The biggest problem with the Hush money trial

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Annee
If that were the case, there would be no trial.

No. The left are making up alleged crimes for their mock 'trials'.
No matter what .. there were going to be trials, and lots of them
until they manage to get something to stick.

Cohen paid Stormy. Trump paid Cohen.

There is NO LEFT in that equation.

And what law was broken in your post?

a reply to: Annee

And it wasn't really a 'campaign contribution' no matter how much the left mutilates the law.

originally posted by: Disgusted123
Trump “repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election.” Trump is alleged to have:

".....orchestrated a scheme with others … by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit [his] electoral prospects. In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York."

That's what the trial is about.

That sounds exactly like conspiracy.
Why isn’t Trump being charged for conspiracy?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: network dude

What all these other witnesses are doing is confirming Cohens testimony when he takes the stand with the knock out blow.

Do you agree the fact Trump paid Cohen validates Cohen?

How do we know Cohen told Trump the truth about the "legal" fees ? 💡

Why does that matter?

But pretty sure it’s been established what this payment was for.

Now up to the jury.

Yup. The payment was made by Cohen. 😃

If Trump had not paid Cohen back we would not be discussing this.

Legal fees are legal fees when a lawyer tells a client it's legal fees. 😀

Are they?

That does seem to be the question.

There’s something about a crime to cover up a felony.

No proof offered of any crime or coverup or felony. 😀

And yes, legal fees are legal fees when a lawyer tells a client legal fees are legal fees. 😃

If that were the case, there would be no trial.

Yet, here we are.

Unless there's ulterior motives like we may be seeing soon. 😀

And actually my comparison is above your assumptions of "there would be no trial".

Well, I’ve been here since 2007 and other places before that.

I’ve come to the conclusion most things are what they are.

Very rarely does a conspiracy actually prove itself.

Yup. Trump will be found innocent of all charges by hung jury mistrial. 😃

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Annee
If that were the case, there would be no trial.

No. The left are making up alleged crimes for their mock 'trials'.
No matter what .. there were going to be trials, and lots of them
until they manage to get something to stick.

Cohen paid Stormy. Trump paid Cohen.

There is NO LEFT in that equation.

But they presented some evidence of one of Stormy's lawyers discussing extortion with Cohen. 😀

Evidence was also presented about a prosecution paralegal deleting phone calls. 😃

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Annee
If that were the case, there would be no trial.

No. The left are making up alleged crimes for their mock 'trials'.
No matter what .. there were going to be trials, and lots of them
until they manage to get something to stick.

Cohen paid Stormy. Trump paid Cohen.

There is NO LEFT in that equation.

But they presented some evidence of one of Stormy's lawyers discussing extortion with Cohen. 😀

Evidence was also presented about a prosecution paralegal deleting phone calls. 😃

I tried to research the deleted phone calls.

So far I’ve only seen the link you provided.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: network dude

What all these other witnesses are doing is confirming Cohens testimony when he takes the stand with the knock out blow.

Do you agree the fact Trump paid Cohen validates Cohen?

How do we know Cohen told Trump the truth about the "legal" fees ? 💡

Why does that matter?

But pretty sure it’s been established what this payment was for.

Now up to the jury.

Yup. The payment was made by Cohen. 😃

If Trump had not paid Cohen back we would not be discussing this.

Legal fees are legal fees when a lawyer tells a client it's legal fees. 😀

Are they?

That does seem to be the question.

There’s something about a crime to cover up a felony.

No proof offered of any crime or coverup or felony. 😀

And yes, legal fees are legal fees when a lawyer tells a client legal fees are legal fees. 😃

If that were the case, there would be no trial.

Yet, here we are.

Unless there's ulterior motives like we may be seeing soon. 😀

And actually my comparison is above your assumptions of "there would be no trial".

Well, I’ve been here since 2007 and other places before that.

I’ve come to the conclusion most things are what they are.

Very rarely does a conspiracy actually prove itself.

Yup. Trump will be found innocent of all charges by hung jury mistrial. 😃

Let the Stormy and the 'hung' jury jokes commence.

a reply to: Annee

Bragg’s Paralegal Admits His Office Deleted Three Pages of Phone Calls Between Stormy Daniels’ Lawyer and Michael Cohen

From CNN:

Defense attorney Emil Bove is challenging the evidence prosecutors are putting forward, asking paralegal Jaden Jarmel-Schneider about the deletion of some toll records between Keith Davidson and Michael Cohen after the defense submitted recordings between the two from 2018.

The paralegal has admitted that they’ve deleted some call records from the files. Bove also has Jarmel-Schneider confirm that some calls were removed from an exhibit of calls between Gina Rodriguez and Dylan Howard.

Bove said it was three-pages worth of records.

politicom.com.au...

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

Thanks.

But the main issue is Trump paying Cohen.

a reply to: Boomer1947

And by the way Trump (or his lawyers) do NOT admit that the sexual encounter took place. That's the entire reason for Stormy Daniels' testimony. The judge [Merchan] pointed this out in his decision the other day:

"Merchan also referred back to the defense’s opening statement when Blanche denied there was ever a sexual encounter between Daniels and Trump. The judge said that assertion opened the door for the prosecution to make an effort to show her story was credible to prove their case, allowing them to ask more detailed questions about the encounter.

“The more specificity Ms. Daniels can provide about the encounter, the more the jury can weigh whether the encounter did occur and if so whether they choose to credit Ms. Daniels’ story,” Merchan said.

And which Stormy do we believe? The one who has been verbally saying it happened or the one that signed statements denying the affair? Which one is it? I have noticed NDA's not being enforced, so does this not mean that getting restitution for breaking a legally binding agreement? Otherwise lawyers are just scamming in setting them up.

originally posted by: hangedman13
a reply to: Boomer1947

And by the way Trump (or his lawyers) do NOT admit that the sexual encounter took place. That's the entire reason for Stormy Daniels' testimony. The judge [Merchan] pointed this out in his decision the other day:

"Merchan also referred back to the defense’s opening statement when Blanche denied there was ever a sexual encounter between Daniels and Trump. The judge said that assertion opened the door for the prosecution to make an effort to show her story was credible to prove their case, allowing them to ask more detailed questions about the encounter.

“The more specificity Ms. Daniels can provide about the encounter, the more the jury can weigh whether the encounter did occur and if so whether they choose to credit Ms. Daniels’ story,” Merchan said.

And which Stormy do we believe? The one who has been verbally saying it happened or the one that signed statements denying the affair? Which one is it? I have noticed NDA's not being enforced, so does this not mean that getting restitution for breaking a legally binding agreement? Otherwise lawyers are just scamming in setting them up.

Reasons why.

a reply to: Annee

You're welcome.

And what do you think about Bragg's paralegal admitting to deleting evidence in the form of 3 pages of records of calls between Keith Davidson and Michael Cohen?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

Thanks.

But the main issue is Trump paying Cohen.

The charges are about who ordered (and did) the accounting column placement(s) and who may have "suggested" lying to Trump about it and why. 😃

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

Thanks.

But the main issue is Trump paying Cohen.

The charges are about who ordered (and did) the accounting column placement(s) and who may have "suggested" lying to Trump about it and why. 😃

Trump reimbursed Cohen. That is what it’s about.

How - when - why - who —- is further discussion.

Up to the jury.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

Thanks.

But the main issue is Trump paying Cohen.

So Trump is going to jail for paying his lawyer that he had on retainer.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong
a reply to: Annee

You're welcome.

And what do you think about Bragg's paralegal admitting to deleting evidence in the form of 3 pages of records of calls between Keith Davidson and Michael Cohen?

Does it have any real direct importance to Trump reimbursing Cohen?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

Thanks.

But the main issue is Trump paying Cohen.

The charges are about who ordered (and did) the accounting column placement(s) and who may have "suggested" lying to Trump about it and why. 😃

Trump reimbursed Cohen. That is what it’s about.

How - when - why - who —- is further discussion.

Up to the jury.

Nope. The charges are about who ordered (and did) the accounting column placement(s) and who may have "suggested" lying to Trump about it and why. That's the alleged "crime" 🤓

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

Thanks.

But the main issue is Trump paying Cohen.

So Trump is going to jail for paying his lawyer that he had on retainer.

and...paid for legal fees. and I think the "check" in question was for a lot more that the $130,000 "paid" to Stormy by Cohen before Trump even knew anything.

a reply to: hangedman13

The only way Daniels can weave her way out of the NDA is if she can prove that somehow Trump nullified the agreement well before she even first mentioned any of these allegations, and even then it wouldn't nullify the entire agreement; it would only allow her to refute whatever disclosures were made by Trump (in violation of the agreement). The mere mention by Trump, or anyone on his team, that an NDA was in place does not constitute a breach of the contract unless this is specifically outlined in the Agreement itself.

So, what does this mean? Well, for one, I'd be absolutely shocked if Daniel's legal representation doesn't know this already. While breach of the Contract is not relevant in the Trump case (directly), it does set Daniel's up for a whole variety of charges in the civil court system. First and foremost of these would be Breach of Contract, and I'd be very surprised if Trump's counsel didn't also file all manner of Defamation and similar collateral charges also. That is, unless Trump jumps in and just wants to just drop the whole thing, which is entirely possibile. The good news though, is Trump and his legal team don't have to file these charges right away; they have time. And, they'd probably be better off waiting until after November to file them anyway. Why? Because if Trump loses the election, then his legal team will absolutely destroy Stormy Daniels and everyone associated with her, citing the Breach as the one of the causes for the loss.

I do a lot of work with NDA's in my line of work, and I can say Ms. Daniels is definitely on thin ice here.

The kicker in all of this is, Daniels doesn't deny there was an NDA, nor does Trump. This much has been sworn to, under Oath in a court of law. As such, that testimony is a matter of public record. This fact alone does not bode well for the Daniels team.

Edit to add - And remember here, Daniels didn't bring the charges against Trump, the DA, Bragg, in his zeal to get Trump, did. So, Daniels is on the hot-seat here bigtime! She can't win for losing. If they convict Trump (which he will successfully appeal, that much is obvious), then Daniels gets hammered. And, if they acquit Trump, Daniels gets hammered. Either way, if Trump loses the election, Daniels gets a mountain of molten bad ju-ju dumped directly on her head. Not a good spot to be if you're Stormy Daniels.

On kind of a side note, I can actually picture possibly one of the largest Defamation and Libel lawsuits in history being filed against the State of NY over all this too.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: FlyersFan

originally posted by: Annee
If that were the case, there would be no trial.

No. The left are making up alleged crimes for their mock 'trials'.
No matter what .. there were going to be trials, and lots of them
until they manage to get something to stick.

Cohen paid Stormy. Trump paid Cohen.

There is NO LEFT in that equation.

I paid the 7-11 guy for my sodi-pop. 7-11 guy shoots a guy. I’m guilty of the shooting.