It keeps getting better!  You can’t make this stuff up.

 

Even “CNN Legal Analyst “ says Stormys testimony is questionable.

 

If the glove doesn’t fit, you must acuit.  Remember that one.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-legal-analyst-stunned-stormy-daniel-admitting-hates-trump-testimony-big-d-deal

3 minutes ago, candide said:

 

1. It's not Trump campaign  it's Trump's business. False equivalence.

Wrong. Were that true, Trumps business would be in court, not him. 

3 minutes ago, candide said:

2. Declaring it in the wrong category of campaign expense is not the same as not declaring it at all as a campaign expense.

The Clinton campaign dud declare it, Trump did not. False equivalence again. 

No, they did not, the DNC hid the expense for her. Had it been declared, but in the "wrong category" it would have been the same misnomer as Trump is changed with. 

3 minutes ago, candide said:

3. I have no idea about what would have happened if he had declared it as campaign expense. But there would have been no falsification of business records for a start.

Yes, the misclassification misdemeanors would still stand on their own, and the FEC would have fined Trump three years ago when they looked at it. 

1 minute ago, G_Money said:

It keeps getting better!  You can’t make this stuff up.

 

Even “CNN Legal Analyst “ says Stormys testimony is questionable.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-legal-analyst-stunned-stormy-daniel-admitting-hates-trump-testimony-big-d-deal

They're only saying it to look objective. 

41 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

It's a campaign finance violation, which is what the felony in the Trump case. So when it the Trump campaign it's Trump, but when it's the Clinton campaign, it the campaign, got it.  

She hid the payment, which is want Trump is accused of. 

 

Declaring it in the wrong category is the same as the charges against Trump, yes? 

They were not legal expenses, it was operation research.

 

Trump paying for the NDA was a personal matter, which is why it should not be classified as a campaign expense. And again, had Trump classified it as a campaign expense they would be prosecuting him for that. 

 

But yeah, he'll be convicted. 

 

 

You seem very confused today.

 

The testimony is very clear that Trump arranged to have the $130,000 paid before the election to support his candidacy. And it was never entered into the books as a campaign item, but for his business.

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Wrong. Were that true, Trumps business would be in court, not him. 

No, they did not, the DNC hid the expense for her. Had it been declared, but in the "wrong category" it would have been the same misnomer as Trump is changed with. 

 

Nope. The Dems listed the expense in question in the campaign books. They didn't try to claim as a business expense.

 

Trump claimed a campaign expense as a business expense.

 

 

6 minutes ago, G_Money said:

It keeps getting better!  You can’t make this stuff up.

 

Even “CNN Legal Analyst “ says Stormys testimony is questionable.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/cnn-legal-analyst-stunned-stormy-daniel-admitting-hates-trump-testimony-big-d-deal

Yep. If a rape victim (as an example) testifies that she hates her attacker, her testimony is questionable.

5 minutes ago, Presto said:

Thanks for showing American values so openly! Appreciate it!

Next you're going to: if we hadn't liberated you, you'd all be speaking German!

Well, I can speak German. And French. And English. Thanks to decent education, which is sorely lacking in America. 

People like you can hardly manage their own English language.

Thats fine, you still jump to our whistle, dontcha. Dont get me started on the issue of values in your pesky little corner of the earth

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Well, that proves it. Trump didn't write it off either, quit pretending he did. 😀😀😀

The closing arguments and verdict could be a big surprise for you.

14 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

My point is if Trump wanted to keep Stormy Daniels from telling Melania, why didn't he tell her to keep quiet in 2006? Why was it so important to keep her quiet in 2016, but not 2006?

Assuming Trump banged Stormy 18 years ago, what reason did he have to pay her off in 2006? Only on her threat of going public with a big story did Stormy get paid for the NDA. 

 

Nothing illegal about paying an NDA to keep something personal quiet. 

 

Do you not remember all of this? 

8 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

 

No, they did not, the DNC hid the expense for her. Had it been declared, but in the "wrong category" it would have been the same misnomer as Trump is changed with. 

Yes, the misclassification misdemeanors would still stand on their own, and the FEC would have fined Trump three years ago when they looked at it. 

You don't seem clear on the concept that it's against the law to hide campaign funds.

 

On the other hand, once money changes hands within the campaign, accounting violations are minor.

 

The main goal is to stop illicit campaign donations.

1 minute ago, Danderman123 said:

Yep. If a rape victim (as an example) testifies that she hates her attacker, her testimony is questionable.

Dude what planet are you from? Do you think that any real lawyer would ask a real rape victim if she hates her attascker LOL? So Ms Frothingslosh, after the defendant beat you and bit off your nipples and raped you in front of your kids, do you hate him?

 

Do you think there is a difference between a rape victim and a mercenary whore involved in years long public battles with the most important man in the world?

 

Try and excersize a bit of critical thinking. If you are going to be a frothing hater, at least try to sound good.

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

The closing arguments and verdict could be a big surprise for you.

The only thing that would surprise me would be Trump being acquitted, 

6 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Thats fine, you still jump to our whistle, dontcha. Dont get me started on the issue of values in your pesky little corner of the earth

The point being, like so many Americans, you don't have a clue about the rest of the world. 

Just now, Yellowtail said:

The only thing that would surprise me would be Trump being acquitted, 

Can you imagine the screaming and gibbering? I bet ya Joe Scarborough would have an epileptic fit. OMG that woukld be funnier thatn the garbage can dudes charging the cops.

2 minutes ago, Presto said:

The point being, like so many Americans, you don't have a clue about the rest of the world. 

In the same way that that the rest of the world (if you are any indication) does not have a clue about America. 

1 minute ago, Presto said:

The point being, like so many Americans, you don't have a clue about the rest of the world. 

Well I do know that Alaska is bigger than Europe and that it would take me longer to drive from Texas to Vegas than it would for me to drive from Paris to Berlin.

 

But like so many Europeans you know little about America except as a tit to suck or a bodyguard when the Boche or Ivans get feisty.

8 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Assuming Trump banged Stormy 18 years ago, what reason did he have to pay her off in 2006? Only on her threat of going public with a big story did Stormy get paid for the NDA. 

 

Nothing illegal about paying an NDA to keep something personal quiet. 

 

 

So Trump didn't care if Melania found in 2006, and therefore no reason to ask Stormy Daniels to keep quiet in 2016.

 

So why was it so urgent to pay her to keep quiet just before the election?

 

BTW, paying someone for an NDA in support of a political campaign, but not reporting it is a campaign finance violation. The FEC has already ruled on this issue, and I have posted their statement.

3 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Well I do know that Alaska is bigger than Europe and that it would take me longer to drive from Texas to Vegas than it would for me to drive from Paris to Berlin.

 

But like so many Europeans you know little about America except as a tit to suck or a bodyguard when the Boche or Ivans get feisty.

I've probably been to more places in America than you.

Just now, Presto said:

I've probably been to more places in America than you.

Not even worthy of a reply

25 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Wrong. Were that true, Trumps business would be in court, not him. 

No, they did not, the DNC hid the expense for her. Had it been declared, but in the "wrong category" it would have been the same misnomer as Trump is changed with. 

Yes, the misclassification misdemeanors would still stand on their own, and the FEC would have fined Trump three years ago when they looked at it. 

Stop trolling.

1. It's not Trump's campaign who paid Cohen.

2. No

 

23 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Yep. If a rape victim (as an example) testifies that she hates her attacker, her testimony is questionable.

You left out how she originally denied the sex act and then reconsidered after being coached to go after the money.  
 

Follow the money .

 

Similar to the Carroll case.  Same Same but different.

 

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

In the same way that that the rest of the world (if you are any indication) does not have a clue about America. 

America has been showing the world what it really is the past 8 years. And that includes the Biden years, in case you missed that.

13 minutes ago, G_Money said:

You left out how she originally denied the sex act and then reconsidered after being coached to go after the money.  
 

Follow the money .

 

Similar to the Carroll case.  Same Same but different.

 

Irrelevant to this case.

 

She got paid to not reveal her story, just before the election. The money given to her was a campaign expense, but an unreported one 

2 hours ago, Yagoda said:

If you offered her a half a million to star in Homeless Gang Bang without cameras she would buy extra lysol wipes.

 

So would I and I'm not a hooker either.

8 hours ago, Walker88 said:

So you admit to watching The View?  Maybe you should get a hobby or a job? Maybe go back and complete that GED, which would put you one up on R Rep Boebert?

 

What about it is 'stupid'? That it contains facts, such as Hope Hicks' testimony and the documents?

 

I appreciate facts are anathema to trumpers. They prefer Kellyanne's "alternative facts" (aka lies) and Rudy's 'truth isn't truth'. Good trumpers lower the Rebel Flag on the F-150 pickup to half mast on the anniversary of Kellyanne's "Bowling Green Massacre". Do you?

and you say maga is a cult..take a step back and look in the mirror Agent Smith!

 

14 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Irrelevant to this case.

 

She got paid to not reveal her story, just before the election. The money given to her was a campaign expense, but an unreported one 

Get real!  Her entire testimony has been irrelevant to the case.

8 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Meanwhile your idol sits docilely in the courtroom, sometimes sleeping, while his lawyers provide a weak defense.

rs

Do you think he'll testify?

and yours sits, filling up his adult diaper, waiting to be told what to mumble next by his handlers

2 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

and yours sits, filling up his adult diaper, waiting to be told what to mumble next by his handlers

Projection much. Trump is the diaper dude.

11 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

and you say maga is a cult..take a step back and look in the mirror Agent Smith!

 

Maga is DEFINITELY a cult.

55 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

The only thing that would surprise me would be Trump being acquitted, 

I’m absolutely certain you won’t accept the verdict if he is.