Trump’s history-making hush-money trial begins ...(Mod Warning)

Your link is paywalled, so I can't read the article, but judging what you're copy and pasting, I see a problem. The highlighted in red is inaccurate.
Here is the statute as written in NY law:

"§ 175.10 Falsifying business records in the first degree.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree
when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second
degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.
Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony."

So you can see that what the writer at NationalReview did was alter the meaning of the statute in a way to make a point, but in doing that made it inaccurate by excluding vital wording to make it fit the articles agenda. You're putting all your eggs in a basket with holes in it.
You're being bamboozled. According to the statute, the crime doesn't even have to be perpetrated, let alone committed or convicted/charged etc.

 

4 min ago
Texts show a series of persistent texts that Cohen sent to Hicks with no response




The jury sees texts Michael Cohen sent to Hope Hicks with no response.

• "Call me." at 7:09 p.m.
• Any news?" at 8:50 p.m.
• Any news???" at 9:02 p.m.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-n...l-05-03-24#h_d99b62d75e02f66e475d175bb577ec58

 

No. Read the section about preemption. Take the time to understand it.

 

Hopey & Change, sobbing on the stand after telling Agent Oranges "sorry".......ETTD.

 

Exactly! This is the point I tried to make earlier. The business record fraud is a State misdemeanour, but if it is committed to ‘shield’ the intention of a second crime, a felony results…

 

The accounting term was “Bribes”. That would have gotten Orange out of the felony counts. Of course , that has a down side too. Nope , we will let the judge and jury sort this one out.
Due process . Guilty or not guilty.

Oh, and by all means, try and get an indictment against a Clinton, any Clinton. Go for it .

Considering you still repeat the falsehood that Bill Clinton pled to a crime , I’m not worried at all for the Clintons.

 

She has nothing to be sorry for, other than her comments and reactions to 1/6. She helped Trump immensely by testifying that Trumps concern was shielding Melania from publication of claims of affairs. Same distinction that prevented John Edwards from being convicted. Has nothing to do with election law. Nothing illegal about S*T*F*U payments.

 

No, as Pecker testified it was "consideration" for the legal contract. The prosecutions theory is that it should have been considered a campaign contribution.

 

You must seriously be confused or simply uninformed, either way sad for you. She was under cross, the party's over........ETTD, it's been proven over and over, he just leaves debris in his waddle.

 

Well, that was the best thing the defense could bring up on cross examination vs this sympathetic witness... though it wouldn't outweigh all the evidence to the contrary in terms of that being his main concern for keeping it covered up.

 

Not quite the WHOLE story.

Hicks says Trump was concerned reports would hurt his standing with voters


Prosecutors are now playing a video from a October 2016 rally in North Carolina where Trump denies these reports.

Asked if Trump was concerned these reports could hurt his standing with voters, Hicks replies, "Yes."

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-05-03-24/index.html

 

Bbbut preemption! Aaand no jurisdiction! Stuff, and, like, things!

NO! You have been advised that you are wrong.

 

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
Follow

No sooner does Trump lawyer Emil Bove's cross begin than Hope Hicks starts to tear up and cry. Afternoon recess.


3:00 PM · May 3, 2024
·
259.9K
Views

 

Second crime is NY state election fraud.

 

Not an issue. Being both a benefit for Trump personally and a benefit for the campaign doesnt run afoul of campaign finance laws. As in the John Edwards case. Unlike Hillary's "Legal expense" to fabricate the Russian Dossier that was exclusively for the benefit of the campaign. Expenses that are exclusively for the benefit of a campaign must be reported as campaign expense. Expenses that benefit both the campaign and the individual dont have to be reported by the campaign.

 

Got anything of substance relevant to the post of mine you chose to quote and respond to without even addressing the content?

 

Why did the Orange Chihuahua lie about the gag order preventing him from testifying?

 

There is and was zero substance in your "hopey and change" screed, just Trump apologist nonsense since you deflected from the facts I posted and then started with the nonsense. I will however commend your post for it's depth of irony, a easy job but still well done.

 

He opened his mouth so...bank on it.

 

Listen to what made Hicks break down on the stand.
She handed the prosecutors exactly what they wanted and she knew it.

short video
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2024/05/03/hope-hicks-trump-hush-money-trial-reid-digvid.cnn


"CNN reporter breaks down what made Hope Hicks cry on the stand

CNN's Paula Reid describes what ex-Trump aide Hope Hicks, once considered one of his closest confidantes, said during her testimony in the ongoing hush money criminal trial against the former president."
02:16 - Source: CNN

 

She basically confirmed he was directly involved, knew everything.

 

"not an issue" OMG! LOL!
Sure is an issue especially when Trump tried to get Cohen to delay paying Stormy until after the election because he told Cohen the story getting out then won't matter.

In addition to what Hicks just testified Trump told her which made her break down.
In the VIDEO I just posted.

 

She was also quoting Trump.
Hicks is not Cohen so no vendetta etc that Cohen is accused of having towards Trump.

 

You dont do facts

Other than the quote "sorry" which I directly addressed.

 

Not a good day for the Orange Diaper.