Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 04:55:36 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Stormy Daniels Gave "Disastrous" Testimony In Trump Trial, CNN Legal Analyst Says
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
References: <Ubt146$3dvu1$17@dont-email.me> <ufi64j9p5th7nmr25dk6q4in75v8bohjjf@4ax.com> <v1vrvv$9d31$1@solani.org> <v200c2$89tl$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-87B68A.09430014052024@news.giganews.com> <v29n5g$2mjdm$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com>
In-Reply-To: <v29n5g$2mjdm$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 93
Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!gandalf.srv.welterde.de!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail
Nntp-Posting-Date: Sat, 18 May 2024 09:55:36 +0000
X-Received-Bytes: 4865
Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com
X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com
Message-Id: <17d08cadf5020aaf$62$2537179$4ad50060@news.newsdemon.com>

On 5/18/24 2:59 AM, FPP wrote:
> On 5/14/24 12:43 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>> In article <v200c2$89tl$1@dont-email.me>,
>>   "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Crosspost to newsgroups Ubi doesn't read cut
>>>
>>> suzeeq <suzeeq@imbris.com> wrote:
>>>> On 5/14/2024 4:25 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> Sun, 12 May 2024 04:30:46 -0400, Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The article that Ubi the shithead plagarized is this:
>>>
>>> Stormy Daniels Gave 'Disastrous' Testimony In Trump Trial, CNN Legal
>>> Analyst Says
>>> By Daniel Chaitin
>>> The Daily Wire
>>> May 8, 2024
>>> https://www.dailywire.com/news/stormy-daniels-gave-disastrous-testimony-in-tru
>>> mp-trial-cnn-legal-analyst-says
>>>
>>>>>> . . .
>>>
>>>>> The prosecutors have yet to produce ANY evidence that Trump committed
>>>>> any crime.
>>>
>>>> He's charged with covering up payments to her for killing her story to
>>>> interfere with his 2016 campaign. That's the crime and they have proved
>>>> it with other witnesses.
>>>
>>> Just a moment. You need to explain this in full.
>>>
>>> She was looking for a payout. She approached people close to Trump
>>> seeking money and wanted to speed the process along by threating to sell
>>> her story to someone else if she didn't receive her payout.
>>>
>>> That's extortion. No one has yet explained why her actions couldn't have
>>> been prosecuted under state law.
>>>
>>> Trump's first instinct was to treat her like he treated subcontractors
>>> on developments: Stall the payment or not pay at all. At first he wanted
>>> to wait till after the election, for if he lost, nothing she was selling
>>> would be of value. He was advised to spend the money to make problem go
>>> away.
>>>
>>> None of this is criminal.
>>>
>>> I'm not even sure if paying extortion is a criminal act on the part of
>>> the victim.
>>>
>>> The payment to her was a crime, not because buying rights so she won't
>>> publish what she claimed was her story is a crime, but because keeping
>>> it from being published was of some benefit to Trump as a candidate and
>>> it wasn't disclosed as required in federal law.
>>
>> If that's the standard, then Democrats have all broken that law by not
>> disclosing MSNBC and CNN, which are a lot more than just some benefit to
>> Democrats as candidates.
>>
>>> What Trump is being prosecuted for is ordering that the payment to
>>> reimburse Cohen be written from one of the companies Trump controlled
>>> and taken as a business expense of that company.
>>
>> They're saying it boils down to Trump notating the payment to Cohen as
>> "legal expenses", which is falsifying a business record. This in a city
>> that's a violent hellhole where thugs are making a sport out of walking
>> up to random women and punching them so hard, the bones in their faces
>> are shattered. And when caught, they're released on no bail almost
>> immediately. Alvin Bragg won't aggressively prosecute *that* but Trump
>> putting a vague term in the memo line on a check to Cohen is apparently
>> worth spending millions of dollars of prosecution resources.
>>
>> But don't say this is weaponizing the courts against political
>> opponents. That means you're a conspiracy theorist!
>>
>> Trump should have just written "reimbursement" on the memo line. That
>> would have been completely truthful and yet in no way revealing.
>>
>>> The coverup was illegal in and of itself but if there was an underlying
>>> crime being covered up, it was extortion committed by her. There was no
>>> underlying crime committed by Trump to cover up.
> 
> Nope.  Ask John Edwards.  Some lawyer you are!


I don't believe he ever was a lawyer because he's too stupid to pass the 
bar.  Also, he's fully indoctrinated by white supremacists, most likely 
Oath Keepers, so he's completely unable to keep from spewing propaganda. 
I can't even remember if there was ever a time where I found his posts 
worth considering, but either way he hasn't been the same since that 
time he literally drove off a cliff.