Trump's NY Election Interference Trial (Trial resumes Monday at 9:30 AM EST with Michael Cohen still on the witness stand)

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,622]

2 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it common sense.

Let me ask you, if Trump walked away from politics after losing in November, is this trial happening?  I'll add to it.  If Trump walked away and said, "You know what, I screwed up.  I see where I when wrong, I'm going back to the Democrat party and throw my support to Joe".  Is this trial happening?

Not in 250 million years.

[thegeneral 1,491]

2 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

You call it a conspiracy theory, I call it common sense.

Let me ask you, if Trump walked away from politics after losing in November, is this trial happening?  I'll add to it.  If Trump walked away and said, "You know what, I screwed up.  I see where I when wrong, I'm going back to the Democrat party and throw my support to Joe".  Is this trial happening?

We can agree to disagree. I think that is conspiracy theory territory. Trump did all this stuff. 

But yeah I think it would.

The other cases absolutely would. The docs case in particular is taking so long only because of Trump. 

[jonmx 1,664]

7 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

We can agree to disagree. I think that is conspiracy theory territory. Trump did all this stuff. 

But yeah I think it would.

The other cases absolutely would. The docs case in particular is taking so long only because of Trump. 

So fuking stupid.  We have seen a dozen of document violations by famous politicians and none of them resulted in charges.   No one has ever been charged for a memo on a check.  These cases are frauds which are 100 percent political and have absolutely no merit. 

[jonmx 1,664]

So basically, what we have learned from the trial thus far:

1.  Cohen paid for Stormy Daniel's story to extort money from Trump without any direction from Trump.  

2.  Trump's team agreed to pay Cohen for the story.

3.  Cohen sent bills to Trump which Trump had no involvement in, but yet somehow that creates a dozen fraudulent records charges against Trump.

4.  Trump's comptroller reviewed the bills and got approval to pay them from Trump Jr., again with no known involvement from Trump.

5. Trump's bookkeeper wrote the checks starting several months after the election and used available catatogory of Legal Expenses with no nefarious motive or direction from Trump.  But somehow this created two dozen plus fraudulent records that neither the IRS or FEC had any issues with.

6.  There still is no discernable crime which these 'fraudulent records' are associated with.  No federal elections laws were violated and laws for state elections don't even apply.  

7.  All the billing and payments occurred after the election and any notes on the checks had zero bearing on any election, let alone any made up 'election interference' law.

8.  Federal laws are not even a 'crime' that applies to this New York fraudulent records law, as a crime is define as a violation of state laws by definition.

9.  The court has allowed the extension of the statute of limitations based on unknown crimes and dubious rationale.

10.  The Court has relied about Supreme Court rulings which were made to protect the defendant's due process rights to a fair trial to create and unconstitutional gag order which denies Trump his rights.  It is as if the Court can't read, but in reality know what they are doing is unconstitutional but don't care.  

11.  The court has allowed testimony and evidence in which has nothing to do with the case which only serves to prejudice the jury against Trump which by itself is enough to overturn a conviction.  

12.  Most posters in this thread are complete morons who are thoroughly overcome with Trump-hatred. 

The only chance of a conviction is if the jury has at least 10 trump-haters on it who can bully the rest into convicting.  There is zero chance this stands up to an appeal.  

[TBayXXXVII 2,154]

17 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Not in 250 million years.

Exactly.

[TBayXXXVII 2,154]

14 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

We can agree to disagree. I think that is conspiracy theory territory. Trump did all this stuff. 

But yeah I think it would.

The other cases absolutely would. The docs case in particular is taking so long only because of Trump. 

Yeah, you're living in fantasy world if you believe that.

[thegeneral 1,491]

3 minutes ago, jonmx said:

So fuking stupid.  We have seen a dozen of document violations by famous politicians and none of them resulted in charges.   No one has ever been charged for a memo on a check.  These cases are frauds which are 100 percent political and have absolutely no merit. 

These were politicians paying media outlets to buy the story through their lawyers that were asked about it before the election?

[thegeneral 1,491]

1 minute ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Yeah, you're living in fantasy world if you believe that.

Well there you go. I think the same of all you lot who constantly buy all the BS that Trump feeds you on the daily.

Thats what makes the world go round and to my initial point of why this is interesting. 

[TBayXXXVII 2,154]

1 minute ago, thegeneral said:

Well there you go. I think the same of all you lot who constantly buy all the BS that Trump feeds you on the daily.

Thats what makes the world go round and to my initial point of why this is interesting. 

Which is why my response was "If you say so". 

[thegeneral 1,491]

Just now, TBayXXXVII said:

Which is why my response was "If you say so". 

I would offer that you are posting about it on a football board so you obviously are interested.

People who aren’t paying attention but instead watch reality TV or some comic book movie are missing out, 

[TBayXXXVII 2,154]

Just now, thegeneral said:

I would offer that you are posting about it on a football board so you obviously are interested.

People who aren’t paying attention but instead watch reality TV or some comic book movie are missing out, 

I believe you're using the word "Interesting" in terms of "entertaining".  I don't think this is "entertaining".  Which again, is why I said "If you say so".

I'm not watching reality tv or comic book movies. 

[The Real timschochet 3,103]

9 minutes ago, jonmx said:

So basically, what we have learned from the trial thus far:

1.  Cohen paid for Stormy Daniel's story to extort money from Trump without any direction from Trump.  

2.  Trump's team agreed to pay Cohen for the story.

3.  Cohen sent bills to Trump which Trump had no involvement in, but yet somehow that creates a dozen fraudulent records charges against Trump.

4.  Trump's comptroller reviewed the bills and got approval to pay them from Trump Jr., again with no known involvement from Trump.

5. Trump's bookkeeper wrote the checks starting several months after the election and used available catatogory of Legal Expenses with no nefarious motive or direction from Trump.  But somehow this created two dozen plus fraudulent records that neither the IRS or FEC had any issues with.

6.  There still is no discernable crime which these 'fraudulent records' are associated with.  No federal elections laws were violated and laws for state elections don't even apply.  

7.  All the billing and payments occurred after the election and any notes on the checks had zero bearing on any election, let alone any made up 'election interference' law.

8.  Federal laws are not even a 'crime' that applies to this New York fraudulent records law, as a crime is define as a violation of state laws by definition.

9.  The court has allowed the extension of the statute of limitations based on unknown crimes and dubious rationale.

10.  The Court has relied about Supreme Court rulings which were made to protect the defendant's due process rights to a fair trial to create and unconstitutional gag order which denies Trump his rights.  It is as if the Court can't read, but in reality know what they are doing is unconstitutional but don't care.  

11.  The court has allowed testimony and evidence in which has nothing to do with the case which only serves to prejudice the jury against Trump which by itself is enough to overturn a conviction.  

12.  Most posters in this thread are complete morons who are thoroughly overcome with Trump-hatred. 

The only chance of a conviction is if the jury has at least 10 trump-haters on it who can bully the rest into convicting.  There is zero chance this stands up to an appeal.  

You felt the need to post this twice? 
 

it’s interesting to me that you call anyone who disagrees with you bootlickers and yet this is a long list of everything Trump’s fiercest supporters are telling us about this case, which apparently you have swallowed without question: I’m not going to break it all down but it’s absurd to believe that Cohen paid off Daniels without Trump’s knowledge or direction. Also, you ignored continual testimony that Trump looked at and questioned every check and payment that left his account, so it’s also absurd to believe that his company repaid Cohen without his direct knowledge (proved in a taped conversation as well.) 

[jonmx 1,664]

11 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You felt the need to post this twice? 
 

it’s interesting to me that you call anyone who disagrees with you bootlickers and yet this is a long list of everything Trump’s fiercest supporters are telling us about this case, which apparently you have swallowed without question: I’m not going to break it all down but it’s absurd to believe that Cohen paid off Daniels without Trump’s knowledge or direction. Also, you ignored continual testimony that Trump looked at and questioned every check and payment that left his account, so it’s also absurd to believe that his company repaid Cohen without his direct knowledge (proved in a taped conversation as well.) 

You are a bootlicker because you bow down to government power.  Trump is the anti-establjshment.  Trump has no power.  Trump never cracked down on citizens or used his massive executive authority to take down his political enemies like what we are seeing today.  

You have no choice than to ignore those points above because you cannot see past the trump-hating brainwashing you have been exposed to.  None of those points have anything to do with what Trump says, it is facts and points which I observed independant of any media spin.  I don't need Rachel Maddow to tell me what to think and which boots to lick.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,622]

20 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Well there you go. I think the same of all you lot who constantly buy all the BS that Trump feeds you on the daily.

Thats what makes the world go round and to my initial point of why this is interesting. 

The problem is that you think this Kangaroo Court is legit.  It's not.  Your STARTING position is wrong.

It's the same procedure they use in tin-pot dictatorships and communist countries.  "Trump" up some charges and broadcast it on propaganda sites hoping the sheep won't see thru it.  Then the sheep go, "See!  It's on the news!  It must be true!".

[Tree of Knowledge 893]

13.  Many people are saying Kyle Griffin shows up every day just in case Snake Plissken shows up in tight leather pants to free Father Trump.  

[thegeneral 1,491]

20 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I believe you're using the word "Interesting" in terms of "entertaining".  I don't think this is "entertaining".  Which again, is why I said "If you say so".

I'm not watching reality tv or comic book movies. 

It’s both extremely Interesting and entertaining. When I say “you” I’m speaking broadly and not specifically about you.

 

[jonmx 1,664]

9 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

The problem is that you think this Kangaroo Court is legit.  It's not.  Your STARTING position is wrong.

It's the same procedure they use in tin-pot dictatorships and communist countries.  "Trump" up some charges and broadcast it on propaganda sites hoping the sheep won't see thru it.  Then the sheep go, "See!  It's on the news!  It must be true!".

It is fuking pathetic how stupid these brainwashed bootlickers are.   Somehow it is a $545 million violation to submit a financial statement which someone has a different opinion on.  Or that putting a meaningless note on a check memo is something you can put someone in prison for 34 years.   It is unbelievable how far their heads can be up their butt.  I am done being polite to these bastards.   They are low-life dishonest scum who are bootlicking for the authoritarians.   

[thegeneral 1,491]

10 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

The problem is that you think this Kangaroo Court is legit.  It's not.  Your STARTING position is wrong.

It's the same procedure they use in tin-pot dictatorships and communist countries.  "Trump" up some charges and broadcast it on propaganda sites hoping the sheep won't see thru it.  Then the sheep go, "See!  It's on the news!  It must be true!".

That’s what the trial is determining I guess. It seems pretty obvious he paid her off with some dubious accounting methods and worked with a media outlet to hide the story. The legal argument about election interference is pretty dense.

He obviously did that because he knew it would be damaging to his election chances.

The other trials, the docs case where he’s busted and the Jan 6th / interference cases, are more egregious I would agree. But looks like we won’t get to see those it seems.

[thegeneral 1,491]

5 minutes ago, jonmx said:

It is fuking pathetic how stupid these brainwashed bootlickers are.   Somehow it is a $545 million violation to submit a financial statement which someone has a different opinion on.  Or that putting a meaningless note on a check memo is something you can put someone in prison for 34 years.   It is unbelievable how far their heads can be up their butt.  I am done being polite to these bastards.   They are low-life dishonest scum who are bootlicking for the authoritarians.   

Oh no Jon isn’t going to be nice

[Horseman 1,571]

Washed up porn star wearing a stripper dress to court.   

[squistion 930]

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1788190928244486624

Judge Merchan warned Trump's lawyer Tuesday that he would not tolerate his client "cursing audibly" during Stormy Daniels' testimony, saying it could be intimidating to the witness.

The exchange occurred during a sidebar that was only revealed when the court transcript was released.

[Beaker15 118]

The best part about this thread is Tim admitting he watches MSNBC and takes their opinions as facts.  

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,622]

46 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Washed up porn star wearing a stripper dress to court.   

And she has not aged well at all.  Gross.

[The Real timschochet 3,103]

3 minutes ago, Beaker15 said:

The best part about this thread is Tim admitting he watches MSNBC and takes their opinions as facts.  

I certainly don’t take any opinions as facts. But I do enjoy listening to MSNBC. (On my phone or in my car through Sirus; I rarely have time to actually watch.) 

[The Real timschochet 3,103]

1 hour ago, jonmx said:

You are a bootlicker because you bow down to government power.  Trump is the anti-establjshment.  Trump has no power.  Trump never cracked down on citizens or used his massive executive authority to take down his political enemies like what we are seeing today.  

You have no choice than to ignore those points above because you cannot see past the trump-hating brainwashing you have been exposed to.  None of those points have anything to do with what Trump says, it is facts and points which I observed independant of any media spin.  I don't need Rachel Maddow to tell me what to think and which boots to lick.  

You didn’t address any of my responses to you. 
 

Let’s take your points #3 and 4. You claim in these two points that Trump had “no known involvement” in the payments that reimbursed Michael Cohen. Yet there has been repeated testimony that Trump knew about and directed every payment that left his office. More specifically there is a tape in which Trump discusses the exact reimbursement with Cohen and how it is to be handled. How do you square this with your assertion of “no known involvement”? 

[The Real timschochet 3,103]

Next, jon, let’s take your point #1: you assert that Cohen paid off Stormy Daniels without any direction from Donald Trump. Cohen is obviously going to testify otherwise, but putting that aside: what possible motivation would Michael Cohen have to give $140,000 to Stormy Daniels if not at Trump’s direction? Can’t we (and the jury) use a little common sense here? 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,867]

1 hour ago, thegeneral said:

We can agree to disagree. I think that is conspiracy theory territory. Trump did all this stuff. 

But yeah I think it would.

The other cases absolutely would. The docs case in particular is taking so long only because of Trump. 

Wrong. The prosecution has stated they won’t be ready and asked for a delay as well. Low information voter. Sad. 

[supermike80 1,317]

46 minutes ago, squistion said:

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1788190928244486624

Judge Merchan warned Trump's lawyer Tuesday that he would not tolerate his client "cursing audibly" during Stormy Daniels' testimony, saying it could be intimidating to the witness.

The exchange occurred during a sidebar that was only revealed when the court transcript was released.

And this is the silly, totally irrelevant stuff liberals pay attention to.   Hilarious.

[Ron_Artest 766]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Wrong. The prosecution has stated they won’t be ready and asked for a delay as well. Low information voter. Sad. 

link?

[thegeneral 1,491]

10 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Wrong. The prosecution has stated they won’t be ready and asked for a delay as well. Low information voter. Sad. 

Trump has delayed everything about this case. The entire reason it is happening is because he delayed giving them the docs they asked for and then when he did return some he didn’t return them all so they had to go through all these mechanisms of retrieving them. 

Take his balls off your chin for just a few minutes

[jonmx 1,664]

23 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You didn’t address any of my responses to you. 
 

Let’s take your points #3 and 4. You claim in these two points that Trump had “no known involvement” in the payments that reimbursed Michael Cohen. Yet there has been repeated testimony that Trump knew about and directed every payment that left his office. More specifically there is a tape in which Trump discusses the exact reimbursement with Cohen and how it is to be handled. How do you square this with your assertion of “no known involvement”? 

Trump was not micro-managing every payment while he was president, despite the testimony.  His comptroller testified he got approval for those payments from Trump Jr.  Not that it really matters, as a note on the memo is meaningless.  It certainly has no impact on the election, and that is what this case is all about.  A meaningless memo note on check stubs. 

[The Real timschochet 3,103]

1 minute ago, jonmx said:

Trump was not micro-managing every payment while he was president, despite the testimony.  His comptroller testified he got approval for those payments from Trump Jr.  Not that it really matters, as a note on the memo is meaningless.  It certainly has no impact on the election, and that is what this case is all about.  A meaningless memo note on check stubs. 

Once again you skip over the direct evidence (the tape). And then you change the subject again. Oh well, let’s see if the jury agrees with you. Who knows? Maybe they will. Nothing would surprise me at this point. 

[IGotWorms 3,390]

Man Trump is a sick fock. I knew he had some weird thing with his own daughter but not so much that he focks women who he can pretend are his daughter  

That’s a really twisted fantasy. I hope he didn’t molest ivanka when she was a little girl, sure seemed like he wanted to

[IGotWorms 3,390]

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

Washed up porn star wearing a stripper dress to court.   

 

1 hour ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

And she has not aged well at all.  Gross.

And yet Trump focked her, because she reminded him of his own daughter. Talk about gross.

Then paid her off for her silence and hid it from regulators. That’s the real issue here. But still, his disgusting fantasy of focking his own daughter is quite a story in its own right 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,622]

5 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

And yet Trump focked her, because she reminded him of his own daughter. Talk about gross.

Then paid her off for her silence and hid it from regulators. That’s the real issue here. But still, his disgusting fantasy of focking his own daughter is quite a story in its own right 

I don't understand what your point is here.  I simply said she's gross. 

Seems like you're the one obsessed with Trump's daughter since you're constantly bringing it up.  TDS, for sure.  Maybe you should stick to fat and ugly men like you're used to.

[IGotWorms 3,390]

Just now, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

I don't understand what your point is here.  I simply said she's gross. 

Seems like you're the one obsessed with Trump's daughter since you're constantly bringing it up.  Maybe you should stick to fat and ugly women like you're used to.

My point is you’re a cuck for Trump yet you agree he focks gross low class pron stars

[Horseman 1,571]

6 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

 

And yet Trump focked her, because she reminded him of his own daughter. Talk about gross.

Then paid her off for her silence and hid it from regulators. That’s the real issue here. But still, his disgusting fantasy of focking his own daughter is quite a story in its own right 

She wasn't washed in 2006 dumbasss.  

https://www.bostonherald.com/wp-content/uploads/migration/2007/02/11/011218stormydaniels001.jpg?w=620

[Horseman 1,571]

Stormy was in her prime in 2006.  Worms doesn't know how pron or time works.  

[Ron_Artest 766]

17 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Man Trump is a sick fock. I knew he had some weird thing with his own daughter but not so much that he focks women who he can pretend are his daughter  

That’s a really twisted fantasy. I hope he didn’t molest ivanka when she was a little girl, sure seemed like he wanted to

Karen McDougal said the same thing, that Trump reminded her of his daughter, during the time they were focking.

And the 13 year old kid that Trump raped with Epstein looks just like Ivanka did as well.

[jonmx 1,664]

2 hours ago, thegeneral said:

These were politicians paying media outlets to buy the story through their lawyers that were asked about it before the election?

Sure Arnold Schwarzenegger paid off tabloids to kill stories.  John Edwards paid off a mistress who fathered his child, but he got in trouble because he illegally used campaign funds.  Bill Clinton paid off Paula Jones so embarrassing details would not surface in court.  Plus Hillary Clinton illegally used campaign funds to hire a foreign intelligence officers to make up a fake report on Trump which was released to try to help her win an election.  Of course none of the cases are exact, but unlike Hillary and Edwards, Trump used personal funds and did not claim deductions, making it so he did not violate election laws or tax laws.   There is nothing illegal about trying to hide embarrassing facts as long as you pay your taxes correctly and do not make the payments illegally using campaign funds.