level of corruption is beyond insane, the Gambino family has nothing on these clowns.


one is not technically illegal…

One is not technically legal…

So other than a couple letters they are exactly the same…

1 Like

If you squint really hard you can’t tell the difference.

1 Like

So paying money for political access is illegal if Trump did it but not technically illegal when Clinton did it.