Verdict

[AccessBlaster]

Sweet - got a taste of the bad summer weather though I bet! it's already getting too warm

It wasn't bad 103ish. We frequent Palm Springs in the summer so no surprises there.

 

[Isaac]

as usual, the only people it may have "helped" was the few people who intiially signed up for it - at the rest of our expense, which it most definitely did not help

 

[Jon]

I Know your a stickler for quotes, at least when it comes your messiah.

I think "messiah" and "cult" accusations are a positive thing, because it shows both envy of the enthusiasm Mr D brings, and also in contrast the complete lethargy Biden supporters have towards their leader.

 

[Isaac]

I think "messiah" and "cult" accusations are a positive thing, because it shows both envy of the enthusiasm Mr D brings, and also in contrast the complete lethargy Biden supporters have towards their leader.

I bet if Trump changed his name, he'd win in a landslide. Because the republican voters would know about it, and the democrat voters largely vascillate between indifference and loathing when it comes to Biden - nobody really likes him so if they thought they weren't voting for Trump they'd go for it.

 

[Isaac]

For all those "but he's guilty!" clamoring:

 

[moke123]

Why is it necessary to create such a twisted trail of payment accounting with such a tangled web?

You mean like reimbursing hush money payments and disguising them as legal invoices?

 

[Mike Krailo]

You mean like reimbursing hush money payments and disguising them as legal invoices?

NDA agreements between parties are legal agreements plain and simple and she agreed to it. The whole purpose of NDA is not to disclose. This is not a crime, you'll have to do better than that.

 

[moke123]

NDA agreements between parties are legal agreements plain and simple

I agree. But why cover it up?

 

[Steve R.]

I agree. But why cover it up?

What cover-up? The purpose of an NDA is silence. Being silent is not a cover-up. Seems that you are implying that if Trump did not advertise in the media the existence of the NDA that, that somehow constitutes a cover-up. An absurd proposition. If you want an example of a real cover-up, look at what Hillary did and Hunter's laptop. Seems they should have been the ones on trial, not Trump.

 

[Jon]

I haven't heard any anti-Trumpers yet say what category it should go in on the accounts software. Still waiting.

 

[moke123]

What cover-up?

Oh, Sorry. I would have thought even Fox would have carried the story. My Bad.

Trump got convicted of 34 counts of election fraud and trying to cover up the payments.
Google it. I'm sure you'll get some hits.

 

[Jon]

We've had fake news for years. Now we've got fake crimes. God help us all!

 

[moke123]

I haven't heard any anti-Trumpers yet say what category it should go in on the accounts software. Still waiting.

Do you think they have a category "Illegal campaign payments?"
If so, that's the one.

 

[Jon]

Do you think they have a category "Illegal campaign payments?"
If so, that's the one.

That doesn't make sense because they said the entry shouldn't have been legal expenses. Not that you can't do an NDA. So again, no answers from the Dems. Why? Because they can't find a category more suitable than legal expenses!

 

[Jon]

I don't know why the Dems don't just play things straight. They were corrupt from the get go. Hillary creates a fake dossier on Trump, to slur her political opponent. Then fake Russia collusion. And they just continued from there. But now they've stepped things up and crossed the rubikon by going full Banana republic. They don't seem to realise that their lust for power by any means necessary is destroying the fabric of society. But they don't care because they are only serving their own interests. Look at how much Nancy earns on the stock market. No wonder she wants to cling on. It's cash and power. Stuff what the voters want!

 

[Steve R.]

Oh, Sorry. I would have thought even Fox would have carried the story. My Bad.

Trump got convicted of 34 counts of election fraud and trying to cover up the payments.
Google it. I'm sure you'll get some hits.

A miscarriage of justice. Recall the attempt to use the 14th Amendment to remove Trump from the ballot. Ultimately, it was quashed by the Supreme Court. That is likely to happen with Trump's phony conviction. Also consider that this Trump persecution was initially rejected for prosecution by various prosecutors as it was considered too weak. Many legal experts consider this conviction to be a perversion of justice (lawfare),

Do you think they have a category "Illegal campaign payments?"

Another absurd statement. By implication, this would mean that every every every every accounting entry that has a generic entry for a legal expense would be "illegal" under Bragg's approach unless it has an extensive narrative explaining each line item. An absurdity.

 

[moke123]

Also consider that this Trump persecution was initially rejected for prosecution by various prosecutors as it was considered too weak.

Guess Bragg proved them wrong.

 

[moke123]

Here's some links to the evidence and trial transcripts.
Read it. At least then you'll know what the jury knows for yourself.

Defense Evidence

Peoples Evidence

Trial Transcripts

 

[Jon]

Guess Bragg proved them wrong.

Very true. He proved you can successfully prosecute a weak case if you have a Democrat jury, a Trump hating judge, let the prosecution go last and hide the crime until after the defense has rested.

 

[moke123]

OK, explain this to me. Trump DID NOT charge his campaign for the NDA. From the charge - he SHOULD have had his campaign pay. Although, that to me seems like it would be an illegal use of campaign funds.

I think your getting close pat. There isn't anything wrong with NDAs and paying for them, other than maybe the reason you need one in the first place. Putting that aside, celebrities and rich assholes do it all the time. Trump was both a celebrity and a rich asshole and he could legally pay any porn star he wanted to do behind his pregnant wife's back. Have at it. It's all good. But when you become a candidate for office you get to be subject to a whole new set of laws that pretty much most of the country isn't subject to. It's just for all those special people both republican and democrat and all the other smaller parties who run for public office. That's where it gets messy with making hush money payments and trying to hide them.

Day 1 evidence is salacious headlines from the Enquirer. WHO in their right mind believes anything they publish?

Magas.