Candidate TRUMP Now Has Crazy Judge JUAN MERCHAN After Him - The Stormy Daniels Hush-Money Case.

a reply to: matafuchs

The crime that was being covered up was the violation of campaign finance laws. You know? The ones Cohen was convicted on?

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: matafuchs

The crime that was being covered up was the violation of campaign finance laws. You know? The ones Cohen was convicted on?

F.E.C. Drops Case Reviewing Trump Hush-Money Payments to Women
The case had examined whether Donald Trump violated election law with a $130,000 payment shortly before the 2016 election to a pornographic-film actress by his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.


www.nytimes.com...

What crime?

a reply to: Threadbarer

So, where in the indictment does it say he violated campaign laws?

a reply to: matafuchs

Colangelo laid it all out in his opening arguments this morning.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: matafuchs

The crime that was being covered up was the violation of campaign finance laws. You know? The ones Cohen was convicted on?

It’s really shady that Cohen got convicted and Trump didn’t — for the exact same crime.

But here we are.

a reply to: Annee

Judge a man by the company he keeps?

originally posted by: WeMustCare
Report: EVIL Judge Juan Murchan won't let Donald Trump's legal team have the names of the first 3 witnesses for the Prosecution.

Source: gettr.com...

Digging his hole deeper, right from the start.

Grounds for mistrial // appeal 😃

They can’t prove any of this was election related.
The only thing that says otherwise is…
1) a lying lawyer with an axe to grind(proven)
2) a slimy fake story peddling publisher who was granted immunity from the Feds
There’s a ridiculous amount of doubt there.

Trump would have tried to bury any negative stories about him regardless of elections.
He always has.
Anybody would.
Saying this is election related is far fetched.

a reply to: Annee

Nope. He was charged with tax evasion. He asked for reimbursements. He was not told to pay Stormy. He did it, with his own LLC, and then when he plead said he did it for Trump.

Link

You can read all about it here.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Annee

Nope. He was charged with tax evasion. He asked for reimbursements. He was not told to pay Stormy. He did it, with his own LLC, and then when he plead said he did it for Trump.

Link

You can read all about it here.

Oh, I think there’s a lot more to the story.

We’re gonna find out.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: matafuchs

The crime that was being covered up was the violation of campaign finance laws. You know? The ones Cohen was convicted on?

It’s really shady that Cohen got convicted and Trump didn’t — for the exact same crime.

But here we are.

Cohen paid off those girls with his own money and didn't tell Trump till long after the fact.

Mistrial coming 😀

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Annee

Judge a man by the company he keeps?

And back to: “The boss never rides in the front seat”.

a reply to: matafuchs

From your link:

"COHEN caused and made the payments described herein in order to influence the 2016 presidential election. In so doing, he coordinated with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. As a result of the payments solicited and made by COHEN, neither Woman-1 nor Woman-2 spoke to the press prior to the election."

So he did all this without Trump's knowledge or say so?

Bit of a stretch, no?

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: matafuchs

The crime that was being covered up was the violation of campaign finance laws. You know? The ones Cohen was convicted on?

It’s really shady that Cohen got convicted and Trump didn’t — for the exact same crime.

But here we are.

Cohen paid off those girls with his own money and didn't tell Trump till long after the fact.

Mistrial coming 😀

We’re gonna find out.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

The payments were finalized October 27th. You really want to say this affected the election?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2


So he did all this without Trump's knowledge or say so?

Bit of a stretch, no?

Not according to Pecker.

But will he say that on the stand?

a reply to: matafuchs

He ensured that the two women didn't speak to the press "prior to the election" did he not?

a reply to: matafuchs

If the hush money didn't come through then Stormy's story would have dropped right before the election. Considering the 2016 election came down to a few thousand votes it very well could have swayed the result.

a reply to: Annee

He's already testified before Congress and in the fraud case to the fact.

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: Annee

He's already testified before Congress and in the fraud case to the fact.

TY.

I knew he admitted this. But did not know if under oath.