Why the Sudden Doubts about the Verdict?

[AntonToo]

Right. Trump, who is notorious for stiffing anyone who does work for him was pretty keen to make sure that Cohen was paid off.

Not just paid off, but according to these fools someone is supposed to belive that Trump paid Cohen FOR DOING NOTHING.

There is ZERO backing to any of these 35k x12 paychecks except the NDA payment paper, which totals exactly $420k as agreed.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Oh, come on, guy nobody believes that.

Trump wasn't stupid enough to get on the stand and claim that was the case.

Cohen had no reason to pay Daniels. he didn't have sex with her.

Cohen's reason to take out the loan against his home to pay Daniels was that he had just found out that he wasn't going to be going to Washington as part of the administration...wasn't going to be Attorney General or Chief of Staff as he'd hoped! Trump wasn't taking him with him. What Cohen was doing was desperately trying to get back in Trump's good graces.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Well, good thing that Trump got on the stand to straighten that out.

Oh, no, wait. He didn't do that? He invoked his fifth Amendment rights? You know who invokes the Fifth Amendment, right? just the guilty, according to Donald Trump.


View attachment 950803

Choosing not to testify isn't taking the 5th, you buffoon! It's the right of anyone who's charged with a crime. Bragg never proved a crime took place. Why would ANY rational person testify?

 

[AntonToo]

Choosing not to testify isn't taking the 5th, you buffoon! It's the right of anyone who's charged with a crime. Bragg never proved a crime took place. Why would ANY rational person testify?

So someone is suppposedly falsely accusing Trump of a crime, for records and payments for which Trump has no sane explanation, for which he may well be convicted and go to jail...and you think he just can't be bothered to get on the stand and definetively testify that he is innocent, that he was not involved in this criminal scheme?

Stupid much?

 

[Care4all]

Cohen took out a loan against his house to pay Daniels. Trump knew nothing about that. As for "hiding" the payment? That entry wouldn't have been visible to anyone until way after the election...why would there even be a need to "hide" it? An NDA is a legal transaction. You have no crime.

Cohen was being reimbursed by Trump for the NDA he paid to Stormy on Trumps behalf....and the taxes he would owe by doing this cover-up.

The business records falsified the Trump records, for the payment Cohen made the previous year to Stormy....and falsely claimed it was a Retainer agreement for future legal work done on a monthly basis....there was no legal retainer, and no monthly legal work for Cohen to be paid monthly for....it was for the reimbursement for the NDA, and NOT legal retainer associated work, which Trump had admitted he paid back Cohen for the Hush money.....the books showed something different, they were falsified.

An NDA may be legal, but falsifying ones records to pay the NDA, is NOT.

ALSO...An NDA under NY LAW is NOT legal when involved in elections to deceive or hide something from voters about candidates.

 

[AntonToo]

You claim that the odds are in favor of a conviction, but I'm willing to lay even odds on an acquital.

Let's say one month off the board?

Here are more specific terms:

Majority of jurors find that Trump falsified bussiness records, you get off USMB for one month..
Majority of jurors don't find that, then I get off USMB for one month.
Equal split is a draw, no one gets off the board.

 

[Man With A Plan]

So someone is suppposedly falsely accusing Trump of a crime, for records and payments for which Trump has no sane explanation, for which he may well be convicted and go to jail...and you think he just can't be bothered to get on the stand and definetively testify that he is innocent, that he was not involved in this criminal scheme?

Stupid much?

You'd have to be insane to take the stand in THAT courtroom with THAT judge, Anton! Merchan had already ruled that if Trump WERE to take the stand that the prosecution could grill him about a wide range of topics that had nothing to do with what Bragg was charging him with! The Letitia James lawsuit. The E Jean Carroll lawsuit. None of which have anything to do with Bragg's case.

 

[AntonToo]

You'd have to be insane to take the stand in THAT courtroom with THAT judge, Anton! Merchan had already ruled that if Trump WERE to take the stand that the prosecution could grill him about a wide range of topics that had nothing to do with what Bragg was charging him with! The Letitia James lawsuit. The E Jean Carroll lawsuit. None of which have anything to do with Bragg's case.

That is just ignorant nonsense. Nobody on the stand has to answer any irrelavant questioning.

It called Objection: Relavance.

Jean Carrol lawsuit has alredy been ruled on and Gerogia case has exactly zero to do with payments to Stormy.

Trump going to jail right is more than likely the end of his presidential hopes, and will ensure he will stand trial in all the other cases againt him. It is an existential threat to him and it's not belivable that he would not even take the stand to clear his name.

 

[Man With A Plan]

Here are more specific terms:

Majority of jurors find that Trump falsified bussiness records, you get off USMB for one month..
Majority of jurors don't find that, then I get off USMB for one month.
Equal split is a draw, no one gets off the board.

Gee, 87% of the jurors voted for Biden? You think the majority of them hadn't found Trump guilty before the trial even started? It's a huge win for justice if just ONE of those jurors has enough integrity to find Trump didn't commit a crime.

 

[Man With A Plan]

That is just stupid, ignorant nonsense. Nobody on the stand has to answer any irrelavant questioning.

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/22/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/civil-lawsuits-are-fair-game-00153595

In any normal courtroom that might be the case but this is Judge Merchon's courtroom and HE decides what is relevant and what isn't. It's why Costello wasn't allowed to answer questions and Stormy Daniels could talk for hours about the sex act she supposedly had with Trump!

 

[JoeB131]

Cohen's reason to take out the loan against his home to pay Daniels was that he had just found out that he wasn't going to be going to Washington as part of the administration...wasn't going to be Attorney General or Chief of Staff as he'd hoped! Trump wasn't taking him with him. What Cohen was doing was desperately trying to get back in Trump's good graces.

Hold on.

Cohen paid Stormy to keep quiet about sex Trump didn't have with her, and then after he found out he wasn't going to take a pay cut to get a government job, he decided to take out a loan on his house, that Trump paid him back for not knowing what it was for?

Do you people even hear yourselves?

Seems pretty clear what happened. Cohen paid Stormy at Trump's behest because Trump was in an absolute panic after the Access Hollywood tape came out. But any large transfer like that would have been caught if he made it outright from his own funds. A

 

[Care4all]

You'd have to be insane to take the stand in THAT courtroom with THAT judge, Anton! Merchan had already ruled that if Trump WERE to take the stand that the prosecution could grill him about a wide range of topics that had nothing to do with what Bragg was charging him with! The Letitia James lawsuit. The E Jean Carroll lawsuit. None of which have anything to do with Bragg's case.

I agree. Trump would open himself up to the prosecution questions. No sane person or lawyer, would want Trump to testify under those conditions.

But Trump knew those conditions when he made his false claim or innuendo, that he would testify. He was just jerking his followers chain.

 

[AntonToo]

https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/22/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/civil-lawsuits-are-fair-game-00153595

In any normal courtroom that might be the case but this is Judge Merchon's courtroom and HE decides what is relevant and what isn't.

BS. Merchon's clearly prejudiced rullings would publicly undermine the case and get over-ruled on appeal, staining his career.

It would be counter-productive to the very bias you are claiming him to have.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Here are more specific terms:

Majority of jurors for conviction, you get off USMB for one month..
Majority of jurors for aquital, I get off USMB for one month.
Equal split is a draw, no one gets off the board.

I respect and appreciate the offer, I’m a sporting man. I have to decline but I’ll tell you my reasons.

Democrats have started doubting that there will be a conviction, but previously they have been a full celebration, gloating in advance about Trump going to jail. Now that the case is over, they see that the prosecution has presented no evidence of any particular crime. But, they won’t admit it.

I said all along that this prosecution is illegitimate. The goal was never to get a conviction, the goal was to have the trial in order to interfere with the election.

Prosecutors are not supposed to try a case with no chance of winning. You and I, a couple of laypersons, can see that the most likely result is a hung jury. The prosecution knew it to push the case anyway. that was unethical. The prosecution relied on the demographics of the jury to get at least some guilty votes no matter how weak their case was. That, also, was unethical.

So, I want somebody to say that I’m wrong, that the case was real and that there will be a conviction, and that they’re willing to put their money where their mouth is, so to speak.

The second reason is that I’m not predicting a majority of jurors voting to acquit. No jury result would surprise me, other than a unanimous vote, either way.

I guess there is a third reason: we won’t know the count of the jury vote except from the media. I don’t believe that they officially announce the numbers. I’m not willing to rely on the media word for a month off the board. If that happened, you would feel cheated because I’m guessing you believe the media is reliable.

So, again, I respectfully decline. However, since you are a fellow sporting person, I will no longer Mention your unwillingness to wager on a conviction.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I agree. Trump would open himself up to the prosecution questions. No sane person or lawyer, would want Trump to testify under those conditions.

But Trump knew those conditions when he made his false claim or innuendo, that he would testify. He was just jerking his followers chain.

I believe that he would have testified if the prosecution had proved their case. Even if it seem like a Hail Mary, if the prosecution case was as strong as Democrats on here, claimed that it was, what would he have to lose?

Now, seeing that the prosecution has basically presented no evidence of any particular crime Trump testifying we just give them an opportunity to drag out all the things that were irrelevant to the trial such as stormy Daniels.

Trump was likely getting Alvin Bragg’s hopes up to crush them. Kind of cruel, but it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.

 

[AntonToo]

I respect and appreciate the offer, I’m a sporting man. I have to decline

I didn't even read the rest.

You propose a bet and then run away when I accept. That's all I needed to know.

 

[Seymour Flops]

I didn't even read the rest.

You propose the bet and then run away when I accept. That's all I needed to know.

You are the one that has been saying Trump will be convicted and are now refusing to bet on it so it is you who can run along.

I never said that the majority of jurors would vote not guilty. If I had, I would defend it, or admit that I could not defend it.

 

[AntonToo]

You are the one that has been saying Trump will be convicted and are now refusing to bet on it so it is you who can run along.

I never said that the majority of jurors would vote not guilty. If I had, I would defend it, or admit that I could not defend it.

Here is you all of two seconds ago:

I have to decline

You didn't propose any alternate terms, you simply declined.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dummy, the payment was primarily TO STORMY. Payments to Cohen were just a costly pass-through to conceal that fact.

So you believe the convicted liar and thief?

 

[AntonToo]

So you believe the convicted liar and thief?

I belive estblished facts and what they all add up to.

There is absolutely no sane explanation for these payments to Cohen from Trump and his company except for this NDA.