Monday, April 15th: First Ever Criminal Trial for a Former US President

[HisArpy]

Ummm Councillor, that's what the trial is about, isn't it? To see if there is evidence?

For one who claims to be a Lawyer, you seem to know Jack Shit about the criminal process.

So far we've heard a lot about how the publisher, in cahoots with Michael Cohen, made deals to not publish derogatory stories concerning Trump.

Not a crime. Doesn't involve Trump.

Where's the evidence TRUMP broke the law?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

So far we've heard a lot about how the publisher, in cahoots with Michael Cohen, made deals to not publish derogatory stories concerning Trump.

Not a crime. Doesn't involve Trump.

Where's the evidence TRUMP broke the law?

Ummm Councillor, that's what the trial is about, isn't it? To see if there is evidence?

For one who claims to be a Lawyer, you seem to know Jack Shit about the criminal process.

Read the bold again Councillor.

 

[RobDownSouth]

So far we've heard a lot about how the publisher, in cahoots with Michael Cohen, made deals to not publish derogatory stories concerning Trump.

Not a crime. Doesn't involve Trump.

Where's the evidence TRUMP broke the law?

Legal analysts on TV are applauding the deliberate pace of the trial. Evidently, according to these legal experts, it's important to introduce the evidence first, then put the perps under oath to document what they did with the evidence.

You're don't have much experience with courtroom procedure, are you?

Perhaps you should be taking notes.

 

[Rightguide]

While not as commonly prosecuted as Forgery, Grand Larceny or Criminal Possession of a Forged Instrument, Falsifying Business Records in the First and Second Degrees, New York Penal Law sections 175.10 and 175.05 respectively, are extremely serious offenses.

There, named, now shut the fuck up!

From the Indictment Statement Of Facts:

In addition to the indictment, Bragg released a 13-page “Statement of Facts” that laid out the details and legal basis for the charges brought against Trump.

In New York, in order for the charge of falsifying business records to be bumped up to a felony, one must commit the crime of falsifying business records when the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

“The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election,” the statement reads.

“From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant [Trump] orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects,” according to the statement. “In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.”

Aside from the fact that the statute of limitations has already expired, we have yet to see any testimony or evidence that Trump personally falsified his business records or instructed any employee to do so. NONE

 

[jomar]

Name the NY Law in question. Name the victim. Bragg has no authority to prosecute a federal election statute. You don't get it. The purpose of this trial is to keep Trump off the campaign trail. The judge is a left-wing political hack. The primary witness is an adjudicated perjurer. The prosecutor is a Trump-hating Marxist just like Trump-hating AG James and DA Willis. NYC is 95% Democratic.

lol, keep up the good fight for your criminal leader! I’d prefer to see him campaign so voters could see his cognitive decline in real time

 

[HisArpy]

From the Indictment Statement Of Facts:

In addition to the indictment, Bragg released a 13-page “Statement of Facts” that laid out the details and legal basis for the charges brought against Trump.

In New York, in order for the charge of falsifying business records to be bumped up to a felony, one must commit the crime of falsifying business records when the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

“The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election,” the statement reads.

“From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant [Trump] orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects,” according to the statement. “In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.”

Aside from the fact that the statute of limitations has already expired, we have yet to see any testimony or evidence that Trump personally falsified his business records or instructed any employee to do so. NONE

OR that doing so in order to prevent damaging information to come to light is a felony committed with the intent to defraud/aid/conceal the criminal act.

 

[Rightguide]

Legal analysts on TV are applauding the deliberate pace of the trial. Evidently, according to these legal experts, it's important to introduce the evidence first, then put the perps under oath to document what they did with the evidence.

You're don't have much experience with courtroom procedure, are you?

Perhaps you should be taking notes.

You need more experience in the use of the English language. We have seen zero evidence of Trump personally falsifying his business records or instructing any of his employees to do so. So, being a couple of weeks into the trial when will that evidence be presented? Check your notes and get back to us.

 

[Rightguide]

lol, keep up the good fight for your criminal leader! I’d prefer to see him campaign so voters could see his cognitive decline in real time

Prove he's a criminal. Show us the evidence, not the partisan bullshit.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

From the Indictment Statement Of Facts:

In addition to the indictment, Bragg released a 13-page “Statement of Facts” that laid out the details and legal basis for the charges brought against Trump.

You know what an addition is, don't you?

Cite the Indictment bozo. You keep asking which statues Trump is charged under, that is where you will find them.

Sucks to be as stupid as you appear to be.....

 

[Rightguide]

You know what an addition is, don't you?

Cite the Indictment bozo. You keep asking which statues Trump is charged under, that is where you will find them.

Sucks to be as stupid as you appear to be.....

I just did. The statement of facts is from the indictment, dummy. Now show us the evidence. Bragg makes a claim but has yet to produce any supporting evidence.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I just did. The statement of facts is from the indictment, dummy.

But it's not the indictment....you asked for the statue underwhich he was charged....now you're just moving goalposts around....

Now show us the evidence. Bragg makes a claim but has yet to produce any supporting evidence.

That's what the trial is about. Or are you as stupid as HisArpy?

 

[HisArpy]

You need more experience in the use of the English language. We have seen zero evidence of Trump personally falsifying his business records or instructing any of his employees to do so. So, being a couple of weeks into the trial when will that evidence be presented? Check your notes and get back to us.

He also doesn't understand that "putting the perps under oath" to make them tell the truth is kinda against the US Constitution's 5th Amendment.

Wanna bet he also thinks that if Trump doesn't testify that means he knows he's guilty? Except that's also against the US Constitution's 14th Amendment.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

He also doesn't understand that "putting the perps under oath" to make them tell the truth is kinda against the US Constitution's 5th Amendment.

Wanna bet he also thinks that if Trump doesn't testify that means he knows he's guilty? Except that's also against the US Constitution's 14th Amendment.

Yah, but Rob's not on the Jury, so what you say means fuck all...

 

[butters]

Trial transcripts and copies of evidence shown to the jury are published online.

Transcripts of proceedings aren't always available, but New York court officials decided to make them available because of "unparalleled public interest."

Many of the transcripts are now available on the New York State Unified Court System's media website. Evidence shown to the jury, including texts, emails, photos and videos, also are available.

−Kinsey Crowley

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...31&cvid=8028721e2fb34da2af9d931fdd1c7084&ei=9

 

[butters]

Daniels' former lawyer speaking about his prep of a denial of an 'affair', and how it was technically 'not a relationship' but rather 'an encounter'... but how he now believes keeping back the full significance of the encounter may have helped trump win the presidency:

Significantly for the prosecution, Davidson also texted "What have we done?" to National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard on the night of the 2016 presidential election, because he believed his actions had aided Trump's campaign.

as for Chone, i'm glad he finally saw the light but he was eminently unsuitable for the kind of position he hoped to get in trump's administration or even becoming the US' AG. It's mind boggling to imagine him in any of those positions, but then remember how trump placed others who didn't have a clue about how to do their jobs in his team.... I guess Cohen made the mistake of keep asking to be paid back after mortgaging his house to pay Daniels off to keep quiet about trump.

Trump attorney Emil Bove began cross-examining Davidson at about 12pm ET. "I thought he was gonna kill himself," Davidson said when asked by Bove about a December, 2016 phone call with former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen. Cohen was allegedly concerned he wouldn't get a position in Trump's presidential administration. Cohen had earlier raised the possibility of becoming Trump's chief of staff, or becoming the United States attorney general.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...31&cvid=8028721e2fb34da2af9d931fdd1c7084&ei=9

 

[adrina]

Donald 'Von ShitzInPantz' has now formally been entered into the public record at Trump's hush-money trial​

Things got weird when his defense attorney Todd Blanche complained that Trump must remain silent about witnesses and jurors while his opponents get to say "anything they want."

That's when President Joe Biden and Donald "Von ShitzInPants" made their bizarre cameo appearances on the official trial record.

https://www.businessinsider.com/don...-formally-been-entered-into-the-record-2024-5

 

[schism666]

 

[Rightguide]

He also doesn't understand that "putting the perps under oath" to make them tell the truth is kinda against the US Constitution's 5th Amendment.

Wanna bet he also thinks that if Trump doesn't testify that means he knows he's guilty? Except that's also against the US Constitution's 14th Amendment.

He ought to read this from his prime source CNN

CNN Panel Stuns Viewers, Shreds Alvin Bragg’s Case against Trump – WATCH​

• By: Jason Walsh
• May 3, 2024

On Thursday, a panel of CNN analysts agreed that the Manhattan case against Trump is all but doomed due to the lack of evidence.
David Chalian told his colleagues, “I’ve seen precious little evidence presented yet that Trump wasn’t floating above.”

“I mean, I’ve seen very little evidence of Trump’s direct involvement in getting this accomplished. Correct me if I’m wrong.”
“No, you’re right. A lot of that’s going to come from Michael Cohen,” CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig said, the Daily Caller reports.

“But also there was a few tidbits in David Pecker’s testimony, right, that there were direct communications, but it’s a great point, David,’ he said.

“There hasn’t been much evidence yet directly of Donald Trump’s involvement and knowledge.”

More here: https://www.dailyfetched.com/cnn-panel-stuns-viewers-shreds-alvin-braggs-case-against-trump/

 

[butters]

is it just me, or does Hope Hicks remind you a whole lot of Karen McDougal?

 

[ll74]

He ought to read this from his prime source CNN

CNN Panel Stuns Viewers, Shreds Alvin Bragg’s Case against Trump – WATCH​

• By: Jason Walsh
• May 3, 2024

On Thursday, a panel of CNN analysts agreed that the Manhattan case against Trump is all but doomed due to the lack of evidence.
David Chalian told his colleagues, “I’ve seen precious little evidence presented yet that Trump wasn’t floating above.”

“I mean, I’ve seen very little evidence of Trump’s direct involvement in getting this accomplished. Correct me if I’m wrong.”
“No, you’re right. A lot of that’s going to come from Michael Cohen,” CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig said, the Daily Caller reports.

“But also there was a few tidbits in David Pecker’s testimony, right, that there were direct communications, but it’s a great point, David,’ he said.

“There hasn’t been much evidence yet directly of Donald Trump’s involvement and knowledge.”

More here: https://www.dailyfetched.com/cnn-panel-stuns-viewers-shreds-alvin-braggs-case-against-trump/

It sounds like they stunned you by agreeing with your position. I doubt any actual viewers.were stunned

 

[Rightguide]

It sounds like they stunned you by agreeing with your position. I doubt any actual viewers.were stunned

It tells me the case is much worse than they let on. CNN knew it was lying about Trump for years yet still made a corporate decision to push those lies. Something has changed. Management might now be looking at their bottom line and deciding that truth, not propaganda, is more profitable.

 

[ll74]

It tells me the case is much worse than they let on.

No it doesn't

CNN knew it was lying about Trump for years yet still made a corporate decision to push those lies. Something has changed. Management might now be looking at their bottom line and deciding that truth, not propaganda, is more profitable.

They didn't lie about 45.

Hence why they aren't being sued.

 

[Rightguide]

is it just me, or does Hope Hicks remind you a whole lot of Karen McDougal?

Hope Hicks and Karen McDougal reminds me they have no case.

 

[butters]

if trump wasn't having 'relations' with hope hicks, i'd be deeply surprised

 

[Lazaran]

is it just me, or does Hope Hicks remind you a whole lot of Karen McDougal?

The demented corrupt orange traitor definitely has a "type".



Every woman in the king MAGAt’s orbit has “The Stepford Wife” look - or “The Handmaid’s Tale” look, in the case of Sarah Huckabee Sanders, etc.