I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
Ok, so something I don't get. Vince McMahon from the WWE did similar things. He cheated on his wife, payed hush money to the women he had affairs with, and the hush money came from a publicly traded company (WWE). All Vince had to do was lay low for a while and slowly come back. I'm struggling to understand how was Trump did differs from that situation?
I wondered the same thing about all of this. But then it has more to do where the money was reported to have come from, or where it actually came from, that is the issue.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
you have to laugh otherwise you'll cry.
good point. And thank you. Thank you Jose as well.
But share the same beliefs as others here yes I’ve been embarrassed at what America has become specially these last 6 years! Not to say America has done terrible things in the past that we can all be embarrassed about but like Halifax stated just to know 7 million Americans voted for him after the 1st term is beyond embarrassing, I thought for sure people would wake up to his en competence but boy was I wrong..
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
How does the defense enter into testimony evidence that POOTWH wanted to hide the affair from Melania because of her alleged wrath without calling POOTWH to the witness stand?
Ok, so something I don't get. Vince McMahon from the WWE did similar things. He cheated on his wife, payed hush money to the women he had affairs with, and the hush money came from a publicly traded company (WWE). All Vince had to do was lay low for a while and slowly come back. I'm struggling to understand how was Trump did differs from that situation?
I agree with this for sure. I think the difference is the standard of which a person should or could be held. How this pertains to the law itself... perhaps not in writing but in court arguments these will stand the measure of mitigating and litigating factors.
Vince is a corporate executive who is awful.
Trump is (was) a political nominee and is now an ex-president (and corporate executive).
I would say that in general, would people think of the same crime being committed by two different people be different in the eyes of the law? I think so. If a junkie stole from a Wal-Mart he or she would receive (this) in punishment. If a cop or a mayor did the same crime, would the punishment be different in the eyes of the law? Yes. I'm not overly familiar with US laws.. but in Canada case law plays a huge role in our justice system.
So if Trump did all the same things as Vince... but he stayed away from public office, I think his situation would be similar to Vince's.
(The similarities between the two, and Trump's literal entrance in the WWE Hall of Fame speaks even more volumes as to how messed up it is that he was President. And I believe his tactics for getting into office were very, very, very similar to that of that day time acting portrayed on WWE. But that's a whole other conversation lol)
I'm not familiar with Vince, but if all he did was pay hush money, there's nothing illegal about that. The issue for Trump is how it influenced the campaign and how the money was reported. He didn't report it as a campaign expense or a donation, or however he was supposed to.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
How does the defense enter into testimony evidence that POOTWH wanted to hide the affair from Melania because of her alleged wrath without calling POOTWH to the witness stand?
lol he’s scared of her that’s to rich as if they have this Camelot marriage from all accounts she despises every single part of him! I bet they don’t even talk
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
How does the defense enter into testimony evidence that POOTWH wanted to hide the affair from Melania because of her alleged wrath without calling POOTWH to the witness stand?
Another question.. because I'm too lazy to research... my understanding is that Trump had been denying his encounter with Stormy. If his defense is now that he was trying to keep her quiet to keep info from his wife, is that not him admitting he has been lying to the American people all this time? (Disclaimer: I'm aware 97% of what comes out of the man's mouth is either a lie, or food droppings. But apparently half of Americans just believe him... for whatever reason.) Between this and the Fox News Dominion stuff... is this not the 'Don't look up' moment for the MAGA movement?
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
How does the defense enter into testimony evidence that POOTWH wanted to hide the affair from Melania because of her alleged wrath without calling POOTWH to the witness stand?
Another question.. because I'm too lazy to research... my understanding is that Trump had been denying his encounter with Stormy. If his defense is now that he was trying to keep her quiet to keep info from his wife, is that not him admitting he has been lying to the American people all this time? (Disclaimer: I'm aware 97% of what comes out of the man's mouth is either a lie, or food droppings. But apparently half of Americans just believe him... for whatever reason.) Between this and the Fox News Dominion stuff... is this not the 'Don't look up' moment for the MAGA movement?
It doesn't matter... it's a supremacist mindset... Hypocrisy doesn't exist because they think the rules are different for them.
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
very, very true.
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
I thought that illegal campaign contribution was part of this list of indictments? Wasn't it only illegal because they didn't record it properly? Therefore not the "bigger crime"? The campaign money, or lack of reporting it rather, can't be both the crime and the coverup which brings it to a felony.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
How does the defense enter into testimony evidence that POOTWH wanted to hide the affair from Melania because of her alleged wrath without calling POOTWH to the witness stand?
Another question.. because I'm too lazy to research... my understanding is that Trump had been denying his encounter with Stormy. If his defense is now that he was trying to keep her quiet to keep info from his wife, is that not him admitting he has been lying to the American people all this time? (Disclaimer: I'm aware 97% of what comes out of the man's mouth is either a lie, or food droppings. But apparently half of Americans just believe him... for whatever reason.) Between this and the Fox News Dominion stuff... is this not the 'Don't look up' moment for the MAGA movement?
He didn't sleep with her. And if he did, so what that just means he's the stud that we need. And who wouldn't do that? And it's his money to pay her off. Also, he didn't sleep with her. But she totally wanted it and it was epic. But he loves Melania because she is a classy, beautiful bride and he respects the institution of marriage. But you can't blame a guy for straying once in a while, which he would never do.
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
There's definitely some that don't care. But a good chunk of the non voters don't vote because they are in a state where their vote doesn't matter. Like California. You know it's going to be a 70/30 turnout in favor of democrats. Both sides don't have a big motivation to vote aside from getting a sticker.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
I thought that illegal campaign contribution was part of this list of indictments? Wasn't it only illegal because they didn't record it properly? Therefore not the "bigger crime"? The campaign money, or lack of reporting it rather, can't be both the crime and the coverup which brings it to a felony.
If I understood what the DA said in his press conference, the 34 charges all stemmed from fraudulent financial statements. I don't think the election crimes were listed.. but he did point out that it's what brings it to felony. Basically:
34 small crimes: misleading statements and claims of fact. 1 big crime: committed those 34 crimes to mislead the public during an election which apparently (and properly) is a federal crime.
What will be rather telling... and also lends 'some' credibility to this being a witch hunt... is how often does stuff like this happen amongst politicians that isn't followed up by the courts? Example: George Santos. How the heck is this guy still in government and not behind bars?
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
How does the defense enter into testimony evidence that POOTWH wanted to hide the affair from Melania because of her alleged wrath without calling POOTWH to the witness stand?
Another question.. because I'm too lazy to research... my understanding is that Trump had been denying his encounter with Stormy. If his defense is now that he was trying to keep her quiet to keep info from his wife, is that not him admitting he has been lying to the American people all this time? (Disclaimer: I'm aware 97% of what comes out of the man's mouth is either a lie, or food droppings. But apparently half of Americans just believe him... for whatever reason.) Between this and the Fox News Dominion stuff... is this not the 'Don't look up' moment for the MAGA movement?
I don't think there will be a "don't look up" moment. They are too invested. it's part of their identity. if they realize what he is, they'll realize what they are, and I can't imagine that would be easy to digest.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
But would 32% of Canadian voters have elected Ford (the crack head one) as PM? Repubs and Indies could have had all the tax cuts, SCOTUS appointments and all the other policy without the lying scumbaggery of POOTWH and the likes of Mikey Flynn Baby, Roger Dodger Stoned and all the other incompetent douches in that Administration. Totally embarrassing.
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
There's definitely some that don't car. But a good chunk of the non voters don't vote because they are in a state where their vote doesn't matter. Like California. You know it's going to be a 70/30 turnout in favor of democrats. Both sides don't have a big motivation to vote aside from getting a sticker.
.... do you actually get a sticker?
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
But would 32% of Canadian voters have elected Ford (the crack head one) as PM? Repubs and Indies could have had all the tax cuts, SCOTUS appointments and all the other policy without the lying scumbaggery of POOTWH and the likes of Mikey Flynn Baby, Roger Dodger Stoned and all the other incompetent douches in that Administration. Totally embarrassing.
if he was up against Trudeau? absolutely. just like if that shark tank idiot had won the nomination for the conservative party. I was overjoyed when he was demolished. (rejection of trumpism here-at least for now)
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
There's definitely some that don't car. But a good chunk of the non voters don't vote because they are in a state where their vote doesn't matter. Like California. You know it's going to be a 70/30 turnout in favor of democrats. Both sides don't have a big motivation to vote aside from getting a sticker.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
Bragg doesn’t have to list the those, so I figure it’s a legal strategy. I recommend reading other lawyer opinions on this over what the mainstream press will report in the next several weeks. It’ll be way more informative without the fluff and feeling obligated to print the “other side”.
I think Trump is your national embarrassment and a forever stain on a normally good country. That said... Trump was in charge for 4 years, and then after that dumpster fire of a presidency still got 74 million votes... winning support on populist fear mongering propaganda. In 2023, he gets indicted in your justice system for amongst other things trying to hide a hush money payment to a porn star that he banged in Vegas while his wife was at home with their newborn. He's just awful.
That said.. in this culture war... you have those for him and those against him. I watch the likes of Colbert and Kimmel often. And while I personally find their schtick's funny... I also think about how sad it is or must be for Americans.
So my question is.. do you Americans ever watch the likes of Colbert, etc. and think to yourself "this is nothing to laugh about. This is nothing to celebrate."
I remember when Bin Laden was captured and killed, there were celebrations on the streets and that became a bit polarizing in itself if I recall. There were many folks suggesting that celebrating the death of an enemy was still in bad taste. Is there a similar sentiment in America with regards to what's going on with your political system and with Trumpism? Just curious.
74 million out of the total population is 25%. 1/4 of the US is just that polarized that they refuse to vote for the other side, no matter what. A much much smaller amount of that are actual trumpsters that you see on tv and social media. I wouldn't be surprised if Biden's age/perceived "near death" he was, and didn't think Kamala had the chops (or were racist) to be prez had at least part to do with that.
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
There's definitely some that don't car. But a good chunk of the non voters don't vote because they are in a state where their vote doesn't matter. Like California. You know it's going to be a 70/30 turnout in favor of democrats. Both sides don't have a big motivation to vote aside from getting a sticker.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
The bigger crime, the one that Michael Cohen plead to and was sentenced to three years in prison, was an illegal campaign contribution. So there is already a conviction related to the bigger crime. It’s also very similar to the case against democrat John Edwards. In that case the jury was deadlocked because he made the same argument as trump, that he did it to conceal from his wife. In edwards case, iirc his wife was very sick so there was compelling evidence that the campaign contribution was not to defraud the voters.
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
I thought that illegal campaign contribution was part of this list of indictments? Wasn't it only illegal because they didn't record it properly? Therefore not the "bigger crime"? The campaign money, or lack of reporting it rather, can't be both the crime and the coverup which brings it to a felony.
If I understood what the DA said in his press conference, the 34 charges all stemmed from fraudulent financial statements. I don't think the election crimes were listed.. but he did point out that it's what brings it to felony. Basically:
34 small crimes: misleading statements and claims of fact. 1 big crime: committed those 34 crimes to mislead the public during an election which apparently (and properly) is a federal crime.
What will be rather telling... and also lends 'some' credibility to this being a witch hunt... is how often does stuff like this happen amongst politicians that isn't followed up by the courts? Example: George Santos. How the heck is this guy still in government and not behind bars?
Let me see if I follow correctly. You say the 34 indictments are the fraudulent financial statement.
But aren't the 34 fraudulent financial statements only a crime because they didn't report it correctly with campaign laws? That's what he is being charged with, not reporting election money finances correctly. There's nothing illegal about paying off a stripper to not talk. But since it was an election, it had to be reported a certain way. It was not. That is the fraud. If the fraud is used to cover up a larger crime, it becomes a felony. The fraud can't be both what he is being charged with and the bigger crime that makes it into a felony. I wouldn't think so anyway. The bigger crime cover up would have to be separate from the false reporting of the money. So that still leaves me asking what's the bigger crime, and if there is one, why wasn't that included in the charges?
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
Bragg doesn’t have to list the those, so I figure it’s a legal strategy. I recommend reading other lawyer opinions on this over what the mainstream press will report in the next several weeks. It’ll be way more informative without the fluff and feeling obligated to print the “other side”.
The only one I saw said they would normally include the bigger crime in with these other 34. Its like if you rob a bank with a gun. They won't just charge with with robbing a bank, but will charge you with using a gun in commission of a crime (along with 30 other charges). But this is like charging you with use of a gun during commission of a crime, but leaving out the bank robbery (the crime it was used in). And then not even explaining what the crime was the gun was used for. Maybe there is a legal reason we'll find out soon. But it just seemed weird to me and I haven't found a satisfactory answer from strangers on the internet yet.
I just got back from a road trip through the deep south (Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee) and I think i saw about 2 of those dumb Trump flags and one large tipped wagon along the highway that said dump Trump so I don't think he has the support he, or even some on the left, believe. I didn't see it like I did locally here in MN a few years ago. I saw way more confederate flags.
He’s still republicans first choice and by the end of the week the indictment will give him another 3-5 point bump.
So it seems like there is more than just Stormy here. The Karen McDougal case is probably a part of it, considering David Pecker from the Enquirer testified to the Grand Jury as well.
Everyone keeps saying that because campaign finance is a federal law, that's not in play. But that doesn't mean NY doesn't have election laws. Those are common in all states. Anyone know specific about NY?
What I hear more than the federal issue, is what is the larger crime? I have to admit, watching some of the news highlights last night seemed odd. I heard Bragg say more than once this is a felony because it was to cover up a larger crime, but declined to say what the larger crime was. If there was a larger crime, why is that not included? If there isn't, what does that mean for these charges? "“Under New York state law, it is a felony to falsify business records with intent to defraud and intent to conceal another crime. That is exactly what this case is about: 34 false statements, made to cover up other crimes,” Bragg told reporters in a news conference. "
So the falsifying records in itself is not a felony without a larger crime to cover up? Why not indict for that too? Or is the intent to defraud the swaying voters? I didn't think that was it, the impression I got was this was to cover up a bigger crime they they haven't listed. So what is it, why not list and charge for that too?
Bragg doesn’t have to list the those, so I figure it’s a legal strategy. I recommend reading other lawyer opinions on this over what the mainstream press will report in the next several weeks. It’ll be way more informative without the fluff and feeling obligated to print the “other side”.
The only one I saw said they would normally include the bigger crime in with these other 34. Its like if you rob a bank with a gun. They won't just charge with with robbing a bank, but will charge you with using a gun in commission of a crime (along with 30 other charges). But this is like charging you with use of a gun during commission of a crime, but leaving out the bank robbery (the crime it was used in). And then not even explaining what the crime was the gun was used for. Maybe there is a legal reason we'll find out soon. But it just seemed weird to me and I haven't found a satisfactory answer from strangers on the internet yet.
The DA fellow basically said he did not specifically list the law, because they 'didn't have to.' Which I too find odd. If I had to guess though, it's likely under a different jurisdiction. Again, your laws are different than mine with regards to 'crimes.' In Canada, we only have federal crimes, not provincial. Take my US law opinion at it's value.. which is low. lol
Toronto 2000
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013 Toronto I&II 2016 10C: 220xxx
Comments
In trumps case, he has three things working against him, 1. timing before the contribution - it was immediately after trumps grabbing p*ssy comment, and 2. two weeks before the election. Trump was extremely motivated to keep this quiet only AFTER the grabbing p*ssy comment. He did “ this” with stormy ten years prior, and never once tried to bribe stormy. So that locks it very tightly to the attempt to defraud voters argument. Also, the third piece of evidence, I believe they have trump saying “who cares if anyone finds out after the election.” Not sure if that’s on recording or witness testimony.
"Art of the delayed deal
The statement of facts alleges that Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment to Daniels for "as long as possible."
"He instructed Lawyer A (Cohen) that if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public," the court filing said.
The strategy didn't work. "Ultimately, with pressure mounting and the election approaching, the Defendant agreed to the payoff and directed Lawyer A to proceed," the filing said.
Including that detail could signal an effort by the prosecutors to undermine a Trump defense. When the payments first became public, his allies argued he wasn't trying to hide an affair he denied from the voters but instead to avoid upsetting his wife, Melania Trump."
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/stormy-daniels-doorman-2024-trial-trump-indictment-top-takeaways-rcna78221
-EV 8/14/93
-EV 8/14/93
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
The issue for Trump is how it influenced the campaign and how the money was reported. He didn't report it as a campaign expense or a donation, or however he was supposed to.
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
Non voters/independents are the biggest slice of the pie. literally half the country just doesn't care who is president. Similar to Canada. Look how many people fucking hate trudeau. 32% of the country voted for him. and he's PM. 1/3 of the country either love him or just won't vote con (right now, I'm the latter). 30% on the other side. and close to 40% don't give a fuck.
it's a sad state no matter how you slice it.
-EV 8/14/93
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
The campaign money, or lack of reporting it rather, can't be both the crime and the coverup which brings it to a felony.
34 small crimes: misleading statements and claims of fact.
1 big crime: committed those 34 crimes to mislead the public during an election which apparently (and properly) is a federal crime.
What will be rather telling... and also lends 'some' credibility to this being a witch hunt... is how often does stuff like this happen amongst politicians that isn't followed up by the courts? Example: George Santos. How the heck is this guy still in government and not behind bars?
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
-EV 8/14/93
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx
-EV 8/14/93
https://www.cuyahogaelectionaudits.us/boeblog/election-updates/ohios-i-voted-sticker-making-its-debut-this-nov/
You say the 34 indictments are the fraudulent financial statement.
But aren't the 34 fraudulent financial statements only a crime because they didn't report it correctly with campaign laws? That's what he is being charged with, not reporting election money finances correctly. There's nothing illegal about paying off a stripper to not talk. But since it was an election, it had to be reported a certain way. It was not. That is the fraud.
If the fraud is used to cover up a larger crime, it becomes a felony. The fraud can't be both what he is being charged with and the bigger crime that makes it into a felony. I wouldn't think so anyway. The bigger crime cover up would have to be separate from the false reporting of the money.
So that still leaves me asking what's the bigger crime, and if there is one, why wasn't that included in the charges?
Its like if you rob a bank with a gun. They won't just charge with with robbing a bank, but will charge you with using a gun in commission of a crime (along with 30 other charges).
But this is like charging you with use of a gun during commission of a crime, but leaving out the bank robbery (the crime it was used in). And then not even explaining what the crime was the gun was used for.
Maybe there is a legal reason we'll find out soon. But it just seemed weird to me and I haven't found a satisfactory answer from strangers on the internet yet.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Buffalo, Phoenix, Toronto 2003
Boston I&II 2004
Kitchener, Hamilton, London, Montreal, Ottawa, Toronto 2005
Toronto I&II, Las Vegas 2006
Chicago Lollapalooza 2007
Toronto, Seattle I&II, Vancouver, Philly I,II,III,IV 2009
Cleveland, Buffalo 2010
Toronto I&II 2011
Buffalo 2013
Toronto I&II 2016
10C: 220xxx