|
|
Post by cyclist on May 7, 2024 14:57:21 GMT -5
That's what happens when you break the law. When you say it like that one might think there wasn't and isn't any shenanigans. There is endless shenanigans or he would have hung on any one of the shenanigan impeachments attempts. The weaponizes judicial and propaganda machine is still slinging goo and trying to get it to stick. This man gave up his lavish life to help our country. He didn't have to. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on May 7, 2024 19:24:23 GMT -5
.gov has targeting systems for most of their weapons. Judicial and propaganda weapons are locked on Trump. That's what happens when you break the law. I guess Jack Smith is going to find out what tampering with evidence is going to cost him...tsk tsk tsk |
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on May 7, 2024 19:29:49 GMT -5
”You remind me of my daughter because she is smart and blonde and beautiful and people underestimate her as well,” That's what VonShitzInPantz said to (and before he fucked) the porn star while his wife was pregnant. That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. |
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on May 7, 2024 19:37:08 GMT -5
Full fledged, out in the open, no bones about it....election tampering. No different than the criminal lying 51 "agents" who committed treason in 2020.
|
|
|
|
Post by biminitwisted on May 7, 2024 20:21:25 GMT -5
We learned today that Trump likes to be spanked with magazines.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tarponator on May 7, 2024 21:04:49 GMT -5
That's what happens when you break the law. I guess Jack Smith is going to find out what tampering with evidence is going to cost him...tsk tsk tsk Based on historical averages, you probably shouldn't guess. |
|
|
|
Post by Tarponator on May 7, 2024 21:05:27 GMT -5
”You remind me of my daughter because she is smart and blonde and beautiful and people underestimate her as well,” That's what VonShitzInPantz said to (and before he fucked) the porn star while his wife was pregnant. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. Would you like to wager on that? |
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on May 7, 2024 21:41:29 GMT -5
That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. Would you like to wager on that? Odds are high in my favor. Remember this is a criminal trial, not a civil trial. Rules are different. |
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 8, 2024 5:17:44 GMT -5
”You remind me of my daughter because she is smart and blonde and beautiful and people underestimate her as well,” That's what VonShitzInPantz said to (and before he fucked) the porn star while his wife was pregnant. That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. You think that's the remark? Not the dozen or so other statements she made the defense objected to or the judge warned the prosecution about. That was a mistake by the prosecution. Judge warned him several times to curb what she said. it doesn't change the facts that Trump broke the law by classifying porn star payments as legal expenses, but it does hurt the trial. New York could retry him if an appeals court does overturn it based on her testimony. I still disagree it is about the election. Trump broke the law, he could have pushed this trial to start sooner and be over by now. I think Trump loves the fact it is taking place now and believes it helps his campaign. |
|
|
|
Post by bullfrog on May 8, 2024 5:55:27 GMT -5
That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. You think that's the remark? Not the dozen or so other statements she made the defense objected to or the judge warned the prosecution about. That was a mistake by the prosecution. Judge warned him several times to curb what she said. it doesn't change the facts that Trump broke the law by classifying porn star payments as legal expenses, but it does hurt the trial. New York could retry him if an appeals court does overturn it based on her testimony. I still disagree it is about the election. Trump broke the law, he could have pushed this trial to start sooner and be over by now. I think Trump loves the fact it is taking place now and believes it helps his campaign. I wasn’t commenting on the specific remark, its her overall testimony for which the statement is simply characteristic. The probative value is minimal and is vastly outweighed by the prejudicial effect. |
|
|
|
Post by Tarponator on May 8, 2024 14:16:50 GMT -5
Would you like to wager on that? Odds are high in my favor. Remember this is a criminal trial, not a civil trial. Rules are different. I didn't ask you what you thought your odds were, I asked if you wished to wager on your prediction.
I'll take that as a no.
|
|
|
|
Post by garycoleco on May 8, 2024 19:53:21 GMT -5
”You remind me of my daughter because she is smart and blonde and beautiful and people underestimate her as well,” That's what VonShitzInPantz said to (and before he fucked) the porn star while his wife was pregnant. That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. You are correct. I know nothing of the fake trial, but a good friend who is an attorney said that there's two lawyers on the jury. He said that Juries typically lean on other members that are attorneys and that isn't good for the prosecution and guarantees an appeal. He also said that no lawyer on a jury would see that as acceptable behavior in court |
|
|
|
Post by biminitwisted on May 8, 2024 23:16:18 GMT -5
That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. You are correct. I know nothing of the fake trial, but a good friend who is an attorney said that there's two lawyers on the jury. He said that Juries typically lean on other members that are attorneys and that isn't good for the prosecution and guarantees an appeal. He also said that no lawyer on a jury would see that as acceptable behavior in court If only his shitty lawyers would of objected then he might have a shot. Instead they sat there with there thumbs up their asses. "As a threshold matter, I agree, Mr. Blanche, that there were many things that would have been better left unsaid," Merchan told Trump's lead attorney Todd Blanche after a lunch break. "In fairness to the people, I think this witness was a little bit difficult to control."
Merchan added he was "surprised" the former president's defense team did not raise more objections during Daniels' testimony.
"When you say the bell has been rung, the defense has to take some responsibility for that," Merchan said.
He noted that even he stepped in to call his own objection at one point. |
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 9, 2024 5:39:29 GMT -5
That will probably win him an overturned conviction later. But where the purpose of this trial is to influence the November election, that won’t matter. You are correct. I know nothing of the fake trial, but a good friend who is an attorney said that there's two lawyers on the jury. He said that Juries typically lean on other members that are attorneys and that isn't good for the prosecution and guarantees an appeal. He also said that no lawyer on a jury would see that as acceptable behavior in court Not sure a corporate attorney and a civil rights lawyers are going to benefit the defense. The corporate lawyer is going to see right through Trump's BS excuses that he just signed the checks and had no idea what they were. I could have guaranteed an appeal if Trump loses the day the trial started. That is guaranteeing the sun will rise tomorrow. An appeal is happening. A mistrial based on Stormy Daniels testimony just means a new trial with a new jury, it doesn't end the problem for Trump. It just delays it. Her testimony also does not change the facts of the case. I am not convinced the appeals court will vote a mistrial just on Stormy's testimony. But I bet before this is over there will be other reasons to appeal it. |
|
