Can anyone explain the crime Trump did?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

ETA: My position is the jury's position

And I bet I could come up with a “juror” of 12 that would declare the earth is flat. The Trump verdict is the “flat earth” of the political world. The same people that brought you Trump Russian collusion. It’s just harassment at this point.

a reply to: Lazy88

How do you find someone guilty of a second crime when it’s only theoretical,

The same way in which a jury can determine "premeditation" based on the judge's instructions and the prosecution's "theories", that are presented to the jury through testimony and evidence, as well as their opening and closing arguments.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The standard isn’t “theory”.

Where is theory in the constitution?

a reply to: Sookiechacha

The same people that brought you the Trump Russian Collusion lie..

The theory miracle conviction of Trump..



Added. Substitute step two with crime one and crime two….

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

And again.

What was falsified with labeling a invoice paying a lawyer to obtain a legal NDA as a legal fee with the correct amounts of money moved / paid.

And name that crime that was “furthered” cited at the beginning of the trail by the prosecution presented to the defense that 12 jurors unanimously found beyond a reasonable doubt occurred as required by the constitution.

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

Based on other crimes never committed 🤤

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

I can’t even imagine being wrong about every damn thing.

Why don’t you tell us what it’s like?

originally posted by: Lazy88

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

And again.

What was falsified with labeling a invoice paying a lawyer to obtain a legal NDA as a legal fee with the correct amounts of money moved / paid.

And name that crime that was “furthered” cited at the beginning of the trail by the prosecution presented to the defense that 12 jurors unanimously found beyond a reasonable doubt occurred as required by the constitution.

Not to mention different jurors used different underlying crimes that were never committed to start with 😃

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

I can’t even imagine being wrong about every damn thing.

Your projecting again Razor.

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

I can’t even imagine being wrong about every damn thing.

Your projecting again Razor.

Nope.
Just speaking the truth like I always do.

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

What is the crime.

Name it.

Falsifying business records for the furtherance of another crime.

I can’t even imagine being wrong about every damn thing.

Your projecting again Razor.

You're *

a reply to: RazorV66

Here’s another thing I’m going to be right about… I think Judge Merchan is going to give Trump an incarceration sentence.

Trump has been found in contempt of court 10 times, has absolutely no remorse for his actions and has been found by a court to have committed fraud multiple times, either personally or though his businesses. What other choice does the Judge have but to send him to prison?

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: Sookiechacha

The standard isn’t “theory”.

I have a theory that it's been raining, even though it isn't raining now, and I didn't see or hear the rain. My theory is based on the fact that that, outside, everything is wet. Dark clouds are breaking up and dispersing. There are large puddles in the road and people are dressed in raincoats and carrying umbrellas. My collogues agree with me, that my theory is sound.
(A paraphrased Judge Merchan)

Where is theory in the constitution?

Where is evidence in the Constitution? I'd tell you they're both in there, wrapped up in the idea of "due process", but you'd just argue with me on that too.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

I have a theory that it's been raining, even though it isn't raining now, and I didn't see or hear the rain. My theory is based on the fact that that, outside, everything is wet. Dark clouds are breaking up and dispersing. There are large puddles in the road and people are dressed in raincoats and carrying umbrellas. My collogues agree with me, that my theory is sound.
(A paraphrased Judge Merchan)

Nice theory. Trouble is, that's a probable cause standard. Not reasonable doubt. For instance they could have been testing fire hydrants and people are preparing for rain later (the judge made no mention of clouds even though my point still stands).

Where is evidence in the Constitution? I'd tell you they're both in there, wrapped up in the idea of "due process", but you'd just argue with me on that too.

Were that true, the allegations of an underpinned crime wouldn't have been made in closing statements and would have been able to be at least defended against by Trumps team.



You are no where near as clever as you think you are and the only demonstrable intelligence you've been able to muster after all your years here is copy/paste others thoughts and ideas.

Talk about a damn shame and a waste of time.....

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

I have a theory that it's been raining,

And where is “theory” and “rain” in the constitution

Again..


What was falsified with labeling a invoice paying a lawyer to obtain a legal NDA as a legal fee with the correct amounts of money moved / paid.

And name that crime that was “furthered” cited at the beginning of the trail by the prosecution presented to the defense that 12 jurors unanimously found beyond a reasonable doubt occurred as required by the constitution.

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: RazorV66

Here’s another thing I’m going to be right about… I think Judge Merchan is going to give Trump an incarceration sentence.

Trump has been found in contempt of court 10 times, has absolutely no remorse for his actions and has been found by a court to have committed fraud multiple times, either personally or though his businesses. What other choice does the Judge have but to send him to prison?

🤣
What will you do when Trump gets elected while in jail?

Cry harder

a reply to: JinMI

Nice theory. Trouble is, that's a probable cause standard.

Mmm, I think we passed the probable cause mark when the Grand Jury indicted Trump.

For instance they could have been testing fire hydrants and people are preparing for rain later (the judge made no mention of clouds even though my point still stands).

Mn Hm. It was the 2nd witness that spoke on the dispersing clouds. They also mentioned a person who got splashed by a passing car, but I didn't mention that, because it was already established that there were puddles in the road.

You are no where near as clever as you think you are and the only demonstrable intelligence you've been able to muster after all your years here is copy/paste others thoughts and ideas.

LOL
I don't need to deviate from reality to make my point. I'm aware that many here do, and seem to need to, too. I don't know why.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha

I have a theory that it's been raining, even though it isn't raining now, and I didn't see or hear the rain. My theory is based on the fact that that, outside, everything is wet. Dark clouds are breaking up and dispersing. There are large puddles in the road and people are dressed in raincoats and carrying umbrellas. My collogues agree with me, that my theory is sound.
(A paraphrased Judge Merchan)

Oh boy. Same logic by flat earthers the earth is flat because it looks flat.