Connect with us

News

Donald Trump Praises FEC After Commission Drops Investigation into Stormy Daniels Hush-Money Claims

Here is what the former President had to say about it…

Published

on

President Donald Trump praised the Federal Election Commission on Friday for putting an end to the investigation into claims that he gave hush-money to stripper Stormy Daniel ahead of the 2016 election.

In a Friday statement, Trump called the case “phony” and blasted both his disgraced former attorney Michael Cohen and Michael Avenatti, a who represented Daniels in her lawsuit against Trump.

“I thank the Commission for their decision, ending this chapter of Fake News,” Trump said in his Friday statement.

Trending: McAfee Dead in Prison After Repeatedly Declaring He Would Not Kill Himself

“The Federal Election Commission in Washington, D.C., has totally dropped the phony case against me concerning payments to women relative to the 2016 Presidential Election,” Trump continued.

take our poll - story continues below

Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration? (1)

  • Do you think the 2nd Amendment will be destroyed by the Biden Administration?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“It was a case built on lies from Michael Cohen, a corrupt and convicted lawyer, a lawyer in fact who was so corrupt he was sentenced to three years in jail for lying to Congress and many other things having nothing to do with me,” the president said.

“Between two sleazebag lawyers, Michael Avenatti and Michael Cohen, we were all able to witness law and justice in our Country at its lowest!” Trump concluded.

Per the Daily Mail:

Four of the six bipartisan FEC commissioners were split in their votes on Thursday, meaning that, without a majority backing the inquiry, the case was dropped. Trump, however, is still on the hook with the state of New York, who is investigating the Trump Organization over tax issues.

The payment to Daniels was never reported on Trump’s campaign filings. Trump’s disgraced former attorney Michael Cohen claimed that he was ordered to make the payment to the porn star to prevent her from disclosing an affair two weeks before the 2016 election.

Cohen was jailed for three years after pleading guilty to making the payment to secure a non-disclosure agreement from Daniels, among other charges. Trump denied the affair.

Now, that part of the investigation has been dropped.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

News

McAfee Dead in Prison After Repeatedly Declaring He Would Not Kill Himself

Social media users were quick to remind the world of McAfee’s own words.

Published

on

John McAfee is a computing legend, having pioneered the way in which systems and networks protect themselves from viruses, malware, spyware, and all the other assorted evils of this internet age. But now he lies dead, having allegedly committed suicide in a Spanish prison cell. Antivirus software tycoon John McAfee died by an apparent suicide in a Spanish jail cell Wednesday evening — hours after reports surfaced that he would be extradited to face federal charges in the US, according to local media. The eccentric tech entrepreneur was arrested in October and was awaiting extradition when he was found dead, police sources told the newspaper El Pais. The newspaper reported McAfee was pulled from his cell in Barcelona and police are investigating the circumstances around his death. Authorities aren’t shying away from calling it a suicide already. “Everything points to suicide,” the newspaper reported, citing justice department officials in the country. A second Spanish newspaper, El Mundo, also reported McAfee had died by an apparent suicide in the jail. But here is where it gets strange:  McAfee has been utterly insistent and consistent about the fact that he would never, ever take his own life, explicitly telling his followers on social media that, should he ever be found dead of suicide, he was killed. https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/1316801215083225096?s=20 https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/1200864283766251521?s=20 https://twitter.com/truthcrumbs/status/1407788935628079113?s=20 The investigation is ongoing at this time.

Continue Reading

News

Lab Finds Zero Fish DNA After Testing Subway’s Tuna Sandwich

You can “eat fresh” at Subway, but can you eat fish?

Published

on

For years we’ve told ourselves that there has to be a better way to do fast food.  Or, at the very least, a healthier way. And so new chains are constantly popping up, while the old staples adapt.  There are salads for sale as places like McDonald’s these days, which is something that kids who grew up in the 80’s might have had a hard time believing would ever occur. In the realm of healthy fast food, there is but one king:  The unbreakable Subway.  Not only did the brand survive having a pedophile as their spokesperson, but they currently operate more physical restaurants in the world than even the aforementioned burger purveyor. But an alarming new study has some wondering if, while they were “eating fresh” with a tuna sub, they were even eating fish. The New York Times published a report Sunday, which revealed that lab tests didn’t find “amplifiable tuna DNA” in Subway’s infamous tuna sandwich. NYT submitted “60 inches worth of Subway tuna sandwiches” from three separate Los Angeles locations for lab analysis in wake of the lawsuit filed earlier this year alleging the sandwich chain was serving customers “a mixture of various concoctions that do not constitute tuna.” The suit claims that independent lab tests showed the company meant to “imitate” tuna’s appearance by blending together these unknown ingredients. The study, commissioned by NYT, failed to not only identify tuna DNA, but the lab couldn’t even determine the origins of the fish in the provided sandwiches. “No amplifiable tuna DNA was present in the sample and so we obtained no amplification products from the DNA. Therefore, we cannot identify the species,” the results read. But it’s not all bad news: “There’s two conclusions. One, it’s so heavily processed that whatever we could pull out, we couldn’t make an…

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week