Damocles and CREW...

PostmodernProphet said:
I am admitting that Bragg fucked up the indictment, fucked up the statement of facts, fucked up the grand jury......

I provided YOU with the statute, cuntselor......neither you or Bragg has a clue what this crime was Trump intended to conceal.......giving Daniels a payoff is not a crime........billing it to Trump as client costs is not a crime.......paying the bill is not a crime.......even not reporting it as a campaign contribution is not a crime in the opinion of the FEC.....
Click to expand...

Ok, you stick with that.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
smart enough to realize there's a difference between facts and rumors......
Click to expand...

You don’t even understand indictments or how they are pled. Yet you yap about how this one is lacking. (It’s not). Keep yapping about something you know nothing about!
 
Jarod said:
You don’t even understand indictments or how they are pled. Yet you yap about how this one is lacking. (It’s not). Keep yapping about something you know nothing about!
Click to expand...

we both understand indictments.....the problem is, Bragg and you, believe in misusing them for political purposes.....
 
Jarod said:
I cant remember the thered or Id bump it, but remember when you said there is no way Bragg could prove the payment to Stormy was related to the campaign....



Well read the Statement of Facts....

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23741892/donald-j-trump-sof.pdf


There is audio of Trump telling Cohen to delay paying Stormy under the agreement, because if she can be held off until after the election it would no longer matter to him if she told her story.


BAM, that is what I told you might be in evidence... You said there was no way!
Click to expand...

The audio recording concerns woman-1 who is likely Karen McDougal. It still goes to intent for making the payoffs to protect Trump's campaign.
 
zymurgy said:
it needs to be more than related - it has to be THE reason.

If he can argue that he would of tried to save his reputation regardless of running for office, it is no longer campaign related

and what kind of moron thinks they can prove he wouldn't care about his reputation otherwise?
Click to expand...

He had no reputation to save. Trump has always thought of women as conquests. He has no respect for marriage vows, he never grew up. Trump was not a part of New York high society. They had no use for the slumlord's spoiled child. They laughed at him and his childish ego. Who would attack a magazine for not including him in the richest person lists?
 
Nordberg said:
He had no reputation to save. Trump has always thought of women as conquests. He has no respect for marriage vows, he never grew up. Trump was not a part of New York high society. They had no use for the slumlord's spoiled child. They laughed at him and his childish ego. Who would attack a magazine for not including him in the richest person lists?
Click to expand...

Please cite to the claim that it has to be “the reason”?

If that were the case one could get away with not reporting all kinds of money. If the candidate has a rally in San Francisco, but also wanted to tour the city for personal reasons… He wouldn’t have to report the money for the flight.

If a candidate paid for opposition research but was also just personally curious about the opposition, that wouldn’t be a campaign expense…

If the campaign leases an airplane for travel, but the candidate also enjoys flying, no t a campaign expense…
 
Last edited:
Nordberg said:
He had no reputation to save. Trump has always thought of women as conquests. He has no respect for marriage vows, he never grew up. Trump was not a part of New York high society. They had no use for the slumlord's spoiled child. They laughed at him and his childish ego. Who would attack a magazine for not including him in the richest person lists?
Click to expand...

blablabla

Trump is a narcissist - what people think of him is of utmost importance.
 
Nomad said:
I don't pretend to know the law surrounding Trump's hush money payment to the porn video sex performer he allegedly had sexual relations with behind his wife's back, so I am not even going to comment on the technical legality of the prosecution or whether or not anyone else but Trump would be prosecuted to this degree for the same thing, or even if it is purely political as his shills are claiming.

But what I do know is this....

1) In 1998 then President Bill Clinton was being sued by Paula Jones. Her legal counsel was being provided free of charge by right-wing extremist billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and The Landmark Legal Foundation, a right-wing extremist political organization which he funded.

2) After Clinton gave what could at worst be described as an "evasive" or "tricky" answer to a question during a civil deposition related to that lawsuit, the Republican Party jumped on it with both feet, called Clinton a liar, accused him of perjury and elevated it to a "high crime" worthy of impeachment.

Of course, had anyone else done the same thing, it would have been met with a slap on the wrist by the judge, possibly affecting his subsequent decision making about how the case would proceed.

3) We all know that if the political party affiliations in the Trump hush money case were reversed, the Republicans would be doing AT LEAST the same thing, probably much worse.

So my opinion is PROSECUTE THE HOLY LIVING FUCK OUT OF THAT FAT-ASS RIGHT-WING FASCIST BASTARD.
Click to expand...

Ra-men.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top