First Trump says he didn't have sex with her now he says he did but paid her legally

[BunkerBoy]

Spoiler Alert - Trump is a pathological liar.

After he is convicted, he will claim he was never on trial.

[bignpisst]

At least he's an honest liar

[poundXpound]

Whatever happens you don’t know the evidence the DA has. None of do. What I DO know however is a DA doesn’t seek an indictment without a solid, solid case. When it’s the former President and the entire world is watching, you best believe they think they will win.

I think I'll give more credence to Jonathan Turley & Alan Dershowitz's legal opinion over yours, derp...

[poundXpound]

Trump on trial for cheating by using donor's money for himself? That's very solid.

You don't even need evidence to know he's guilty beyond a reasonablr doubt.

Not saying this is the case, but you fools think he's not a selfish criminal, rather some victimized angel. Wake the fuk up. Get to running through the woods till you see the highway before your cult does you in.

Trump is the victim here. He had a legal NDA with a sex worker who then broke it. If she hadn't, a DA, who ran for election promising to prosecute Trump, before he had ANY evidence, there would be no trial happening.

[Cleveland33]

Trump is the victim here. He had a legal NDA with a sex worker who then broke it. If she hadn't, a DA, who ran for election promising to prosecute Trump, before he had ANY evidence, there would be no trial happening.

do they think Trump would go to jail over a campaign finance violation?

[poundXpound]

Remember when the big talk about Clinton during the Lewinski era was we don't care what he does in the bedroom as long as he can run the country.

That was (D)ifferent...

[Dave22reborn]

Surely it’s over for Trump this time

The beginning of the end, the walls are closing in......

[bezarker]

[miscinbro]

I think I'll give more credence to Jonathan Turley & Alan Dershowitz's legal opinion over yours, derp...

And they said that DAs bring charges on super high-profile cases they don’t think they will win?

I’ll need a quote for that.

[georgeenoob]

The beginning of the end, the walls are closing in......

Well he's reaching 80, typical age when he dies. After he's dead, Jesus is gonna be his new judge. He's going to be sitting there telling Jesus there was a mistake and beg that he's the best person that ever walked the earth but nah, them walls are definitely gonna be closing in.

He's gonna get fukked in the ass by a demon for a thousand years in a room designed for people like him where the walls take a thousand years to close, but the demon starts raping him from day one.

Judgement day is not something Trump is looking forward to. He'll go to hell before telling the truth. As far as Republicans are concerned that makes you a RINO.

[Fishman15]

Whatever happens you don’t know the evidence the DA has. None of do. What I DO know however is a DA doesn’t seek an indictment without a solid, solid case. When it’s the former President and the entire world is watching, you best believe they think they will win.

You're talking like this is actually a legitimate trial. Nobody is buying that except for you and your msndc TV pals...

[miscinbro]

You're talking like this is actually a legitimate trial. Nobody is buying that except for you and your msndc TV pals...

If Trump broke the law, shouldn’t he be held accountable?

[georgeenoob]

If Trump broke the law, shouldn’t he be held accountable?

That's msm propaganda. Trump is the most innocent man that ever lived. He also did more for blacks than any other president.

What fools you are telling us about propaganda, saying he's a victim of it while he cooks propaganda like a chef on clockwork to feed hungry supporters. Do you even know what you are? Do you not know the definition of a cultist?

The glutton for propaganda.

Edit: the more I talk about this subject the more outrageous I find it all. I will truly never understand trump supporters. It's like a science equation.

[BeachPro11]

Whatever happens you don’t know the evidence the DA has. None of do. What I DO know however is a DA doesn’t seek an indictment without a solid, solid case. When it’s the former President and the entire world is watching, you best believe they think they will win.

But see you are missing the entire point. And it is amazing to me how people such as yourself and Pat keep saying this. This isn't a case that was brought forward because of some big crime being committed and justice needs to be served. If this was Joe Blow or Joe Biden, it would have never been brought forward. DA would have looked at it and said 'this isn't a crime' and that would be that.

But this case was brought forward for a very simple reason. Because the Dems and the Dept of Justice are using it to distract and to discredit. To distract Trump from campaigning, and to try to discredit him in the eyes of the American people.

The big problem for the Dems though is this. When this case was dreamed up and planned out, they never dreamed that Trump would actually benefit from it and actually make him more popular. They thought that along with the other 2 cases being 'trumped up', that it would either force him to drop out of the race or just make him so unpopular with the American people (after all, how could the American people ever elect a criminal POTUS.....right?) that he would get beat handily and all would be good. They never banked on him leading the polls and/or him not dropping out.

So now they kind of f'd themselves. Because if he gets found guilty? Which is a real possibility in the far leftist city of NYC..... And is either forced to quit the race or get put into jail? Over something as trivial and inconsequential as this? The Dems absolutely look like a 3rd world banana republic and NO ONE WILL EVER TRUST them again because they will have done what dictators do....throw their political opponents in jail. Or have them killed.

The Dems know all of this. It looks terrible that this is happening in the U S of A. This thing snowballed for them and now there is no turning back however.

So right now I promise you that the Dems DO NOT WANT Trump found guilty. They just want this trial to go on long enough and that it will be harmful enough to Trump where it will turn the polls to Biden.

[Cleveland33]

But see you are missing the entire point. And it is amazing to me how people such as yourself and Pat keep saying this. This isn't a case that was brought forward because of some big crime being committed and justice needs to be served. If this was Joe Blow or Joe Biden, it would have never been brought forward. DA would have looked at it and said 'this isn't a crime' and that would be that.

But this case was brought forward for a very simple reason. Because the Dems and the Dept of Justice are using it to distract and to discredit. To distract Trump from campaigning, and to try to discredit him in the eyes of the American people.

The big problem for the Dems though is this. When this case was dreamed up and planned out, they never dreamed that Trump would actually benefit from it and actually make him more popular. They thought that along with the other 2 cases being 'trumped up', that it would either force him to drop out of the race or just make him so unpopular with the American people (after all, how could the American people ever elect a criminal POTUS.....right?) that he would get beat handily and all would be good. They never banked on him leading the polls and/or him not dropping out.

So now they kind of f'd themselves. Because if he gets found guilty? Which is a real possibility in the far leftist city of NYC..... And is either forced to quit the race or get put into jail? Over something as trivial and inconsequential as this? The Dems absolutely look like a 3rd world banana republic and NO ONE WILL EVER TRUST them again because they will have done what dictators do....throw their political opponents in jail. Or have them killed.

The Dems know all of this. It looks terrible that this is happening in the U S of A. This thing snowballed for them and now there is no turning back however.

So right now I promise you that the Dems DO NOT WANT Trump found guilty. They just want this trial to go on long enough and that it will be harmful enough to Trump where it will turn the polls to Biden.

has anyone been jailed previously under campaign finance violations?

[NYPat]

You're talking like this is actually a legitimate trial. Nobody is buying that except for you and your msndc TV pals...

That's funny, because if he's found guilty the judge/jury could send him to "legitimate" prison.

If Trump broke the law, shouldn’t he be held accountable?

Lmao this is a joke question right? These people don't think Trump should be held responsible for anything. He's just a billionaire looking out for them..

[BeachPro11]

has anyone been jailed previously under campaign finance violations?

Certainly nothing like this (POTUS) and for something so trivial.

Lmao this is a joke question right? These people don't think Trump should be held responsible for anything. He's just a billionaire looking out for them..

I don't think that is the case at all. Most people understand that Trump is not a completely moral and upstanding person. He has many faults and they know that. But he is a symbol of the fight against the woke movement, pro war and Imperialism, and the cratering of traditional American culture and values, and that is enough for them. It is also why he is hated by the establishment. Because they want the woke movement and everything that comes along with it. They want wars. They want control.

[Dave22reborn]

Well he's reaching 80, typical age when he dies. After he's dead, Jesus is gonna be his new judge. He's going to be sitting there telling Jesus there was a mistake and beg that he's the best person that ever walked the earth but nah, them walls are definitely gonna be closing in.

He's gonna get fukked in the ass by a demon for a thousand years in a room designed for people like him where the walls take a thousand years to close, but the demon starts raping him from day one.

Judgement day is not something Trump is looking forward to. He'll go to hell before telling the truth. As far as Republicans are concerned that makes you a RINO.

Christ, you need help.....

[BeachPro11]

He's gonna get fukked in the ass by a demon for a thousand years in a room designed for people like him where the walls take a thousand years to close, but the demon starts raping him from day one.

Judgement day is not something Trump is looking forward to. He'll go to hell before telling the truth.

When I see quotes like these? All it does in my mind is invalidate every other thing you wrote before it. None of that is going to happen. Do you know why?

Because it is all fantasy. Made up. It doesn't exist. You sound no more sane than people chanting ala snack bar and calling for Jihad. You might as well believe in the Flying Spaghetti monster.

How people still believe in this make believe biblical/supernatural/heaven-hell crap, in the year 2024.....blows my mind.

How can you be expected to be taken seriously making statements like that?

[georgeenoob]

When I see quotes like these? All it does in my mind is invalidate every other thing you wrote before it. None of that is going to happen. Do you know why?

Because it is all fantasy. Made up. It doesn't exist. You sound no more sane than people chanting ala snack bar and calling for Jihad. You might as well believe in the Flying Spaghetti monster.

How people still believe in this make believe biblical/supernatural/heaven-hell crap, in the year 2024.....blows my mind.

How can you be expected to be taken seriously making statements like that?

Well for an atheist's perspective, of course you think it's crazy but I truly believe in what you believe is a fantasy, without any question. I don't even remember the last time I doubted my religious beliefs for a moment, it's all but confirmed to be true from my perspective.

Religion is a completely different topic though and I can unserstand a person's belief/disbelief and wouldn't judge.

[georgeenoob]

Christ, you need help.....

I do need help. Help me understand why you dumbasses support such a piece of sht! I'll even beg!

[gwg77]

This one is for our resident misc e-lawyer, miscinbro, who thinks the DA must have a really solid case, if he's going after a former President.

Whatever happens you don’t know the evidence the DA has. None of do. What I DO know however is a DA doesn’t seek an indictment without a solid, solid case. When it’s the former President and the entire world is watching, you best believe they think they will win.

By Jed Handelsman Shugerman
Mr. Shugerman is a law professor at Boston University.

About a year ago, when Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, indicted former President Donald Trump, I was critical of the case and called it an embarrassment. I thought an array of legal problems would and should lead to long delays in federal courts.

After listening to Monday’s opening statement by prosecutors, I still think the Manhattan D.A. has made a historic mistake. Their vague allegation about “a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election” has me more concerned than ever about their unprecedented use of state law and their persistent avoidance of specifying an election crime or a valid theory of fraud.

To recap: Mr. Trump is accused in the case of falsifying business records. Those are misdemeanor charges. To elevate it to a criminal case, Mr. Bragg and his team have pointed to potential violations of federal election law and state tax fraud. They also cite state election law, but state statutory definitions of “public office” seem to limit those statutes to state and local races.

Both the misdemeanor and felony charges require that the defendant made the false record with “intent to defraud.” A year ago, I wondered how entirely internal business records (the daily ledger, pay stubs and invoices) could be the basis of any fraud if they are not shared with anyone outside the business. I suggested that the real fraud was Mr. Trump’s filing an (allegedly) false report to the Federal Election Commission, and only federal prosecutors had jurisdiction over that filing.

A recent conversation with Jeffrey Cohen, a friend, Boston College law professor and former prosecutor, made me think that the case could turn out to be more legitimate than I had originally thought. The reason has to do with those allegedly falsified business records: Most of them were entered in early 2017, generally before Mr. Trump filed his Federal Election Commission report that summer. Mr. Trump may have foreseen an investigation into his campaign, leading to its financial records. Mr. Trump may have falsely recorded these internal records before the F.E.C. filing as consciously part of the same fraud: to create a consistent paper trail and to hide intent to violate federal election laws, or defraud the F.E.C.

In short: It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up.

Looking at the case in this way might address concerns about state jurisdiction. In this scenario, Mr. Trump arguably intended to deceive state investigators, too. State investigators could find these inconsistencies and alert federal agencies. Prosecutors could argue that New York State agencies have an interest in detecting conspiracies to defraud federal entities; they might also have a plausible answer to significant questions about whether New York State has jurisdiction or whether this stretch of a state business filing law is pre-empted by federal law.

However, this explanation is a novel interpretation with many significant legal problems. And none of the Manhattan D.A.’s filings or today’s opening statement even hint at this approach.

Instead of a theory of defrauding state regulators, Mr. Bragg has adopted a weak theory of “election interference,” and Justice Juan Merchan described the case, in his summary of it during jury selection, as an allegation of falsifying business records “to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 election.”

As a reality check, it is legal for a candidate to pay for a nondisclosure agreement. Hush money is unseemly, but it is legal. The election law scholar Richard Hasen rightly observed, “Calling it election interference actually cheapens the term and undermines the deadly serious charges in the real election interference cases.”

In Monday’s opening argument, the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo still evaded specifics about what was illegal about influencing an election, but then he claimed, “It was election fraud, pure and simple.” None of the relevant state or federal statutes refer to filing violations as fraud. Calling it “election fraud” is a legal and strategic mistake, exaggerating the case and setting up the jury with high expectations that the prosecutors cannot meet.

The most accurate description of this criminal case is a federal campaign finance filing violation. Without a federal violation (which the state election statute is tethered to), Mr. Bragg cannot upgrade the misdemeanor counts into felonies. Moreover, it is unclear how this case would even fulfill the misdemeanor requirement of “intent to defraud” without the federal crime.

In stretching jurisdiction and trying a federal crime in state court, the Manhattan D.A. is now pushing untested legal interpretations and applications. I see three red flags raising concerns about selective prosecution upon appeal.

First, I could find no previous case of any state prosecutor relying on the Federal Election Campaign Act either as a direct crime or a predicate crime. Whether state prosecutors have avoided doing so as a matter of law, norms or lack of expertise, this novel attempt is a sign of overreach.

Second, Mr. Trump’s lawyers argued that the New York statute requires that the predicate (underlying) crime must also be a New York crime, not a crime in another jurisdiction. The Manhattan D.A. responded with judicial precedents only about other criminal statutes, not the statute in this case. In the end, they could not cite a single judicial interpretation of this particular statute supporting their use of the statute (a plea deal and a single jury instruction do not count).

Third, no New York precedent has allowed an interpretation of defrauding the general public. Legal experts have noted that such a broad “election interference” theory is unprecedented, and a conviction based on it may not survive a state appeal.

Mr. Trump’s legal team also undercut itself for its decisions in the past year: His lawyers essentially put all of their eggs in the meritless basket of seeking to move the trial to federal court, instead of seeking a federal injunction to stop the trial entirely. If they had raised the issues of selective or vindictive prosecution and a mix of jurisdictional, pre-emption and constitutional claims, they could have delayed the trial past Election Day, even if they lost at each federal stage.

Another reason a federal crime has wound up in state court is that President Biden’s Justice Department bent over backward not to reopen this valid case or appoint a special counsel. Mr. Trump has tried to blame Mr. Biden for this prosecution as the real “election interference.” The Biden administration’s extra restraint belies this allegation and deserves more credit.

Eight years after the alleged crime itself, it is reasonable to ask if this is more about Manhattan politics than New York law. This case should serve as a cautionary tale about broader prosecutorial abuses in America — and promote bipartisan reforms of our partisan prosecutorial system.

Nevertheless, prosecutors should have some latitude to develop their case during trial, and maybe they will be more careful and precise about the underlying crime, fraud and the jurisdictional questions. Mr. Trump has received sufficient notice of the charges, and he can raise his arguments on appeal. One important principle of “our Federalism,” in the Supreme Court’s terms, is abstention, that federal courts should generally allow state trials to proceed first and wait to hear challenges later.

This case is still an embarrassment of prosecutorial ethics and apparent selective prosecution. Nevertheless, each side should have its day in court. If convicted, Mr. Trump can fight many other days — and perhaps win — in appellate courts. But if Monday’s opening is a preview of exaggerated allegations, imprecise legal theories and persistently unaddressed problems, the prosecutors might not win a conviction at all.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/o...ump-trial.html

[BeachPro11]

Well for an atheist's perspective, of course you think it's crazy but I truly believe in what you believe is a fantasy, without any question. I don't even remember the last time I doubted my religious beliefs for a moment, it's all but confirmed to be true from my perspective.

Religion is a completely different topic though and I can unserstand a person's belief/disbelief and wouldn't judge.

I respect your beliefs, and even though I don't believe in it I do think that Christianity has overall done a lot of good for the world. Especially in the USA. But it is still all man made fantasy. None of what happened in the bible was ever real.


And that being said, I do believe in a higher power. Not a "God". But a universal karma. Something that transcends the Universe. Something that can explain, without it being in any way supernatural, how the Universe came to be. This gigantic infinite universe. Probably having to do with mathematics and numbers/integers. Which is why I think numbers like 1111 for example have a real meaning.

[BeachPro11]

This one is for our resident misc e-lawyer, miscinbro, who thinks the DA must have a really solid case, if he's going after a former President.







By Jed Handelsman Shugerman
Mr. Shugerman is a law professor at Boston University.




https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/o...ump-trial.html

It is an historic mistake. It snowballed out of the Dems control as I said in an earlier post and now they screwed themselves.

YOU SIMPLY CANNOT, IN A DEMOCRACY LIKE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, threaten to jail political opponents over things that no one has ever been jailed for before. Especially Presidential political opponents. And especially especially Presidential political opponents that at least half the country will vote for!

It is as bad as any 3rd world banana republic and opens the door to all kinds of horrible things, the worst of which is an actual civil war.

[georgeenoob]

I respect your beliefs, and even though I don't believe in it I do think that Christianity has overall done a lot of good for the world. Especially in the USA. But it is still all man made fantasy. None of what happened in the bible was ever real.


And that being said, I do believe in a higher power. Not a "God". But a universal karma. Something that transcends the Universe. Something that can explain, without it being in any way supernatural, how the Universe came to be. This gigantic infinite universe. Probably having to do with mathematics and numbers/integers. Which is why I think numbers like 1111 for example have a real meaning.

You're a pantheist (I think).

Doesn't matter how many times you say it's a fantasy, that's your own personal speculation. You sound arrogant.

It all comes down to a binary opinion/belief: whether or not you believe there's a God out there. I firmly believe there's a God and I can't be convinced otherwise.

Now the religion. Easy: Christianity cause a God that loves you, created you in his image, gave us love, etc among other things like the physics all around me, astronomy, mathematics, how everything seemed to fit.

Whenever someone says there is no God I ask very specific questions: where did you look? Where didn't you look? Did God come down here and kill himself? Is that how sure you are or is that just your belief?

[BeachPro11]

You're a pantheist (I think).

Doesn't matter how many times you say it's a fantasy, that's your own personal speculation. You sound arrogant.

It all comes down to a binary opinion/belief: whether or not you believe there's a God out there. I firmly believe there's a God and I can't be convinced otherwise.

Now the religion. Easy: Christianity cause a God that loves you, created you in his image, gave us love, etc among other things like the physics all around me, astronomy, mathematics, how everything seemed to fit.

Whenever someone says there is no God I ask very specific questions: where did you look? Where didn't you look? Did God come down here and kill himself? Is that how sure you are or is that just your belief?

Again...I respect your opinions and if your beliefs give you happiness? I am happy for you.

At the same time, there is a reason that different regions of the world, with different races of people, all believe in a god. But no god is alike.

Because it all comes down to how you were brought up. Culture.

Asians believed in multiple gods like Buddha as did C and S Americans.

Muslims believe in Allah snack bar.

Christians believe in JC.

Jews believe in YHWH.

Catholics believe in all kinds of saints.

Even people like the Aztecs and American Indians and other cultures back to the Romans and the Greeks believed in all kinds of different gods that were related to the sun and the planets. As are almost all religions based on...the solar system.....including Christianity.

Why is yours the right god? And you call me arrogant? What you are claiming is the epitome of arrogance.

Why should people on earth, that evolved from a single cell amoeba hundreds of millions of years ago, on a planet in a solar system in a galaxy amongst an infinite number of galaxies....be a species that worships a god that has control over our infinite universe??

And especially the white Christian god?

Again....do you have any idea how arrogant that sounds?

[AlfBundy]

I think the p3do cult only cares about who Trump bangs because it highlights their lack of having sex since their dating pool is full of trannys and blue hair land whales so they had to turn to little kids.

They just look for reasons to hate him so they get confused when normal people don't care

Also, OP follows Trump on Truth Social. Let that sink in

[georgeenoob]

They just look for reasons to hate him so they get confused when normal people don't care

Also, OP follows Trump on Truth Social. Let that sink in

I don't follow him on truth social, let that sink in.

You know I hate hypocrites so you're purposefully being a hyoocrite just to trigger me, you failed to realize I am also aware you're in middle school, so I'm gonna give you extra patience and be more forgiving to you being a dumbass.

[Bushmaster]

Whatever happens you don’t know the evidence the DA has. None of do. What I DO know however is a DA doesn’t seek an indictment without a solid, solid case. When it’s the former President and the entire world is watching, you best believe they think they will win.

Like Kyle Rittenhouse.

Oh, wait....

[georgeenoob]

Again...I respect your opinions and if your beliefs give you happiness? I am happy for you.

At the same time, there is a reason that different regions of the world, with different races of people, all believe in a god. But no god is alike.

Because it all comes down to how you were brought up. Culture.

Asians believed in multiple gods like Buddha as did C and S Americans.

Muslims believe in Allah snack bar.

Christians believe in JC.

Jews believe in YHWH.

Catholics believe in all kinds of saints.

Even people like the Aztecs and American Indians and other cultures back to the Romans and the Greeks believed in all kinds of different gods that were related to the sun and the planets. As are almost all religions based on...the solar system.....including Christianity.

Why is yours the right god? And you call me arrogant? What you are claiming is the epitome of arrogance.

Why should people on earth, that evolved from a single cell amoeba hundreds of millions of years ago, on a planet in a solar system in a galaxy amongst an infinite number of galaxies....be a species that worships a god that has control over our infinite universe??

And especially the white Christian god?

Again....do you have any idea how arrogant that sounds?

It's nothing personal. Just saying anyone to say there is no god, fairytale, etc sounds arrogant cause they don't know that. Say you don't believe there's a God, huge difference.

I don't believe in God to be happy, that makes no sense and contradicts the definition of belief. Especially because hell is scary and I'm moore tham likely to end up there.

As far as the differemt religions, it's not like the more religions/Gods man worships the less likely there is a God.

I have a firm belief there is a God. With that said, I'm playing it safe choosing Christianity cause I doubt some other God from a different religion will get offended for memisinterpreting him as a loving God.

It's also my belief that whether its the christian god or whatever oher God, that he is merciful. Therefore, I have a Christian approach.

As far as the white jesus part, it's all political. Doesn't matter that he's white, God chose his son to be born in Nazareth, hence why he's white. If God wanted him born in Africa, he'd be black. Such a fruitless argument.