T1B

Who you got?

Trump has homecourt advantage. He gets to have a trial in his own backyard where he grew up and amongst the people he grew up with (New Yorkers) and who know him the best.

This is a huge advantage and I don't see how Bragg and company can overcome this disadvantage. This should be a unanimous NOT GUILTY verdict.

The only problem I can see... is that Trump once said, if you're in court and on trial and don't take the witness stand. You have something to hide and you're GUILTY!

So when he didn't take the witness stand in this case. One could surmise that he is GUILTY or he's a COWARD.

Most New Yorkers have heard him say this multiple times in the past. And one thing New Yorkers hate more than anything... is a COWARD!


Still, this should be a slam dunk NOT GUILTY verdict. The jurors are his peers and people and the homefield advantage should be to hard for Bragg and company to overcome.


How do you see this game playing out?






"Unified Reich" -- Make America Germanic!

FiatLux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:09 am Who you got?

Trump has homecourt advantage. He gets to have a trial in his own backyard where he grew up and amongst the people he grew up with (New Yorkers) and who know him the best.

This is a huge advantage and I don't see how Bragg and company can overcome this disadvantage. This should be a unanimous NOT GUILTY verdict.

The only problem I can see... is that Trump once said, if you're in court and on trial and don't take the witness stand. You have something to hide and you're GUILTY!

So when he didn't take the witness stand in this case. One could surmise that he is GUILTY or he's a COWARD.

Most New Yorkers have heard him say this multiple times in the past. And one thing New Yorkers hate more than anything... is a COWARD!


Still, this should be a slam dunk NOT GUILTY verdict. The jurors are his peers and people and the homefield advantage should be to hard for Bragg and company to overcome.


How do you see this game playing out?






"Unified Reich" -- Make America Germanic!

You obviously aren't a "legal mind" by any means whatsoever.

Bragg has homecourt advantage by virtue of both the "judge and jury" being left-wing extremists.

Second, ANY attorney worth their salt, will tell you that you don't take the stand unless you absolutely, positively have to, or YOUR LIFE depends upon it.

In this case, ONLY A GOT DAMN FOOL would take the stand.

As for the result of this left-wing kangaroo court?

EVEN WITH the extremist judge and jury, IT'S A SLAM DUNK "NOT GUILTY" for president trump because at the end of the day, this was a TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE and an EMBARRASSMENT to the American legal system.

I used to think the O.J. trial was the biggest farce in history, but this trial makes that trial look like the GOLD STANDARD for "American Jurisprudence"

But I digress..............

All you leftist crazies who actually believed that "WE GOT HIM THIS TIME", should be put into involuntary psychiatric confinement camps.

Case dismissed.

FiatLux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:09 amThe only problem I can see... is that Trump once said, if you're in court and on trial and don't take the witness stand. You have something to hide and you're GUILTY!

So when he didn't take the witness stand in this case. One could surmise that he is GUILTY or he's a COWARD.

That's not how it works. Every criminal defendant is presumed innocent, and that presumption still exists even if the defendant does not take the stand at trial. No doubt the judge will instruct the jury on this point.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove each and every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If just one juror concludes that the prosecution failed to prove just one element of the crime, then the defendant will not be found guilty of the crime.

In terms of predictions, I predict that the jury will get it right, whatever their decision may be. They are the ones who have been in court the entire time, they are the ones who have seen the evidence and heard the witnesses. This trial is about law and evidence, not politics. By definition, they will get it right and I'll accept the verdict, whatever it may be.

The one prediction I'll make is that the collective national reaction will be reminiscent of the OJ Simpson criminal trial. Regardless of the verdict, there will be two reactions:

Maybe splitting hairs, but I believe that a hung jury doesn’t equal “not guilty.”

Roux wrote: The one prediction I'll make is that the collective national reaction will be reminiscent of the OJ Simpson criminal trial. Regardless of the verdict, there will be two reactions:

I don’t think people are as engaged as the OJ trial. People are split on what they want the outcome to be, but I really believe Trumpers will shrug it off and just keep moving forward.

What is going to happen if he’s found guilty? (Which it’s pretty obvious he is)

Does anything change really if the SC sides with Trump on presidential immunity?

My contention is the more time he gets in the media, the more his 70+ million supporters will dig their heels in and cry conspiracy.

I just want to move on from this era of presidents. So over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Mikey wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 2:24 pmhung jury

That's what the likely outcome will be.

Go Coogs' wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 3:11 pm

Roux wrote: The one prediction I'll make is that the collective national reaction will be reminiscent of the OJ Simpson criminal trial. Regardless of the verdict, there will be two reactions:

I don’t think people are as engaged as the OJ trial. People are split on what they want the outcome to be, but I really believe Trumpers will shrug it off and just keep moving forward.

What is going to happen if he’s found guilty? (Which it’s pretty obvious he is)

Does anything change really if the SC sides with Trump on presidential immunity?

My contention is the more time he gets in the media, the more his 70+ million supporters will dig their heels in and cry conspiracy.

I just want to move on from this era of presidents. So over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no "trumpers", that's your "brainwashing" kicking in.

It's obvious he's guilty?



More evidence of your brainwashing.
What happens if he's found guilty by this kangaroo court?
It will 100% be overturned upon appeal. THAT'S how outrageous this judge was.

You spoke of conspiracies?

The last eight plus years has been ONE CONSPIRACY AFTER ANOTHER put forth by the criminally corrupt left-wing democrat party.

Starting with Obama's department of Justice, using unverified BS propaganda lying to a federal judge, opening the Mueller investigation being run by Weissman, collusion with Putin, two BS partisan impeachments, straight up to today with Biden's department of Justice and corrupt left-wing attorney general Merrick Garland who thinks he's above the law.

You totally IGNORE these left-wing democrat conspiracy theories and accuse the other half of the country of conspiracy theories.

Every single case brought against president trump is complete and utter BS.
This department of Justice prosecuting president trump for the same exact things that they excused Alzheimer's Joe of, IS EVIDENCE of the weaponization of the government against president trump.

The American people are "OVER IT" as evidenced by all the current polling showing president trump increasing his leads over the JOKE CLOWN in the white house.

Your cognitive dissonance is duly noted.

I have no doubt he’s being singled out compared to others with money, power, and politicians.

But I also have an 18 month old daughter and a 13 year old bonus daughter that I treasure more than anything. Trump is a womanizer and a sexual abuser.

I really don’t care about hush money, Russia election fix, insurrection, documents at his house, Ukraine, and his social media platform.

I do care about how someone I vote for treats women.

Joe is creepy
Trump is a f*cking monster.

No thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Smackie Chan wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 3:21 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 2:24 pmhung jury

That's what the likely outcome will be.

This is fabulous news!

Sin,
Irie

The Whistle Is Screaming wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:37 pm

Smackie Chan wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 3:21 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 2:24 pmhung jury

That's what the likely outcome will be.

This is fabulous news!

Sin,
Irie

Go Coogs' wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:17 pm I have no doubt he’s being singled out compared to others with money, power, and politicians.

But I also have an 18 month old daughter and a 13 year old bonus daughter that I treasure more than anything. Trump is a womanizer and a sexual abuser.

I really don’t care about hush money, Russia election fix, insurrection, documents at his house, Ukraine, and his social media platform.

I do care about how someone I vote for treats women.

Joe is creepy
Trump is a f*cking monster.

No thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok. I get it.

But you voted for Bill Clinton twice. So how do you justify that?

As far as womanizer, it's public knowledge.
So was JFK who is greatly respected by the same folks calling president trump a monster.

No matter what you say, he's not a sexual abuser, that's a complete and utter LIE.

That jury in the E Jean Carroll case, was entirely made up of left-wing extremists.
Any jury is capable of convicting a "ham sandwich" with the right pooling.

You've been fed so much BS propaganda concerning president trump the past decade, that you are no longer able to be honest and fair minded.

JPG, since you appear to be following the trial closely, a couple of questions if you don't mind. It should be noted that neither of these questions are regarding any alleged criminal conduct.

Please reply with a yes or no, and then any additional comments that you may want to add. Thanks.



1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Seeing as the trial was not televised, it is difficult for me to know how the jurors might have absorbed the information they were given.
Reports we get from Faux News and PMSNBC seem like they are coming from alternate realities.

That said, I assume Smackie is correct, and it will be a hung jury.

Even if Donna is convicted, he will appeal, and things will drag on longer.
Run out the clock.

Regardless of the outcome, as Rumps said, Dump is a filthy, very low character dirtbag who should never be anywhere near public office.

We know there are sociopaths in the world, and so be it, but for a large and storied organization like the GOP to continue to pimp such a person is way beyond disgraceful.

Basically, the 2024 presidential race is a national disgrace.

Both turds should have been flushed a long time ago.

Roux;
You're correct that the judge will tell the jury in his charging instructions that they shouldn't hold it against Dump that he didn't testify.

Just like the judge in a DUI trial on which I was on the jury that we couldn't hold it against the defendant that he didn't produce a usable ua sample.

But did most of the jurors hold it against the defendant for basically faking being unable to produce a sample once we started deliberations? You better believe it. You can't expect people to just turn off their common sense in the deliberations room.

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm JPG, since you appear to be following the trial closely, a couple of questions if you don't mind. It should be noted that neither of these questions are regarding any alleged criminal conduct.

Please reply with a yes or no, and then any additional comments that you may want to add. Thanks.



1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

1) How can anyone know? Unless they were in the room or saw actual video, it's hearsay.

2) Again, if this was a "cash deal" how can anyone know for sure, without a signed and notarized legal document?

Has a video surfaced of this alleged sexual encounter? Has his DNA been extrapolated from her?

Is there an official document signed by both parties that's readily available for viewing?

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm
2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

This is actually a crime when it is

A) done to alter the outcome of an election,

B) business records are fraudulently altered to hide the payment.

Both are what Dump is charged with.

Softball Bat wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:54 pm Seeing as the trial was not televised, it is difficult for me to know how the jurors might have absorbed the information they were given.
Reports we get from Faux News and PMSNBC seem like they are coming from alternate realities.

That said, I assume Smackie is correct, and it will be a hung jury.

Even if Donna is convicted, he will appeal, and things will drag on longer.
Run out the clock.

Regardless of the outcome, as Rumps said, Dump is a filthy, very low character dirtbag who should never be anywhere near public office.

We know there are sociopaths in the world, and so be it, but for a large and storied organization like the GOP to continue to pimp such a person is way beyond disgraceful.

Basically, the 2024 presidential race is a national disgrace.

Both turds should have been flushed a long time ago.

Funny, everything you said about President trump being a low character dirtbag, applies to JFK, a president you love, admire and respect.

Do you understand what that does to your credibility here?

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:02 pm

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm
2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

This is actually a crime when it is

A) done to alter the outcome of an election,

B) business records are fraudulently altered to hide the payment.

Both are what Dump is charged with.

Every single one of these monkey trials are designed to alter the upcoming election.

Both the inspector General report and the Durham report came to the exact same conclusions about the weaponization of the government against president trump.

You have ZERO clue as to who the criminals are.

JPGettysburg wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:17 pm I have no doubt he’s being singled out compared to others with money, power, and politicians.

But I also have an 18 month old daughter and a 13 year old bonus daughter that I treasure more than anything. Trump is a womanizer and a sexual abuser.

I really don’t care about hush money, Russia election fix, insurrection, documents at his house, Ukraine, and his social media platform.

I do care about how someone I vote for treats women.

Joe is creepy
Trump is a f*cking monster.

No thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok. I get it.

But you voted for Bill Clinton twice. So how do you justify that?

As far as womanizer, it's public knowledge.
So was JFK who is greatly respected by the same folks calling president trump a monster.

No matter what you say, he's not a sexual abuser, that's a complete and utter LIE.

That jury in the E Jean Carroll case, was entirely made up of left-wing extremists.
Any jury is capable of convicting a "ham sandwich" with the right pooling.

You've been fed so much BS propaganda concerning president trump the past decade, that you are no longer able to be honest and fair minded.

I wasn’t old enough to vote for Clinton in ‘92 (was an avid Bush fan) and I had just turned 18 in 1996 and didn’t really care to vote. Here is my voting record since then:

Bush
Bush
Paul
Romney
2016 - Skipped
2020 - Skipped
2024 - skipping

I’m not giving into propaganda. 26 women have come forward alleging sexual misconduct. I’m sure some of it is embellished but the access Hollywood hot mic, the creepiness of his comments towards Ivanka, and pressing Hugh Hefner to run a “Girls of Trump” edition of Playboy tells me his womanizing and objectification is very much real.

I don’t support that behavior as a father of girls and a husband.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JPGettysburg wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:00 pm

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

1) How can anyone know? Unless they were in the room or saw actual video, it's hearsay.

2) Again, if this was a "cash deal" how can anyone know for sure, without a signed and notarized legal document?

C'mon, man.

Just a yes or no, then any comments you want

Rumps wrote:I’m not giving into propaganda. 26 women have come forward alleging sexual misconduct. I’m sure some of it is embellished but the access Hollywood hot mic, the creepiness of his comments towards Ivanka, and pressing Hugh Hefner to run a “Girls of Trump” edition of Playboy tells me his womanizing and objectification is very much real.

I don’t support that behavior as a father of girls and a husband.

Softball Bat wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:45 pm

Rumps wrote:I’m not giving into propaganda. 26 women have come forward alleging sexual misconduct. I’m sure some of it is embellished but the access Hollywood hot mic, the creepiness of his comments towards Ivanka, and pressing Hugh Hefner to run a “Girls of Trump” edition of Playboy tells me his womanizing and objectification is very much real.

I don’t support that behavior as a father of girls and a husband.

You're feeding into the BS propaganda.
President trump is a womanizer just like JFK.
That footage of epstein was at events with adult women.

Bill Clinton is the one who traveled to "Lolita island" 27 times.

WHEN trump was informed of epstein's behavior with underage girls, he didn't hesitate for a second, throwing epstein out and banning him from his resort for life.

Can I be any more CRYSTAL CLEAR?

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:37 pm

JPGettysburg wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:00 pm

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

1) How can anyone know? Unless they were in the room or saw actual video, it's hearsay.

2) Again, if this was a "cash deal" how can anyone know for sure, without a signed and notarized legal document?

C'mon, man.

Just a yes or no, then any comments you want

Can you read?
Without actual proof, how can you answer?

First show the proof, then you'll get an answer.
This isn't rocket science.

Go Coogs' wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:31 pm

JPGettysburg wrote:

Go Coogs' wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:17 pm I have no doubt he’s being singled out compared to others with money, power, and politicians.

But I also have an 18 month old daughter and a 13 year old bonus daughter that I treasure more than anything. Trump is a womanizer and a sexual abuser.

I really don’t care about hush money, Russia election fix, insurrection, documents at his house, Ukraine, and his social media platform.

I do care about how someone I vote for treats women.

Joe is creepy
Trump is a f*cking monster.

No thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok. I get it.

But you voted for Bill Clinton twice. So how do you justify that?

As far as womanizer, it's public knowledge.
So was JFK who is greatly respected by the same folks calling president trump a monster.

No matter what you say, he's not a sexual abuser, that's a complete and utter LIE.

That jury in the E Jean Carroll case, was entirely made up of left-wing extremists.
Any jury is capable of convicting a "ham sandwich" with the right pooling.

You've been fed so much BS propaganda concerning president trump the past decade, that you are no longer able to be honest and fair minded.

I wasn’t old enough to vote for Clinton in ‘92 (was an avid Bush fan) and I had just turned 18 in 1996 and didn’t really care to vote. Here is my voting record since then:

Bush
Bush
Paul
Romney
2016 - Skipped
2020 - Skipped
2024 - skipping

I’m not giving into propaganda. 26 women have come forward alleging sexual misconduct. I’m sure some of it is embellished but the access Hollywood hot mic, the creepiness of his comments towards Ivanka, and pressing Hugh Hefner to run a “Girls of Trump” edition of Playboy tells me his womanizing and objectification is very much real.

I don’t support that behavior as a father of girls and a husband.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The access Hollywood tape was edited to make it look like he was assaulting women.
I CANNOT BELIEVE you don't know this fact.

He's a womanizer like JFK. I get that.
But unfortunately, your "non-vote" actually brings your daughters into a much darker and hedonistic world than you could ever possibly imagine.

If you actually research the left, you'd have a clue about this.
Oh the irony...........

You're trying to save your children from a hedonistic society, yet because of your ignorance, you're actually escorting them there on a one-way first class ticket.

Dude, I understand the whole “you vote the party; not the man/woman” strategy. Doesn’t bother me that I abstain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm JPG, since you appear to be following the trial closely, a couple of questions if you don't mind. It should be noted that neither of these questions are regarding any alleged criminal conduct.

Please reply with a yes or no, and then any additional comments that you may want to add. Thanks.



1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Thanks.

Go Coogs' wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 6:32 pm Dude, I understand the whole “you vote the party; not the man/woman” strategy. Doesn’t bother me that I abstain.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

For the record, I vote for policies. And yes, if the left stays in power, the inevitable outcome is extremely bleak for your children.

Take care.

Trump would have been asking Khrushchev if he needed any help getting his shipments to Cuba.

JPGettysburg wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 6:15 pm

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:37 pm

JPGettysburg wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:00 pm


1) How can anyone know? Unless they were in the room or saw actual video, it's hearsay.

2) Again, if this was a "cash deal" how can anyone know for sure, without a signed and notarized legal document?

C'mon, man.

Just a yes or no, then any comments you want

Can you read?
Without actual proof, how can you answer?

First show the proof, then you'll get an answer.
This isn't rocket science.

sigh

Is the shape of the earth best described as flat or a globe?

Never mind.

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 7:40 pm

JPGettysburg wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 6:15 pm

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:37 pm


C'mon, man.

Just a yes or no, then any comments you want

Can you read?
Without actual proof, how can you answer?

First show the proof, then you'll get an answer.
This isn't rocket science.

sigh

Is the shape of the earth best described as flat or a globe?

Never mind.

It's a round globe. There's actual evidence of that.

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 7:15 pm Trump would have been asking Khrushchev if he needed any help getting his shipments to Cuba.

Unlike you, I don't speculate.
Biden's administration has actually given billions upon billions of dollars to the number one state sponsor of terrorism, the murderous regime of Iran. Funding sworn enemies of the United States, IS the very definition of treason.

But I digress...............

Breaking News!

Attorney general Garland will be held in felony contempt of congress.

Is he above the law? He thinks he is.

JPGettysburg wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 8:32 pm

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 7:15 pm Trump would have been asking Khrushchev if he needed any help getting his shipments to Cuba.

Unlike you, I don't speculate.

But I digress...............

Breaking News!

Attorney general Garland will be held in felony contempt of congress.

Is he above the law? He thinks he is.

Since Congress hasn't even held a hearing your statement that Garland will be held in contempt of Congress is purely....

Speculation.



Congrats on kicking your own ass yet again.

Love how you edited my comments to leave out your Alzheimer's JOKE clown funding the number one state sponsor of terrorism.
I'm not surprised, it's what you do.

As for AG Merrick Garland? He will be charged with felony contempt of congress, the votes are there.

The biden administration sending billions upon billions to Iran isn't speculation, it's HARD FACT.

FOR the past eight years, you've been saying,
"We've got him now"

Your entire existence on earth is literally feuled by BS propaganda.

FiatLux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:09 am Who you got?

Trump has homecourt advantage. He gets to have a trial in his own backyard where he grew up and amongst the people he grew up with (New Yorkers) and who know him the best.

This is a huge advantage and I don't see how Bragg and company can overcome this disadvantage. This should be a unanimous NOT GUILTY verdict.

The only problem I can see... is that Trump once said, if you're in court and on trial and don't take the witness stand. You have something to hide and you're GUILTY!

So when he didn't take the witness stand in this case. One could surmise that he is GUILTY or he's a COWARD.

Most New Yorkers have heard him say this multiple times in the past. And one thing New Yorkers hate more than anything... is a COWARD!


Still, this should be a slam dunk NOT GUILTY verdict. The jurors are his peers and people and the homefield advantage should be to hard for Bragg and company to overcome.


How do you see this game playing out?






"Unified Reich" -- Make America Germanic!

Oh the irony.

You post president trump as a nazi socialist, dressed to look exactly like Hitler.

YET, Your left-wing masters openly support Hamas and Hezzbolah! Two terrorist organizations who do EXACTLY WHAT the nazis did. By definition, THEY ARE NAZIS!
AOC, Crockett, and a huge contingent of your criminally corrupt left-wing democrat party, SUPPORTS these NAZIS.

And you haven't got the slightest clue whatsoever!

President trump wants to exterminate Hamas and Hezzbolah, the modern day NAZIS.

Yet you remain completely clueless about this.

You're either ignorant or displaying massive cognitive dissonance.
OR, you're just plain batshit krazy.

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm 1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Aren’t both of those questions already admitted as true?

Please explain the statutes alleged to have been violated and the evidence presented at trial that would support a guilty verdict.

88BuckeyeGrad wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 12:46 am

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm 1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Aren’t both of those questions already admitted as true?

Please explain the statutes alleged to have been violated and the evidence presented at trial that would support a guilty verdict.

WOW!

And just like that,

88 flies in, and in "one fell swoop", makes mincemeat out of Roux.

88BuckeyeGrad wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 12:46 am

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm 1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Aren’t both of those questions already admitted as true?

Please explain the statutes alleged to have been violated and the evidence presented at trial that would support a guilty verdict.

I'll try to help. Here's a link to the indictment and a link to the "Statement of Facts" according to Alvin Bragg:

http://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploa ... ctment.pdf

http://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploa ... 04-SOF.pdf

The statute of limitations already ran on the "false business records" which Trump did not enter himself.

What is the "other crime" Trump allegedly committed? And what evidence was presented to show that Trump did commit it?

88BuckeyeGrad wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 12:46 am

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm 1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Aren’t both of those questions already admitted as true?

Please explain the statutes alleged to have been violated and the evidence presented at trial that would support a guilty verdict.

I really have not been following the trial in detail. But it is my understanding that trump still denies both of them.

By themselves, they are not criminal acts.

FiatLux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 5:09 am Who you got?

Loser. Keep rooting for the ones wanting your chime collection to gather the dust from your ashes....

Roux wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 1:51 am

88BuckeyeGrad wrote: ↑Fri May 24, 2024 12:46 am

Roux wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 4:52 pm 1) Did trump have sex with Stormy Daniels?

2) Did he pay her (directly or thru other persons) $130,000 for a non-disclosure agreement?

Aren’t both of those questions already admitted as true?

Please explain the statutes alleged to have been violated and the evidence presented at trial that would support a guilty verdict.

I really have not been following the trial in detail. But it is my understanding that trump still denies both of them.

By themselves, they are not criminal acts.

For the past eight years, starting with Obama's department of Justice, unverified BS propaganda has been used by actual law enforcement, in their efforts to take down the DULY ELECTED president trump, at any and all cost.

Here we are eight years later, and NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Biden's department of Justice has been weaponized against president trump.

I firmly believe without any doubt whatsoever, that the American people are fed up with the weaponization of the government against president trump, as evidenced by all the current polling.