---President Elect Musk and Convicted Felon Donald J Trump---

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

tbergs said:

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?

Zod said:

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?

Parksy said:

mrussel1 said:

Parksy said:

I'm curious about opinions here... 

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. 

Parksy said:

Zod said:

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) 

Halifax2TheMax said:

Merkin Baller said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

tbergs said:

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."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/stormy-daniels-doorman-2024-trial-trump-indictment-top-takeaways-rcna78221

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?

Parksy said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Merkin Baller said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

tbergs said:

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."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/stormy-daniels-doorman-2024-trial-trump-indictment-top-takeaways-rcna78221

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? 

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

tbergs said:

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.

Parksy said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Merkin Baller said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

tbergs said:

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."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/stormy-daniels-doorman-2024-trial-trump-indictment-top-takeaways-rcna78221

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? 

mace1229 said:

Lerxst1992 said:

mace1229 said:

mrussel1 said:

Go Beavers said:

tbergs said:

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. 

HughFreakingDillon said:

Parksy said:

I'm curious about opinions here... 

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.