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

Not so much, during the Floyd riots. You have been woefully misinformed by RW media.

 

That's the script.

 

No, that's the fact.

 

Oh, for sure.

 

Oh, for sure.

 

For sure.

 

From your clip, people were taken into custody in violation of their constitutional rights.

You don’t like the constitution?

 

Who said their Constitutional rights were violated?

 

Being arrested by men in unmarked uniforms and thrown into unmarked vans is a violation of their Constitutional rights.

 

Who said that?

 

It was in the news. I'll look it up for you.

My question
were men in unmarked uniforms? arresting people during the floyd riots?


Copilot
Using the web
Yes, there were reports of men in unmarked uniforms arresting people during the protests that followed the death of George Floyd. These individuals were federal law enforcement officials who showed up at protests against police brutality bearing no indication of who they worked for and with their name tags obscured1.

In Washington D.C., law enforcement officials were seen in riot gear unmarked, hiding their names and offering no indication of which agency they worked for1. This led to lawmakers proposing legislation that would require federal officers in uniform responding to First Amendment assemblies to have their agency and name visibly marked1.

In Portland, Oregon, there were reports of federal officers detaining protesters using unmarked vans2. These officers were operating under orders from then U.S. President Donald Trump during the summer of 2020.

Using relevant sources
'I was horrified': Democrats seek to outlaw unmarked police as they ...
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/wh...k-outlaw-unmarked-police-they-patrol-n1225016

And tRumpublicans want to pretend tRaitor tRump doesn't have fascist tendencies.

 

Why were they arrested?

 

Watch the clip you posted. Watch it to the end.

You have tried to derail this thread for long enough.

 

We've pinned the tail on the problem.

I can do research for you but, in this format anyway, you have to read the results.

Portland Oregon, maybe DC

 

What political party do they belong to?

 

NBC live updates"

"Trump trial live updates: Stormy Daniels to resume testimony in hush money case'

1h ago / 7:01 AM EDTWhat to expect in court today
Zoë Richards

'Trump's lawyers are expected to resume their cross-examination of Daniels after court is back in session at 9:30 a.m.

Daniels delivered testimony Tuesday about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and the hush money that came a decade later, near the end of the 2016 presidential campaign.

It is unclear if Daniels will finish her testimony today.

More Trump allies are expected in the courtroom today, including Republican Sen. Rick Scott, who is running for re-election in Trump's home state of Florida.'

cont:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...stormy-daniels-day-14-live-updates-rcna150794

 

CNN live updates:

LIVE UPDATES
'Stormy Daniels to resume testimony in Trump trial'

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-05-09-24/index.html

 

Guardian live updates:

06.55 EDT
Stormy Daniels faces further questioning from Trump lawyers

'Good morning and welcome back to our live coverage of Donald Trump’s hush-money trial where Stormy Daniels is returning to the stand for a second round of testimony.'

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...money-stormy-daniels-testifies-latest-updates

 

Paying hush money isn't "election interference".

Daniel's testimony is nothing but prejudicing the jury. There's nothing she has to say that could remotely be considered evidence.

 

Karen Friedman and Ben @ Meidastound.
Morning analysis on what could be expected today.
Each day when the trial is over they do another analysis of the days proceedings.
Friedman was a prosecutor in the SDNY for 25 ish years.

Scheduled to begin @ 8:30-am

 

Please stay on topic of the trial's proceedings and don't post same old same old arguments about the charges.

This is a TRIAL thread.
Thanks,

 

The topic is literally alleged election interference and Stormy Daniels testimony.

Keep posting about fake charges and we'll keep calling them fake charges. If you don't like that, I don't know what to tell you.

 

The cross examination didn't go well at all for the persecution...


CNN legal analyst stunned by Stormy Daniels admitting that she hates Trump in her testimony: 'Big damn deal'


CNN legal analyst Elie Honig said that the cross-examination of adult film actress and Trump trial witness Stormy Daniels after her testimony against former President Trump was a disaster.

While Honig said that Daniels' testimony about a sexual encounter with Trump in a hotel room in 2006 was "plausible," her responses under cross-examination by Trump's team called her credibility into question.

"Her responses were disastrous," Honig said, referring to the moment when Daniels admitted that she hates Trump.

 

Make your own thread about
"Paying hush money isn't "election interference".

This thread is about today's TRIAL

 

It is when you cover up the payments as something else.

And her testimony shows how damaging to the Trump campaign it would have been if it had gotten out. It speaks to his motive for covering it up as a campaign expenditure.