Crime Donald Trump Hush Money Fraud Trial

[idrankyourbeer]

Trump: Happy birthday to Melania, who I'd like to be with, but I'm at this trial because I had sex with a porn star while she was pregnant with our son and I paid $130K to hide it so voters wouldn't find out.

 

[The XL]

Obama waged an illegal war on Libya, Clinton ordered an illegal attack on Sudan and the Bush administration lied about WMDs and nothing happened to any of them. Whether or not Trump is a criminal is one thing, but that's not why they're going after him

 

[idrankyourbeer]

Obama waged an illegal war on Libya, Clinton ordered an illegal attack on Sudan and the Bush administration lied about WMDs and nothing happened to any of them. Whether or not Trump is a criminal is one thing, but that's not why they're going after him

as a staunch supporter of the party of law and order, how dare they prosecute my favorite rapist and fraudster for his crimes! it's just so unfair! perlitercal persercution, the likes of which we've never seen! the derp state and that pesky werpernized DOJ! witch hunt to the 45'th degree! but whatbout hunter's laptop?

 

[jefferz]

yeah. nothing owns the libs quite like getting hauled off to prison.

i mean look at all those heaps of maga trash who threw a nuclear toddler tantrum at the capitol, beat up some cops with their back the blue flags, took a peaceful and orderly sightseeing tour of the american justice system, and got hauled off to jail just to own the libs.

i mean they're all getting passed around the prison pod for honeybuns while they cry about the big guy and hunters laptop and that cute little stolen election thingy of theirs, and our good friend enrique tarrio won't be getting out of prison until the year 2046, we're at almost 1400 arrests now and nothing impresses prospective employers quite like having a felony criminal record that will stick with you for the rest of your life, but it was all worth it because they really stuck it to the libs and showed the world just how deranged everybody else is.

they're all rockstars i say! every. single. one.

Don’t forget about spreading human shit on the walls of the Capital.

 

[The XL]

as the party of law and order, how dare they prosecute my favorite rapist and fraudster for his crimes! it's just so unfair! perlitercal persercution, the likes of which we've never seen! the derp state and that pesky werpernized DOJ! witch hunt to the 45'th degree!

If it was about justice, they'd prosecute the other three too. But it isn't

 

[AWilder]

Complete nonsense. We've had Presidents break all kind of laws and nothing happens to them. It's absolutely astonishing that you dumb fucks actually believe the shit that you're spewing

What's complete nonsense is hand waiving the crimes of one person because another person committed crimes (allegedly).

It's crazy that this has to be explained to who i assume is an adult. Are you an adult?

 

[idrankyourbeer]

If it was about justice, they'd prosecute the other three too. But it isn't

you see in order to charge them, the first thing they have to do is find evidence of a crime being committed and put it in front of a grand jury. sadly, it seems as if nobody was able to get past step 1. or even attempt to. not even during the one-term fraudster & rapist's stint in office.

so whatabout hunter's laptop? and the hindenberg?

i know. maybe if we just plug our ears, close our eyes, stamp our feat, and scream "But whatabout Obama?" at the sky 3 times loudly, it might make molestini cheetolini's crimes and legal issues magically just go away! they're totally gonna throw out them 90 something felony charges and everybody is just going to suddenly forget about all of the devoted christian family mans terrible sins the moment they hear about obama wearing that tan suit.

 

[LMP]

If it was about justice, they'd prosecute the other three too. But it isn't

See the immunity claims that Trump brought before the Supreme Court already protects those Presidents because those were all clearly official acts of the United States. Where Trump loses the immunity were the acts he committed to personally benefit himself against the United States. No one is talking about prosecuting Trump for all of the bombs he dropped killing civilians in other countries in the interest of America. It's the crimes against America that he is being held responsible for.

Pretty amazing how simple and ridiculous the claims that Trump should have immunity for these crimes are.

 

[DoctorTaco]

Whether or not Trump is a criminal is one thing

He has been convicted of crimes in a court of law. There is no “whether or not”. He is by every definition of the word, a criminal.

 

[idrankyourbeer]

See the immunity claims that Trump brought before the Supreme Court already protects those Presidents because those were all clearly official acts of the United States. Where Trump loses the immunity was the acts he committed to personally were to benefit himself against the United States. No one is talking about prosecuting Trump for all of the bombs he dropped killing civilians in other countries in the interest of America. It's the crimes against America that he is being held responsible for.

Pretty amazing how simple and ridiculous the claims that Trump should have immunity for these crimes are.

yeah it's funny how they try to whatabout and compare decisions that presidents made while in office to crimes that a private citizen committed when he held no office.

private citizens get charged for falsifying business records all the time. i guess the better question to ask is why shouldn't trump? is it only because he got elected president after the fact, and anybody (or just my favorite cult messiah) who gets elected into presidential office at one point of his life should be protected from prosecution for any crimes he may have committed during any point of his life?

i mean the immunity defense is nonsense and is going to be struck down, but there is no immunity defense for this one. private citizen trump held no office while he committed these crimes. the disgraced former president's legal team didn't even try to make that argument.

 

[HOLA]

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/26/nyregion/trump-hush-money-trial

[Haberman, NY Times] Emil Bove, the defense lawyer, is currently arguing that it was fairly well-known, if not widely spoken about, that The Enquirer was trying to help Trump during his 2016 campaign. So it’s worth calling back to something Trump said when one of the negative Enquirer stories about Ted Cruz, one of his rivals, came out in 2016: “I did not know about it, and have not, as yet, read it," Trump said at the time. "Likewise, I have nothing to do with the National Enquirer and unlike Lyin’ Ted Cruz I do not surround myself with political hacks and henchman and then pretend total innocence.”

 

[sickc0d3r]

I don’t think it would matter. Edwards lost his election.

I think it matters if we’re using the feds passing on the issue as a way to invalidate the NY prosecution. We know the feds won’t charge a sitting potus.

 

[The XL]

He has been convicted of crimes in a court of law. There is no “whether or not”. He is by every definition of the word, a criminal.

I don't really reject the fact that he's a criminal. Nearly everyone at this level is. I have an issue with our elites picking and choosing who they go after. There is no such thing as immunity from criminal prosecution when it comes to Presidents, yet we have 3 ex Presidents who are war criminals walking the streets without a care in the world. It's nonsense. Let's call it for what it is, an attempt to prevent Trump from beating Biden. They don't care about whatever generic Neocon would take his place as Republican nominee because they own all of them too

 

[Andy Capp]

If it was about justice, they'd prosecute the other three too. But it isn't

Please show me a sign you can't really be this stupid. Say it ain't so. I mean, I have always given you the benefit of the doubt that you're basically a normal person who likes to troll a bit to "trigger the libz". But you can't think you're convincing anyone with this idiocy, surely?

 

[44nutman]

I don't really reject the fact that he's a criminal. Nearly everyone at this level is. I have an issue with our elites picking and choosing who they go after. There is no such thing as immunity from criminal prosecution when it comes to Presidents, yet we have 3 ex Presidents who are war criminals walking the streets without a care in the world. It's nonsense. Let's call it for what it is, an attempt to prevent Trump from beating Biden. They don't care about whatever generic Neocon would take his place as Republican nominee because they own all of them too

Trump is not on trial for War, unless you think it was a battle for Sleepy Don to give Stormy 2 pumps.

 

[Poon Goon]

I don't really reject the fact that he's a criminal. Nearly everyone at this level is. I have an issue with our elites picking and choosing who they go after. There is no such thing as immunity from criminal prosecution when it comes to Presidents, yet we have 3 ex Presidents who are war criminals walking the streets without a care in the world. It's nonsense. Let's call it for what it is, an attempt to prevent Trump from beating Biden. They don't care about whatever generic Neocon would take his place as Republican nominee because they own all of them too

Weird that you chose to ignore the post directly above the one you chose to quote. Was that because it spells out the difference in the situations you are yammering about? I'll quote it below in case you missed it.

See the immunity claims that Trump brought before the Supreme Court already protects those Presidents because those were all clearly official acts of the United States. Where Trump loses the immunity were the acts he committed to personally benefit himself against the United States. No one is talking about prosecuting Trump for all of the bombs he dropped killing civilians in other countries in the interest of America. It's the crimes against America that he is being held responsible for.

Pretty amazing how simple and ridiculous the claims that Trump should have immunity for these crimes are.

 

[Rob Battisti]

I haven’t followed this.

Could I get a rundown of what he’s being charged with and if he’s guilty?

 

[Rob Battisti]

are you retarded? you can't find the crimes he's accused of? clearly you have access to the internet.

Just read this, so basically he paid off SD but did so in a way that was illegal?

 

[The XL]

Please show me a sign you can't really be this stupid. Say it ain't so. I mean, I have always given you the benefit of the doubt that you're basically a normal person who likes to troll a bit to "trigger the libz". But you can't think you're convincing anyone with this idiocy, surely?

The elites are just selectively picking and choosing what to prosecute so they can get Trump. It's incredibly obvious to those who aren't leftist cheerleaders. If they cared about criminal acts from Presidents, they prosecute all criminal acts from all Presidents. And no, Presidents do not have immunity from criminal prosecution. Obama literally waged an illegal war and killed a US citizen without due process. All of these guys are criminals.

 

[CatchnShoot]

Obama waged an illegal war on Libya, Clinton ordered an illegal attack on Sudan and the Bush administration lied about WMDs and nothing happened to any of them. Whether or not Trump is a criminal is one thing, but that's not why they're going after him

Those were all "official acts". ie) In service of the country.

NONE of criminal activity Trump did were "official acts". I suspect that Scrotus will make that distinction crystal clear for you...... but ya never know.