Who is politicizing trump's trial?

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

jesus. you are an idiot. back on ignore.

it might make me feel better about trump 47 if he signs an nda covering all of our classified information.

Too late. Garage Docs*Joe has already released classified information.

 

[ThisIsMe]

The indictment itemized the charges against Trump. Trump was not charged with the underlying crime, hence, the underlying crime can be found in the statement of facts, not the indictment.

Savvy?

Ok, but the statement of facts also never specified a criminal statute. It never even talks about the crimes cohen committed. It just references him as the person who made the invoices and it takes an out catch and kill, but in that whole document, not a single criminal statute is ever cited.

 

[Missourian]

 

[Faun]

You’re behind on the leftist talking points. It’s now business records.

That's what Trump listed in his business records.

 

[OKTexas]

You're grabbing at straws there buddy.

I simply stated known facts, you seem to be the one in denial.

.

 

[Faun]

Nope. NDAs are legal. You should use the google machine and look up how many democrats have used them.

Cry to Cohen. He went to jail for it, among other crimes.

 

[rampart]

It's jury tampering by the xiden campaign.

.

the biden campaign, nor the president, has said much about this trial.

meanwhile, you guys are swatting the capital police mothers, whose only crime is giving birth to people strong and brave enough to stand up to this asswhole?

 

[Faun]

Ok, but the statement of facts also never specified a criminal statute. It never even talks about the crimes cohen committed. It just references him as the person who made the invoices and it takes an out catch and kill, but in that whole document, not a single criminal statute is ever cited.

It describes his crime. Show me where a statement of facts has to provide a statute number for underlying crimes?

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Are you channeling Mark Levin here?

You’re talking about our next attorney general.

 

[OKTexas]

intent to commit what crime? The indictment never says.

Also, that text is not accurate because I think the law has a part in there about intent to defraud

Also:

971. Sufficiency of Indictment—Generally

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Does it sound like the indictment contained all the essential facts of the crime charged? No, it leaves out all the supporting information to explain how Bragg came to his charge.



Sounds like Bragg was supposed to have included all of the relevant facts IN the indictment.

Also, I just realized…even the statement of facts doesn’t ever list a crime. He tells a story about catch and kill and payments to Daniels, but at no time does he ever list the criminal statute violated. His indictment say he intended to conceal a crime, but the actual criminal statute he supposedly violated is never cited.

So, hush money payments are not illegal, catch and kill stories are not illegal, ndas are not illegal. If Bragg is alleging that trump violated campaign finance laws, he never specified what law was broke.

It’s like he’s trying to be very vague, hoping that the people won’t look further than the surface.

He couldn't find "hoodwink" in any of the NY statutes, but he sure brought it up in his closing arguments. 6 hours of nothing but winging it, the jury should sue him for wasting their time.

.

 

[westwall]

They can be illegal, as was the case with Cohen/Daniels.

First time an NDA has ever been tried to be made criminal. Clinton paid Paula Jones 9 times as much. Silence from you twats.

 

[Crepitus]

Perhaps you didn't notice trump is the one qualified to make remarks on his trial my gosh you people are imbeciles what business does Dizero or any Biden official have commenting on the trial which does not involve them except for the weaponized DA and DOJ

So then MAGA mike Johnson and the red tie brigade didn't belong there either?

 

[OKTexas]

the biden campaign, nor the president, has said much about this trial.

meanwhile, you guys are swatting the capital police mothers, whose only crime is giving birth to people strong and brave enough to stand up to this asswhole?

Yet the xiden campaign organized that little sideshow yesterday. And don't make accusations against me without solid evidence.

.

 

[Faun]

First time an NDA has ever been tried to be made criminal. Clinton paid Paula Jones 9 times as much. Silence from you twats.

You mean his out of court settlement with her? What was illegal about that?

 

[rampart]

Perhaps you didn't notice trump is the one qualified to make remarks on his trial my gosh you people are imbeciles what business does Dizero or any Biden official have commenting on the trial which does not involve them except for the weaponized DA and DOJ

trump is qualified to speak at his trial under oath. he chose not to do sol. this crap outside the courthouse is just usual trump bull shit.

gag orders are constitutional and often used to protect the witnesses and prosecutors of these wanna be mob bosses.

 

[MagicMike]

You're a fool. You need an insurrection like a baby needs a pacifier.

Fake news

There WAS NO INSURRECTION. Not a single soul has been charged for it.

Sure they have.
Every single insurrectionist who has been charged and convicted is sitting in prison for various insurrection related crimes.

 

[IDIOCRACY]

Fake news

Sure they have.
Every single insurrectionist who has been charged and convicted is sitting in prison for various insurrection related crimes.

PROVE IT.

 

[MagicMike]

Yet the xiden campaign organized that little sideshow yesterday.

Prove it.

.

 

[MagicMike]

You mean his out of court settlement with her? What was illegal about that?

He didn't follow applicable state bookkeeping laws pertaining to the proper recording of those payments.
34 seperate offenses.

 

[rampart]

PROVE IT.

prove they are not.

the founders knew what an insurrection was. shays rebellion, the whiskey rebellion, even the treason of a vice president were not dragged out in court long enough for the principles to escape justice or, heaven forbid, reassume office.