How to fight the Fake Trump prosecution

[Polishprince]

Extortion is a crime, taking the highest bid when information is offered to multiple sources is not.

WW

The "information" was a lie, however.

President Trump has made it crystal clear that he didn't have relations with Daniels.


And I'm not sure that it wouldn't be extortion even if Daniels could prove that the two had an affair. If someone has information that WW is cruising the local gay highway rest stops and offers to sell the info to WW and his father-in-law for the highest bid, that might be considered "extortion", no?

 

[Mac1958]

Impossible.

Trump is above the law.

WW

That's why they don't want to answer my question.

 

[Ralph Norton]

Paying hush money is 100% legal.

Like, not a crime.

Its possibly illegal to DEMAND hush money like Stormy Daniels and Mike Cohen may have done. Extortion is a serious felony. But paying it? Might not be advisable but its as legal as shit.

Don't confuse the moonbats by stating facts.

 

[Hellokitty]

Seems stupid to me. Protest is no substitute for the law.

I think he is probably guilty of campaign finance felony or felonies. That said, here is the way to actually fight, the real charge in a court of law, not public opinion.
His lawyers should point out, the payoffs (proven with cancelled check(checks) were to keep the information from getting to his wife, not hide from the supposed public or Christian voters. People have been hiding adultery from their wives (and failing) since marriage began. Is it reprehensible? Yes, but is it a felony? No, it is a misdemeanor, dependent on where the money came from. Then on the public relations side, they get to claim it all a witch hunt failed and go on to the next prosecution. This ain't rocket science, and so common, it should be simple to put the doubt in jurors mind, unless the jury is hopelessly partisan. Getting a non-partisan jury (if indicted, as the prosecution knows this defense would probably work) is the primary job of competent defense counsel. Everything else is just partisan hoopla.

TRUMP's lawyers have made the case the payoff funded by TRUMP was to prevent wife for finding out, also Stormy has testified she didn't have sex with TRUMP.
As for the defense on picking jury we have already seen in past political cases people lying or with holding information to get picked for jury.

 

[White 6]

TRUMP's lawyers have made the case the payoff funded by TRUMP was to prevent wife for finding out, also Stormy has testified she didn't have sex with TRUMP.
As for the defense on picking jury we have already seen in past political cases people lying or with holding information to get picked for jury.

On the first statement, I have not heard Stormy testify she didn't have sex with Donny.
The second statement is the Defense problem.

 

[WorldWatcher]

TRUMP's lawyers have made the case the payoff funded by TRUMP was to prevent wife for finding out, also Stormy has testified she didn't have sex with TRUMP.
As for the defense on picking jury we have already seen in past political cases people lying or with holding information to get picked for jury.

Their problem is that the affair took place in 2006, news of the affair was originally published in 2011, the hush money was paid in 2016 as part of protecting the campaign.

Now if the money had been paid in 2011 to prevent publication, that would be believable. But the idea that it was to protect the wife from an already published story from 5 years prior, that takes stretch.

WW

 

[Polishprince]

Their problem is that the affair took place in 2006, news of the affair was originally published in 2011, the hush money was paid in 2016 as part of protecting the campaign.

Now if the money had been paid in 2011 to prevent publication, that would be believable. But the idea that it was to protect the wife from an already published story from 5 years prior, that takes stretch.

WW

How do you know the affair ever took place?

Sound like just a scheme to shake down The Donald.

 

[WorldWatcher]

How do you know the affair ever took place?

Sound like just a scheme to shake down The Donald.

Trump inserting his man-parts into Stormy's woman-parts are irrelevant to the case.

The case is about the legality of the financial transaction in terms of New York State campaign finance and business operations laws.

Someone once said (and the author escapes me) and to paraphrase: "It isn't the crime that gets you, it's the coverup."

WW

 

[SavannahMann]

.


Prove he did and then we'll let you waste our time talking about it.

Bye.



.

If memory serves, that is the purpose of a trial. The Prosecutor makes his case to the Jury, the Defense makes their case, and the Jury decides.

Apparently we have a new standard. First we must prove it in the court of public opinion. Then if say, 60% of the people think there is proof of guilt, then we will indict and try a suspect.

One quick question. Does this new policy apply to everyone or just Trump?