Trump Guilty...Surprised?

[rightwinger]

Okay so Bill Clinton is guilty then too.

Bill Clinton openly paid her and used his own money

See the difference?

 

[Dadoalex]

It’s called a NDA, which is perfectly legal. The prosecution never claimed the NDA was illegal, nor that a payment for it would be illegal.


So thanks for proving my point, you can’t show me what the crime was. All you can do is parrot MSM talking points by repeating this phrase “hush money” as if that is even a legal term or illegal in any way. Bill Clinton paid Paula Jones $850,000 for her to drop her sexual assault case, which was perfectly legal. Although now apparently it is not, so perhaps BJ Clinton needs to be charged with something now.

He wasn't convicted for an NDA.
He was convicted of business fraud.

I understand your need to shift the topic but no amount of denial or spinning or "whataboutism" changes the facts presented at trial nor does it change the fact that Trump stands convicted.

The question is why do you feel the need to deny inconvenient facts and why you are surprised by the verdict.
A question you seem unwilling to address.

 

[otto105]

What exactly is he “guilty“ of?


They said he “falsified” a record in order to cover up another crime.

How was calling a payment to a lawyer as a legal fee a “false record”? What was it supposed to be coded as?

What was this other “crime” this record was “covering up”? The prosecution never said what this other crime was. The judge told the jury they could just imagine any reason.


Total sham of trail and a kangaroo court in a 100% Democrat district.

8+ years of spying on this man and the most you got was an accountant marked a payment to his lawyer as a “legal fee”.

3 more trials to go maga felon pussy

 

[Dadoalex]

It's been discussed 900 times the last couple days.

point to one where the premise is "why is MAGA surprised?"
Please do.

Or address the actual topic
or
Just STFU

 

[pknopp]

point to one where the premise is "why is MAGA surprised?"
Please do.

Or address the actual topic
or
Just STFU

Read the other 900 threads on this.

 

[Dadoalex]

If it was done in court then all you have to do is say what the evidence was that was presented in court, yet you can’t.

Thanks for proving my point. You‘re just a communist who approves jailing political opponents for any reason.

Here you go.
Feel free to make a worthless attempt to disprove the facts presented.

Trump found guilty: Read the court transcript of the hush money trial's final day

Donald Trump was found guilty for falsifying business records by a New York jury. We couldn't watch live, but you can read the transcripts.

www.usatoday.com

AND

AM I?

Why is it you can't simply discuss the topic at hand?
Does self-examination frighten you that much?

 

[theHawk]

Nothing wrong with an NDA. Trump does it all the time.

But if Trump wants to pay off his sexual conquests, he needs to use his own money……not that of the Trump Organization hidden as a legal fee

Why? No where does the law say that is illegal.

 

[theHawk]

Here you go.
Feel free to make a worthless attempt to disprove the facts presented.

Trump found guilty: Read the court transcript of the hush money trial's final day

Donald Trump was found guilty for falsifying business records by a New York jury. We couldn't watch live, but you can read the transcripts.

www.usatoday.com

AND

AM I?
View attachment 955382

Why is it you can't simply discuss the topic at hand?
Does self-examination frighten you that much?

And you still can’t articulate what the actual crime was.

Once again, thanks for proving my point.

 

[JoeMoma]

If Cohen performed legal services for the Trump organization it would be a legitimate legal fee.

But for Cohen to personally pay hush money to cover one of Trumps sexual conquests and be reimbursed by the Trump organization is no “legal fee”

Is a NDA not a legal document?

 

[theHawk]

He wasn't convicted for an NDA.
He was convicted of business fraud.

I understand your need to shift the topic but no amount of denial or spinning or "whataboutism" changes the facts presented at trial nor does it change the fact that Trump stands convicted.

The question is why do you feel the need to deny inconvenient facts and why you are surprised by the verdict.
A question you seem unwilling to address.

The “fraud” was to cover up some other crime.

Yet you can’t articulate what this other crime was.

There can be no fraud if there was no other crime being covered up.

 

[gtopa1]

The arguments are done.
Trump stands convicted.
Your denying the facts presented at trial does not change the facts.
Trump was convicted of committing business fraud.

Why do you feel the need to deny the factual evidence?

IDIOT!! They've only just begun. The moves to an appeal are already put in motion.

Meh; I want to see the USSC take on matters. It should be a hoot!!!!

Greg

 

[Dadoalex]

Read the other 900 threads on this.

So there is no thread addressing this topic.
You admission is refreshing.
Your need to avoid the topic is unsurprising.

 

[theHawk]

He wasn't convicted for an NDA.
He was convicted of business fraud.

I understand your need to shift the topic but no amount of denial or spinning or "whataboutism"

You are the one that is shifting.

First you idiots claimed that “hush money” payment was illegal.

Now you admit a NDA is perfectly legal.

 

[Dadoalex]

And you still can’t articulate what the actual crime was.

Once again, thanks for proving my point.

Business Fraud...FOR THE 34th TIME

So why can't you address the actual topic?
Fear?

 

[Dadoalex]

The arguments are done.
Trump stands convicted.
Your denying the facts presented at trial does not change the facts.
Trump was convicted of committing business fraud.

Why do you feel the need to deny the factual evidence?

On to USMB's favorite troll tactic.

The "Fake News" emogi.

So tell us gtopa1

Are the arguments not done?
Does Trump not stand convicted?
Does denying the facts change the facts?
Was Trump not convicted of business fraud? 34 times?


You see my tiny minded MAGAT, if any of that were true you would appear less stupid.
But all of it is true so your stupidity remains intact.

TROLL

 

[Oddball]

 

[Dadoalex]

You are the one that is shifting.

First you idiots claimed that “hush money” payment was illegal.

Now you admit a NDA is perfectly legal.

And now he begins to lie and lie and lie...

So where exactly did I say that Trump's NDA was illegal.

 

[theHawk]

On to USMB's favorite troll tactic.

The "Fake News" emogi.
View attachment 955384
So tell us gtopa1

Are the arguments not done?
Does Trump not stand convicted?
Does denying the facts change the facts?
Was Trump not convicted of business fraud? 34 times?


You see my tiny minded MAGAT, if any of that were true you would appear less stupid.
But all of it is true so your stupidity remains intact.

TROLL

^^ lol someone is triggered.

 

[theHawk]

Business Fraud...FOR THE 34th TIME

View attachment 955383

So why can't you address the actual topic?
Fear?

I am addressing it.

Fraud can only happen if another crime is being covered up.

What was the other crime?

Now let’s see who won’t address the topic.

 

[Catsnmeters]

IDIOT!! They've only just begun. The moves to an appeal are already put in motion.

Meh; I want to see the USSC take on matters. It should be a hoot!!!!

Greg

On what specific grounds do you think an appeal will overturn the decision?