BackAgain
Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Laughing at the truth doesn’t make it go away, Konnie.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Laughing at the truth doesn’t make it go away, Konnie.
There were no Trump “crimes.”That’s irrelevant to Trump’s crimes and he’s already been in prison on Trump’s account.
1. Why wouldn't the judge allow Shiller to be asked if he handed the phone to Trump?
Not true.That’s irrelevant to Trump’s crimes and he’s already been in prison on Trump’s account.
I'm not a fan of the charges, but the expert witness thing is an easy question. Expert witnesses don't testify in criminal trials that the def in innocent. And the state doesn't have to prove Trump violated election laws, only that he attempted to do so with the payoffs.1. Why wouldn't the judge allow Shiller to be asked if he handed the phone to Trump?
2. Why wasn't Alan Weisselburg called as a witness?
3. Why wouldn't the judge allow Trump's expert witness on Federal Election law to testify?
There are (3) missing witnesses that should be mentioned in instructions to the jury.
Also, since Cohen lied to the jury, the judge needs to advise them that they can disregard his entire testimony.
This case should never even be handed to the jury, the state did not prove their case. It should be a "directed verdict" of not guilty.
It wasn’t a payoff. And it’s kind of absurd to maintain that he attempted to commit a crime which isn’t a crime.I'm not a fan of the charges, but the expert witness thing is an easy question. Expert witnesses don't testify in criminal trials that the def in innocent. And the state doesn't have to prove Trump violated election laws, only that he attempted to do so with the payoffs.
That’s true.The whole thing's bs.
No evidence of that.But Trump would be doing the same if he was potus.
Zzz. Hyperbole. Not acted upon.Lock her up.
I am.What goes around comes around in politics. I'm not looking forward to Trump's second term.
why was he even thinking of it?The defense will close it's questioning of witnesses tomorrow most likely. Of course trump did not take the stand as he promised. No surprise there. So we should have a verdict probably this week.
How do the documents lie?Not true.
Bragg has the fact that Cohen stole $60,000 from Trump to force Cohen to testify against Trump or go to prison for 30-years.
so who asked what you prefer?attempt to commit a crime is not only a crime, but generally the punishment is the same as for a completed crime.
I'd prefer an election between two people who are not retirement age.
None of them are trustworthy and don’t have Cohen’s documentation to back them up. Usually when Trump and his team say the judge didn’t allow something, it really means they don’t want to do it, but can’t admit it!1. Why wouldn't the judge allow Shiller to be asked if he handed the phone to Trump?
2. Why wasn't Alan Weisselburg called as a witness?
3. Why wouldn't the judge allow Trump's expert witness on Federal Election law to testify?
There are (3) missing witnesses that should be mentioned in instructions to the jury.
Also, since Cohen lied to the jury, the judge needs to advise them that they can disregard his entire testimony.
This case should never even be handed to the jury, the state did not prove their case. It should be a "directed verdict" of not guilty.
It's Alinsky BSLaughing at the truth doesn’t make it go away, Konnie.
WHAT CRIME? The fucking judge won't say.attempt to commit a crime is not only a crime, but generally the punishment is the same as for a completed crime.
I'd prefer an election between two people who are not retirement age.
How do you know what the documents say is current without calling Weisselburg?How do the documents lie?
Nope. An attempt to commit a crime in NY is, by law, almost always a lower degree.attempt to commit a crime is not only a crime, but generally the punishment is the same as for a completed crime
Nobody cares what you’d prefer.I'd prefer an election between two people who are not retirement age.
I said that I'm not a fan of the prosecution. Although, the gop and Trump play the same game.WHAT CRIME? The fucking judge won't say.
1. The "crime" says that NDAs are illegal. I think that is total bullshit. NDAs are ALWAYS legal.I said that I'm not a fan of the prosecution. Although, the gop and Trump play the same game.
The "crime" is an attempt to influence the election via an illegal campaign contribution. There's no doubt or issue that Cohen made an illegal contribution to Trump's campaign in using his own money to pay off the porn star and naked model. Cohen copped a plea. That cannot be relitigated.
I assume (although I haven't seen the jury instructions, and I don't think they've been given) the jury will have to decide whether Trump attempted to influence the election via Cohen. If that's the "case" (lol) the jury has documentary evidence as well as Cohen's "word."
BUT AGAIN, IT DOESN'T MATTER. Trump is still running for potus, and his followers are paying hls legal fees. Trump gets free press (no criticism) and he'll have enough cash for commercials in the fall
I don't think the State alleges all NDAs are illegal. But an NDA is ILLEGAL if it's used to hide a crime.1. The "crime" says that NDAs are illegal. I think that is total bullshit. NDAs are ALWAYS legal.
The "real crime" is that Trump is leading Biden in the polls so the democrats want to tie Trump up in court.
2. Trump tried to call a Federal Election expert witness, and the judge said no. That shows right there that there is no election related crime.
Without the felony, they already have no case, so what would they have without it?Down from a felony? Are you really this dense?