The trouble with Trump’s jurors shows the results of a post-truth society

[d0gbreath]

You know why. To keep him off the campaign trail.

Couldn't they keep him off of the trail with a misdemeanor charge?

(P.S. I remembered what I said to you that you didn't care for. It was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, but that can be pretty hard to portray in type. I won't say it again.)

 

[Blaster]

Just another political show trial.

 

[berg80]

Who the heck thinks all of these just happened to come up after Trump’s political ambitions came to fruition? You have to be a special kind of stupid to believe that.

His political ambitions became clear in 2015. With the exception of the civil biz fraud case his crimes all took place well after that.

 

[berg80]

Not at all… I love a good counter argument and debate. Just prefer it to be based on facts and not made up bluster like the Trump crew tosses out.

Bluster is all they have.

 

[Lisa558]

Couldn't they keep him off of the trail with a misdemeanor charge?

(P.S. I remembered what I said to you that you didn't care for. It was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, but that can be pretty hard to portray in type. I won't say it again.)

What did you say? I’m curious. But DM me, please….we don’t want to give the antisemites any new ideas.

To answer your question, misdemeanors don’t involve long jury trials. There’s usually a fine, and that’s that.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I am asking you what the charges are. You tell me what you think they have and I will tell you why their accusations are flawed. That is the way it works.

No, you make a case and we rebut it. The case is already made. That is why you have to after.

 

[surada]

I am asking you what the charges are. You tell me what you think they have and I will tell you why their accusations are flawed. That is the way it works.

In the second paragraph of the Statement of Facts, Bragg claims: "From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant's electoral prospects."

 

[Nostra]

In the second paragraph of the Statement of Facts, Bragg claims: "From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant's electoral prospects."

Is that against the law?

 

[j-mac]

Is that against the law?

No.

 

[SeaMajor7]

In the second paragraph of the Statement of Facts, Bragg claims: "From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant's electoral prospects."

Gee, that sounds EXACTLY like Hillary $pending millions for the Steele Dossier!!!!!
Remember THAT??????
God damn the projection and gaslighting from the demented LEFT is completely ridiculous.

 

[DBA]

So it’s just a coincidence that he decided to pay her off a few days before the election for an affair he had a decade ago?

Not coincidental at all. Trump didn’t want the information public, even prior to his run for President. Why is that? Could it be for other reasons than his campaign? Why yes, I think we are on to something.

Daniels came out to Touch magazine in an interview in 2011, but the story was never published. She says that Trump and some of his associates threatned her which is why the interview was not published. If that is the case, Trump clearly had an interest then in her not talking and that was well before his campaign. Whether her claims about why the interview wasn’t published or the tactics to supress the story used by Trump are true or not, we know for certain that she did the interview and that it wasn’t published.

Trump announces his run for president in 2015 and what do you now, Daniel’s sees an opportunity for a money grab and threatens to contact the National Enquirer to tell her story. He paid her off when she threatened to go public to the National Enquirer, which would most certainly affect him personally. Maybe you should ask Daniel’s why she coincidental made this threat 4 years when Trump announced his Presidential bid.

Nice try, but you lose all day every day with this argument. In fact, Trump’s attorney should bring this to light in court. It is a slam dunk.

 

[MagicMike]

This is a Dem RIGGED joke of a trial designed to do one thing, RIG the 2024 election by gagging Trump and locking Trump in a courtroom so he can't travel and campaign.

The real question is WHY would anybody even consider voting for a candidate who can't even campaign properly because of his self inflicted legal problems?

 

[BluesLegend]

The real question is WHY would anybody even consider voting for a candidate who can't even campaign properly because of his self inflicted legal problems?

Look who's talking CORRUPT Joe Biden voter.

 

[MagicMike]

Look who's talking CORRUPT Joe Biden voter.

So predictable.
But we're talking about Trump here.
Try to focus.

 

[BluesLegend]

So predictable.
But we're talking about Trump here.
Try to focus.

I'm focused on drop kicking Dems in the nuts this Nov. See you at the polls Dem party of lies and corruption.

 

[DBA]

In the second paragraph of the Statement of Facts, Bragg claims: "From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant's electoral prospects."

The problem for Bragg's is that Trump also tried to keep the alleged affair secret back when Daniel's first reported it back in 2011. This shows that he had interest other than campaign interest for not allowing it to go public. Case closed.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

MAGA post-truth philosophy falls apart.