Pecker testimony reveals backroom deals that helped Trump win 2016

The "effing" indictment doesn't explain how the catch and kill plan is a crime, nor how it makes the misdemeanors into felonies... FFS.

Had you bothered to read the thread you would know that another poster said "the way Trump did it makes it a crime". I asked to explain how "Trump did it". Would you like to take the challenge, or are you going to join the parade and parrot "read the indictment", even though the indictment doesn't answer my question.

 

That's never happened...lol

 

It looks like he’s back to posting porky pies. People are tired of the shtick.

 

for what-saying something that you don't like? WE don't need the Karen mindset here

 

Has anyone checked to see if the "National Enquirer" is covering Trump's election interference trial? (chuckle)


'Donald Trump Wonders Out Loud: ‘Why Didn’t the National Enquirer Get the Pulitzer Prize?’
J.D. DurkinJul 22nd, 2016, 11:33 am

snip:


'Speaking Friday morning alongside his Vice Presidential candidate Mike Pence, Republican nominee Donald Trump told the press about his take on several National Enquirer stories, a sticking point of controversy that has dogged his campaign in the past.

In May, the real estate mogul worked himself into a bit of trouble when he implied that Raphael Cruz, the father of Texas Senator Ted Boos Cruz, was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy. The assertions came from a cover story in the well-known tabloid, and Trump said at the time, “His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald’s being — you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous.”
https://www.mediaite.com/online/don...the-national-enquirer-get-the-pulitzer-prize/'

https://www.mediaite.com/online/don...the-national-enquirer-get-the-pulitzer-prize/

 

Nobody cares what you're tired of...lol

 

Everyone is. It’s stale and stupid.

 

People, read the public record about the Bragg case. Don’t read editorials, the views of kooks, etc.

 

Too late...lol

 

You're mad because you can't answer my question and you know everyone can see that you can't...lol

 

I have a better idea: the people who swear that Trump broke the law should be able to explain HOW he broke the law.

 

They’ve done so. Numerous times. No more. Look at the public record, my Trump loving amigo.

 

Exactly.

 

Not one person can explain how Trump "did it" that made it illegal.

 

Let's let the ones who know tell you.
You're welcome.


'It outlaws conspiring to promote or prevent someone's election through "unlawful means." Trump is on trial for falsifying business records throughout his first year in office to hide an election-influencing hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.12 hours ago

Old, unused, and 'twisty' — meet the obscure NY election-conspiracy law that just might get Trump convicted
businessinsider.com

Snip:

"Sure, 17-152 has never been used before, they said. But that doesn't mean it won't work now that the dust has been blown off.

"I think it's very smart of prosecutors to use this state law, whether it's been used before or not," said Jeffrey M. Wice, who teaches state election law at New York Law School.

Wice noted that two judges — Merchan and Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein, a Manhattan federal judge who rejected Trump's attempt to move the hush-money case to federal court — upheld the use of 17-152 in this case.'

https://www.businessinsider.com › trump-hush-money-ca...

 

You’re right that it’s “not one”. It’s dozens. Your response is to deny reality and demand that the poster “prove” reality to you.

Not again. I’m not surprised by your antics and shenanigans any longer.

 

That's the law. That doesn't explain how Trump violated the law. There's no law prohibiting the purchase of the rights to a story, then not printing the story. Feel free to show us a law that does prohibit "catch and kill".

 

lol!
Why was this "catch & Kill" carried out?
lol!

 

As if!

 

Then why claim that "the Leftists don't want it to stay that way" regarding the press? Just to be contrary?

 

I stand by my remark. Instead of asking about the criminal act in an indictment, look it up. Why can't you do that?

If the indictment isn't clear to you, you'll learn nothing by attacking those who may be able to clarify. Your endless use of "lol" comes off as pompous, arrogant, and close-minded. Based on experience, one must assume that any attempt to answer your questions will result in ridicule as your reply. You give the strong impression of someone wants to remain antagonistic.

Apologies, I know this is off topic, and I don't want you to feel under attack here. I'm just attempting to explain why you don't get much cooperation or civility in reply. Tit for tat is so much easier than remaining civil.

 

Maybe he doesn’t know how to use google.

 

Geebus.

Which part of "Trump is on trial for falsifying business records throughout his first year in office to hide an election-influencing hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels" did you not read or understand?

It took me less than 60 seconds to find this:

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/ELN/17-152

Do. Your. Own. Research.

 

Buzz is Rhona Graff's testimony has now set up the testimony for Madeline Westerhout.
Trump's gatekeeper/ personal secretary.

Westerhout was fired for leaking personal info about Trump's kids .
Who handed Trump all the $35,000 checks for him to sign while he was president?

Lisa Rubin on her importance and more/Jeffrey McConney..controller.





https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madeleine_Westerhout

 

you all seem happy with Joetato and his minions do it