So trump cheated and broke the law to win in 2016?


trump played the system in 2016. He payed off women, had his buddy Pecker kill stories, and the tried to hide it by falsifying records. He was elected in 2016 through illegal means.

Twice Impeached
Proven sexual abuser
Now 34 felonies

trump may be the death of the repub party.
The Trump years have been an ongoing study in orange projection.
 
View attachment 956184

That's like raising jaywalking to a felony because two people were alleged to have conspired to jaywalk. What's even worse, they convinced the jury that there was a law broken even though no laws were broken.

The fraudster prosecution never proved their case, and the biased pedophile judge told the jury that they didn't have to prove anything,

So the two Biden lawyers in the jury tricked the jury into giving them 34 guilty verdicts.

That's the trial
Cohen pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance violations. Trump was named as an unindicted co-conspirator.

That established that the crime indeed occurred.

The falsification of business records was an attempt to conceal those campaign violations thereby elevating them to felonies.

It really is that simple.
 
Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations. Trump was named as an unindicted co-conspirator.

That established that the crime indeed occurred.

The falsification of business records was an attempt to conceal those crimes thereby elevating them to felonies.

It really is that simple.
No it's not.

Michael Cohen and others testified that Trump didn't authorize the Stormy Daniels payoffs.

Stormy Daniels should have been charged with blackmail or extortion, but wasn't.

Michael Cohen was suicidal and was willing to sign a statement (just to stay out of jail) that Trump authorized the payments. He lied.

Trump said there was no point to paying off Stormy because the story had been public since 2011. Why pay her only to have the story surface anyway?
 
I want you to understand this case but you obviously don’t and are unwilling to.
You can’t substitute the reality of the facts in this case with your own admittedly flawed suppositions and accept that as the new reality.
That’s neither acceptable nor accurate.
You really should aim to do better.
It will get shitcanned on appeal, and you will whine like a little girl.
 
No it's not.

Michael Cohen and others testified that Trump didn't authorize the Stormy Daniels payoffs.

Stormy Daniels should have been charged with blackmail or extortion, but wasn't.

Michael Cohen was suicidal and was willing to sign a statement (just to stay out of jail) that Trump authorized the payments. He lied.

Trump said there was no point to paying off Stormy because the story had been public since 2011. Why pay her only to have the story surface anyway?
You’re not being objective. What I presented is exactly what the prosecution showed.

The campaign finance violations happened. Cohen pleaded guilty and went to prison for them.

That is an established fact.

The Trump org falsified records in an attempt to hide the reimbursement to Cohen for those campaign finance violations.

They were crimes in an attempt to conceal other crimes. That elevated them to felonies.

That is now an established fact as well.

You can argue any and all minutiae you would like but none of it will change those facts.
 
Trump played the system? You gotta be kidding. Career politician Biden invented the freaking system.
 
You’re not being objective. What I presented is exactly what the prosecution showed.

The campaign finance violations happened. Cohen pleaded guilty and went to prison for them.

That is an established fact.

The Trump org falsified records in an attempt to hide the reimbursement to Cohen for those campaign finance violations.

They were crimes in an attempt to conceal other crimes. That elevated them to felonies.

That is now an established fact as well.

You can argue any and all minutiae you would like but none of it will change those facts.
What you presented is evidence that they couldn't prove.

But the jury instructions allowed the jury to vote guilty even though the prosecution wasn't able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt,

This judge was a Democrat and he wasn't about to let that jury go home for good until he got a conviction.
 
What you presented is evidence that they couldn't prove.

But the jury instructions allowed the jury to vote guilty even though the prosecution wasn't able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt,

This judge was a Democrat and he wasn't about to let that jury go home for good until he got a conviction.
Obviously it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt 34 separate times. :rolleyes:
 
NDAs are legal.
So is killing negative stories.

No one said that NDA's aren't legal. But conspiring to cover up damaging information for an election candidate and to promote negative stories about his opponents - whether true or not, is illegal. It's election fraud.

Driving a car is legal as well, but driving the getaway car in a bank robbery is not. Even if you otherwise didn't participate in the robbery.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top