The biggest problem with the Hush money trial

a reply to: Annee

lol lol lol that opinion never presented any actual evidence tying Trump to the actual charges. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
The question now is, will Trump take the stand and give evidence?

I don't think he needs to.
The star prosecution witness was shredded.
The prosecution gave no case.
Usually the defendant will get on the stand as a last resort.
I don't think Trump is in that position.

a reply to: FlyersFan

Thanks. The trial is not being reported over here in as much detail as it is over there.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong
a reply to: Annee

"Yes, I think, if I was a juror in this case, watching that, I would think this guy's making this up as he's going along or he's making this particular story up." --Anderson Cooper

pjmedia.com...

I’m not a fan of Cooper.

I do like Maddow — I find her very articulate in her research.

What does she say?

You should know what she says. You're her fan.

I do.

Please enlighten us as to what she said of Cohen's text exchange with Schiller.

A detail that interests you?

Admit it....You have no idea what Maddow says about the Cohen/Schiller text testimony today.
Did she even report or comment on it?

Maddow is in big panic mode.

I would say she's in denial...but "panic" fits as well.

You'd have that opinion of her no matter what.

Therefore, meaningless.

She IS in denial.
As we have already established together...she hasn't even mentioned Blanche's takedown of Cohen in court yesterday to all her fans like you.

I am not surprised that is your opinion.

Opinion or fact?
Is it opinion or fact that Maddow said nothing of the Cohen/Schiller text exchange yesterday?

In my experience she is meticulous.

She doesn't just open her mouth and nonsense flows out like Trump does.

She may or may not address it. If she does it won't be fluff. IMO

In Other Words...

Maddow is such a meticulous researcher and has had no real-time opinion on the Cohen/Schiller text exchange in court yesterday...

...because she's still waiting for the Democrat Party Talking Points Memo on it to be released.

They're running late.

I have no interest in debating my opinion. This is starting to become stupid.

Is that your exit line?

NO -- this is.

"Don't bounce with a bouncing ball".

When a discussion turns into "Ping Pong" -- it's over.

Know when to close the door.

You've just stated that: "I have no interest in debating my opinion".

It's your MIND that's already closed...closing any doors would be superfluous.

WRONG

Opinions rarely are changed.

It just becomes boring/annoying/childish back and forth “Ping Pong”.

I have no need to prove anything.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: WeMustCare

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong
a reply to: Annee

"Yes, I think, if I was a juror in this case, watching that, I would think this guy's making this up as he's going along or he's making this particular story up." --Anderson Cooper

pjmedia.com...

I’m not a fan of Cooper.

I do like Maddow — I find her very articulate in her research.

What does she say?

You should know what she says. You're her fan.

I do.

Please enlighten us as to what she said of Cohen's text exchange with Schiller.

A detail that interests you?

Admit it....You have no idea what Maddow says about the Cohen/Schiller text testimony today.
Did she even report or comment on it?

Maddow is in big panic mode.

I would say she's in denial...but "panic" fits as well.

You'd have that opinion of her no matter what.

Therefore, meaningless.

She IS in denial.
As we have already established together...she hasn't even mentioned Blanche's takedown of Cohen in court yesterday to all her fans like you.

I am not surprised that is your opinion.

Opinion or fact?
Is it opinion or fact that Maddow said nothing of the Cohen/Schiller text exchange yesterday?

In my experience she is meticulous.

She doesn't just open her mouth and nonsense flows out like Trump does.

She may or may not address it. If she does it won't be fluff. IMO

In Other Words...

Maddow is such a meticulous researcher and has had no real-time opinion on the Cohen/Schiller text exchange in court yesterday...

...because she's still waiting for the Democrat Party Talking Points Memo on it to be released.

They're running late.

I have no interest in debating my opinion. This is starting to become stupid.

Is that your exit line?

NO -- this is.

"Don't bounce with a bouncing ball".

When a discussion turns into "Ping Pong" -- it's over.

Know when to close the door.

You've just stated that: "I have no interest in debating my opinion".

It's your MIND that's already closed...closing any doors would be superfluous.

WRONG
Opinions rarely are changed.

I knew you couldn't stay away after slamming your mind in everyone's face.

a reply to: MrGashler

It’s not conjecture if the prosecution has done a good job of piecing together what happened with documents, witnesses and even Trumps own social media posts.

The defenses argument is just nonsensical. They’re basically claiming Cohen went rogue and Trump knew nothing about it, so they want the jury to believe the NDA and checks came across Trumps desk and he was like, “who’s Stormy Daniels and why are we paying her $130,000?… oh well, we better reimburse Cohen for a NDA with this lady I never slept with and we’ll give him extra for doing a good job”… lol.

Also that whole claim about Blanche destroying Cohen is a total stretch. It was a few minutes of over 12 hours of cross examination where Blanche was shrieking and screaming at Cohen, well Cohen remained claim and stood by his story.

I just hope ATS is still around in a few weeks so I can gloat about how right I was.

originally posted by: JadedGhost

Also that whole claim about Blanche destroying Cohen is a total stretch. It was a few minutes of over 12 hours of cross examination where Blanche was shrieking and screaming at Cohen, well Cohen remained claim and stood by his story.

Yes -- Cohen did not waiver from his story.

Blanche did try to get him to -- but he didn't.

The Op-Eds on this exchange are "all over the place" -- as in extremely varied opinions.

a reply to: Annee

He was not shredded. Trumps lawyers cross examination was awful.

They were presented with a wide open goal in the form of Cohen, and they missed. By miles.

The opening question was a bad one and wrong footed them.

a reply to: JadedGhost

Please explain how he would be found guilty of his actual charges? All anyone keeps talking about is a Stormy payment. How this interfered with an election. How Trump is in control of everything and personally handled it.

No.

The charges are misdemeanors that were past the statue of limitations. In order to charge, they had to try to tie it to a Federal crime which they are stating is campaign related. He was never found guilty. He was never charged Federally. It is all something he SDNY 'created'.

Invoices were submitted like they would be at any company.
Those invoices were paid.
Those invoices were recorded in their Accounting software Program.
Taxes were paid.

What is illegal about that? Nothing. That is what each charge is for. A year worth of 3 things. An Invoince. An Accounting entry. A Check.

Suddenly the media can say 34 FELONY COUNTS OF FRAUD!!!!!

These threads have been perfect to show half this country just believes the MSM and that the information they are getting is propaganda and not even close to right.

Those same people got vaxxed.....

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: JadedGhost

Also that whole claim about Blanche destroying Cohen is a total stretch. It was a few minutes of over 12 hours of cross examination where Blanche was shrieking and screaming at Cohen, well Cohen remained claim and stood by his story.

Yes -- Cohen did not waiver from his story.

Blanche did try to get him to -- but he didn't.

The Op-Eds on this exchange are "all over the place" -- as in extremely varied opinions.

Stop reading the op eds. Even the libs are admitting he was owned by Blanche.
Read the transcript or reporting of what was actually said in court.
You’ll find Blanche pushed Cohen to get caught in two more lies, by my count.
The guy just cannot tell the truth.
I feel sorry for him even though his misery is self induced.
He came into court with zero credibility due to his criminal history with truth telling and fraud.
He is into negative territory now.
All that’s left is crossing your fingers for a super partisan jury.🤞
Good luck.
I’d say trumps odds are way up to 50/50 now.
It is what it is.

a reply to: Annee

And yet here you are......

a reply to: JadedGhost

No, it is absolutely conjecture. Even almost the entirety of this comment that I'm replying to is conjecture.

I hope so too, so we can all get a laugh at you. They've been saying they were going to 'get Trump this time' for what, 8 years now? They keep failing to do so, but this will be the one right?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Annee

He was not shredded. Trumps lawyers cross examination was awful.

They were presented with a wide open goal in the form of Cohen, and they missed. By miles.

The opening question was a bad one and wrong footed them.

originally posted by: MrGashler
a reply to: Annee

And yet here you are......

Entertainment

a reply to: Annee

Honestly I can respect that.

originally posted by: MrGashler
a reply to: JadedGhost
They've been saying they were going to 'get Trump this time' for what, 8 years now? They keep failing to do so, but this will be the one right?

They have got him 3 times now in civil lawsuits.

Plus, he couldn’t have been charged with a crime well he was president, the impeachments were a joke because the Republicans were always going to block it. He also had friends in high places who kept his name out of it when Cohen was convicted for his part in this crime.

a reply to: JadedGhost

Like the lawsuit where the lady with the rape fantasy claimed she was raped by him 30 years after the fact? Or the lawsuit claiming he defrauded......someone.....by getting a loan from a bank that the bank approved and was paid back in full with interest? I'll admit I'm drawing a blank on the third one so feel free to enlighten me, but man those sure had some staying power behind them.

All I'm seeing is a lot of "They would've gotten him if it weren't for [insert excuse here]". Those damn kids and their talking dog.

a reply to: MrGashler

I was counting the E. Jean Carroll cases as two. He was found liable for 5 million for sexual assault and then later found liable for 83 million for defamation.

His got that Jan 6 federal case coming up to, which he’ll most likely delay until after the election and be able to pardon himself if he wins. His going to be in some hot water for that though, if he doesn’t get elected.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
So, the good news is...none of this will get resolved here in the remaining 36+/- hours of ATS, and the platform for Annee's partisan rhetoric will vanish.

And 'wait for the verdict' you will, Annee. Though you will no longer have a platform to celebrate your disapproval or partisan zeal. There will only be silence. But rest easy, there's always that kiddie sandbox called reddit where you can go argue with 12 year olds. And, I'm sure CNN probably has a place for you in their echo chamber.

Enjoy.

From the beginning of this case, it was a "Hail Mary".

A win would be the surprise.

However, it accomplishes the same thing as "blow hard" Trump.

Trump runs his mouth saying whatever his cult will respond to. Doesn't have to make sense. They eat it up anyway.

Trump has been gagged and exposed. His numbers are falling.

what numbers? got a link?

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: MrGashler

It’s not conjecture if the prosecution has done a good job of piecing together what happened with documents, witnesses and even Trumps own social media posts.

The defenses argument is just nonsensical. They’re basically claiming Cohen went rogue and Trump knew nothing about it, so they want the jury to believe the NDA and checks came across Trumps desk and he was like, “who’s Stormy Daniels and why are we paying her $130,000?… oh well, we better reimburse Cohen for a NDA with this lady I never slept with and we’ll give him extra for doing a good job”… lol.

Also that whole claim about Blanche destroying Cohen is a total stretch. It was a few minutes of over 12 hours of cross examination where Blanche was shrieking and screaming at Cohen, well Cohen remained claim and stood by his story.

I just hope ATS is still around in a few weeks so I can gloat about how right I was.

I wish you would be man enough to do just that, but even if ATS is still here, you will be a scared little child and runnoft.

There hasn't been a crime addressed as of yet, and the prosecution is about done. Unless you can share what crime Trump has been proven to be guilty of. Porking a whore? not a crime. Paying for an NDA? not a crime. Paying his lawyer for legal bills? not a crime. Listing those payments as legal fees? not a crime. Being orange? GUILTY!!!!!

You are like a sad joke with no punchline. tell us all what the jury will convict Trump for.