Trump indicates he'd testify in hush money trial, says a conviction could 'make me more popular'

He was not found guilty of any other crime, as you’ve been told countless times.

 

Blanche took up the position explained here by Politico. By stating that, he was in direct contradiction of 2 witnesses, and more likely three - Pecker, Cohen, and the Trump secretary

https://www.politico.com/live-updat...oney-criminal-trial/done-for-the-day-00160316

‘Blanche is now attacking the notion that the National Enquirer’s effort to “catch and kill” negative stories about Trump was a nefarious arrangement and a key part of a conspiracy to unlawfully influence the 2016 election.”

 

Covering up personally embarassing acts IS NOT ILLEGAL. Campaigns are ALL ABOUT influencing an election it is NOT ILLEGAL. Trump has never been charged with an election crime to do with the 2016 election by the one exclusive body with the jurisdiction to do so.

 

Complaining about the verdict accomplishes nothing. Trump blew it. Lying is not illegal either, but not a good idea, when you want the trust of the jury.

 

It points out the travesty of justice here which you continue to do. Trump did NOT have to prove his innocence. You cannot hold the fact he exercised his right not to testify as evidence of guilt. And you show there was no case.

 

He chose not to. Meaning all of his whining about not being "allowed" to use an advice of counsel defense is a lie. He chose not to use that option, which would have required testimony.

 

Was he required to testify? No. So why should he have. What did he need to refute by testifying? And you cannot use that against him so why do y'all even bring it up?