Yakuda
Verified User
Actually no I'm not. This is how stupid you are I've told you a thousand times i don't give a shit about trump but you STILL don't get it.
But what youre saying is its their opinion of trumps intention. Thanks.
For you idiots, the alleged crimes!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
But what youre saying is its their opinion of trumps intention. Thanks.
"What you are saying is...."
When you type that, what I see is... "I am going to pretend you are saying... so I can prove this pretend statement wrong and feel superior."
That is not even close to what I am saying. You are not paying attention, and yet you spout stupid shit that is idiotic, it makes you seem very dumb. Its like you are siting in Junior High Science class, and you tell the teacher... "What you are saying is that the Sun revolves around the Earth?"
Yakuda
Verified User
You mentioned that the testimony of two people is evidence of Trump's intention. I merely pointed out that that is their opinion of his intent.
The rest of your rant is what I have come to expect from a pretend lawyer.
OK
Actions are usually used to prove intent, so yes, the actions of a known liar named trump.
That is precisely what he posted and what you third world, banana republic thugs support.
The only law in the savage world of you Stalinist extremists is "obey the party without question."
Tell me, do you support loyalty oaths and summary executions? Party monitors patrolling the streets demanding oaths of loyalty by passers by, and shooting them if they resist in anyway?
You know, just like those exactly like you did in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, the Khmer Rouge, etc.
Even Cohen never said what the intended "crime" was. To pay an NDA? That's perfectly legal and Stalinists do it every single day.
Be specific, what underlying "crime" did Hicks testify about that turned the bookkeeping error into a felony? That Trump is ahead of Joe Biden in the polls?
After all, we ALL know that is the actual "crime" he is being lynched for,
From the jury instructions…
First, the jury must find unanimously that Trump knowingly caused a business record to be falsified.
Second, the jury must find unanimously that Trump intended to defraud by concealing a conspiracy to promote his election as president by “unlawful means.”
Third the jurors must find at least one of several offered “unlawful means,” but they need not be unanimous on which one. That’s because this is not an element of the offense, but a manner and means of committing it. This instruction is consistent with the law and with due process.
Did the judge give the jury his written instructions before sending them off to deliberate?
No, for some reason that is against the law in NY, but he reread to them the portions they asked for.
So, you can't come up with anything that Hicks testified that indicates an underlying crime.
Instead you retreat to flinging shit at a fan with that corrupt cunt Merchan's unethical and illegal instructions to the jury to find guilt regardless of evidence or fact.
QP!
Verified User
Who cares what you point out, when you are wrong.
What Hicks, Pecker and others who testified is EVIDENCE of Trumps intent that a jury can way and decide upon.
When Pecker speaks to the scheming and planning with Trump that is not simply his opinion. It is direct evidence.
NakedHunterBiden
“It’s the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown”
"Really devastating": Experts say Hope Hicks' testimony was the beginning of the end for Trump
"Really devastating": Experts say Hope Hicks' testimony was the beginning of the end for Trump
Hicks testified that the former president was happy that Stormy Daniels' story did not come out before the election
Sure, she testified that Trump is a micromanager and would never pay anyone over $400,000 dollars for attorney fees without evidence that the work was performed.
QP!
Verified User
Before that cunt Merchan gave his unethical and illegal instructions to the jury to ignore facts and evidence, 78% of Americans believed that a fair trial in New York was impossible for President Trump. Only 22% of Americans believe that the system of law still exists in the third world, banana republic. Now that Merchan has openly shit on the concept of due process and finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, will that number shrink, or are the 22% - who are all radical left - so hostile to the concept of law that even this open corruption will not sway them?
This has proven too much even for DNC controlled CNN. Who notes that this utter collapse of the rule of law is working against the Marxist party.
This has proven too much even for DNC controlled CNN. Who notes that this utter collapse of the rule of law is working against the Marxist party.
QP!
Verified User
He gave them verbally as is required by law in NYS and at any point the jury can ask to have them read or clarified for them again.