Slade3200
Diamond Member
- Jan 13, 2016
- 66,987
- 17,029
- 2,190
Its not, nobody is saying it isSince when is fucking a porn star a business record?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Its not, nobody is saying it isSince when is fucking a porn star a business record?
No need to get angry. Just be more honest moving forward. I would take no dispute with the legal point you just made. I haven't said otherwise.lol.
Quibble away.
Listen, you penis breath imbecile. He could still be convicted on a retrial. And that’s what might happen if the jury were to end up hung.
Can’t you get anything right?
LOLIts not, nobody is saying it is
No it’s not what they said in their Bill of Paeticulars.Thats exactly what the prosecutors said in court. Bragg initially filed for 4 "other" crimes: violations of federal campaign finance law under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA); violations of New York Election Law § 17-152; violations of federal, local, and state tax law; and additional falsifications of business records outside the Trump Organization. Judge Merchan allowed Bragg to move forward with the first three but tossed out the last one.
They don't need to be pursued, the prosecution probably feels like the underlying charges are enough.None of which are being pursued, by anyone.
Unlike you, I’m the one who does understand the charges.Thats what the trial is for bucko. You need to pay closer attention. You don't even understand the basic charges. How are we to expect you to follow the actual trial?!
I'm not talking about the Bill of Paeticulars. I'm talking about arguments they made in courtNo it’s not what they said in their Bill of Paeticulars.
You must learn how to read properly.
Start by looking up the meaning of “may.”
Good luck.
Apparently not. You're acting all kinds of confused about it.Unlike you, I’m the one who does understand the charges.
The trial is to prove the charges. It’s kinda hard when the persecutor won’t even set forth his charges.
I don’t care what ambition like you expects. You’re tragically ignorant.![]()
.....and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commitThey don't need to be pursued
“Arguments” which don’t bind them.I'm not talking about the Bill of Paeticulars. I'm talking about arguments they made in court
He is accused of hiding the payments to stormy. They went through Cohen and Cohen went to jail for his part of it. Now Trump is on trial for his part
Where in the criminal code is "hiding payments" a criminal act?
No. I’m just exposing your perpetual ignorance.Apparently not. You're acting all kinds of confused about it.
Your brain is the enemy of intellect.Emotion is the enemy of intellect
Neither Merchan nor Bragg have legal jurisdiction to charge or try any alleged federal crimes.Thats exactly what the prosecutors said in court. Bragg initially filed for 4 "other" crimes: violations of federal campaign finance law under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA); violations of New York Election Law § 17-152; violations of federal, local, and state tax law; and additional falsifications of business records outside the Trump Organization. Judge Merchan allowed Bragg to move forward with the first three but tossed out the last one.
How do you not know the crime by now?
He hide payments made to silence Stormy Daniels via a NDA violating business filing and election laws
What's the crime?....
Lock! Him. UP!!!!
You know? Oddly enough, even CNN’s Fareed Zakaria now agrees with you!The crime is Donald Trump being Donald Trump.
INTENT... They don't need to prosecute him for committing the other crimes. They had to make a case that his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit one of the three crimes they laid out. The actually presented 4 crimes but the judge threw one out......and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.
IOW; yes they do....If you have no conviction of an underlying crime, then you don't even have a popcorn fart as basis for prosecution of the peripheral acts.
You're a monkey trying to fuck a football.
11 pages on this thread and still no crime... I know there is an indictment... that does not spell out the crime... so what did Trump do that was illegal?... if legal experts like Turley can't see a crime after 4 weeks of a jury trial there is a problem here....