They are busting Trump rght now in court

[Faun]

If you think Cohen got 3 years for making a false statement to a bank and campaign finance violations then you're as clueless as Fort Fun! He got 3 years for income tax violations and then got that sentence reduced for cooperation in the suits the Feds were going to bring against Trump! Gee, no reason for him to lie...right, Faun?

LOLOL

You're funny.

I'm quoting the Justice Department which prosecuted him.

You're quoting you.

Our sources are not equal.

 

[Faun]

They have 34 charges of misdemeanor…which are past statute of limitations and can only be revived if they were done in furtherance of another crime..it is that crime which you don’t have

Nope, not past the statute of limitations. That should be obvious to you since Trump's defense would have had the case dismissed before it ever went to trial, had the statute of limitations actually expired.

 

[LeroyDumonde]

They have 34 charges of misdemeanor…which are past statute of limitations and can only be revived if they were done in furtherance of another crime..it is that crime which you don’t have

The TDS crowd are in denial about this case. I think they all overdosed on copium.

 

[Coyote]

Discuss the topic please, if you are not sure what it is, review the OP.

 

[Slade3200]

They have 34 charges of misdemeanor…which are past statute of limitations and can only be revived if they were done in furtherance of another crime..it is that crime which you don’t have

The other crime is intent to break campaign finance law

 

[Skylar]

The other crime is intent to break campaign finance law

The other law in the NY case, NY Election law, SECTION 17-152.

§ 17-152. Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more
persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to
a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by
one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

 

[struth]

So not common.

What? Yes according to the witnesses it was

 

[ThisIsMe]

Nope, not past the statute of limitations. That should be obvious to you since Trump's defense would have had the case dismissed before it ever went to trial, had the statute of limitations actually expired.

You should read the articles. They will tell you all of this

 

[ThisIsMe]

The other crime is intent to break campaign finance law

Ok, now we’re getting somewhere…

Trump hasn’t broken that law…

 

[Slade3200]

Ok, now we’re getting somewhere…

Trump hasn’t broken that law…

Well that’s what the courts case is about. The jury will decide

 

[ThisIsMe]

Well that’s what the courts case is about. The jury will decide

No, this court case has nothing to do with campaign finance violations. This court case is about falsification of business records.

Trump has not been charged with campaign violations..which is why THIS case is bogus. Read the law Bragg cited…there has to be a crime for him to even bring this lawsuit…that why this will be overturned in appeals…the judge..seeing the weak legal theory that Bragg used, should have rejected the case, because what Bragg is trying to do is prop his case up using a federal crime that hasn’t been charged, tried, and convicted.

 

[Slade3200]

No, this court case has nothing to do with campaign finance violations. This court case is about falsification of business records.

Trump has not been charged with campaign violations..which is why THIS case is bogus. Read the law Bragg cited…there has to be a crime for him to even bring this lawsuit…that why this will be overturned in appeals…the judge..seeing the weak legal theory that Bragg used, should have rejected the case, because what Bragg is trying to do is prop his case up using a federal crime that hasn’t been charged, tried, and convicted.

Well there you go, if your legal interpretation is correct then the case will be dismissed by the courts

 

[Faun]

What? Yes according to the witnesses it was

2 people is not common.

 

[Faun]

You should read the articles. They will tell you all of this

Prosecutors would not have wasted time with a grand jury if the statute of limitations had expired.

The DA would not have wasted time taking Trump to court if the statute of limitations had expired.

The judge would have dismissed the trial when Trump submitted a motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations, had it expired.

Time for you to face reality for once, as scary as that is for you. The reality is...

It's not a corrupt justice system, at every level, ignoring the statute of limitations...

It's not that the statute of limitations expired...

It's that you're completely ignorant about the law in New York governing statutes of limitations...

NYS Open Legislation | NYSenate.gov

www.nysenate.gov

 

[Faun]

No, this court case has nothing to do with campaign finance violations. This court case is about falsification of business records.

Trump has not been charged with campaign violations..which is why THIS case is bogus. Read the law Bragg cited…there has to be a crime for him to even bring this lawsuit…that why this will be overturned in appeals…the judge..seeing the weak legal theory that Bragg used, should have rejected the case, because what Bragg is trying to do is prop his case up using a federal crime that hasn’t been charged, tried, and convicted.

Cohen broke the law. Trump tried covering it up.

 

[struth]

2 people is not common.

LOLOL

You're funny.

I'm quoting the Justice Department which prosecuted him.

You're quoting you.

Our sources are not equal.

Trump’s justice department that prosecuted him.

 

[Faun]

Trump’s justice department that prosecuted him.

So? I'm still quoting the justice department while your fellow idiot was quoting himself.

 

[struth]

Cohen broke the law. Trump tried covering it up.

How did he try covering it up when he literally prosecuted him for it?? Hahaha

 

[ThisIsMe]

Well there you go, if your legal interpretation is correct then the case will be dismissed by the courts

That’s the point. The judge should have dismissed it but he’s letting it go…because liberal?

 

[Slade3200]

That’s the point. The judge should have dismissed it but he’s letting it go…because liberal?

Or perhaps he has a different or better understanding of the law than you. I’d bet on the latter, but like you said, it’s always open for appeal