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

She confirmed he was aware. But
Daniels' lawyer believed the ultimate source of the money would be Donald Trump — even though Trump's fixer, Michael Cohen, told him he would “do it myself.”

 

Hopey cried and said sorry to Trump because she inadvertantly burned him by how she phrased the truth. All facts. You can't handle facts so you quote me and gas light and deflect. To be honest, the deflection gas lighting is so desperate, it's funny and pitiful at the same time. She buried him, she admitted he knew everything and was 100% involved and that it was for the election. ETTD, it's a given. She Shangi-ed him in the little hands...oh, in bold, irony.

 

Jessica Denson worked in Trump's 2016 campaign and sued him over her NDA and won.

Tonight @ 7pm




Jessica Denson Wins Major Victory Over Trump Campaign

Protect Democracy
https://protectdemocracy.org › work › jessica-denson-w...

Mar 30, 2021 — Today, a federal court held that the standard form non-disclosure agreement (Form NDA) the Trump campaign.

Judge Issues Victory for Jessica Denson In 2016 Trump ...

Protect Democracy
https://protectdemocracy.org › work › victory-jessica-d...

Oct 11, 2023 — A judge issued a sweeping victory for former Trump campaign staffer Jessica Denson, signing off on a settlement that will permanently free ...

 

How did the Trumpers figure out how the law works and the judges are big dummies?

 

Pecker says po-ta-to , I say po-tay-toe……..
…….lets let the jury decide…….

 

WOW…you must be watching a lot of OAN and newsmax.

You know that he is currently being tried of a federal offense right ?

I was just reading about her testimony today and she BURNED HIM TO THE GROUND…..

But he only “hires the best”…….

He got eviscerated by his own people today….

 

Pointing out that the trial IS taking place and will reach a conclusion SHOULD be typical It's certainly not void of substance when countering the crazy unending attempts by the right IN THIS THREAD that the trial the IS happening is invalid.

 

The statute at issue was cited, learned articles from actual lawyers were cited, court orders from this case were posted…in response, the Trumpers mused their own misguided thoughts after reading RW echo chambers. WTF is called “substance less”? LOL!

 

No, your claim that Trump was "directly involved" isnt supported by any facts. Thats your determination while Cohens words confirm he was to "do it myself"

 

All which no one denies. I was referring to the lack of substance of YOUR posts, relevant to the post you chose to quote and respond to.

 

It wouldn't surprise me if Mannequin Melania shows up at the trial as it's wrapping up before the jury begins deliberating.
Anyone else?

Oh, and she'd charge him millions. lol

 

It was quite relevant. Which is why you protest so loud and long.

 

No relevance or substance.

 

To your reply? Yeah.

You agreed with this part: "Pointing out that the trial IS taking place and will reach a conclusion SHOULD be typical It's certainly not void of substance"

So your argument is against this part: "when countering the crazy unending attempts by the right IN THIS THREAD that the trial the IS happening is invalid."

But you, blues and many others, keep challenging the validity of the trail. The substance IS you and others are arguing endlessly against a FACT. How can my pointing that out be without relevance? Your lists of laws and arguments against the trail are what's irrelevant. They add nothing to the discussion about the trail, they will do nothing to stop the trial and offer nothing to a discussion about the trial.

You seem to want to and, think you actually can put an end to the trial right here in this thread on this board ...

... you can't.

 

Certainly is as no one claims otherwise. You scrapping about for refuge in the next strawman is neither relevant or substantive.

Irrelevant. Ive never claimed the trial is "invalid" and you were quoting and replying to MY post. Has ANYONE claimed it is "invalid". You should probably quote and reply to their post.
You are BEAUTIFULLY DEMONSTATING my point. A deep dark void absent any relevance or substance. Its what you do here. I would expect nothing else.

 

You haven't done anything but repeat yourself. Neither addressing or countering my argument. Which neither discusses or adds to the thread topic. Which is tRaitor tRumps trial. Which is trolling.



Goodbye!

 

It did not go for legal fees.

 

And he was directly involved behind the scene, you keep trying and flailing to find a toe hold, pitifully sad. She admitted he told her he wanted it quashed NOW and then she apologized to him because she knew right there and then she had informed the jury he was directly involved behind the scene. Critical thinking is a skill, focus. ETTD, it's a given. Run along now.

What should really worry you is that after she told the truth, inadvertently, she started crying......that shows the depth of corruption of the POS in the defendant chair and how he hides behind others.

 

Was the check signed? Was it signed by his lawyer? If so, sounds like the business records were spot on. Someone earlier stated the ledger also read "retainer". Sounds like a simple misnomer if so. Not even a misdemeanor.

 

It was not legal fees. Not a retainer. It was reimbursement of a settlement payment.

The records were falsified. You may not think it’s a big deal, but it is actually falsifying business records.

 

How was the check deposited? I think, by his lawyer. End of story.
EDIT: Remember, Cohen had been Trump's lawyer since 2006. He no doubt uses the guy regularly and gives him a lot of checks for various things. As I recall, it was his lawyer that ironed out everything with Daniels. Legal fee.

 

Wasn’t Cohen already an employee? Why would the Orange Loser be paying his in house lawyer a “fee” in addition to his salary? He wouldn’t. He was reimbursing him and knowingly falsifying his records. He even talked to Cohen about how to pay her! How do you Orange cultists explain that?

 

In 2023 Trump said "I can fix everything in 6 months or less"
I read this elsewhere and it's gold.

"Hope Hicks' blind spot"

"I don’t know about you, but it seems to me Hope Hicks described the defendant quite well. She just doesn’t recognize that Michael Cohen and TFG are cut from the same cloth.

From her testimony:

“ I did not know Michael to be an especially charitable or selfless person; he is a kind of person who seeks credit,”
Sound like anyone we know?

Cohen liked to "used to like to call himself Mr. Fix It.”

Anyone else remember TFG’s 2016 campaign ? Didn’t he say “I alone can fix it “ at the GOP convention?"

 

Denying facts and fabricating the law is suddenly and magically substantive ? LOL!

 

It's YOUR theory not mine cite where it gives Bragg jurisdiction of the DOJ and FEC in a federal election and him the authority to charge and prosecute such a crime. This order merely said he could not take it to a federal court.

[/QUOTE]


WHAT CRIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There was/is no federal election crime. The NDA was not a crime so there was no criminal intent and Bragg couldn't charge him with such a crime even if there were one. Bragg cannot simply declare someone committed some crime not in his court and then use that to be able to ramp of a long ago dead misdemeanor.

AND already explained why the hasn't been used in decades New York statute is unconstitutional under New York law.

From the ruling

"“The evidence overwhelmingly suggests that the matter was a purely a personal item of the President — a cover-up of an embarrassing event. Hush money paid to an adult film star is not related to a President’s official acts. It does not reflect in any way the color of the President’s official duties,” Hellerstein wrote."

OK there goes any campaign finance charge since it was a PERSONAL matter.