Stormy kills Bragg case

[*Nately120*]

(05-10-2024, 08:03 AM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I get you are not tossing me into the witch hunt group, just  do not see how anyone can believe DJT is getting a fair trial or admit the timing is suspicious at best.

Similarly, not going to argue it, because, sadly, no one ever changes their minds here and DJT is a polarizing man.

Not lumping you in the TDS group.

I'm saying there is no possibility for a trial for someone with as polarizing as Trump.  Our justice system isn't designed to handle people like him, and as much as I think he should be held accountable IF IF IF IF IF IF IF he did anything wrong, I will also admit that any jury that is justifiably representative of the US population should have at least 2 or 3 people on it who would be more likely to believe that the Browns have won 57 straight super bowls than they would believe that Donald Trump could possibly do anything dishonest.

There is no "good" time to put a president on trial, which is why people still talk about and analyze the whole Nixon thing 50+ years later.  When Trump did what he's accused of doing he was running for president, then he was president, then he was running for president, and next he will either be president or he will be running for president.  I've asked a lot of people when the "right" time to bring charges against Trump would be, and the answer I seem to get it never, because you're never supposed to bring charges against someone who is president or running for president...I assume, I feel like for a lot of people that would only apply to Trump.

As a reasonable middle of the road viewer of this when would you have suggested they put Trump on trial?  Opinions seem mixed on whether or not the president should have total immunity, but a lot of people seem to think that a president or presidential candidate should never be subject to a trial, so what is the difference?

[Stewy]

(05-09-2024, 09:56 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: For the last, that is what both sides are doing, and what I also noted. I am certain DTJ is guilty of multiple crimes. He has multiple character flaws. The problem is the left throws everything at the wall, no matter how crazy, and engages is overcharging and charge stacking, as opposed to sticking to what is simple and provable, and DJT likely skates because they are overzealous and too aggressive.

Or DJT is just a criminal who is finally getting his due, but keep those blinders on if you like.

And I agree with others here......it is absolutely true that he is getting an unfair trial.....anyone else would have been in prison long ago, but his money and influence have kept him out of jail for years.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(05-10-2024, 10:13 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: More likely will be lap dance tokens and VIP passes. Barron's graduation party is going to be lit! 

I thought that was how she purchased the paintings from Hunter...

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(05-10-2024, 10:58 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I'm saying there is no possibility for a trial for someone with as polarizing as Trump.  Our justice system isn't designed to handle people like him, and as much as I think he should be held accountable IF IF IF IF IF IF IF he did anything wrong, I will also admit that any jury that is justifiably representative of the US population should have at least 2 or 3 people on it who would be more likely to believe that the Browns have won 57 straight super bowls than they would believe that Donald Trump could possibly do anything dishonest.

There is no "good" time to put a president on trial, which is why people still talk about and analyze the whole Nixon thing 50+ years later.  When Trump did what he's accused of doing he was running for president, then he was president, then he was running for president, and next he will either be president or he will be running for president.  I've asked a lot of people when the "right" time to bring charges against Trump would be, and the answer I seem to get it never, because you're never supposed to bring charges against someone who is president or running for president...I assume, I feel like for a lot of people that would only apply to Trump.

As a reasonable middle of the road viewer of this when would you have suggested they put Trump on trial?  Opinions seem mixed on whether or not the president should have total immunity, but a lot of people seem to think that a president or presidential candidate should never be subject to a trial, so what is the difference?

I agree to a point, but that is the problem with DJT getting a fair trial. If he has a true sample of the nation's make up, he will have die hards who would never convict him no matter the blood on his hands, as well as die hards who would never admit his innocence, not matter how pristine the proof. 

There is no good time, but there is better timing.

The timing of all of the charges brought on is questionable to me because they were brought at once, punishing him via the process and taking him away from campaigning, and Baron's thing that was super important... The trials are not being done in a bulletproof manner, so once they conclude, there will still be a divide.

I think where we share common ground is thinking this is a mess we will not be clear of for at least four more years that does the country no good on the world stage. 

Hopefully, if DJT wins the presidency for a second time (I think he will due to a new voting block of Never Biden voters being out there, similar to the Never Trumpers emerging after his first term), he does not engage in weaponizing the FBI and DOJ like Biden is being accused of doing. 

Hoping for the best,  but not the most optimistic. 

[*Nately120*]

(05-10-2024, 12:57 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote:  and Baron's thing that was super important...

Are you being sarcastic on this?  He was never barred from going, and he was eventually allowed to go, but his plans seem to currently be to fly to campaign in Minnesota that day.  At least that's where things stand at the moment as I understand them.

I think you're being sarcastic but it really jumped out at me.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(05-10-2024, 01:04 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Are you being sarcastic on this?  He was never barred from going, and he was eventually allowed to go, but his plans seem to currently be to fly to campaign in Minnesota that day.  At least that's where things stand at the moment as I understand them.

I think you're being sarcastic but it really jumped out at me.

Yes, it was sarcasm.


I was going to make a joke involving Kristi Noam dog sitting for the Bidens as problem solving and the parties coming together. Alas, I couldn't string together a good line and fit it in stream of thought, so I went with the low hanging fruit.


Much like the parties did with their respective representatives...

[Luvnit2]

(05-10-2024, 11:00 AM)Stewy Wrote: Or DJT is just a criminal who is finally getting his due, but keep those blinders on if you like.

And I agree with others here......it is absolutely true that he is getting an unfair trial.....anyone else would have been in prison long ago, but his money and influence have kept him out of jail for years.

LOL

What is the crime? Why did the former DOJ and others refuse to bring the NY case to trial?

I ask again as I have asked others. What federal crime did Trump commit in NY?  

Every expert I see say if he committed a crime, it is a misdemeanor.

I will wait.

While I wait, should Hillary avoid prosecution for her crime Comey exposes as violation of federal law but were dismissed since she was the Democratic nominee? Did Bill Clinton avoid crimes for paying off his rape victims through a NDA?

I find it ironic liberals who are going after Trump to sway an election are concerned Trump will seek revenge. If Democrats did nothing wrong, seek revenge of what exactly? I missed him seeking revenge from 2017 to 2021.

Only treat to Democracy is happening right now and the voters see it for what it is, election interference and Biden's use of the DOJ to get reelected. 

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(05-10-2024, 11:00 AM)Stewy Wrote: Or DJT is just a criminal who is finally getting his due, but keep those blinders on if you like.

And I agree with others here......it is absolutely true that he is getting an unfair trial.....anyone else would have been in prison long ago, but his money and influence have kept him out of jail for years.

Oh the irony...


What blinders? 


I never said he was innocent, in fact, I suspect he is likely guilty of multiple things and stated as much. You just saw DJT and had the Pavlovian response of frothing at the mouth and went on the attack like Major going after the secret service. I am certain there is a better phrase for people with that sort of knee jerk reaction to the former president.

I cannot have a good faith discussion with DJT living in your head like that.  

Sorry.

[hollodero]

(05-10-2024, 12:57 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I agree to a point, but that is the problem with DJT getting a fair trial. If he has a true sample of the nation's make up, he will have die hards who would never convict him no matter the blood on his hands, as well as die hards who would never admit his innocence, not matter how pristine the proof. 

There is no good time, but there is better timing.

The timing of all of the charges brought on is questionable to me because they were brought at once, punishing him via the process and taking him away from campaigning, and Baron's thing that was super important... The trials are not being done in a bulletproof manner, so once they conclude, there will still be a divide.

I mean, as you said there will be a divide anyway, no degree of bulletproofness could prevent that. And the, in your eyes, most perfect timing would still be questioned by anyone who wishes to. Considering that, imho it wouldn't make too much sense for the justice system to extensively regard these things, that in theory should not play a role in the first place. Everyone wants a justice system independent from politics, after all. It seems a bit odd to now demand they take politics into account so severely as to postpone or skip a trial.

As for the timing, imho there might be two things in play, first the cases need time to be properly investigated before going to court, and secondly if a candidate asks for full presidential immunity and could potentially pardon himself as president, there's a clear, not strictly political inclination to have the trials take place before the election. That might be a not so nefarious explanation as to why these trials all take place now.

That being said, I will not die on the hill that these trials are definitely all fair. They probably aren't, and they probably never really could be.

(05-10-2024, 12:57 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I think where we share common ground is thinking this is a mess we will not be clear of for at least four more years that does the country no good on the world stage. 

Hopefully, if DJT wins the presidency for a second time (I think he will due to a new voting block of Never Biden voters being out there, similar to the Never Trumpers emerging after his first term), he does not engage in weaponizing the FBI and DOJ like Biden is being accused of doing. 

Hoping for the best,  but not the most optimistic. 

Trump already stated quite clearly what he intends to do, eg. only let stolen election apologists have roles in his admin, and he seems like a man on a vengeful mission these days, so I guess he's not kidding. One can always hope, but I'd be extremely pessimistic on that one.

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(05-10-2024, 02:22 PM)hollodero Wrote: I mean, as you said there will be a divide anyway, no degree of bulletproofness could prevent that. And the, in your eyes, most perfect timing would still be questioned by anyone who wishes to. Considering that, imho it wouldn't make too much sense for the justice system to extensively regard these things, that in theory should not play a role in the first place. Everyone wants a justice system independent from politics, after all. It seems a bit odd to now demand they take politics into account so severely as to postpone or skip a trial.

As for the timing, imho there might be two things in play, first the cases need time to be properly investigated before going to court, and secondly if a candidate asks for full presidential immunity and could potentially pardon himself as president, there's a clear, not strictly political inclination to have the trials take place before the election. That might be a not so nefarious explanation as to why these trials all take place now.

That being said, I will not die on the hill that these trials are definitely all fair. They probably aren't, and they probably never really could be.



Trump already stated quite clearly what he intends to do, eg. only let stolen election apologists have roles in his admin, and he seems like a man on a vengeful mission these days, so I guess he's not kidding. One can always hope, but I'd be extremely pessimistic on that one.

To the bolded, sorry I do not know how to split quotes yet, nor post pictures, I agree, but think they could have done better to make the trials more bulletproof and look less like a hitjob via lawfare. The DA did campaign on putting DJT in jail, while not grounds for a mistrial, it is a mad look on the national scene.

While I agree with your point on trying to get everything in before the election and a reasonable point, I would hope you would consider how it looks from the other side as railroading, charge stacking, and throwing everything at DJT to disrupt his campaign? I am not saying that is 100% the case, but they sure are bad optics.


As for the election deniers and apologists, that's been going on for decades. Bush in 2000, Trump 2016 *Hillary has made a bunch of hay on that talking point, even now), and Stacey Abrhams,. The deniers on the other side of the coin are still in politics and prospering, same as DJT deniers of his 2020 loss may be and prosper if he is re-elected.

It is the sad state of politics.

I appreciate the balanced conversation, thank you.



Thant said, I look at the upcoming election as I look at the Michigan v Ohio State college football game every year. 



I hope and pray somehow they both lose.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-09-2024, 05:36 PM)pally Wrote: Do you realize that many of those undocumented folks are working and paying taxes?  Can you imagine what food costs would be like without these workers laboring, on farms, ranches, orchards, and in meat processing facilities?

Whatever. the taxes gained and unclaimed doesn't even come close to the amount in benefits we pay out to their US born kids.

Your retired, how would you like someone out there to be running around using your SSN and earning wages with it? how would that affect your monthly retirement? It would be reduced. If you can afford to wait several months for the IRS/US Gov to get it fixed internally, then kudos to you, but many can't.

On the other Side, working people won't know their SSN is being used til they file taxes and the IRS sends them a letter stating they are being audited for falsely reporting income/wages earned for the Tax year. 

In most instances, the people doing the fraud aren't caught, and once they realize their SSN has been flagged, they ditch it and get a new one, then the process starts all over for another individual. Rinse and repeat. 

(05-09-2024, 05:36 PM)pally Wrote: You can't have it both ways....Trump cannot simultaneously be responsible for the perceived good things during his Presidency and not responsible for the bad things that happened...as much as he would like it to be.

yes we can have it both ways, if farms need pickers, you can apply for foreign workers to come and do the job. They come here legally and many work and return when the job is done so they can come back again the following year. It's not nearly as complicated as you are making it out to be. 


It's called the H2-A visa. In 2021 there was over 317k of these issued. 
H2-A is for Agriculture workers
H2-B is for non-Agriculture workers. So far for 2024 ytd, 130k have been issued. 

It's a very easy process, you apply about 60 days in advance stating how many workers  you will need, and like a Temp agency, the workers are supplied from the Pool that apply for work in the US. You don't have to hunt them down individually like you would if you were bringing in a specialized worker. yes some will abuse it and stay in the US when it expires, but the majority do not. This is how they survive and they know that if they do that, they won't be allowed back the following years. 

(05-09-2024, 05:36 PM)pally Wrote: There was zero guarantee that any person who lost their job during COVID would have that job to return to post-COVID.  In fact, a lot didn't come back.  New jobs took their place.  

Trump's lack of leadership and politicization of the pandemic response prolonged the shut down.  

Oh FFS, Trump gambled and down played the COVID in order to prevent everyone from from closing and tanking the Economy.

If he had allowed places to close, all we'd be hearing about from the Left is how he tanked the Economy. It was a Lose-Lose situation all the way around. 

I know, you know it, we all know it, and you act like he had all this control over a very unfortunate situation. But but Biden wouldda, coulda shoulda handled it better. Hindsight is nice, but from what we have seen from Biden, he flubbed up the immigration and created a crisis that wasn't there when he came into office and still hasn't done anything to address it. 

[*pally*]

(05-11-2024, 11:39 AM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Whatever. the taxes gained and unclaimed doesn't even come close to the amount in benefits we pay out to their US born kids.

Your retired, how would you like someone out there to be running around using your SSN and earning wages with it? how would that affect your monthly retirement? It would be reduced. If you can afford to wait several months for the IRS/US Gov to get it fixed internally, then kudos to you, but many can't.

On the other Side, working people won't know their SSN is being used til they file taxes and the IRS sends them a letter stating they are being audited for falsely reporting income/wages earned for the Tax year. 

In most instances, the people doing the fraud aren't caught, and once they realize their SSN has been flagged, they ditch it and get a new one, then the process starts all over for another individual. Rinse and repeat. 


yes we can have it both ways, if farms need pickers, you can apply for foreign workers to come and do the job. They come here legally and many work and return when the job is done so they can come back again the following year. It's not nearly as complicated as you are making it out to be. 


It's called the H2-A visa. In 2021 there was over 317k of these issued. 
H2-A is for Agriculture workers
H2-B is for non-Agriculture workers. So far for 2024 ytd, 130k have been issued. 

It's a very easy process, you apply about 60 days in advance stating how many workers  you will need, and like a Temp agency, the workers are supplied from the Pool that apply for work in the US. You don't have to hunt them down individually like you would if you were bringing in a specialized worker. yes some will abuse it and stay in the US when it expires, but the majority do not. This is how they survive and they know that if they do that, they won't be allowed back the following years. 


Oh FFS, Trump gambled and down played the COVID in order to prevent everyone from from closing and tanking the Economy.

If he had allowed places to close, all we'd be hearing about from the Left is how he tanked the Economy. It was a Lose-Lose situation all the way around. 

I know, you know it, we all know it, and you act like he had all this control over a very unfortunate situation. But but Biden wouldda, coulda shoulda handled it better. Hindsight is nice, but from what we have seen from Biden, he flubbed up the immigration and created a crisis that wasn't there when he came into office and still hasn't done anything to address it. 

Bullcrap... Trump played down the pandemic so that it wouldn't hurt his reelection chances.  He put cronies in charge of the pandemic economic response instead of people trained in logistics. He regularly discounted experts and publicized crackpots.  He failed to take the role of a world leader.  Every decision was made with his own personal interests in mind not the countries.

The depression wasn't Herbert Hoover's fault but he gets stuck with the blame.  Pearl Harbor wasn't FDR's fault but he gets stuck with the blame.  That's the joy of the Presidency...they get the credit for the good and the blame for the bad regardless of their actual role.  However, we can place blame on Trump's abysmal medical, political, and economic failures as a leader during the pandemic for much of what happened in 2020 and beyond

[GMDino]

Trump is doing his best to help the prosecution.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-trial-prosecutors-reveal-alleged-hush-money-deal-to-trump-crony-allen-weisselberg?source=twitter&via=desktop

Quote:Prosecutors Reveal Alleged Hush Money Deal to Trump Crony

BOMBSHELL
Prosecutors have alleged in court that the Trump Organization offered former chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg more than $1 million to keep his mouth shut.

[/url]Jose Pagliery
Political Investigations Reporter


Updated May 11, 2024 9:05AM EDT / Published May 10, 2024 1:33PM EDT 

[url=https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Ftrump-trial-prosecutors-reveal-alleged-hush-money-deal-to-trump-crony-allen-weisselberg%3Fsource%3Dtwitter%26via%3Ddesktop&via=thedailybeast&text=Prosecutors%20Reveal%20Alleged%20Hush%20Money%20Deal%20to%20Trump%20Crony&counturl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thedailybeast.com%2Ftrump-trial-prosecutors-reveal-alleged-hush-money-deal-to-trump-crony-allen-weisselberg]

[/url]
[img=1041x587]https://img.thedailybeast.com/image/upload/c_crop,d_placeholder_euli9k,h_1688,w_3000,x_0,y_0/dpr_1.5/c_limit,w_1044/fl_lossy,q_auto/v1715365463/051124-allen-hero_egnrzf[/img]

Photo Illustration by Luis G. Rendon/The Daily Beast/Reuters



In a turn that is oh-so-meta, a brand new hush money deal is now at the center of attention in [url=https://www.thedailybeast.com/keyword/donald-j-trump]Donald Trump’s ongoing hush money trial: $750,000 that prosecutors say the business mogul is dangling above Allen Weisselberg’s head to keep him from testifying against his former boss.


For the first time on Friday, prosecutors disclosed the strict terms of a severance agreement that the Trump Organization used to promise more than $1 million to its outgoing chief financial officer—as long as he kept his mouth shut.

The 76-year-old disgraced accountant is currently serving a five-month jail sentence on Rikers Island for perjury, having lied to try sparing Trump from legal trouble in a separate case that ultimately fined the tycoon nearly $500 million for bank fraud.

But Weisselberg has conspicuously remained the missing witness at Trump’s first criminal trial. Prosecutors allege he was the finance guy who helped manage the hush money deal that kept the porn star Stormy Daniels quiet about her sexual affair with Trump in the final weeks of the 2016 election. Documents in court show that Weisselberg structured the $420,000 repayment to Michael Cohen (then Trump’s personal attorney) after the so-called “fixer” had fronted the $130,000 initial payment to the porn star.

In court on Friday, prosecutors revealed that the Trump Organization has promised to pay Weisselberg three installments of $250,000 due later this year in June, September, and December—if he doesn’t “cooperate” with law enforcement.

One part of the contract, read out loud in court, says Weisselberg promises “not to verbally or in writing disparage, criticize, denigrate” the company or any of its executives. Another section says “he will not communicate with” and “otherwise will not cooperate with” any entity seeking “adverse claims” against the company.

And while the law generally punishes people for “aiding or abetting” a criminal, Weisselberg’s contract by contrast punishes him if he decides to “aid, abet, or cause” any action against the Trump real estate empire.

This whole other kind of hush money deal came up because prosecutors are planning to wrap up their presentation of the case next week without calling Weisselberg to the stand, which might seem confusing to jurors. That’s why they asked the judge to let jurors see the severance agreement.

“What we’re trying to do is explain his absence. This agreement offers a real explanation as to why he’s not going to be here at this trial,” said prosecutor Christopher Conroy.

This legal debate ensued after the 18 jurors considering the case were sent home for the weekend. The discussion made clear that prosecutors will likely call Cohen as a final witness, then wrap up their presentation against the former president. It would then be Trump’s turn to tell his side of the story, if he even has plans to do so.

For a few minutes, lawyers on both sides sparred over whether to allow jurors to see the severance agreement. The judge initially seemed open to the idea. That is, until he discovered that prosecutors haven’t even tried.

“Has anyone attempted having him come in in some way… serving him with a subpoena or trying to compel his testimony?” Justice Juan Merchan asked.

“Judge, the people have not,” a prosecutor responded.

The reality is a tad bit complicated. The fact is, neither side wants jurors to hear from Weisselberg—because no one knows what a pissed off old man suffering in jail for the second time around after once again taking the fall for his boss might say.
He’s a loaded gun, and he could point in either direction.

Donald Trump and his son Donald, Jr., with Allen Weisselberg ©.


Timothy A. Clary

Joshua Steinglass, a prosecutor, readily admitted that his team saw it as a “strategically bad decision to put a witness on the stand who has an agreement like that.”

Meanwhile Trump’s defense team fought against the notion of having Weisselberg testify. But then he also complained that it would be unfair to let jurors see the agreement.

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, tried to have the judge consider this cushy retirement package in total isolation. In reality, that deal followed years of Trump’s top accountant refusing to flip on his boss.

Weisselberg has been grilled by federal prosecutors who initially looked into the deal six years ago, pressured to testify about his cooking of the books at the company’s tax fraud trial in 2022 (before this same judge), later spent three months at Rikers for dodging taxes, played a reluctant witness at Trump’s bank fraud trial last year, and is now serving time for lying during that trial.
“That he entered into a settlement agreement after the fact… is not relevant to what’s going on at this trial,” Bove tried to convince the judge. “Mr. Weisselberg is in prison right now and not available to anyone.”

But the judge saw right through the uncomfortable dance being performed on both sides.

“It would be helpful to make my decision if I see that there were some efforts taken,” he said, accusing all the lawyers of “jumping the gun.”

The judge pointed to a narrow provision in Weisselberg’s retirement deal that allows him to testify if he’s dragged into court by a subpoena, calling it “a factor for me in making that decision.”

At that point, Steinglass pivoted, warning the judge that having prosecutors approach Weisselberg at all could cost the Trump associate dearly but still ultimately prove futile on the witness stand if he decides to plead his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

Merchan suggested an alternative, one that would subject Weisselberg to a bus ride from the dreaded island jail in the East River to the criminal courthouse in downtown Manhattan. Once there, he could be ordered to testify in a courtroom without the jury present—and once lawyers know what he’ll say, decide whether to put him in front of jurors.

Merchan said the entire exercise would be important. After all, there’s a key difference between that and what he’s hearing now from lawyers who have a common interest in not hearing from a complicated key player in this saga.
“Then it’s on the record, and I’ve seen it,” Merchan said.

In the final moments of the fourth week of Trump’s ongoing trial, Bove made one last try to keep Weisselberg from showing up next week, complaining that the accountant was never on the government’s witness list.
“We were entitled to notice of that long before the trial started,” Bove argued.

At that, the judge turned down his gray bearded chin, shaking his head while his eyes pierced into Bove from behind his thick-rimmed black glasses.

“You didn’t think it was a possibility the people might call Allen Weisselberg to testify?”

[hollodero]

(05-10-2024, 03:22 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: To the bolded, sorry I do not know how to split quotes yet, nor post pictures,

Yeah that takes some getting used to. I for one split quotes by using the "view source" button (at the end of the row starting with the bolding button), after which the quoteblocks get displayed as code, as in {quote='"name/date/..''} and an endtag {/quote}. I copypaste these tags around the parts I want to respond to. There might be better ways though. 
In the same row of buttons, there's also an insert picture option and some other stuff to use. You can hover over them to check them out.

(05-10-2024, 03:22 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I agree, but think they could have done better to make the trials more bulletproof and look less like a hitjob via lawfare. The DA did campaign on putting DJT in jail, while not grounds for a mistrial, it is a mad look on the national scene.

That's hard to really dispute, yeah. Also the record sums Trump was convicted to pay look strange, especially coupled with the huge amounts of schadenfreude about that in the media world. And imho the hush money trial probably should not have happened to begin with, it's apparently more embarrassing than criminally relevant; and then not telling your witness that insulting the defendant on the stand is a bad idea, and this and that, all that sure paints a picture, and it's far from looking entirely fair and impartial.

(05-10-2024, 03:22 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: While I agree with your point on trying to get everything in before the election and a reasonable point, I would hope you would consider how it looks from the other side as railroading, charge stacking, and throwing everything at DJT to disrupt his campaign? I am not saying that is 100% the case, but they sure are bad optics.

I preemted the answer to that, sure I can see that. At some point though, I feel it is important to divide the looks from the essence of things; and to remember that no matter the circumstances, it does not make Trump less guilty of anything either. That is where imho folks take it too far, when they seem to conclude that because it's all so suspicious and the optics so bad, Trump must be an innocent man. And he is not. I don't care about Stormy, don't know about the finance issues, but there is him as sitting president losing an election and then calling a state secretary asking him to find him the votes he needs to win, and threatening him if not complying. And that is on tape and that still, in my view, has to be a serious crime treated - meaning investigated and tried - as such. The most heineous attacks on Trump can not wash him free from that (and some other things, eg. stealing and lying about classified docs, slandering people and all the things he does).

(05-10-2024, 03:22 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: As for the election deniers and apologists, that's been going on for decades. Bush in 2000, Trump 2016 *Hillary has made a bunch of hay on that talking point, even now), and Stacey Abrhams,. The deniers on the other side of the coin are still in politics and prospering, same as DJT deniers of his 2020 loss may be and prosper if he is re-elected.

It is the sad state of politics.

Yeah I have to say, I always find that comparison of Trump with Stacey Abrams to be quite inept. No judgment on it here, but she addressed systemic disadvantages (Hillary claimed Russian meddling). Trump claimed there's a huge conspiracy within the election system to overturn the rightful results, an enormous crime and treason against the people playing out on a massive scale, massive enough to warrant a repeal of the constitution. That are very different things, imho.

(05-10-2024, 03:22 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: I hope and pray somehow they both lose.

I understand. As I usually annoyingly say at this point, you need a massive overhaul of your voting system. Two parties, electors, winner takes all districts, that apparently does you no good. Sadly most americans seem content to pick a side and then shape a whole construct of selective logic around that desicion.

[Stewy]

(05-10-2024, 01:39 PM)FormerlyBengalRugby Wrote: Oh the irony...


What blinders? 


I never said he was innocent, in fact, I suspect he is likely guilty of multiple things and stated as much. You just saw DJT and had the Pavlovian response of frothing at the mouth and went on the attack like Major going after the secret service. I am certain there is a better phrase for people with that sort of knee jerk reaction to the former president.

I cannot have a good faith discussion with DJT living in your head like that.  

Sorry.

You see the problem is that you still believe the lies.

Hundreds of losses in court across the entire country, conservative and liberal, in over a dozen states....again hundreds of court cases, all of them losses for Trump (every single one) on the election lies.  EVERY (as proven by court records) time his lawyers were asked for evidence, they provided nothing....NOTHING and "case dismissed".  Over and over.  So one either has to believe it is a cross country conspiracy embroiling the entire nation (with no evidence to support a conspiracy) or it's a lie.  No in between because the man who started the lie keeps telling it.

Yet Trump continues to tell that lie, and his followers eat it up.  One must believe hundreds of independent court cases...or Trump.  There is no in between here. (repeating for emphasis)  If you believe the lie, then we have no "middle" ground to have a conversation because people believe the lie.  And if they will believe the most ludicrous of lies (ELECTION STOLEN), then they will believe anything he says because all he does is lie.  (except about taking revenge on his enemies - I believe that and it is frightening because he is vindictive and has no conscience).

If this is the man you want to have a legitimate conversation about, then we're done.  We've survived 4 years of Biden, I am terrified of four more years of Trump because he doesn't care about you or me or the voters or the country for that matter.....he only cares about himself.  But for me it comes down to this....if one believe Trump then they are a sheep or a fool.  If one understands what Trump is and still votes for him because it is in their best personal interest, then they're an opportunist or a hypocrite or a mercenary just as bad as he is (i.e. all the MAGA folks in Congress, that suck his political **** daily (MGT, Jim Jordan, Gaetz).

But this is where we are.  Those who are "Never Trump" (said with derision by MAGA supports, but I'm proud to say it), like myself, do not see Trump as a legitimate candidate, so you can't have a legitimate conversation about the illegitimate.

But carry on my friend, we have nothing to discuss.

[Mike M (the other one)]

(05-11-2024, 01:54 PM)pally Wrote: Bullcrap... Trump played down the pandemic so that it wouldn't hurt his reelection chances.  He put cronies in charge of the pandemic economic response instead of people trained in logistics. He regularly discounted experts and publicized crackpots.  He failed to take the role of a world leader.  Every decision was made with his own personal interests in mind not the countries.

The depression wasn't Herbert Hoover's fault but he gets stuck with the blame.  Pearl Harbor wasn't FDR's fault but he gets stuck with the blame.  That's the joy of the Presidency...they get the credit for the good and the blame for the bad regardless of their actual role.  However, we can place blame on Trump's abysmal medical, political, and economic failures as a leader during the pandemic for much of what happened in 2020 and beyond

So with that Logic,  

the current immigration crisis 
Hamas, Israel, Iran.  
Inflation... 
Shortage of baby formula.
Sky Rocketing rise in cost of groceries
Murder and Assault cases increasing.
Car Jackings and smash and grab thefts in big cities
Fentanyl coming from over the border causing increase in OD's.
High Gas prices 

All Bidens fault. I'm sure i missed more. But if you want to play that game, then you have to admit to this list as it was things that happened on Bidens watch therefore his fault. 

[FormerlyBengalRugby]

(05-11-2024, 03:03 PM)Stewy Wrote: You see the problem is that you still believe the lies.

Another rabid falsehood, proven by nothing you ferociously typed afterwards.


There is a classification for this condition, and are great example of why I will spend little time responding to the "scientist."

[Luvnit2]

Maher agrees, Stormy sucks (well we already knew that), but she also sucks as a witness.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/bill-maher-unleashes-stormy-daniels-testimony-trump-trial-shes-bad-witness

Bill Maher unleashes on Stormy Daniels’ testimony in Trump trial: 'She's a bad witness!'
Maher highlighted his 2018 interview with Daniels, pointing out what she told him was quite different than what she said in the courtroom

Next key witness is the disbarred perjury king Cohen next week. It should be fun.

The defense is ready to rest their case next week. It will be interesting to see whom the defense calls as witnesses.

Either way, the judge sealed the fate of even a rigged jury vote of guilty will be overturned on appeal.

I still have not had one member of this forum explain to meet the federal crime Trump committed. Celebrities and politicians enter into NDA all the time. There is nothing illegal about regardless of the reason. IIn Trump's case, the man had a teenage son when the NDA was made with the queen of porn, anyone who questions Trump had zero motivation to shield his wife and kids only needs to look at the testimony of at least 2 of Bragg's witnesses who said it under oath.

[Dill]

(05-11-2024, 11:39 PM)Luvnit2 Wrote: I still have not had one member of this forum explain to meet the federal crime Trump committed. Celebrities and politicians enter into NDA all the time. There is nothing illegal about regardless of the reason. IIn Trump's case, the man had a teenage son when the NDA was made with the queen of porn, anyone who questions Trump had zero motivation to shield his wife and kids only needs to look at the testimony of at least 2 of Bragg's witnesses who said it under oath.

Is Trump on trial for committing a federal crime, or for falsifying business records, which is illegal in MY 
regardless of the reason--but especially concerning when committed to conceal further crimes?

Perhaps going directly to the primary sources could help you.

https://manhattanda.org/district-attorney-bragg-announces-34-count-felony-indictment-of-former-president-donald-j-trump/

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-04-04-SOF.pdf

[*Nately120*]

Why did Trump even cheat on Melania with a vile money-grubbing hoe like Stormy Daniels in the first place?  I thought we could understand why Bill Clinton would step out on Hillary, but why Trump?  I would expect even Trump supporters to admit that he has a severe lack of control and judgment for doing this.

The more Trump supporters rag on Stormy, the more they're just pointing out that their pick to run this country stuck his ding dong in crazy...and you don't stick your ding dong in crazy, and no man who does is fit for office.  Then again, I guess that makes him a better representation of me than Biden, because lordy did I well....anyway.