squistion

Source is James O'Keefe, the discredited ex-member of Project Veritas.

That is literally absurd. There is no proof those organizations are the same people or connected in any way (if you can even call Antifa an organization). That crackpot, Rockaction, on the PSF claimed that, but the only evidence he could offer was one New Yorker article quoting one BLM member (just one and only one) saying Antifa was working with BLM.

Yeah, that's all part of the left's larger plan.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1782435473668854124 Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told the jury that Michael Cohen's testimony will be backed up by emails, text messages, phone logs, and business documents. "And it will be backed up by Donald Trump’s own words on tape, in social media posts, in his own books, and in videos of his own speeches."

I think he did and paid a fine but it was a clerical error done by his campaign.

Thanks! It does articulate all the elements of the crimes charged. Once again you have proven you have no idea what you are talking about. Not a clue.

Mike Johnson did the right thing, probably because he figured he was dead meat anyway (so to speak). In his obituary, this will be listed as one of his few accomplishments during his tenure as Speaker of the House, so he probably takes pride in that he will be perhaps his only positive legacy.

They have, look at what he is charged with.

They will during the trial. Wait and see for the evidence presented by the prosecution.

I can't find that in a Google search. They asked for a summary judgment in the E. Jean Carroll case but I don't see they have done that here. And the appeals court would have to listen to if the trial is as bogus as you claim.

Which is pretty easy to prove here. And it doesn't have to be a threat just against a witness, it can also be a thread against members of the court and jurors.

If the case is bogus as you contend, then why haven't Trump's attorneys filed a motion of summary judgement, which they would be entitled to and would be granted if your analysis is correct.

Fun Fact: Gag orders can be issued to protect anyone involved in a trial, not just the defendant but also witnesses and members of the court. And there is no rule that a gag order can only be used to protect the defendant.

No it isn't, it would be considered some sort of non-disclosure agreement. What is illegal, as was charged here is falsifying business records involving the hush money payment, which is a misdemeanor crime. The two taken together is being charged as a felony. And the statute of limitations on the falsifying business records is not a problem as if it were, his attorneys would have obtained a summary judgment before the trail began (or when it first started) and the case would have been dismissed.

He didn't say no. He left it to be determined as they approach that date. If he was effing with him about it, he would have said flat out "NO" (which Trump erroneously claims he did).

Fun Fact: Most criminal defendants are not given the day off during their trial to attend a family event (the only exception I have seen has been in the case of a funeral).

He didn't say that Trump could not attend the graduation, he said that would be determined in the future by the court calendar. Plus, at this point in time, the court is scheduled to have the day off that Barron's graduation falls on.

It can in some instances, for instance, where historically, homosexual behavior has been institutionalized. But you are taking a huge leap to saying that a child being read a story by a Drag Queen in a Public Library can turn them gay.

Rhetorical question?

Hearing a story told from a Drag Queen at public library will not influence a 5 year olds sexual orientation. That is absurd and laugable. Please.