Trump appears to have been done in by.......pardon the pun........

[Oddball]

View attachment 938652

 

[Billiejeens]

"Do you know if anyone else besides Michael Cohen had any knowledge of this contract?" prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked.

"Yes, I believe Donald Trump did," Pecker responded.

"Was your principal purpose to suppress the story to prevent it from influencing the election?" Steinglass asked.

"Yes," Pecker said.

"Were you aware that expenditures by corporations made for the purpose of influencing an election made in coordination with or at the request of a candidate or campaign were unlawful?" Steinglass asked.

Pecker said he was aware and confirmed that the Enquirer's parent company, AMI, never reported the payment to the Federal Election Commission.

"We purchased the story so it wouldn't be published by any other organization," Pecker said.

"Why did you not want it to be published by any other organization?" Steinglass asked.

"We didn't want the story to embarrass Mr. Trump or embarrass or hurt the campaign," Pecker said.

I don't think that you will understand this.
In the real world the highlighted words would shred your case.
If there was an actual case.

 

[blackhawk]

 

[HikerGuy83]

....a Pecker.

Not the oddly shaped one described by Stormy, his porn star paramour, the one he used to schtoink her. But rather his buddy Dave. Maybe former buddy?

One of the more uncomfortable things Dave testified to was his concern that catching and killing the Karen McDougal story might violate campaign finance law. He was so concerned he consulted a number of attorneys on the matter. When the prosecution asked him if after those conversations he concluded buying Karen's story would be a bad idea, he answered yes. Why?

Because in answer to a previous question..........."Were you aware that expenditures by a corporation made for the purpose of influencing an election at the request of a candidate are illegal?".......he similarly answered yes. Hmmmmmmmm.

Pecker says McDougal's story could have 'hurt the campaign'

Follow the latest developments in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial in New York.

abcnews.go.com

No wonder he didn't want Trump, through Cohen, to reimburse him for the cash paid to Karen. No wonder when it came time to pay Stormy he refused. Which set in motion the process of Cohen setting up an LLC to hide the payments to Daniels for which Trump reimbursed him. And subsequently the falsified financial documents Bragg has charged Don with creating.

As an aside, I can't help feeling a little bad for Karen. She seems to be remorseful for her part in an adulterous affair and genuinely duped in to thinking Don cared for her and not just her vajayjay.

 

[berg80]

Pecker said he had reason to be nervous about making the payment through AMI. He replied that the company had once bought a story from a woman with a story about Arnold Schwarzenegger while he was running for governor of California. She ended up going public anyway, and AMI was investigated by the authorities for potential campaign contribution violations, Pecker said.

While Pecker did not go into detail about the fallout from the Schwarzenegger story, he confirmed to prosecutors that AMI consulted with an election law attorney when they were considering paying McDougal for her story.

In the agreement AMI made with McDougal, the company included language that said she would be doing work for the company, writing a monthly column on ageing and fitness. The company wanted to make it seem like they had a “basis” for paying McDougal.

“I wanted the contract to be a record for the services that she was going to perform for American Media,” Pecker said.

The jury was shown records of the $150,000 payment, including an invoice from McDougal’s lawyer.

While AMI was on the verge of giving Cohen, and thus Trump, the rights to McDougal’s story for $125,000, Pecker said he ultimately backed out of the agreement after talking with lawyers. He would not say what they discussed, citing attorney-client privilege.

Cohen was “very, very angry, screaming basically” when the agreement was called off. He recalled Cohen saying, “I can’t believe it, I’m a lawyer, I’m your friend, I don’t understand why you’re concerned.” Ultimately, Cohen agreed to call off the agreement.
David Pecker says he bought McDougal story so it did not hurt Trump campaign

 

[berg80]

I don't think that you will understand this.
In the real world the highlighted words would shred your case.
If there was an actual case.

The opposite is true. A point Trump's attorney missed on his cross examination.

 

[Billiejeens]

Pecker said he had reason to be nervous about making the payment through AMI. He replied that the company had once bought a story from a woman with a story about Arnold Schwarzenegger while he was running for governor of California. She ended up going public anyway, and AMI was investigated by the authorities for potential campaign contribution violations, Pecker said.

While Pecker did not go into detail about the fallout from the Schwarzenegger story, he confirmed to prosecutors that AMI consulted with an election law attorney when they were considering paying McDougal for her story.

In the agreement AMI made with McDougal, the company included language that said she would be doing work for the company, writing a monthly column on ageing and fitness. The company wanted to make it seem like they had a “basis” for paying McDougal.

“I wanted the contract to be a record for the services that she was going to perform for American Media,” Pecker said.

The jury was shown records of the $150,000 payment, including an invoice from McDougal’s lawyer.

While AMI was on the verge of giving Cohen, and thus Trump, the rights to McDougal’s story for $125,000, Pecker said he ultimately backed out of the agreement after talking with lawyers. He would not say what they discussed, citing attorney-client privilege.

Cohen was “very, very angry, screaming basically” when the agreement was called off. He recalled Cohen saying, “I can’t believe it, I’m a lawyer, I’m your friend, I don’t understand why you’re concerned.” Ultimately, Cohen agreed to call off the agreement.
David Pecker says he bought McDougal story so it did not hurt Trump campaign

You continue to make my points.
Thanks.

 

[Billiejeens]

The opposite is true. A point Trump's attorney missed on his cross examination.

No

 

[whitehall]

The left wing fantasy is that Trump is "done-in" but he is stronger than ever.

 

[Moonglow]

....a Pecker.

Not the oddly shaped one described by Stormy, his porn star paramour, the one he used to schtoink her. But rather his buddy Dave. Maybe former buddy?

One of the more uncomfortable things Dave testified to was his concern that catching and killing the Karen McDougal story might violate campaign finance law. He was so concerned he consulted a number of attorneys on the matter. When the prosecution asked him if after those conversations he concluded buying Karen's story would be a bad idea, he answered yes. Why?

Because in answer to a previous question..........."Were you aware that expenditures by a corporation made for the purpose of influencing an election at the request of a candidate are illegal?".......he similarly answered yes. Hmmmmmmmm.

Pecker says McDougal's story could have 'hurt the campaign'

Follow the latest developments in former President Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial in New York.

abcnews.go.com

No wonder he didn't want Trump, through Cohen, to reimburse him for the cash paid to Karen. No wonder when it came time to pay Stormy he refused. Which set in motion the process of Cohen setting up an LLC to hide the payments to Daniels for which Trump reimbursed him. And subsequently the falsified financial documents Bragg has charged Don with creating.

As an aside, I can't help feeling a little bad for Karen. She seems to be remorseful for her part in an adulterous affair and genuinely duped in to thinking Don cared for her and not just her vajayjay.

Peckers get jealous of other pecker's puzzy.

 

[Moonglow]

The left wing fantasy is that Trump is "done-in" but he is stronger than ever.

We damn sure knows he get screwed when it comes to buying puzzy, I get mine fer free.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

I just realized billiejeans does not understand the case.

 

[Billiejeens]

I just realized billiejeans does not understand the case.

View attachment 939059

Nope.
You did not realize that.

 

[d0gbreath]

I'm sure Trump has a fine penis. Look at all the beautiful women he has scored!
View attachment 938657

Being a billionaire certainly didn't have anything to do with that.

 

[Chillicothe]

"Catch-N-Kill is not illegal."

Well, that depends.
As.....hold for it.....this criminal trial abundantly demonstrates.

 

[Clipper]

I'm sure Trump has a fine penis. Look at all the beautiful women he has scored!
View attachment 938657

What about Putin's?

 

[surada]

I mean, the Steele dossier wasn't to influence an election. Oh, no, no, no! Heaven forfend!

Paul Singer abandoned the dossier when Trump won the nomination.

 

[Billiejeens]

Well, that depends.
As.....hold for it.....this criminal trial abundantly demonstrates.

No one is even claiming that -

 

[surada]

No one is even claiming that -

Lol Trump is claiming on video that the gag order prevents him from testifying...and his minions believe him.

Rule 43. Defendant's Presence

www.law.cornell.edu

In Allen, the court held that “there are at least three constitutionally permissible ways for a trial judge to handle an obstreperous defendant like Allen: (1) bind and gag him, thereby keeping him present; (2) cite him for contempt; (3) take him out of the courtroom until he promises to conduct himself properly.” 397 ...

 

[Billiejeens]

Circling back to some actual legal and common sense.

The lawyer representing Stormy Daniels, Keith Davidson, said in court that the payment given to Daniels was not “hush money.” He read a statement that said the rumors that the money was “hush money” were “completely false.” The money was a “consideration” not a payment to keep the woman silent, it appears.

A “consideration” is a term in legal contracts for something given in return for the promise of abiding by a contract. The payment was called “legal fees” in Trump’s accounting, which is what Democrats claim was fraud.

This strikes a huge blow in the left’s case. If Daniels didn’t consider the payment “hush money” then there was no reason for Trump’s lawyers to falsify accounting papers. The charges leveled at Trump seem a stretch at best. And this testimony should certainly lead to this case wrapping up in a vindication for Trump.


Democrats are hellbent on stopping Trump from returning to office. These cases are being called “lawfare” as a means of ruining him.

ps - it's not working.