Trump-Stormy Daniels settlement at heart of potential NY DA indictment didn't violate

good lord, you people are stupid.....that isn't someone claiming this fee was a retainer, that was someone saying the retainer agreement dictated how invoices were to be paid.....

no, I don't misrepresent the services I provide to my clients on my invoices.....I also don't misrepresent facts in my posts on political boards like you just did......cope......

Invoices that charge for work that wasn't done is just fine by you it seems.
 
In circumstances they do have that authority. You see even long established laws change with circumstances. See Row v. Wade.
Funny that isn't what the Constitution says .It does not say judges get to change the legislature law. They may be able to rule those laws legal or not but it is the legislature that gets to rewrite them not judges. 4 swing states judge rewrote election laws in violation of the US Constitution. Since Biden won by ~ 40k votes spread over 4 states those illegal unconstitutional changes may have changed the outcome of the election. So don't ever disrespect other people that say the 2020 election was tainted.
 
Funny that isn't what the Constitution says .It does not say judges get to change the legislature law. They may be able to rule those laws legal or not but it is the legislature that gets to rewrite them not judges. 4 swing states judge rewrote election laws in violation of the US Constitution. Since Biden won by ~ 40k votes spread over 4 states those illegal unconstitutional changes may have changed the outcome of the election. So don't ever disrespect other people that say the 2020 election was tainted.

Judges are charged, under the constitution, with interpreting the law and determining its constitutionality. How the law applies in different circumstances is part of interpreting the laws. You need to go back to 6th grade civics if you do not understand that. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
 
It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is.

— Marbury, 5 U.S. at 177.
 
If this indictment is focused around the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels it is doomed to failure. This is a political stunt to get the morons in the Democrat party excited.

Wait are you talking about "10 Benghazi' investigations that spanned over 4 years?

Or the 4 year investigation by Ken Starr and Brett Kavanaugh of Bill Clinton over 'WHITE WATER' that lead to consensual blow job?

Or the still running, 4 year, John Durham investigation to find 'SPYING' and the 'Origins of the Russia investigation'?

I can list a whole crap load more if you want them. All Republican lead that go no where. Just as all the "investigate the Investigators' ones being run by Marjorie Greene with her puppet, McCarthy will all go no where.

So i am curious. Are you really against political stunts???
 
If this indictment is focused around the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels it is doomed to failure. This is a political stunt to get the morons in the Democrat party excited.

Why?

BTW, Do you believe trump when he says he did not have sex with Stormy?
 
neither......it appears to be a man paying his bills to his lawyer.....

OMG the guy who pretends to be a lawyer again shows he knows nothing about the law or how good lawyer conduct business.



Trump payment to Cohen is a clear flow thru payment. To argue it is not is to say Lawyers pay off their clients problems out of the goodness of their heart and all the client has to do is pay them the legal costs they incurred in doing so.

That is so stupid only you could accept it. They will have clear evidence the National Enquirer paid to Catch and Kill the story for Trump. Then Cohen made the payment. Was it charity? is he writing it off? Is he ok with getting legal fees that he will pay taxes on, while he just donates money to Stormy he will not?


you as a lawyer, if you are one, look at all that and think 'yes that looks perfectly reasonable to me and i would argue it as his lawyer to defend him' and that is because you either are not a lawyer or you are this lawyer or have the same intellect as her.

0x0.jpg
 
OMG the guy who pretends to be a lawyer again shows he knows nothing about the law or how good lawyer conduct business.



Trump payment to Cohen is a clear flow thru payment. To argue it is not is to say Lawyers pay off their clients problems out of the goodness of their heart and all the client has to do is pay them the legal costs they incurred in doing so.

That is so stupid only you could accept it. They will have clear evidence the National Enquirer paid to Catch and Kill the story for Trump. Then Cohen made the payment. Was it charity? is he writing it off? Is he ok with getting legal fees that he will pay taxes on, while he just donates money to Stormy he will not?


you as a lawyer, if you are one, look at all that and think 'yes that looks perfectly reasonable to me and i would argue it as his lawyer to defend him' and that is because you either are not a lawyer or you are this lawyer or have the same intellect as her.

0x0.jpg

He knows better, he just lies a lot
 
He knows better, he just lies a lot

I don't know man.

I mean, I want to believe he is not as stupid as he pretends to be and it is just a game and lies, but at times when he gets more serious in his posts he gives off a real Marjorie Greene vibe, as what he says is just so dumb and yet he seems to think it is a good point.

But i am open to believing he is not that dumb, if we ever get evidence of it.
 
I don't know man.

I mean, I want to believe he is not as stupid as he pretends to be and it is just a game and lies, but at times when he gets more serious in his posts he gives off a real Marjorie Greene vibe, as what he says is just so dumb and yet he seems to think it is a good point.

But i am open to believing he is not that dumb, if we ever get evidence of it.

Maybe
 
You loved Clinton who head banged a very young WH aide. What Trump did was years before he ran for President.

Why do you presume to speak for me? I liked Clinton's politics. He did a good job and cut the debt while doing it. Lewinsky, unlike Trump and Epstein girls, was above the age of consent. I do not approve of a guy risking so much for so little.
 
Judges are charged, under the constitution, with interpreting the law and determining its constitutionality. How the law applies in different circumstances is part of interpreting the laws. You need to go back to 6th grade civics if you do not understand that. Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
Judge don't get to rewrite the law they only get to determine if it is Constitutional or not. Separation of power judges don't get to write law they can only determine if it is legal or not. If you don't understand that you are a crappy lawyer. The Judges in 4 swing states rewrote portions of the law in violation of their Constitutional authority.

BTW Marbury v Madison DOES NOT give the court the authority to create law. They only get to rule on if the law is legal or not. No one questioned if the existing election laws were legal or not. The courts that changed the law and rewrote portions of it did so illegally, tainting the election results in 4 key swing states.
 
Last edited:
Judge don't get to rewrite the law they only get to determine if it is Constitutional or not. Separation of power judges don't get to write law they can only determine if it is legal or not. If you don't understand that you are a crappy lawyer. The Judges in 4 swing states rewrote portions of the law in violation of their Constitutional authority.

Sorry you are so poorly educated, it is the judicial branches duty to interperate the law.

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is."

— Marbury, 5 U.S. at 177.
 
Why do you presume to speak for me? I liked Clinton's politics. He did a good job and cut the debt while doing it. Lewinsky, unlike Trump and Epstein girls, was above the age of consent. I do not approve of a guy risking so much for so little.
See I was right.

Clinton was Monica's boss and was over 20 years he senior. That would have got Clinton canned in and major corporation in America. You have no proof that Trump ever had a sexual encounter with anyone he supervised or that was a minor. Proof of Clinton's sexual relationship was all over Monica's blue dress.
 
Sorry you are so poorly educated, it is the judicial branches duty to interperate the law.

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is."

— Marbury, 5 U.S. at 177.
Now show me where it is in the province of the Judaical Department to WRITE the law. I'll wait....


Powers of Congress
Congress, as one of the three coequal branches of government, is ascribed significant powers by the Constitution. All legislative power in the government is vested in Congress, meaning that it is the only part of the government that can make new laws or change existing laws.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/about-th...ive power in the,laws or change existing laws.

BTW I know a Federal Judge that is a close friend. He graduated from Yale Law. He is on senior status in the Northern District of Texas and teaches a SMU law school Should I ask him if a judge can rewrite law? He calls me for medical opinions all the time I'm sure he won't mind. My wife was his court reporter for 35 years.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top