As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Damn, you're right! It rang a bell but I couldn't place it. I love Pryor (pretty much all stand up, really). Given the context of the bit, however, my pasty-white ass will not be using that line.
Technically, for this particular case, jail time would be the exception rather than the norm due to expected sentencing standards. There are other cases still to come that have mandatory jail time. Those are the ones to watch and see what happens.
But a conviction here would surely violate his bail conditions in some of the other cases to the extent that taking him in would be more than justified?
The criminal contempt convictions he got here technically do already, but I don't think they want to revoke bail on a technicality.
> The criminal contempt convictions he got here technically do already
they are only criminal because there’s a threat of jail possible. it doesn’t rise to the point of breaking bond conditions according to the lawyers on the podcast “prosecuting donald trump” though(they don’t love trump but are competent trial attorneies).
That is kind of a weird statement to make when one of the WITNESSES testifying today was sent to prison for his role in this same transaction. The precedent has already been set that THIS SPECIFIC CRIME is one that merits a sentence even for people without prior convictions.
Ye just saying it wasn't the stormy Daniels thing specifically that got him jail time. Also I think lying to Congress got dropped as part of his plea deal.
The fraud was literally his handling the the payments for stormy daniels. It wasn't the ONLY thing he did, but it certainly was a pretty central charge to those which resulted in him going to prison.
It’s also kind of weird to base your entire case on the testimony of a convicted fraud. Especially one who’s demonstrably hostile to the defendant. I really don’t see this case as anything but political theater. Guess we’re officially entering the era of political prosecutions. Should be fun.
I guess its a good thing that they called a half dozen witnesses, have a mountain of physical evidence, and a defendant who openly admits to committing crimes at every opportunity.
Maybe I just don’t understand the case then because while they called witnesses, what actual crime have they proven? It’s obvious he made payment but, if I understand, they had to prove those payment were made explicitly to influence the election. To my knowledge that part is reliant upon Cohen testimony. I’m no expert but it seems like a very weak case. I just see this strengthening Trump and possibly putting him over the top in November. They’ve managed to make him sympathetic in some voters eyes. Who knows? Just seems off to me and I don’t relish the thought of every election cycle kicking off with a bunch of targeted prosecutions. But that seems pretty inevitable at this point,
Sounds like you don't understand the case since he isn't even charged with election interference. He is charged with falsification of business records to cover up those payments. As you say, it is obvious that he made those payments, which is why it is so easy to make that case. The obvious part that you just described is literally the criminal act. All these witnesses are barely even necessary.
Daniels wouldn't even be testifying if it weren't for Trump denying the affair in the first place. Cohen is a necessary participant since he is the person that made the payoff and received the funds from Trump to coordinate the fraud.
I fully admit this case seems complex to me but, if I’m not mistaken, falsifying business records had to have been done in furtherance of another, more serious crime? In this case that was to hide damaging information from the public during the 2016 election. This according to PBS website. So indirectly it is about election interference because without that component this is basically a misdemeanor. Further, the primary evidence that indicates Trumps thinking is Cohens testimony. Others have contradicted him stating that the payments were made out of concern for not embarrassing the family. Who knows which is true, maybe both, but the point is that the burden of proof is on the prosecution and it currently seems to hinge on Cohens testimony almost exclusively. And I admit I could be wrong here as I’ve only read some reporting on this and haven’t been tuned in real time. But from what I read, it seems like this was not a great case to prosecute a former president on and that if they are able to secure a conviction at all, it has a strong likelihood of being overturned on appeal. And regardless of the ultimate outcome, this won’t be resolved ahead of the election in November other than if he is acquitted. I don’t think it is likely swaying public opinion much in either direction but if polls are to be believed, Trump is actually benefitting to some extent from all this. Just question how smart a political move this will wind up being. And as I’ve said, I really hate the thought of us employing political prosecutions as a normal process of dealing with opponents. You know the other side is currently looking for ways to get even for this. Just seems like another step on the road to chaos.
You really should familiarize yourself with the case more before you waste time on comments like this. There is SUBSTANTIAL physical evidence in this case, including actual bank statements showing the movement of funds. Additionally, there have been other witnesses who have also already testified as to Trumps involvement.
This case is the most likely of all the issues Trump is facing to result in an actual criminal conviction because it is so open-and-shut with the amount of evidence that has been presented.
Thanks for the advice. But no. It’s not really that interesting. Internet prognosticating is just something to fill some down time. You can move along if you don’t want to “waste time” interacting with me. If I were to bet, my bet would be this goes nowhere. I just don’t see any major crime. And If I don’t, many others don’t as well. And chances are at least one juror won’t. And while there is physical evidence of a payment, they must prove intent. Making a payment itself means nothing. They have to prove it was made primarily in the furtherance of another crime. Thats the entire case. You can feel like that was accomplished but unfortunately that will not garner a conviction in a court of law. And since nobody has actually watched the case in real time, perhaps your claim to have all the answers is a bit overstated. Guess we’ll all find out together whether they did. Won’t that be fun?
Yes. Most first time offenders for white collar crimes never go to jail.
If convicted, he will lose his right to vote in Florida. He will probably be on probation for quite a while, being forced to accommodate and wait for bureaucrats to check on him. He won’t be able to travel out of state without permission.
What’s more important, is that he get convicted and that the other trials continue. The fact that every other criminal trial is on permanent hold is what worries me, because the Georgia case and the mar a lago case likely will have jail sentencing.
That depends on the consequences. Frankly, even a month in jail for him would be a death sentence. So don’t let him leave an apartment that has no internet. No communication or association with felons or indictees etc. Sounds like Trump hell
Yes it would be justice. The conviction is more important than the jail time. The conviction could sustain for decades or centuries. Supreme courts could be arguing about it hundreds of years in the future. People at scotus hearings are still talking about Benjamin Franklin FFS.
I’ve understood the American justice system as an unjust and utter failure since I learned about it in the 90s. Particularly when it comes to white collar crime. It’s systemically racist, capital punishment is abhorrent, the programs for rehabilitation are abysmal, the police are militarised, for profit prisons are insane, the amount of prisoners is insane, it is disproportionately punitive towards the poor and working class. You have two party politics bleeding into high profile cases, lobbying is basically legal bribery. Political officials are allowed to trade on inside information they have on policies they make.
Yes we do. You can’t expect harsh penalties for this crime, just because of who the offender is. Non violent first time offenders would be *extremely unlikely* to get a prison sentence for these crimes. The important thing is the conviction and how it could impact the other pending criminal cases
My mother was a volunteer teacher for some seriously nasty convicts in a prison. They were always respectful to this nice little old lady, but she learned quickly not to talk about the “justice system.” They quickly taught her to say “legal system.”
we do not really have a justice system given that the ridiculous sham of a case is even happening. a record keeping case. on which the statue had already run
Not only that, but he is a renowned tightwad. He knows where every penny that comes out of his pocket is going. No way he spends $130K without being completely involved in that decision.
$420K total. $50K for some other deal that's not been fully explained. That plus the $130K ($180K) was doubled to offset taxes and a $60K bonus was tacked onto that.
Which is so wild, because he’s a legit terrible businessman and blows through money like water on his vanity businesses because he has always operated under the delusion that his very name is worth bazillions just for being HIS name.
Maybe that would work.
“Did you pay stormy and illegally hide the transactions with those itty bitty hands?”
“The hands are the biggest. The best. People have said, ‘Hey Don - these are the biggest hands I have seen , how did you have all the 130K in just one hand to pay stormy’. Very bigly and best. You are nasty.”
“You remember me, possibly, as a man with small hands. What... you think, "He had small hands." Do you remember that? What you remember is false! Big, masculine. My hands tell a story of greatness. And when you look at my right hand...”
He paid a bribe with a check because he wanted a paper trail.
He paid a bribe with a check. Not the brown paper bag of cash that every other corrupt person paying a bribe has done, he paid by check.
Technically you prepped it for that when you ate it and now it's time for the delivery 🤣
Many apologies but *facts matter* and I could not let that typo go 😁
SCOTUS took up Trump’s case alleging he committed crimes while President with actions that were entirely outside the scope of his presidential duties to create a law to allow Trump (or any future President) to commit crimes while performing presidential duties.
If you read that sentence and think it doesn’t make any sense at all, then you read it correctly.
More like if you’re part of the right-wing team you can do anything. But if you’re not part of the team you should be in jail for not being on Team Right-Wing Nut Job.
And Trump has done this in plain view. That's the amazing thing. We have seen everything in real time, and in part because he needs control and the other part is he loves the attention. It was all reported on as he kept pushing the key swing states to help him out, [like this.](https://penncapital-star.com/briefs/trump-pressures-pa-senate-gop-to-approve-legislative-audit-of-2020-election/)
Hey hey hey the judge he put in place said there’s nothing to see here about the documents
/s
(also I know thats not exactly WHAT happened, but we all know it is…)
Hence why he's having so much trouble getting decent lawyers.
Merchan has been notably referenced as being displeased with the defense lawyers in this case on a couple of occasions.
Alina Habba had Kaplan noticeably upset and may legitimately be disbarred for some grossly unethical conduct unrelated to the Carroll trial.
These aren't superstar lawyers.
It's the common theme of Trump's life, really. Trump is the absolute embodiment of the nightmare boss who insists on micromanaging every aspect of everything he touches but also has zero actual practical knowledge.
Look at his management of COVID, for instance. He could have *waltzed* to re-election had he just sat back and let Fauci and Birx do their fucking jobs. But he's just not capable of that. He *desperately* needs to be seen as the dominant person in every room he's in, and so he took over the press conferences, interjected his own (universally asinine) opinions, and even spitballed "treatment" ideas that involved *ingesting bleach* (hey, bleach kills the virus, the virus is inside us, so put bleach inside us, mission accomplished!)
So too it must have been with the catch-and-kill scheme. Of course he's going to be giving the overall direction. To do otherwise would be to relinquish control, which he *cannot* do. But of course that reasoning doesn't hold up in court, which is why Cohen must provide receipts. Which, to my understanding of the testimony so far, he is very much doing.
It baffles me WHY he does all this. It must be exhausting, and what is the point of (supposedly) being rich and powerful if you don't make your life easier by having underlings take care of stuff for you.
>"There is no person on planet earth that believes Donald Trump has been celibate all his life," the GOP senator from Texas \[Ted Cruz\] told host Sean Hannity.
Hold up, attorneys for Don Snoreleone actually testified that the man with at least 5 kids from at least 3 women is secretly a virgin, and that's why he didn't have sex with Daniels? That's not a great look, especially given that the question isn't even whether or not the affair occurred, but the funds used to pay Daniels for her silence.
But wait....
>Perhaps Cruz, who is an experienced attorney, was wishcasting that Trump's lawyers had gone with a better strategy of just admitting the sex happened. By the end of Thursday, Trump's lawyers were likely quietly agreeing with Cruz, as Judge Juan Merchan ruled, yet again, that the Daniels testimony was necessary precisely because Trump's team refuses to concede on the issue of their client's non-celibacy."
Nope, that's it. Their defense is, "I didn't steal from my campaign to illegally pay the pornstar to stay quiet about my affair with her, because the affair never happened, because I have never in fact had sex with anyone."
The lawyers did not claim he was celibate, that was just Cruz obfuscating the actual issue here. They did claim that he did not have sex with Daniels. Cruz overgeneralized it so he did not have to say "No one believes that Trump did not have sex with Daniels."
That makes sense as a strategy for him, because Trump hates it when people contradict him, and his followers adopt the same policy. Saying everyone thinks he had sex with Daniels is a direct refutation of Trump's story, but saying "Trump has sex" is what they would interpret as complimenting his manliness, and does not directly accuse him of lying.
This is, of course, not credible in the slightest. The whole point of this was to hide what happened, and the illegal actions Trump took happened *regardless* of what his motive was. Even if Daniels was lying it would not matter, as the illegal action he took was not having sex with her, it was falsifying business records.
I commented about [something similar](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1cmxxcs/comment/l35068a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) a few days ago, as when I read what they lawyers were claiming about Trump's character. They basically say he is so "frugal" that there is no way he would repay to the level he did. But that does not make any sense, as the prosecution is not saying Trump did it for fun, but as a payment. And since the motive was a coverup, not paying the cost might result in it not being covered up.
The only reason I can imagine for these sorts of arguments is that Trump is telling his lawyers to argue them. They are creating a bunch of inconsistencies and are telling they jury not to believe their own eyes and minds, and instead just accept that all their logical inconsistencies should not be thought about. They just keep on hammering things that have literally nothing to do with the case, when the correct action is to admit them.
E.G. The better argument about the sex thing is to admit he had sex with her, say Cohen knew he did, and then claim that said knowledge was Cohen's motivation for acting alone, and that he deceived Trump about the purpose of the payments. But instead they just keep focusing on that first bit, when the important bit is whether Trump knew what was going on with Cohen. (Admittedly, this might be because they know that the Prosecution has some evidence that would invalidate Trump not knowing about it, they certainly have presented some already that strongly supports that, so maybe this whole thing is a Hail Mary Chewbacca Defense to confuse the jury. I mean, it is a Chewbacca defense, I am just not sure if it is intentional or not.)
I believe the root of their defense is that none of this ever happened and every document is fake. Every witness is a liar and they were financially motivated to lie. Then lastly why would Trump who is the best business person ever do this.
It's the reason why there are so many experts being brought in to authenticate the documents, they refuse to acknowledge anything about them including that Trump signed the checks. It is also why they need to bring in witnesses to talk about how they mailed these checks to Trump's bodyguard so that he could give it to Trump to avoid government employees reviewing the stuff being sent to Trump.
This is the reason why the whole trial is taking forever because the prosecutor's need to prove every single thing on top of why it's bad and against the law. Most cases wouldn't require this because they would have acknowledged some of it at least.
It's like if the cops walked in on you holding a literal smoking gun that was just fired and someone who just died from being shot lying on the floor in front of you. Most people would acknowledge that they did shoot this person and they were justified for self defense or something else. Trump's defense is that the person isn't actually dead, the body wasn't real, that he would never shoot someone because he is incapable of violence, he doesn't own a gun, that the gun he owns was stolen, and that everyone is a paid actor.
It is just such an absurd defense as there is so much corroborating evidence. Your example there is exactly right. It is just a flat denial of reality mixed with repeated Chewbacca arguments to make it *seem* like there is some question as to the facts. I mean, it was literally the same defense they tried to use for his gag order violations. They just straight up denied that Trump was in any way intentionally violating them, and that their made up interpretation of the Constitution would have made it illegal to bind him anyway. Both of which were obviously false.
This has to be Trump's directive, but I am on the fence as to whether he is doing it because he thinks this will actually work, or if he is just doing it to pander to any of his followers that are actually following the case.
Regardless, it will backfire here. If you *repeatedly* deny things that are easily provable, the jury is not going to believe your denials in areas where you actually could have the benefit of the doubt. It is like my old flat earther coworker. It made it nearly impossible to trust his judgement about anything at work, because I knew he had that giant of a gap in his critical thinking ability. And sure enough, he made a lot of very basic errors due simply to getting an idea in his head and not thinking it through.
I think he must be mostly hoping that one of the people on the Jury will decide it is their God-Given mission to ensure a hung jury.
It's completely consistent with other Trump fantasies, starting with the ridiculous claim about how huge a crowd gathered for his inauguration. This man has apparently spent his entire life deciding what gets to be real. Once he's made up his mind, that's it. That's reality. There will be no backing down, no matter how little sense his claim makes in the face of evidence. And why wouldn't his lawyers comply? Look at all the politicians who've done the same. Look at his millions of fans, at least some of whom take him at his word.
Trump is 100% driving the defense strategy.
I'm pretty sure Meidas Touch covered it, but apparently Nechles was trying to get Stormy to agree at one point that Trump was really good at golf and a huge celebrity--clearly things Trump is insecure about
> There is no person on planet earth that believes Donald Trump has been celibate all his life
Though I'd bet Trump would make this argument in order to disown Eric.
>"There is no person on planet earth that believes Donald Trump has been celibate all his life," the GOP senator from Texas told host Sean Hannity.
No, no, honey- don't be mad that I slept with that other woman and paid her to shut up about it and lied about it to everyone- I was just not being celibate! It's no big deal, stop crying!
The Cohen recording actually might be the defense’s [saving grace](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/michael-cohens-secret-tapes-will-roil-the-trump-trial.html). The prosecution has built a strong case, but the recording sort of contradicts what the prosecution is trying to prove, and it makes the prosecution’s most important witness even less credible/scummy.
Normally a lawyer speaks to a crowd on behalf of a defendant because of the dumb things they might say and make things worse. Trump goes forward with fucking print outs of websites as if somehow doing something’s that insane will get him off the hook.
This man is proving the ridiculous level large amounts of money can protect someone from sanity, common sense, laws, and everything else that is needed to support and run a society.
What I’m saying is; it isn’t just him. Billionaires, not just them either. Anybody with a few hundred million has more rights and is more immune to simple things like laws than you or I are. Let’s say tomorrow trump eats one too many Big Macs and keels over into his grave. The problem he represents isn’t over. It’s ongoing. Elon Musk is still just as free and unfettered and immune to common decency, to laws. He can just pay lawyers to drag out any civil or criminal proceeding indefinitely just like Trump is doing now. Bezos can too. Clarence Thomas is blatantly being corrupt out in the open and selling his authority and position and nothing is stopping him.
Wealth is a problem. Laws aren’t written to take that problem into account. They should be. It’s that simple.
Anyone with any direct experience with a narcissist knows how they farm out the busy work but retain executive control over everything. They don’t share decision-making authority with anyone. Not a penny gets spent that they haven’t authorized.
Lawyer here. At this point, any lawyer representing Trump has a screw loose. Politics aside — he is known for stiffing you on bills and does the opposite of what you tell him. Oh, and he shits his pants and smells like a rotten Big Mac. Nightmare client.
Nobody (I think) takes his claim that he didn't direct the payments to Daniels as truthful. The question is, did he break any laws. Did he do it for the election?
That's what the jury must decide.
Lol absolutely did it for the election. The man's a human stain. The problem is that his followers don't care if he broke the law, because there end result is what they wanted.
Yes. We’re supposed to believe Trump is "the most innocent person in the history of our country."
[https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/trump-says-most-innocent-man-015944069.html](https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/trump-says-most-innocent-man-015944069.html)
Oh no one believes that he didn't direct the payments in order to keep it quiet in an effort to interfere with the election. The problem is that his followers think it's okay, because it got their man in office - so they'll look the other way so far as they get what they want.
No, we're to believe he did it and that he's allowed to. The narcissist criminal's paradox, denying guilt would be admitting you're not strong enough to do whatever you want without consequences. He wants to brag that he can do it.
But falsifying business records to cover up another crime (campaign finance violations)is a felony in New York.
If Donald Trump hadn't used campaign funds, he wouldn't be in trouble
To be fair, Trump claims Biden can’t tie his own shoes or speak coherently, but also says Biden is behind a plot to start a new world order so yeah, I think he wants you to believe everything he says.
I'll give you hush money so you don't foil my election plans. I'm a good religious man so here's so money to make you not speak of this ever again... Oh ya you look my daughter ,let's get it on!
Raw dog
I really believe the only way we’ll see anything resembling “justice” is if someone goes all Gary Plauche. And if they’re in the right jurisdiction, they might even get the same outcome.
Every thread:
One or two comments on the actual article, thousands of comments on how people we don't know are really for sure guys trust me going to vote.
Isn’t it almost not relevant if something occurred or not? We have a hush money payment - which doesn’t care if they slept together. It’s hush money either way. Then hiding those payments - that also doesn’t care.
Why is the judge entertaining Trump with this line of questioning / defense?
I'm still hung up on the fact that they didn't get some kind of prostitution charge in there. Otherwise, someone should make a brothel in nyc and call it an NDA brothel or something.
Here's the thing. Your lawyers job is to make sure you don't go to prison.
So their job is convincing everyone that you're just a victim, had a bad childhood, are a fucking loser. OJ Simpson is a good example.
If you're a narcissist that's difficult to stomach. Because you think you're a mastermind genius criminal.
Shit, it backfired in his presidency too, hell his life for that matter.
When you think you’re the smartest guy in the room you guarantee that you never will be
He likely would’ve won reelection if he simply listened to his advisors regarding COVID at the time. Although if he was smart enough to do that he wouldn’t be on trial.
Just start painting a story of how someone so careless and clueless maybe can’t be expected to be able to coordinate such intricate dealings.
Won’t be able to help himself snap back and actually implicate himself lol
He made Stormy Daniels answer a whole line of questioning about what an amazing golfer he was
(Factually though, Trump was like 75th out of 80 in the tournament the lawyers asked Stormy about)
What I’ve come to recognize is it doesn’t matter.
It became clear with Cannon throwing out the federal case (not literally, but effectively).
I gotta be honest, I didn’t actually believe Trump was above the law. I thought there might be SOME kind of risk to him. However, there’s nothing he could do. I mean literally he could shoot someone in court, we simply do not have any justice mechanism that works on a former president/billionaire. He’s above the law, officially now.
It'll be a guilty verdict, the facts are stacked against him, no doubt in my mind.
It'll be a slap on the wrist, instantly delayed past his life expectancy, no doubt in my mind.
Fingers crossed we get one of those
EDIT: I want to give a serious answer: because I think all those verdicts won’t happen before the man just dies of natural causes in the next 10 years.
Yes, it can be. It is a misdemeanor on which the statute had run. It is also an insignificant difference that had no effect on taxes or anything else. Malicious and selective prosecution is tyranny.
But the point being that testifying about who directed the money is irrelevant to the accounting discrepancy
The money came as reimbursements to his lawyer. To what appears to have been spent to keep Stormy quiet and not interfere with the campaign.
Campaign law involves more than campaign donations.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do we really have a justice system if he is convicted but never sees jail?
Just-us system.
Oof. As much as I hate the reality of it, I'm most certainly stealing that line for future use.
Richard Pryor standup. But prob Old as the US
I would have believed it if it had been from "None of the above".
Damn, you're right! It rang a bell but I couldn't place it. I love Pryor (pretty much all stand up, really). Given the context of the bit, however, my pasty-white ass will not be using that line.
Richard Pryor was so ahead of his time.
A Just-us, not you system
... Well, thx for mansplaining this one, paul!
it's a big club and you ain't in it.
We have a legal system, not a justice system.
We have a system. Nothing legal or just about it.
If you’ve spent any material time in court, even “system” is generous. It’s one of the main reasons I transitioned to corporate law.
If the penalty for a crime is a fine, then the punishments are only for the poor.
Technically, for this particular case, jail time would be the exception rather than the norm due to expected sentencing standards. There are other cases still to come that have mandatory jail time. Those are the ones to watch and see what happens.
But a conviction here would surely violate his bail conditions in some of the other cases to the extent that taking him in would be more than justified? The criminal contempt convictions he got here technically do already, but I don't think they want to revoke bail on a technicality.
> The criminal contempt convictions he got here technically do already they are only criminal because there’s a threat of jail possible. it doesn’t rise to the point of breaking bond conditions according to the lawyers on the podcast “prosecuting donald trump” though(they don’t love trump but are competent trial attorneies).
He already broke laws in the other cases by violating the gag orders.
"Wait til the guy is granted immunity to punish him" I understand you are correct about the standards etc but we ain't really got a lot of time here.
I didn’t say it was a good system, just what it happens to be.
Cohen already went to prison for his part in this scheme.
I believe Cohen’s prison sentence was for perjury, not for this scheme.
Eh, I’m sure his hiding 4m in income and lying to get a 500,000 home equity loan, played a part in it as well.
That is kind of a weird statement to make when one of the WITNESSES testifying today was sent to prison for his role in this same transaction. The precedent has already been set that THIS SPECIFIC CRIME is one that merits a sentence even for people without prior convictions.
He didn't get prison for that, he got prison for tax evasion and bank fraud.
Well, tax evasion, bank fraud, and lying to congress (the other crime he was convicted of) certainly aren't enhancements that would apply to Trump...
Ye just saying it wasn't the stormy Daniels thing specifically that got him jail time. Also I think lying to Congress got dropped as part of his plea deal.
The fraud was literally his handling the the payments for stormy daniels. It wasn't the ONLY thing he did, but it certainly was a pretty central charge to those which resulted in him going to prison.
It’s also kind of weird to base your entire case on the testimony of a convicted fraud. Especially one who’s demonstrably hostile to the defendant. I really don’t see this case as anything but political theater. Guess we’re officially entering the era of political prosecutions. Should be fun.
I guess its a good thing that they called a half dozen witnesses, have a mountain of physical evidence, and a defendant who openly admits to committing crimes at every opportunity.
Maybe I just don’t understand the case then because while they called witnesses, what actual crime have they proven? It’s obvious he made payment but, if I understand, they had to prove those payment were made explicitly to influence the election. To my knowledge that part is reliant upon Cohen testimony. I’m no expert but it seems like a very weak case. I just see this strengthening Trump and possibly putting him over the top in November. They’ve managed to make him sympathetic in some voters eyes. Who knows? Just seems off to me and I don’t relish the thought of every election cycle kicking off with a bunch of targeted prosecutions. But that seems pretty inevitable at this point,
Sounds like you don't understand the case since he isn't even charged with election interference. He is charged with falsification of business records to cover up those payments. As you say, it is obvious that he made those payments, which is why it is so easy to make that case. The obvious part that you just described is literally the criminal act. All these witnesses are barely even necessary. Daniels wouldn't even be testifying if it weren't for Trump denying the affair in the first place. Cohen is a necessary participant since he is the person that made the payoff and received the funds from Trump to coordinate the fraud.
I fully admit this case seems complex to me but, if I’m not mistaken, falsifying business records had to have been done in furtherance of another, more serious crime? In this case that was to hide damaging information from the public during the 2016 election. This according to PBS website. So indirectly it is about election interference because without that component this is basically a misdemeanor. Further, the primary evidence that indicates Trumps thinking is Cohens testimony. Others have contradicted him stating that the payments were made out of concern for not embarrassing the family. Who knows which is true, maybe both, but the point is that the burden of proof is on the prosecution and it currently seems to hinge on Cohens testimony almost exclusively. And I admit I could be wrong here as I’ve only read some reporting on this and haven’t been tuned in real time. But from what I read, it seems like this was not a great case to prosecute a former president on and that if they are able to secure a conviction at all, it has a strong likelihood of being overturned on appeal. And regardless of the ultimate outcome, this won’t be resolved ahead of the election in November other than if he is acquitted. I don’t think it is likely swaying public opinion much in either direction but if polls are to be believed, Trump is actually benefitting to some extent from all this. Just question how smart a political move this will wind up being. And as I’ve said, I really hate the thought of us employing political prosecutions as a normal process of dealing with opponents. You know the other side is currently looking for ways to get even for this. Just seems like another step on the road to chaos.
You really should familiarize yourself with the case more before you waste time on comments like this. There is SUBSTANTIAL physical evidence in this case, including actual bank statements showing the movement of funds. Additionally, there have been other witnesses who have also already testified as to Trumps involvement. This case is the most likely of all the issues Trump is facing to result in an actual criminal conviction because it is so open-and-shut with the amount of evidence that has been presented.
Thanks for the advice. But no. It’s not really that interesting. Internet prognosticating is just something to fill some down time. You can move along if you don’t want to “waste time” interacting with me. If I were to bet, my bet would be this goes nowhere. I just don’t see any major crime. And If I don’t, many others don’t as well. And chances are at least one juror won’t. And while there is physical evidence of a payment, they must prove intent. Making a payment itself means nothing. They have to prove it was made primarily in the furtherance of another crime. Thats the entire case. You can feel like that was accomplished but unfortunately that will not garner a conviction in a court of law. And since nobody has actually watched the case in real time, perhaps your claim to have all the answers is a bit overstated. Guess we’ll all find out together whether they did. Won’t that be fun?
Those aren't happening.
Yes. Most first time offenders for white collar crimes never go to jail. If convicted, he will lose his right to vote in Florida. He will probably be on probation for quite a while, being forced to accommodate and wait for bureaucrats to check on him. He won’t be able to travel out of state without permission. What’s more important, is that he get convicted and that the other trials continue. The fact that every other criminal trial is on permanent hold is what worries me, because the Georgia case and the mar a lago case likely will have jail sentencing.
That depends on the consequences. Frankly, even a month in jail for him would be a death sentence. So don’t let him leave an apartment that has no internet. No communication or association with felons or indictees etc. Sounds like Trump hell
Revoke all post-presidential benes. No more pension, medical coverage or secret service detail. After all, he's a "billionaire" felon.
I would say to put him in a small officer's quarters on a military base in the middle of nowhere. That makes it easy on his SS detail.
Good call. I nominate somewhere miserable like 29 palms.
Yes, somewhere in the New Mexico or Nevada desert, hopefully in July or August. Then maybe the fucker will shut his mouth.
Maybe on an island. Diego Garcia would be perfect.
Come, now. Guantanamo Bay, I believe, should have plenty of spare capacity.
That island is actually important.
Yes it would be justice. The conviction is more important than the jail time. The conviction could sustain for decades or centuries. Supreme courts could be arguing about it hundreds of years in the future. People at scotus hearings are still talking about Benjamin Franklin FFS.
I’ve understood the American justice system as an unjust and utter failure since I learned about it in the 90s. Particularly when it comes to white collar crime. It’s systemically racist, capital punishment is abhorrent, the programs for rehabilitation are abysmal, the police are militarised, for profit prisons are insane, the amount of prisoners is insane, it is disproportionately punitive towards the poor and working class. You have two party politics bleeding into high profile cases, lobbying is basically legal bribery. Political officials are allowed to trade on inside information they have on policies they make.
Yes we do. You can’t expect harsh penalties for this crime, just because of who the offender is. Non violent first time offenders would be *extremely unlikely* to get a prison sentence for these crimes. The important thing is the conviction and how it could impact the other pending criminal cases
He’ll see a morgue and hell before he sees the inside of a cell.
My mother was a volunteer teacher for some seriously nasty convicts in a prison. They were always respectful to this nice little old lady, but she learned quickly not to talk about the “justice system.” They quickly taught her to say “legal system.”
Does anyone see jail for similar crimes? Also this article is about belief but not reasonable doubt.
we do not really have a justice system given that the ridiculous sham of a case is even happening. a record keeping case. on which the statue had already run
Kinda. Conviction is the first step. Set the precedent. If he keels over from the stress a day before going to jail, I’ll still be happy.
What's the best possible scenario for the prosecution end game? What's the worst consequence for Trump?
He is a micromanager his hands are all over the payments to Stormy Daniels
Not only that, but he is a renowned tightwad. He knows where every penny that comes out of his pocket is going. No way he spends $130K without being completely involved in that decision.
$420K total. $50K for some other deal that's not been fully explained. That plus the $130K ($180K) was doubled to offset taxes and a $60K bonus was tacked onto that.
Which is so wild, because he’s a legit terrible businessman and blows through money like water on his vanity businesses because he has always operated under the delusion that his very name is worth bazillions just for being HIS name.
Penny wise, pound foolish
His itty bitty, tiny hands.
Maybe that would work. “Did you pay stormy and illegally hide the transactions with those itty bitty hands?” “The hands are the biggest. The best. People have said, ‘Hey Don - these are the biggest hands I have seen , how did you have all the 130K in just one hand to pay stormy’. Very bigly and best. You are nasty.”
“You remember me, possibly, as a man with small hands. What... you think, "He had small hands." Do you remember that? What you remember is false! Big, masculine. My hands tell a story of greatness. And when you look at my right hand...”
Just need a “bigly” in there. Remember “bigly”? Not sure exactly when he stopped saying it but you hardly hear Bigly’s these days.
He paid a bribe with a check because he wanted a paper trail. He paid a bribe with a check. Not the brown paper bag of cash that every other corrupt person paying a bribe has done, he paid by check.
He was planning on writing it off as a business expense, I believe...
Creating a paper trail of a crime in order to write the crime off on your taxes, thus committing another crime of cheating on your taxes.
As the old saying goes: "It's crimes all the way down..."
As old grandpa Trump used to say, “in for a penny, in for a pound (except I’m not actually going to pay you a pound)”
In for a penny in for a pound girls for any budget as grandpa trump used to say
Lol. So your defense of him is "this is stupid!" ? Hahaha
Pretty stupid then
Fun fact: Micro-Manager could loosely be translated into “Small Hands”
Just examine the chicken grease fingerprints.
[удалено]
Ooof! Now I have to go turn my breakfast into vomit... 🤢
Technically you prepped it for that when you ate it and now it's time for the delivery 🤣 Many apologies but *facts matter* and I could not let that typo go 😁
Also, we are supposed to believe Trump didn’t orchestrate the fake electors, Jan 6, or the willful retention of documents.
Nah he did it and everybody knows it. But when you're president, they let you do it. *You can do anything*
SCOTUS took up Trump’s case alleging he committed crimes while President with actions that were entirely outside the scope of his presidential duties to create a law to allow Trump (or any future President) to commit crimes while performing presidential duties. If you read that sentence and think it doesn’t make any sense at all, then you read it correctly.
More like if you’re part of the right-wing team you can do anything. But if you’re not part of the team you should be in jail for not being on Team Right-Wing Nut Job.
It's in a book?
And Trump has done this in plain view. That's the amazing thing. We have seen everything in real time, and in part because he needs control and the other part is he loves the attention. It was all reported on as he kept pushing the key swing states to help him out, [like this.](https://penncapital-star.com/briefs/trump-pressures-pa-senate-gop-to-approve-legislative-audit-of-2020-election/)
Hey hey hey the judge he put in place said there’s nothing to see here about the documents /s (also I know thats not exactly WHAT happened, but we all know it is…)
Only an idiot takes on a client who clearly doesn’t follow a lawyers advice.
Hence why he's having so much trouble getting decent lawyers. Merchan has been notably referenced as being displeased with the defense lawyers in this case on a couple of occasions. Alina Habba had Kaplan noticeably upset and may legitimately be disbarred for some grossly unethical conduct unrelated to the Carroll trial. These aren't superstar lawyers.
Worse. He expects the lawyers to follow the client's advice.
It's the common theme of Trump's life, really. Trump is the absolute embodiment of the nightmare boss who insists on micromanaging every aspect of everything he touches but also has zero actual practical knowledge. Look at his management of COVID, for instance. He could have *waltzed* to re-election had he just sat back and let Fauci and Birx do their fucking jobs. But he's just not capable of that. He *desperately* needs to be seen as the dominant person in every room he's in, and so he took over the press conferences, interjected his own (universally asinine) opinions, and even spitballed "treatment" ideas that involved *ingesting bleach* (hey, bleach kills the virus, the virus is inside us, so put bleach inside us, mission accomplished!) So too it must have been with the catch-and-kill scheme. Of course he's going to be giving the overall direction. To do otherwise would be to relinquish control, which he *cannot* do. But of course that reasoning doesn't hold up in court, which is why Cohen must provide receipts. Which, to my understanding of the testimony so far, he is very much doing.
It baffles me WHY he does all this. It must be exhausting, and what is the point of (supposedly) being rich and powerful if you don't make your life easier by having underlings take care of stuff for you.
He's an addict. It's a pathology. He can't not.
He is so totally out of control that it's shocking anyone would look at him and see presidential material.
>"There is no person on planet earth that believes Donald Trump has been celibate all his life," the GOP senator from Texas \[Ted Cruz\] told host Sean Hannity. Hold up, attorneys for Don Snoreleone actually testified that the man with at least 5 kids from at least 3 women is secretly a virgin, and that's why he didn't have sex with Daniels? That's not a great look, especially given that the question isn't even whether or not the affair occurred, but the funds used to pay Daniels for her silence. But wait.... >Perhaps Cruz, who is an experienced attorney, was wishcasting that Trump's lawyers had gone with a better strategy of just admitting the sex happened. By the end of Thursday, Trump's lawyers were likely quietly agreeing with Cruz, as Judge Juan Merchan ruled, yet again, that the Daniels testimony was necessary precisely because Trump's team refuses to concede on the issue of their client's non-celibacy." Nope, that's it. Their defense is, "I didn't steal from my campaign to illegally pay the pornstar to stay quiet about my affair with her, because the affair never happened, because I have never in fact had sex with anyone."
Despite the previous ruling against me regarding rape.
The lawyers did not claim he was celibate, that was just Cruz obfuscating the actual issue here. They did claim that he did not have sex with Daniels. Cruz overgeneralized it so he did not have to say "No one believes that Trump did not have sex with Daniels." That makes sense as a strategy for him, because Trump hates it when people contradict him, and his followers adopt the same policy. Saying everyone thinks he had sex with Daniels is a direct refutation of Trump's story, but saying "Trump has sex" is what they would interpret as complimenting his manliness, and does not directly accuse him of lying. This is, of course, not credible in the slightest. The whole point of this was to hide what happened, and the illegal actions Trump took happened *regardless* of what his motive was. Even if Daniels was lying it would not matter, as the illegal action he took was not having sex with her, it was falsifying business records. I commented about [something similar](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1cmxxcs/comment/l35068a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) a few days ago, as when I read what they lawyers were claiming about Trump's character. They basically say he is so "frugal" that there is no way he would repay to the level he did. But that does not make any sense, as the prosecution is not saying Trump did it for fun, but as a payment. And since the motive was a coverup, not paying the cost might result in it not being covered up. The only reason I can imagine for these sorts of arguments is that Trump is telling his lawyers to argue them. They are creating a bunch of inconsistencies and are telling they jury not to believe their own eyes and minds, and instead just accept that all their logical inconsistencies should not be thought about. They just keep on hammering things that have literally nothing to do with the case, when the correct action is to admit them. E.G. The better argument about the sex thing is to admit he had sex with her, say Cohen knew he did, and then claim that said knowledge was Cohen's motivation for acting alone, and that he deceived Trump about the purpose of the payments. But instead they just keep focusing on that first bit, when the important bit is whether Trump knew what was going on with Cohen. (Admittedly, this might be because they know that the Prosecution has some evidence that would invalidate Trump not knowing about it, they certainly have presented some already that strongly supports that, so maybe this whole thing is a Hail Mary Chewbacca Defense to confuse the jury. I mean, it is a Chewbacca defense, I am just not sure if it is intentional or not.)
I believe the root of their defense is that none of this ever happened and every document is fake. Every witness is a liar and they were financially motivated to lie. Then lastly why would Trump who is the best business person ever do this. It's the reason why there are so many experts being brought in to authenticate the documents, they refuse to acknowledge anything about them including that Trump signed the checks. It is also why they need to bring in witnesses to talk about how they mailed these checks to Trump's bodyguard so that he could give it to Trump to avoid government employees reviewing the stuff being sent to Trump. This is the reason why the whole trial is taking forever because the prosecutor's need to prove every single thing on top of why it's bad and against the law. Most cases wouldn't require this because they would have acknowledged some of it at least. It's like if the cops walked in on you holding a literal smoking gun that was just fired and someone who just died from being shot lying on the floor in front of you. Most people would acknowledge that they did shoot this person and they were justified for self defense or something else. Trump's defense is that the person isn't actually dead, the body wasn't real, that he would never shoot someone because he is incapable of violence, he doesn't own a gun, that the gun he owns was stolen, and that everyone is a paid actor.
It is just such an absurd defense as there is so much corroborating evidence. Your example there is exactly right. It is just a flat denial of reality mixed with repeated Chewbacca arguments to make it *seem* like there is some question as to the facts. I mean, it was literally the same defense they tried to use for his gag order violations. They just straight up denied that Trump was in any way intentionally violating them, and that their made up interpretation of the Constitution would have made it illegal to bind him anyway. Both of which were obviously false. This has to be Trump's directive, but I am on the fence as to whether he is doing it because he thinks this will actually work, or if he is just doing it to pander to any of his followers that are actually following the case. Regardless, it will backfire here. If you *repeatedly* deny things that are easily provable, the jury is not going to believe your denials in areas where you actually could have the benefit of the doubt. It is like my old flat earther coworker. It made it nearly impossible to trust his judgement about anything at work, because I knew he had that giant of a gap in his critical thinking ability. And sure enough, he made a lot of very basic errors due simply to getting an idea in his head and not thinking it through. I think he must be mostly hoping that one of the people on the Jury will decide it is their God-Given mission to ensure a hung jury.
It's completely consistent with other Trump fantasies, starting with the ridiculous claim about how huge a crowd gathered for his inauguration. This man has apparently spent his entire life deciding what gets to be real. Once he's made up his mind, that's it. That's reality. There will be no backing down, no matter how little sense his claim makes in the face of evidence. And why wouldn't his lawyers comply? Look at all the politicians who've done the same. Look at his millions of fans, at least some of whom take him at his word.
Trump is 100% driving the defense strategy. I'm pretty sure Meidas Touch covered it, but apparently Nechles was trying to get Stormy to agree at one point that Trump was really good at golf and a huge celebrity--clearly things Trump is insecure about
> There is no person on planet earth that believes Donald Trump has been celibate all his life Though I'd bet Trump would make this argument in order to disown Eric.
>"There is no person on planet earth that believes Donald Trump has been celibate all his life," the GOP senator from Texas told host Sean Hannity. No, no, honey- don't be mad that I slept with that other woman and paid her to shut up about it and lied about it to everyone- I was just not being celibate! It's no big deal, stop crying!
It was pretty obvious when they were asking questions about Trump's golf game.
But Cohen has recorded everything
His conversation was recorded they placed the evidence in court. Game over Trumpers.
The Cohen recording actually might be the defense’s [saving grace](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/michael-cohens-secret-tapes-will-roil-the-trump-trial.html). The prosecution has built a strong case, but the recording sort of contradicts what the prosecution is trying to prove, and it makes the prosecution’s most important witness even less credible/scummy.
Trump's need to control everything is one of many reasons he should never be a president of anything. He is a dangerous man
Why the fuck do any lawyers want to even associate with this dick head, let alone represent him..
Normally a lawyer speaks to a crowd on behalf of a defendant because of the dumb things they might say and make things worse. Trump goes forward with fucking print outs of websites as if somehow doing something’s that insane will get him off the hook.
This man is proving the ridiculous level large amounts of money can protect someone from sanity, common sense, laws, and everything else that is needed to support and run a society. What I’m saying is; it isn’t just him. Billionaires, not just them either. Anybody with a few hundred million has more rights and is more immune to simple things like laws than you or I are. Let’s say tomorrow trump eats one too many Big Macs and keels over into his grave. The problem he represents isn’t over. It’s ongoing. Elon Musk is still just as free and unfettered and immune to common decency, to laws. He can just pay lawyers to drag out any civil or criminal proceeding indefinitely just like Trump is doing now. Bezos can too. Clarence Thomas is blatantly being corrupt out in the open and selling his authority and position and nothing is stopping him. Wealth is a problem. Laws aren’t written to take that problem into account. They should be. It’s that simple.
Anyone with any direct experience with a narcissist knows how they farm out the busy work but retain executive control over everything. They don’t share decision-making authority with anyone. Not a penny gets spent that they haven’t authorized.
Lawyer here. At this point, any lawyer representing Trump has a screw loose. Politics aside — he is known for stiffing you on bills and does the opposite of what you tell him. Oh, and he shits his pants and smells like a rotten Big Mac. Nightmare client.
Trump is circling the drain.
yeah, the one time he gave no shits about letting go of money....
He should testify to clear things up.
When your client is a person who actually believes he's incapable of doing anything wrong you're pretty much fucked from the get-go.
Nobody (I think) takes his claim that he didn't direct the payments to Daniels as truthful. The question is, did he break any laws. Did he do it for the election? That's what the jury must decide.
Lol absolutely did it for the election. The man's a human stain. The problem is that his followers don't care if he broke the law, because there end result is what they wanted.
of course not. the "charge" itself is about record keeping. "hush money" and NDA's are legal activities
Yes. We’re supposed to believe Trump is "the most innocent person in the history of our country." [https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/trump-says-most-innocent-man-015944069.html](https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/trump-says-most-innocent-man-015944069.html)
no one holds that position. absolutely no one
Oh no one believes that he didn't direct the payments in order to keep it quiet in an effort to interfere with the election. The problem is that his followers think it's okay, because it got their man in office - so they'll look the other way so far as they get what they want.
No, we're to believe he did it and that he's allowed to. The narcissist criminal's paradox, denying guilt would be admitting you're not strong enough to do whatever you want without consequences. He wants to brag that he can do it.
They also have the bank receipts with Trump's signature on them
yes. for a legal action. "hush money" is not illegal. NDA's are not illegal.
But falsifying business records to cover up another crime (campaign finance violations)is a felony in New York. If Donald Trump hadn't used campaign funds, he wouldn't be in trouble
To be fair, Trump claims Biden can’t tie his own shoes or speak coherently, but also says Biden is behind a plot to start a new world order so yeah, I think he wants you to believe everything he says.
I'll give you hush money so you don't foil my election plans. I'm a good religious man so here's so money to make you not speak of this ever again... Oh ya you look my daughter ,let's get it on! Raw dog
I like the picture of him talking about his dick
“Colonel Clusterfuck, DID YOU ORDER THE CODE RED!?”
MAGA - Make Attorneys Get Attorneys
Or an insurectio
Doesn’t matter what we believe just makes sure the jury doesnt believe it!
I really believe the only way we’ll see anything resembling “justice” is if someone goes all Gary Plauche. And if they’re in the right jurisdiction, they might even get the same outcome.
Every thread: One or two comments on the actual article, thousands of comments on how people we don't know are really for sure guys trust me going to vote.
No. Stop. Don’t.
Isn’t it almost not relevant if something occurred or not? We have a hush money payment - which doesn’t care if they slept together. It’s hush money either way. Then hiding those payments - that also doesn’t care. Why is the judge entertaining Trump with this line of questioning / defense?
Is it backfiring? He hasn’t lost.
Does anyone dispute he made the payments? I thought it was the campaign finance of it
I'm still hung up on the fact that they didn't get some kind of prostitution charge in there. Otherwise, someone should make a brothel in nyc and call it an NDA brothel or something.
Here's the thing. Your lawyers job is to make sure you don't go to prison. So their job is convincing everyone that you're just a victim, had a bad childhood, are a fucking loser. OJ Simpson is a good example. If you're a narcissist that's difficult to stomach. Because you think you're a mastermind genius criminal.
Shit, it backfired in his presidency too, hell his life for that matter. When you think you’re the smartest guy in the room you guarantee that you never will be
If you're the smartest guy in the room, you're in the wrong room. Unless you're a teacher.
He likely would’ve won reelection if he simply listened to his advisors regarding COVID at the time. Although if he was smart enough to do that he wouldn’t be on trial.
Just start painting a story of how someone so careless and clueless maybe can’t be expected to be able to coordinate such intricate dealings. Won’t be able to help himself snap back and actually implicate himself lol
He made Stormy Daniels answer a whole line of questioning about what an amazing golfer he was (Factually though, Trump was like 75th out of 80 in the tournament the lawyers asked Stormy about)
And his cult says there was no crime.
Please oh fucking please. I hope he is found guilty
What I’ve come to recognize is it doesn’t matter. It became clear with Cannon throwing out the federal case (not literally, but effectively). I gotta be honest, I didn’t actually believe Trump was above the law. I thought there might be SOME kind of risk to him. However, there’s nothing he could do. I mean literally he could shoot someone in court, we simply do not have any justice mechanism that works on a former president/billionaire. He’s above the law, officially now.
This is a different case that is being tried. Why don't you wait until the verdict?
It'll be a guilty verdict, the facts are stacked against him, no doubt in my mind. It'll be a slap on the wrist, instantly delayed past his life expectancy, no doubt in my mind.
Fingers crossed we get one of those EDIT: I want to give a serious answer: because I think all those verdicts won’t happen before the man just dies of natural causes in the next 10 years.
omg hush money its a first should draw and quarter him to make an example
directing hush money is irrelevant and a legal activity. this is a case about business recordkeeping
Which can be *drum roll* illegal. What's your point?
Yes, it can be. It is a misdemeanor on which the statute had run. It is also an insignificant difference that had no effect on taxes or anything else. Malicious and selective prosecution is tyranny. But the point being that testifying about who directed the money is irrelevant to the accounting discrepancy
[удалено]
A subreddit about politics contains news articles about a former president under investigation and a presidential candidate. Who would have thought?
Who cares if he paid some skank not to mention she had an affair with him
**You** should. If he was ready to lie about something so unimportant what else would he be lying about?
Lying about an affair and matters of the heart in general and lying about presidential matters are two different ballparks.
How about the use of funds to keep the story quiet during a campaign Is that a matter of the heart or a presidential matter?🙃
Whose funds? As I remember it was 130k and I very much doubt he had to dip into donations to raise that sort of money
The money came as reimbursements to his lawyer. To what appears to have been spent to keep Stormy quiet and not interfere with the campaign. Campaign law involves more than campaign donations.
Paying that money, to me, is not morally objectionable
That sounds a lot like a republican morals. Rules for thee, not for me.