Hahahahhahahhahhaah!!!!! Sure it does, Jimmy. Keep repeating that mantra for the next 6 months, as we coast to wins in Arizona and Nevada -- and put Florida in play.
Last edited:
Trial Begins for Bible Salesman Paying Pornstar Hush Money
- Thread starter troypwr
- Start date
Maybe he will. At least one of the charges is falsifying business records, though. So it isn't the hush money, per se, at issue.
There is some truth to what you say. But Planned Parenthood performed 392,000 abortions last year! Think about it. The democratic party (with few exceptions) sees abortion as empowering, and should never be restricted, under any circumstance. That is truly evil. The Supreme Court got it right on Row v. Wade It's up to the states now. Some will go to far in restricting abortion, which will not end it. People on the pro life side should understand that even though we see abortion as murder, there are circumstances where it can be justified, and allowed.
Far more concerning is the attitude of the left, that Abortion is a sign of freedom, and should be celebrated, with no restrictions whatsoever.If you don't believe me, please supply multiple examples of Democrats today, saying abortion should be safe legal and rare.
You guys keep repeating this line, it is utter nonsense. I don't know where you get this BS, or how you can even believe it.
Maybe you can show us where you the Left believes abortion should be celebrated. And I don't mean a few people holding up some signs.
I think in the general sense democrats believe in empowering women to make their own choices. Is that what you mean by empowering? If you think the party thinks the abortion, in and of itself, is empowering, I disagree. While there are always extreme people who will "celebrate" abortion, I don't know of anyone in party leadership who "celebrates" abortion --- certainly not Biden.
One of the interesting things about this trial is that Trump could have avoided the whole debacle if he had simply paid Stormy Daniels/Stephanie Clifford from his own checking account rather than launder the funds through the Trump Organization.
He is so cheap that he managed to set himself up for a criminal charge. Moron.
He is so cheap that he managed to set himself up for a criminal charge. Moron.
You guys are real class. But then you are the ones who cater to the fringes of our society. Maybe I should start posting on your prepubescent level too?
Same flipkowski that defends nude gay/trans parades in front of children? Why yes, yes it is. What other insightful gem can he post to teach us how to live..
Cripes! Is that Phil Spector, back from the grave and looking better than Trump, sitting next to the orange goon? 
www.yahoo.com
“Devastating”: Legal experts say first Trump trial witness sitting on “dynamite evidence”
The "testimony could be critical in establishing Trump’s intent and knowledge," says MSNBC analyst Lisa Rubin
How Alvin Bragg made (preposterous) history with Donald Trump's case
By Rich Lowry
Published April 22, 2024Alvin Bragg is to be commended for getting to trial on the Trump hush-payments case.
Lesser prosecutors would have been daunted by the prospect of creating a national melodrama and a norm-breaking prosecution of a former president over what is, in essence, a misdemeanor business-records charge.
They would have blanched at relying on serial perjurer Michael Cohen as a star witness.
They would have recognized the inherent ambiguity over whether the hush payments to Stormy Daniels were personal payments or campaign expenses.
They would have been reluctant to torture the law to stretch the statute of limitations just far enough to cover the events in question, and would have been too embarrassed by the chronological difficulty involved in arguing that events in 2017 influenced the 2016 election.
This is why federal prosecutors and Bragg's predecessor took a pass on this case, but Bragg wasn't going to let mere legal inadequacy stop him.
If all goes as planned for Bragg, before long he'll be known as the Manhattan district attorney who goes easy on disturbed men who punch old ladies on subway platforms but is hell on bookkeeping offenses that don't harm anyone, not even the tax collector.
The trial is all about Trump, but the most important piece of the puzzle is Bragg, since no one else with an ounce of judgment would have brought this case.
As we know, it involves a $130,000 payment from former Trump fixer Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels right before the 2016 election to keep her quiet about an alleged affair she had with Trump a decade earlier.
Such a hush payment may be sleazy, but there is nothing illegal about it.
The underlying offense occurred later, when Trump reimbursed Cohen in 2017 and misleadingly booked the payment not as the reimbursement of a debt but as an ongoing legal expense.
This was not to evade taxes — in fact, the amount paid to Cohen was basically doubled to account for his paying taxes on the reimbursement.
If this alleged crime doesn't shock your conscience, the drafters of the relevant New York statute agreed — they made it a misdemeanor.
This is when Alvin Bragg showed creativity verging on brilliance, as he found a way to redefine the misdemeanor into a felony by arguing that the underlying offense was in furtherance of another crime, namely a violation of federal campaign finance laws.
Never mind that the hush payment does not constitute any of the things that are traditionally defined as campaign expenses — advertising and the like.
Never mind that if Trump had paid Stormy Daniels from his campaign coffers, his enemies would be contending that he had misallocated campaign funds for personal purposes.
And never mind that it is untested whether a federal crime can be the secondary offense in a violation of New York's business records law (Bragg has a couple of other, even less convincing theories of the secondary offense).
By redefining Trump's offense as a felony, Bragg got several years back on the statute-of-limitations clock. He then proceeded to charge basically every keystroke related to these payments as a separate offense, making a misdemeanor into 34 felonies.
Meantime, the facts don't come close to fitting Bragg's underlying theory. In his statement of facts, Bragg says Trump orchestrated a scheme to influence the 2016 election "from August 2015 to December 2017."
This framing might make sense if the election had happened . . . in December 2017. Is Bragg hoping that no one notices that the election was held in November 2016 and that the reimbursement of Cohen's payment, which this case is about, occurred after that date?
It's likely that none of this is going to matter because the New York legal system is so stacked against Trump. Still, it's possible that the former president could wiggle off the hook.
Anything less than a resounding victory will be a major embarrassment for Bragg, and it couldn't happen to a better prosecutor.
You act like none of the constitutional scholars agree with him, but then flipkowski isn’t a scholar. He’s a pedophile loving freak liberal as are most who you quote.
If I was Trumps lawyer I would argue the state had no right to discuss a private consensual sexual encounter, and labeling Stormy as a porn star is not relevant to the case and is prejudice. But I assume Trump has run out of quality legal help by now
@troypwr CUCKING for Adam Schofield since Jan 7th, 2021
Boy, you are one fat, stupid, mutherfocker
Shhh, darling. You know we’ve gotta be quiet when we’re in the shower together Ashley..