Well What’s Next At Trumps Trial?
General Topic
Contributors to this thread:
DL 20-May-24
scentman 20-May-24
BoggsBowhunts 20-May-24
70lbDraw 20-May-24
DL 20-May-24
spike78 20-May-24
olddogrib 21-May-24
soccern23ny 21-May-24
soccern23ny 21-May-24
4nolz@work 21-May-24
soccern23ny 21-May-24
70lbDraw 21-May-24
Michael 21-May-24
Will tell 21-May-24
Buskill 21-May-24
DanaC 21-May-24
2Wild Bill 21-May-24
csalem 21-May-24
RutnStrut 21-May-24
Nyati 21-May-24
csalem 21-May-24
DanaC 21-May-24
soccern23ny 21-May-24
Will 21-May-24
csalem 21-May-24
Mint 21-May-24
scentman 21-May-24
TRnCO 21-May-24
Nyati 21-May-24
DanaC 21-May-24
Nyati 21-May-24
Buffalo1 21-May-24
4nolz@work 21-May-24
olddogrib 21-May-24
scentman 21-May-24
HunterR 21-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
CaptMike 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
Catscratch 25-May-24
Will 25-May-24
4nolz@work 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
CaptMike 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
RK 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
70lbDraw 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
HDE 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
csalem 25-May-24
Red Lion 25-May-24
Nyati 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
DanaC 25-May-24
Nyati 25-May-24
Jaquomo 25-May-24
RK 25-May-24
spike78 25-May-24
RK 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
RutnStrut 25-May-24
Nyati 25-May-24
KSflatlander 25-May-24
Nyati 25-May-24
Nyati 25-May-24
RK 25-May-24
Catscratch 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
Catscratch 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
CaptMike 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
Catscratch 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
Mike in CT 26-May-24
Catscratch 26-May-24
Nyati 26-May-24
BowSniper 26-May-24
BowSniper 26-May-24
nchunter 26-May-24
70lbDraw 26-May-24
spike78 26-May-24
CaptMike 26-May-24
Bowfreak 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
CaptMike 26-May-24
DanaC 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
70lbDraw 26-May-24
CaptMike 26-May-24
DanaC 26-May-24
Catscratch 26-May-24
KSflatlander 26-May-24
CaptMike 27-May-24
KSflatlander 27-May-24
Catscratch 27-May-24
KSflatlander 27-May-24
70lbDraw 27-May-24
KSflatlander 27-May-24
spike78 27-May-24
Catscratch 27-May-24
KSflatlander 27-May-24
CaptMike 27-May-24
Mint 27-May-24
KSflatlander 27-May-24
Zbone 27-May-24
sundowner 27-May-24
Mint 27-May-24
CaptMike 27-May-24
KSflatlander 27-May-24
Catscratch 27-May-24
CaptMike 29-May-24
Will 29-May-24
TRnCO 29-May-24
xtroutx 29-May-24
2Wild Bill 29-May-24
Nyati 29-May-24
greenmountain 29-May-24
Glunt@work 29-May-24
Mint 29-May-24
Nyati 29-May-24
Glunt@work 29-May-24
DanaC 29-May-24
scentman 29-May-24
sundowner 29-May-24
Recurve Man 29-May-24
Nomad 29-May-24
scentman 29-May-24
spike78 29-May-24
CaptMike 29-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
HunterR 30-May-24
CaptMike 30-May-24
sundowner 30-May-24
BoggsBowhunts 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
Canepole 30-May-24
CaptMike 30-May-24
spike78 30-May-24
70lbDraw 30-May-24
70lbDraw 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
CaptMike 30-May-24
Zbone 30-May-24
Nyati 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
CaptMike 30-May-24
spike78 30-May-24
Michael 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
70lbDraw 30-May-24
Mint 30-May-24
Corax_latrans 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
70lbDraw 30-May-24
DanaC 30-May-24
spike78 30-May-24
Zbone 30-May-24
spike78 30-May-24
CaptMike 30-May-24
TRnCO 30-May-24
scentman 30-May-24
From: DL
20-May-24
Cohen sure threw a monkey wrench in it. I predict counter suits coming.

From: scentman
20-May-24
Dave, you live in Cali... surely you know how this system works. scentman

20-May-24
Does Cohen bowhunt?

From: 70lbDraw
20-May-24
It’s starting to fall apart for the lefties. I suppose it won’t be long that they no longer worship a hooker since she didn’t do much to hurt Trump.

From: DL
20-May-24
Scentman, sadly yes.

From: spike78
20-May-24
70 she’s a porn star get it right lol

From: olddogrib
21-May-24
70lbDraw & spike78, Isn't that a technicality a bit like the ancient joke....a man asks a woman if she'd have sex for $1,000,000. She replies "absolutely, when and where". He replies "will you have sex for $10"? She replies "hell no, what do you think I am"? He replies, "ma'am we've already established that, now were just quibbling over the price"!

21-May-24
isnt a "porn star" by definition a prostitute?

prostitute:

a person, in particular a woman, who engages in sexual activity for payment.

From: soccern23ny
21-May-24
What's more plausible....

That Cohen paid some broad that trump supposedly didn't have sex with 130k of his own money, and got reimbursed 130k but it wasn't from trump, then made it all up to make trump look bad.

Or

the guy that raw dogged a playboy playmate for 10 months while married to Melania and paid her 150k also raw dogged another porn star while married to melania, and then paid Cohen 130k to pay her to be quiet as well.

Im gonna go out on a limb and say the second one is true

21-May-24
"the guy that raw dogged a playboy playmate for 10 months while married to Melania and paid her 150k also raw dogged another porn star while married to melania, and then paid Cohen 130k to pay her to be quiet as well.

Im gonna go out on a limb and say the second one is true"

lets assume every bit of that is true.

why dont you go out on a limb and tell us what part of that is illegal?

From: soccern23ny
21-May-24
@ricky...

Do you think all of his affairs are fictitious? Or that he had affairs but didn't pay people money to keep quiet about them?

He's had more affairs than he's had wives

21-May-24
"@ricky...

Do you think all of his affairs are fictitious? Or that he had affairs but didn't pay people money to keep quiet about them? He's had more affairs than he's had wives"

whether or not i (or anyone else) think those things happened is completely irrelevant.

again...lets assume 100% of what you said is true. what part of it is illegal?

From: 4nolz@work
21-May-24
They give the whore all the latitude and the judge melts down when they put Cohen's lawyer on.Sickening corrupt trial I hope 1 New Yorker is honest

From: soccern23ny
21-May-24
Its amazing how according to you guys she can be a paid whore, while simultaneously not being trumps paid whore

From: 70lbDraw
21-May-24
“a person, in particular a woman, who engages in sexual activity for payment.”

Don’t porn stars fit that description as well?

“again...lets assume 100% of what you said is true. what part of it is illegal?”

None of it is. It’s just soccern working as Hitlers fluffer!!

From: Michael
21-May-24
In the eyes of lady justice who cares if Trump banged a porn star. It’s not illegal, it’s not illegal to pay her off either. I will give the court the benefit of the doubt in a wrongful entry on the ledger. Which is a misdemeanor. Now to say that it was done to sway an election. Which would bump it up to a felony. That would take getting into trumps mind and I don’t think the prosecution has proven that.

Then there is the former FEC chair that has been on record saying it’s not against campaign finance laws in the first place.

From: Will tell
21-May-24
Say what you will but Trump has about 50 50 chance. Wouldn’t bet either way. I don’t think he’ll be in much trouble even if he’s found guilty.

21-May-24
"Its amazing how according to you guys she can be a paid whore, while simultaneously not being trumps paid whore."

for the third time...again...lets assume 100% of what you said is true. what part of it is illegal?

can you answer that or are you just going to keep dancing?

From: Buskill
21-May-24
I never thought I’d see “fluffer” used in a Bowsite post. I’m still smiling over that one.

From: DanaC
21-May-24
Ricky are you joking? The charge Trump is facing in court is "falsifying business records" ** to cover up the payment. Are you actually following this case? Or is your BDS making you blind to all charges and all evidence?

** Yes, that IS ILLEGAL.

From: 2Wild Bill
21-May-24
DanaC, Your serious case of TDS has already been establish on Bowsite. Is it illegal? No, but admitting it to yourself is the first step to recovery. Till then, you're just Ricky's wind up toy.

From: csalem
21-May-24
What evidence. Danac you obviously are not following the trial at all. Not surprised

21-May-24
"The charge Trump is facing in court is "falsifying business records."

I know exactly what he's being charged with.

is an nda (which is a legal agreement) illegal? how exactly should he have listed the expenses paid to execute a legal agreement? what would it be for if not for "legal expenses." if i hire an attorney to execute a trust...i would list those as "legal expenses"...would i not?

are you seriously taking michael cohens word for how things went down...or is your tds making you blind to the reality of the situation?

From: RutnStrut
21-May-24
"again...lets assume 100% of what you said is true. what part of it is illegal?"

He won't answer you. He may be having trouble breathing the thin air waaay up there on his moral high horse.

From: Nyati
21-May-24
We haven’t seen the juggling clowns on unicycles yet . That might be next

From: csalem
21-May-24
Nyati. Don’t be surprised if they show up Lol !!

BDS ? Ironic comment considering the source.

From: DanaC
21-May-24

DanaC's embedded Photo
DanaC's embedded Photo
Sorry, Ricky it's not _just_ Michael Cohen's word.

"or is your tds making you blind to the reality of the situation? "

Love how all you BDS-manic Trump-swabbers love your silly little paranoid 'argument. ' The 'reality of the situation' is that Trump can only delay justice for so long. And the clock is ticking. OMB kiddies >;-)

From: soccern23ny
21-May-24
What is there to respond to?

Witnesses, recordings, bank statements, etc.

He "could shoot a person in broad daylight on 5th avenue" and you would still defend him. He is, for all purposes infallible to you. Ergo there is no argument i or anyone can make to prove his guilt. Or better yet prove his actions require actual consequences. There is no reason to actually debate the merits of anything beyond stating the facts.

He is your demi God and you will blindly worship him regardless

From: Will
21-May-24
I like that pic Dana. That would be what I suspect happens.

From: csalem
21-May-24
Well that may happen, Will. But if it does you will have to add the 4-8 secret service agents that have to be in there with him to the picture.

From: Mint
21-May-24
As a CPA that's been in the business for 40 years I can tell you this case is a complete joke and every business is guilty of the same offense. Paying Stormy wasn't illegal and it wasn't a campaign finance violation since he didn't pay it from his campaign. Hilary did pay for the Steele Dossier with her campaign and put it under legal fees and her campaign was fined $4K. With trump they are charging him with 34 felonies since it was 34 payments and they did novel legal maneuver to upgrade from a misdemeanor. They Judge if not wholly corrupt will dismiss the case.

From: scentman
21-May-24
You hate Trump so much that you don't care we are being sold out to communist and 3rd world countries... Biden looks like a corpse's shell and that's who you want to ruin not run our great America... pitiful. scentman

From: TRnCO
21-May-24
they got him this time.....LOL!!! With Cohen as the prime witness. LOL....

21-May-24
“Paying Stormy wasn't illegal and it wasn't a campaign finance violation since he didn't pay it from his campaign.”

bingo. all the rest is just tds wishful thinking.

even if they do manage to get a conviction…(it’s manhattan after all) which one of you tds heavy breathers want to take the bet that it will be overturned on appeal?

the prosecution knows it will too…they just want to eek out a felony conviction so loopy joe can run on it.

21-May-24
soccern23ny…

nice diversion…but what part of the following is illegal?

“Do you think all of his affairs are fictitious? Or that he had affairs but didn't pay people money to keep quiet about them?”

sorry…dana can’t save you on this one.

lol

From: Nyati
21-May-24
There is no case. The feds even passed on it. It’s all a show to tie Trump up and try to hurt him during an election. If he is found guilty it will be overturned on appeal but that likely won’t happen before the election. My only hope is if there are at least 1-2 jurors with common sense

From: DanaC
21-May-24

DanaC's Link
https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-04-04-SOF.pdf

From: Nyati
21-May-24
A NY Prosecutor can indite a ham sandwich.

From: Buffalo1
21-May-24
The moral of the story- you mess with a whore, you’re gonna get screwed.

From: 4nolz@work
21-May-24
We should be chilled by this Court.

From: olddogrib
21-May-24
Whaaaaat, I'm "chilled" by a whole lot more than just "this Court". After all this is the party that cries "the sky is falling" and "it's the end of Democracy". Yes, I'd say when a party gets away with weaponizing the Judicial Branch it probably is the end.

From: scentman
21-May-24
The prosecutor ate the ham sandwich... can't any court or judicial group end this madness? Who is paying for all these court proceedings? Oh, we are... middle class funding the demise of our once great country... middle class is their real target fellas. scentman

From: HunterR
21-May-24

HunterR's Link
Even if Trump isn't charged with something that makes him ineligible to run the fact that they're able to put him through all these bs charges, the border is wide open, a "war" is going on and we seem to be supporting both sides, "our" corpse of a president appears to be almost entirely brain dead and can not think on his own, inflation is insane, boys are girls and girls are boys and girls now have penises, amongst everything else all this should be a clear sign that the Dems/mentally ill are running this country and have been since the stolen election in 2020. Does anyone actually think they won't do the exact same thing again in 2024? Personally I don't think it matters how many votes Trump might get again assuming he can even run, if need be this will simply be another stolen bs election and 4 more years of pudding head joe. Sad but true, said best by Metallica.

25-May-24
from the link danac provided.

"INTRODUCTION

1. The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election."

even if we are to believe that trump falsified business records (by claiming that payments to his lawyer in order to execute a nda were legal expenses), what specifically is the "criminal conduct" that he intended to conceal?

From: spike78
25-May-24
Let me see Trump banged a porn star and Clinton banged his intern while at work hmm which one is worse?

From: CaptMike
25-May-24
The conniving, deceitful liberals at work. They are nothing more than a cancer in this country, with cells spread near and far, as evidenced by the trolls who spend time posting their propaganda on this site.

From: DanaC
25-May-24
"what specifically is the "criminal conduct" that he intended to conceal? "

Election fraud.

From: DanaC
25-May-24
Spike, and Clinton was impeached for lying about it.

25-May-24
"Election fraud"

really? so lets just say that trump did the nda for the sole purpose of influencing the election (which by the way...every campaign contribution is for the purpose of influencing an election)...how specifically is trump donating to his own campaign "election fraud?"

25-May-24
"...and Clinton was impeached for lying about it."

clinton was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice. nothing close to what trump is being tried for.

From: DanaC
25-May-24
Remind me, what was Clinton being investigated for at that time?

A doggone shame that Trump didn't testify at this trial.

25-May-24
“Remind me, what was Clinton being investigated for at that time?”

completely irrelevant, but the Lewinsky situation was revealed when he was being investigated for his role in the whitewater scandal…”travel-gate”…and “file-gate.”

would you mind answering my question now?

“so lets just say that trump did the nda for the sole purpose of influencing the election (which by the way...every campaign contribution is for the purpose of influencing an election)...how specifically is trump donating to his own campaign "election fraud?"

From: DanaC
25-May-24
It's the *combination* of falsifying records and misrepresenting his conduct.

If he'd had the gumption to just say, yeah, I boffed the bimbo and payed her to keep her mouth shut, this would've gone away.

From: Catscratch
25-May-24
"If he'd had the gumption to just say, yeah, I boffed the bimbo and payed her to keep her mouth shut, this would've gone away."

I disagree. Nothing just goes away for Trump concerning the media and the politian's against him.

From: Will
25-May-24
Dana - he cant do that. It would be honest. The guy is pathologically allergic to speaking about anything remotely real/honest. He's literally incapable of it.

You are correct, though. The guy was correct; he could do anything and lose no voters. ANYTHING.

From: 4nolz@work
25-May-24
It's funny Trump speaks plain and people are horrified while other politicians say the same things in political mumbo jumbo and no one says anything.

From: DanaC
25-May-24
"Nothing just goes away for Trump concerning the media and the politian's against him. "

Same holds true for most pols. Ted Kennedy died with the word 'Chappaquiddick' in his ears. Nixon, Watergate. Etc. etc.

From: spike78
25-May-24
It’s also funny that Trump is a lying scumbag but slick Willy is not and you all would vote for him again lol yup makes total sense. That right there is the reason why we could never have a reasonable debate.

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
Grown men carrying water for a silver spoon con man.

Trumpers calling 50% of their fellow Americans a cancer...on Memorial Day weekend. Pathetic.

From: CaptMike
25-May-24
…and the cancer continues to spread with another cell emerging.

From: spike78
25-May-24
So Trump is a silver spoon conman after being given money by his father and starting businesses but Joe Biden is a multimillionaire from a Senators salary. Hmm I’m wondering who the real conman is? So let me get this straight if your father gave you millions you would give it away and not invest it? Ok

From: spike78
25-May-24
Furthermore you Bideners are actually duped into believing he gives a crap about any of us and he’s definitely not a racist right? He must different then all the rest I guess. It’s laughable how naive you guys are.

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
Spike- your head is so far up Trump's a#% you can't see or hear anything remotely close to reality.

You see anyone incessantly starting Biden threads? Get a clue mush brain.

From: spike78
25-May-24
Meanwhile Trump paid for his own campaign instead of taking special interest money and declined the Presidential salary but Biden happily filled his pockets like he’s done for the last 50 years but yup Trump big bad man.

25-May-24
"It's the *combination* of falsifying records and misrepresenting his conduct."

why do you suppose the fec chose not to bring this "election fraud" case against trump?

as a matter of fact...didnt they say what trump did didnt amount to any campaign violations. it took a da that ran on the promise that he was going to get trump to bring this convoluted case forward. weird...

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
You are the strawman queen of Bowsite. That was very honerable of Trump to do Spike. I'm not going to hold it against Biden that he used legal campaign contribution just like Every President Ever besides Trump in 2016. Trump deserves credit for that...pretty ballsy. How much of his own money is he using this go around?

Trump had his day in court. Let the jury decide. Let the constitutional process play out.

Spike- Your brain is just mush man and your confirmation bias is off the chart.

25-May-24
"Trump had his day in court. Let the jury decide. Let the constitutional process play out."

everyone here (as well as the prosecution in this case) knows that if trump is found guilty...it will be overturned on appeal. they dont care...they know that will take time. all they want is a felony conviction they can strap to trump so they have a talking point during this election cycle.

lets hope it plays out better than the unconstitutional student loan "forgiveness."

or the unconstitutional eviction moratorium.

or the uncostitutional vaccine mandates.

or...or...or...

yes...thank god we have biden in office..."for the constitution." (talk about brains of mush...lol)

in reality...thank god we had trump in office and we have the scotus we currently have.

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
Yes Ricky, thank goodness for the check and balances in our government. If Biden does something unconstitutional then it should be reversed.

I'm mush for brains when you admit that you know who you will vote for in every future election forever...let that sink in there Ricky. That is truly literally brainless.

25-May-24
"That is truly literally brainless."

on the contrary my "mush" brained friend.

first...i never said "who" i would vote for...just which party. i have no idea who the nominee will be next election cycle.

second...i dont expect you to understand this but it is literally the polar opposite of "brainless." knowing how the power structure works in a two party system...it is actually quite strategic. what is truly "brainless" is thinking you can vote for person...who is a member of the opposite party that you most closely align with...and have them effect the change you would like to see.

"brainless" is too kind a word for that.

From: RK
25-May-24

From: DanaC
25-May-24
" first...i never said "who" i would vote for...just which party. i have no idea who the nominee will be next election cycle. "

ROTFLMAO!!! So it doesn't even matter who the nominee will be, you'll automatically support them. I guess character doesn't matter anymore in a candidate.

From: spike78
25-May-24
Wow I have mush for brains for the Trump comment I made? Yeah that makes total sense. I guess when I speak facts liberals can’t handle it so they must insult.

From: spike78
25-May-24
Let me ask all the libs this. Who here would let uncle Joe around their 6 year old daughter? That creepy slime bag would probably go through my underwear drawer if he could.

From: 70lbDraw
25-May-24
“If he'd had the gumption to just say, yeah, I boffed the bimbo and payed her to keep her mouth shut, this would've gone away.”

Lol! That’s BULLS**T to the nth degree, and you know it. If Trump admitted anything you’d build a statue to commemorate the day he gave the idiots endless ammunition. Then you’d spend the rest of your lives reminding everyone how Trump admitted wanting to be a dictator.

“Trumpers calling 50% of their fellow Americans a cancer...on Memorial Day weekend. Pathetic.”

Then you said, “Spike- Your brain is just mush man and your confirmation bias is off the chart.”

So trumpers can’t throw insults on Memorial Day, but you can? You guys need to decide which face you’ll wear each day. It gets confusing when you use them both at once.

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
"first...i never said "who" i would vote for...just which party. i have no idea who the nominee will be next election cycle."

Exactly my point. Does the parties put up more than one candidate? Thanks for playing.

"second...i dont expect you to understand this but it is literally the polar opposite of "brainless." knowing how the power structure works in a two party system...it is actually quite strategic. what is truly "brainless" is thinking you can vote for person...who is a member of the opposite party that you most closely align with...and have them effect the change you would like to see."

I've never agreed with every policy of everyone I've ever voted for and I've voted for Rs and Ds. I completely agree with Trump/Biden on some things and not on others. But I can recognize a spineless populist and a cult of personality like Trump. Biden is mentally incapable of leading IMO.

Spike- you're clueless because all of the stupid conspiracies you post. I know kids that recognize BS much better than you. Far better.

From: HDE
25-May-24
...and people that follow biden aren't "cultists"?

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
"...and people that follow biden aren't "cultists"?"

Key word is "follow." Bit of a Freudian slip from your cult brain. I don't know anyone who follows Biden. If they do then yes...they are in a cult.

Why would anyone "follow" any politician?

From: spike78
25-May-24
KS conspiracy’s like Covid coming from the Wuhan lab? conspiracy’s like chemtrails which you can read about daily? Yeah they’re ALL just conspiracy theories. How about the Vaxes being safe and here we have liberal Chris Cuomo saying he was vaxxed injured. Yeah I will stick to my theories and be healthier than you deniers.

From: csalem
25-May-24
That TDS really has old KS Spewing his venom today

Must be having a rough weekend LOL!

From: Red Lion
25-May-24
What I don’t understand is that they going after trump for paying her off to keep quiet but it seems she didn’t have much trouble taking the money in the first place. So where is the crime.

From: Nyati
25-May-24
There is no crime. NDAs are not illegal. High profile people do them all the time. He paid for it with his own money not campaign money . Feds looked at it and said They’re’s no case. Bragg initially looked at it and said there’s no crime. If there was a crime it would be federal and not state. Suddenly in an election year 8 years after the fact and after political pressure they decide to prosecute and after 6 weeks of trial they still haven’t announced what felony crime they are trying to prosecute him for .

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
He's not on trial for an NDA or cheating on his wife with a pornstar or paying her. He's charged with 34 felonies for cooking the books (falsifying business records).

From: DanaC
25-May-24
"Then you’d spend the rest of your lives reminding everyone how Trump admitted wanting to be a dictator. "

Wait, you admit he said that ???? Guess I don't need to erect the statue. >;-)

From: Nyati
25-May-24
Listing legal expenses as legal expenses is a crime ??? A NDA is a legal document and thus a legal expenditure.

If the federal government looked at it and declined to prosecute when it happened 8 years ago then why is NY prosecuting 8 years later.

From: Jaquomo
25-May-24
"He's charged with 34 felonies for cooking the books (falsifying business records)."

Only 34? Surely they could have rounded it up to 100, especially since the DOJ dug into it and found nothing to prosecute. Zippo. At worst he may have been guilty of a misdemeanor for looking the other way. Trump didn't personally "cook" any books. You know better than that, KS.

From: RK
25-May-24
If course KS know that Jaquomo. But Hrabe is blinded by the real disease known as TDS

Which is sad because he thinks of himself as a scientist and a fair and balanced person. Maybe but not with Trump things. Rabid foaming queen.

From: spike78
25-May-24
Lol Trump cooking the books? You do realize he pays a team of accountants right? Oh and when you were crying to see his tax returns he has them done by accountants right? Wow and my brain is mush. I also hope you realize when he pays zero taxes that is due to tax law set by our corrupt government.

From: RK
25-May-24

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
"But Hrabe is blinded by the real disease known as TDS"

RK- last time i posted about your TDS you crawfished in a hurry. Just as expected.

I guess we will find out if he broke the law when a jury makes a decision. I'm good with whatever the jury decides...guilty or not.

From: RutnStrut
25-May-24
"He's charged with 34 felonies for cooking the books (falsifying business records)."

Well then they need to prove that he does his own books. So far all that has been proven is that the judge is heavily biased and Cohen is a thief as well as a liar.

From: Nyati
25-May-24
If they wanted a fair trial under our justice system they wouldn’t have picked a district that was 90% democrats

25-May-24
" Biden is mentally incapable of leading IMO."

yet you voted for him to be the leader of the free world (and "for the constitution" of course). that tells us everything we need to know about your own cognitive abilities...or the level of your tds.

yes indeed..."thanks for playing."

From: KSflatlander
25-May-24
And he was still a better choice than the con man and his cult. January 6 proved that.

From: Nyati
25-May-24
Eye rolling emoji inserted here if we had one

25-May-24
"And he was still a better choice than the con man and his cult."

so i guess we can assume you will vote for him again. "for the constitution" of course. lol

From: Nyati
25-May-24
Eye rolling emoji inserted here if we had one

From: RK
25-May-24
WTF are you talking about KS. I might have exited because I have a very busy schedule but crawfishing from the likes of you. Too funny, never.

From: Catscratch
26-May-24

Catscratch's embedded Photo
Catscratch's embedded Photo
Bahahaha. Flatlander's opening line yesterday morning with zero content and 100% antagonistism. You guys were TROLLED big time. He couldn't have gotten more bites tossing a little black beetlespinner into a local farm pond! Then carried on to display the disrespect and cancer that he accuses others of ten fold. Impressive showing!

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
Easy Karen Catscratch. Everyone can dish it but not all can take it.

RK- if you don't have TDS then name 3 things/policies in which you disagree with Trump and 3 things you agree with Biden. I'll go first:

Trump (positive): 1. Great American Outdoors Act 2. Border Security 3. Allowing terminally ill patients to try experimental drugs

Biden (disagree): 1. Afghan withdraw 2. Illegal Classified documents 3. Incapable of military decisions

Your turn RK.

From: Catscratch
26-May-24
I think it's awesome KS! You stop in dropping mindless bombs and everyone gets in a tissy. It was very well played for what you were after. You did great! And your still doing it by calling me a "Karen" after I complemented your moves. Simply spectacular trolling! :)

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
When you start moderating for the right wing nut "mindless bombs" here too then you might have a point. Stop whining Karen.

From: CaptMike
26-May-24
Troll is all KS is. And, not a good one as he offers nothing that even comes close to factual. But, being overly emotional is a hallmark of lib supporters.

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
Here is your chance Karen...another Trumper "mindless bomb" from Shawn.

Or wait for RK cause he usually just post mindless bombs...or maybe mindless snap pops is a better descriptor. Then again you can always count on Spike for the mindless.

From: Catscratch
26-May-24
So I'd have to call out other people's actions to add validity to calling out your actions? Do your "mindless bombs" not exist if others aren't brought to light? You just just admitted to your trolling and at the same time tried to deflect. Kudos once again for doing such a good job of rattling the can but saying nothing.

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
No, I posted my opinion on a discussion thread just like anyone else. Seems pretty hypocritical. Hence the Karen comment.

From: Mike in CT
26-May-24

Mike in CT's Link
I've followed a lot of the commentary on this case from these and other legal minds, some of them decidedly not fans of Donald Trump.

In terms of quotes that are almost too mind-boggling to believe someone would actually utter, this one ranks high on the list "The Manhattan District Attorney seeks to prove that before the 2016 presidential election, Trump paid, or discussed paying, the two women not to disclose alleged affairs with them, thereby influencing voters as to his character."

Seriously Alvin? Seriously? You honestly think people in this country were unaware of DJT's flaws before Stormy Daniels? The list of transgressions that predate this are not only many but widely known; hell, the "grab them by the pussy" comment didn't suffer from lack of air time.

From where I sit Alvin Bragg has proved 2 things and unfortunately for him, none of them have anything to do with his case.

He's proved:

1. Darwin was right. 2. You can't fix stupid.

From: Catscratch
26-May-24

Catscratch's embedded Photo
Catscratch's embedded Photo
Nope, I said your first post yesterday was without content and antagonistic (I still stand by that and you have to prove me wrong even though youve tried deflection several times). Then you very plainly said that I'd have a point IF I'd call others out for the same thing. Either your post was or wasn't those things, others have nothing to do with it. By the way, I like how you go back and edit your posts to make them sound different after others have already responded. Another nice troll move! You're stackin em up!

From: Nyati
26-May-24

Nyati 's embedded Photo
Nyati 's embedded Photo
Prosecutor’s surprise witness to appear in Trumps trial Tuesday.

From: BowSniper
26-May-24
That National Enquirer witness said its common for celebrities to pay to suppress bad publicity stories... happens all the time. Not a crime.

Trump would have paid to silence a marital sex scandal whether running for office or not. Had nothing to do with an election. Not a crime.

Trump had millions of his own money, and didn't use any campaign money to pay Daniel's. Not a crime.

Trump made these payments to his lawyer, which seems not crazy to call them legal payments.

The old John Edward's scandel is similar, back when he was running for President. A misdemeanor and fine at best.

I recall Hillary paying for the election 'dirty dossier' by funneling those payments through her lawyer.

But any legal precedent will go right out the window in this era of political lawfare... with a Trump hating DA bringing this case to a Trump hating DA in a Trump hating town with a Trump hating jury.

From: BowSniper
26-May-24

BowSniper's Link
Good recap of the John Edward's election sex scandal here.....

From: nchunter
26-May-24
The part I don't get from the democrats who opine on this thread is how corruptly bias this trial is. The gag order to Trump and not allowing Costello to speak a complete sentence. He was interrupted after saying two or three words and the judge allowing it. If the republicans were weaponizing the justice system like this I would be saying the same thing against it. If Trump was not running he would have ZERO charges against him-plain and simple.

From: 70lbDraw
26-May-24
“The part I don't get from the democrats who opine on this thread is how corruptly bias this trial is.”

I’ve commented on that a number of times. After trying to ask sincerely formed questions, I’m under the impression that folks like Dana, and fdp, don’t believe in the American rule of law. Weaponizing the system will get the results they want. But along the way, those two have been great advocates for the outcome of j6 and its lack of accountability for anyone that wasn’t a “MAGA”t in attendance.

From: spike78
26-May-24
Mike in CT what cracks me up is that happened before the 2016 election. So are we saying it took 7-8 years to take this to trial OR are we saying that if Trump was not running in 2024 that this trial would never have happened?

From: CaptMike
26-May-24
Of course it never would have happened if he were not running for president. The hypocrisy of libs here and elsewhere is astounding. They have zero moral compass.

From: Bowfreak
26-May-24
I hope they pin more phony charges on Trump. All it has done is make him stronger.

He’s going to win and I can’t wait to watch his enemies squirm.

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
"Nope, I said your first post yesterday was without content and antagonistic (I still stand by that and you have to prove me wrong even though youve tried deflection several times)."

It's your OPINION genius. You want me to prove your subjective and relative opinion wrong lol. Maybe that's your problem Cat...you don't understand fact from opinion.

A troll. What a cop out. I've bowhunting for +40 years and on Bowsite since the late 1990s. But if it makes you feel better.

Catscratch- Please explain what the thread edit button is for again?

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
"Of course it never would have happened if he were not running for president. The hypocrisy of libs here and elsewhere is astounding. They have zero moral compass."

This trial includes a husband and father ( Trump) who cheated on his 3rd wife, who was with an infant child, with a pornstar. What an alternate reality about a moral compass LMAO. Another Bowsite classic. And didn't some Trumper on here call 1/2 of Americans "a cancer."

From: CaptMike
26-May-24
"This trial includes a husband and father ( Trump) who cheated on his 3rd wife, who was with an infant child, with a pornstar. What an alternate reality about a moral compass LMAO. Another Bowsite classic. And didn't some Trumper on here call 1/2 of Americans "a cancer." Are any of those things you mentioned against the law? Let me help you, just in case your estrogen is high. The answer is no. But, weaponizing the judicial system in order to besmirch an opponent is a highly hypocritical act, coming from a party rife with cigar stuffing candidates of their own. Therin lies the lack of any moral compass. I doubt the ratio is 50/50 but liberal cancer is rife in this country and aided by overly emotional and ignorant useful idiots.

26-May-24
"And didn't some Trumper on here call 1/2 of Americans "a cancer."

dont know about that but i know a president that called half the the nation "semi-facists." I know another presidential candidate that called a quarter of the nation "a basket of deplorables."

i know you voted for one of them...and i suspect you voted for the other.

From: DanaC
26-May-24
" Are any of those things you mentioned against the law?"

The point isn't whether 'those things' are 'against the law' but whether they make a candidate morally unfit for office. And apparently, since he's the Republican candidate, they do not, in the eyes of many 'good Christian conservative' voters.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, "but Clinton!" So electing a Republican pig is okay because the Democrats elected one? Pigs is pigs.

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
"dont know about that but i know a president that called half the the nation "semi-facists." I know another presidential candidate that called a quarter of the nation "a basket of deplorables."

And IMO doing those things are just as dumb and divisive.

From: 70lbDraw
26-May-24
“This trial includes a husband and father ( Trump) who cheated on his 3rd wife, who was with an infant child, with a pornstar.”

So, the only sensible solution is, if Trump is convicted, we go through all politicians background and prosecute every one of them that had a supposed “affair”. Cuz… you know…morality and all…?

From: CaptMike
26-May-24
"The point isn't whether 'those things' are 'against the law' but whether they make a candidate morally unfit for office." No, that is not the point. The conversation was about hypocritical and morally empty people. Bringing a suit such as this one, propagated by rabid liberals afraid of an opposition candidate and supported by useful idiots is the point.

From: DanaC
26-May-24
"The conversation was about hypocritical and morally empty people. "

And that was MY point. You ally yourself with an amoral pig because he agrees with you on certain political points. And when people point out his swinishness *they* are the amoral ones?

This is not about "rabid liberals afraid of an opposition candidate," it's about people who don't want political power in the hands of an amoral pig. That is the same whether the pigs name is Clinton or Trump.

From: Catscratch
26-May-24
So your first post yesterday was relevant and contributing to the thread, and it was also not antagonistic. That really did go right over my head. It's pretty subjective of you to assume I have a problem. Is that your opinion or a fact, or do you know?

I said you like to troll the members here. What exactly is that a cop-out of? And what does the length of time you've bowhunted or been a member of a forum have to do with any part of this discussion? I'm once again really struggling with how those are connected, and if there is any relevance whatsoever. Doesn't someone have to be a member to even be able to troll? Maybe it just means you've been a troll since dial-up...

I'd never thought about the edit button much until I saw you going back and changing your posts. People use it to correct typos and grammar errors. Trolls use it to go back and change the meaning of their post after people have started responding to it. Of course you knew that before asking me.

You've seemed easily triggered this weekend. Maybe a beetlespin and a pond would do ya some good? I might get up early and try some of that myself!

From: KSflatlander
26-May-24
Yeah the cancer comment did trigger me on Memorial Day as I was thinking about my grandparents who helped us learn to respect others regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, religion. I thought someone should speak up. I may disagree with Trump voters but I have many friends who are. Cutting through the BS they are my fellow Americans.

I edit to correct errors too and also sometimes someone else post to me while typing a response. I figured it was easier to post a response to those in the same post so it's chronological.

I just got off the lake with the family. I'm doing better than I deserve. Good luck fishing.

From: CaptMike
27-May-24
I ally myself with the person I think will do best for this country. Promoting homosexuality, mental disease, weaponizing the judicial system, pushing reliance on foreign communist countries, selling off our natural resources to other countries, having a multiple tiered legal system, and profiteering from taxpayers are all amoral acts that stem from current liberals. Time to overcome your estrogen laden feelings and open your eyes to how your party is destroying the country. THAT is amoral.

27-May-24
"And IMO doing those things are just as dumb and divisive."

i agree. but thats not really the point.

we all say and do things that can be considered dumb and divisive.

every politician says and does things that can be considered dumb and divisive.

the point is that you dont seem to have any problem looking past those things to vote for a person that you feel is a better choice overall.

when someone does the exact same thing with trump...you accuse them of being...trumpers...cultists...mush brains...having their heads up trumps a#$...strawman queens...brainless...clueless...karens...etc...etc...etc.

the point is...every candidate is flawed...including the ones you vote for. everyone that votes does so for a flawed candidate...for specific reasons that are important to them...including you.

the notion that you are any different than anyone else here...or that you are somehow morally superior because you refuse to vote for one flawed candidate and instead vote for another flawed candidate...is just plain hypocritical.

thats the point...

27-May-24

Ricky The Cabel Guy's Link
back the original thread topic...this is a very good read for anyone with an open mind. even alan dershowitz (certainly no trump "cultist") sees this trial...this judge...and the media coverage of both for exactly what they are.

"I was inside the court when the judge closed the Trump trial, what I saw shocked me: Alan Dershowitz"

"I have observed and participated in trials throughout the world. I have seen justice and injustice in China, Russia, Ukraine, England, France, Italy, Israel, as well as in nearly 40 of our 50 states.

But in my 60 years as a lawyer and law professor, I have never seen a spectacle such as the one I observed sitting in the front row of the courthouse yesterday.

The judge in Donald Trump’s trial was an absolute tyrant, though he appeared to the jury to be a benevolent despot. He seemed automatically to be ruling against the defendant at every turn.

Many experienced lawyers raised their eyebrows when the judge excluded obviously relevant evidence when offered by the defense, while including irrelevant evidence offered by the prosecution.

But when the defense’s only substantive witness, the experienced attorney Robert Costello, raised his eyebrows at one of New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan’s rulings, the court went berserk.

Losing his cool and showing his thin skin, the judge cleared the courtroom of everyone including the media.

For some reason, I was allowed to stay, and I observed one of the most remarkable wrong-headed biases I have ever seen. The judge actually threatened to strike all of Costello’s testimony if he raised his eyebrows again.

That of course would have been unconstitutional because it would have denied the defendant his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and to raise a defense."

"Even when journalists do report on courtroom proceedings, their accounts must be taken with a grain of salt. When you watch CNN or MSNBC, you generally see an account of a trial that never took place.

They spin the events so much that reality is totally distorted.

I experienced that distortion firsthand yesterday, when I saw one of my former students and research assistants, a CNN legal analyst named Norman Eisen, during a break and went over to him and asked him about his family. We chatted for a few minutes in the most friendly way.

But NBC, the Daily Beast and other media decided to make up a story about the event. They claimed that I had a spat with my nemesis, rather than a friendly conversation with a former student. Their account was made up, yet it was circulated through the media.

To his credit, Eisen wrote to the media to correct the account, saying that the person sitting next to him would confirm the media’s false reporting. I doubt we will see a retraction."

From: KSflatlander
27-May-24
There's a difference between a Trumper and someone who votes for Trump. January 6 idiots are a good example of Trumpers. Or those who carry water for the con man.

From: Catscratch
27-May-24
"Yeah the cancer comment did trigger me on Memorial Day"

I missed that one too. I skimmed back through this thread for that day and didn't find that comment. Who said it?

27-May-24
"There's a difference between a Trumper and someone who votes for Trump. January 6 idiots are a good example of Trumpers. Or those who carry water for the con man."

which one am I?

From: KSflatlander
27-May-24
IDK You determine that Ricky. Not me. But I notice that no matter what the criticism of Trump or right wingers you go on auto pilot dig in and defend the defenseless IMO.

Catscratch- CaptMike said it. Just scroll above my first post on this thread. My grandfather fought and was wounded in the Battle of the Bulge. He deserves more respect than to be called a cancer. Many liberals made the ultimate sacrifice for the country just as much as conservatives. We are Americans first and I wish we could get back to that. I thought the comment was anti-patriotic and disrespectful to our fallen on Memorial Day weekend. So you skipped those mindless bombs to criticize me for calling it out. Telling that you didn't and don't. Not that I've seen.

Our "shining city on a hill" is slow being dimmed by us. And division/tribalism is to blame. If your definition of a liberal is anyone who doesn't support Trump then it's you. If you can't give Trump any credit for anything then it's you. If you can't accept criticism of the candidate or party you voted for it's you. If you think the other 50% of the population is the total problem then it's you. You are the problem IMO.

From: 70lbDraw
27-May-24
“January 6 idiots are a good example of Trumpers.”

I can’t help but wonder how many “anti-trumpers” are guilty of trespassing on J6.

Yes, KS, Dana, I’m suggesting some of your liberal friends were involved in breaching the Capitol. You know, In much the same way you accuse Trump of seeding his own rally in New York. Political affiliation isn’t a recognizable trait for the average American. So how do you possibly know that 100% of the crowd was MAGA? You don’t, and you never will. If you can prove that liberals are as pure and crime-free as you try to portray, then prove there were none in the Capitol on j6, I’ll come to the dark side and vote for Harris with you.

Quit being so dramatic! Nobody is disrespecting anyone’s fallen family members. As Americans we’ve all contributed and lost something or someone along the way. You aren’t unique in that aspect.

27-May-24
IDK You determine that Ricky. Not me. But I notice that no matter what the criticism of Trump or right wingers you go on auto pilot dig in and defend the defenseless IMO.

couldnt the same be said about you? whenever someone defends trump "you go on auto pilot dig in" and start calling them trumpers... cultists...and a whole variety of other pejoratives.

trump has run for president 3 times now. the first time i voted for him because my preferred candidate did not get the nomination. the second time i voted for him because he was the incumbent...and i had now doubt he would be better than the incompetent that was running against him. this time if he is the nominee again...i will vote for him because my preferred candidate will have not been nominated again...and he will be much better than the incumbent.

that hardly sounds like a trumper or a cultist...but i am confident that wont stop you from going on auto pilot and digging in again.

From: KSflatlander
27-May-24
I've already said Biden doesn't deserve another term due to his mental condition among other things. Trump doesn't deserve another one either. I'll decide who to vote for after the conventions and debates but right now it's neither Trump or Biden for me.

27-May-24
“I've already said Biden doesn't deserve another term due to his mental condition among other things. Trump doesn't deserve another one either.”

that’s just another area where you and I disagree.

I don’t think in terms of what trump or Biden “deserve.”

i think in terms of what the american people “deserve.”

they deserve a secure border.

they deserve a thriving economy.

they deserve to be safe from crime.

they deserve to have their second amendment protected.

they deserve freedom of speech…religion…and the right to life.

women (real women) deserve protection of their spaces…their sports…and their institutions.

they deserve a supreme court that upholds the constitution as written.

i could go on and on but suffice it to say…between trump and biden the choice to me is obvious…flaws and all.

From: spike78
27-May-24
Well right now there are enough illegals in this country to completely destroy it so if Trump deports them great if not we are all done anyway. And I’m not referring to the families that came here to have a better life. I’m referring to all the soon to be soldiers that are now here on purpose. Someone made a great comment on YouTube when you escape a war you bring your family and men going off to war go alone. We now have plenty of 25-35 year old men from other countries and when you used to say our military would never fire on us well they found an answer to that problem.

From: Catscratch
27-May-24
"Telling that you didn't and don't. Not that I've seen."

What exactly is "telling" telling you? What do you know? Make sure it's a fact and not an OPINION. I'd like to know why I skip 70's comments, CaptMike's, Dana's, Grey Ghost's, Ricky's, etc to "moderate" (as you put it) yours? And if you don't like people doing that then why do you constantly call other people out for their comments? How is when you do it different?

Still curious on what I'm copping out of, and what the length of time that you've bowhunted has to do with anything other than... the length of time you've been bowhunting?

From: KSflatlander
27-May-24
Call me out is fine. But if you want to start pointing out trolls or dropping "mindless bombs" then maybe be more consistent. I post even though I know it's dissenting opinion because bowhunting is not exclusive to right wingers. Sure more lean conservative but many are moderates and even "liberal" in the real definition or true sense of the word. Not the "librtards" definition that has been hijacked and is propagated by right wing fake news outlets.

I personally wish the political threads would stop. I've hunted and shoot with many great people for which I do not know thier politics and if I did it would not change my opinion of them. I judge people by words and actions and how they treat others.

The cop out is that you call me a troll when I post an opinion you apparently disagree with on a non-bowhunting thread that I didn't start. Is the person who is starting the political thread the real troll? Calling me out and not them is a cop out and hypocritical IMO.

From: CaptMike
27-May-24
KS, if you are a conniving, deceitful liberal then you are a cancer on this country. I did not call you, your grandparents or anyone else a cancer. I called conniving, deceitful liberals a cancer. If you applied that to yourself then you determined that you are a conniving, deceitful liberal, not me.

From: Mint
27-May-24
"He's charged with 34 felonies for cooking the books (falsifying business records)."

As A CPA with 40 years of auditing experience I can tell you 99.9% of Company's would have posted the entries the same way and auditors would not have changed the entries. He is facing 34 felonies because there was 34 entries of these payments. Now hunter falsifying his records by saying hookers, strip clubs and drug dealer payments were legitimate business expenses will get you in trouble with the IRS.

From: KSflatlander
27-May-24
"The conniving, deceitful liberals at work. They are nothing more than a cancer in this country, with cells spread near and far, as evidenced by the trolls who spend time posting their propaganda on this site."

CaptMike- do you think all liberals are conniving and deceitful? What is your opinion of about conniving and deceitful Republicans or just people in general? And who are the liberals here you refer to as conniving and deceitful on this site?

Don't back pedal now. Go all in. Tell us exactly what you mean.

From: Zbone
27-May-24

Zbone's Link
Talk about Trump trials, what about Hunter Biden trials:

"Joe Biden's Visit With Hunter Biden Witness Raises Eyebrows"

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/joe-biden-s-visit-with-hunter-biden-witness-raises-eyebrows/ar-BB1n9m1B?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=f6d4910b10c741aaaf9152ab057d612e&ei=22

From: sundowner
27-May-24
"The conniving, deceitful liberals at work. They are nothing more than a cancer in this country, with cells spread near and far, as evidenced by the trolls who spend time posting their propaganda on this site."

Well said, and absolutely true.

27-May-24
“CaptMike- do you think all liberals are conniving and deceitful?”

i can’t speak for anyone else but I don’t think that of all “liberals”…but I do think that of most “progressives” and all “leftists.”

some people lump them all together but they are far from the same.

From: Mint
27-May-24

Mint's Link
Jonathan Turley, the liberal Georgetown professor sums up the case pretty well at the link.

From: CaptMike
27-May-24
KS, as it relates to this thread, the conniving deceitful ones are those who orchestrated these charges, carefully choosing the players and the stadium. That they have made a mockery of our judicial system by responding it does indeed make them a cancer on this country. Those new cancer cells that sprout are those who would defend such blasphemous actions. No back pedaling , rather, straight at you.

From: KSflatlander
27-May-24
"No back pedaling , rather, straight at you."

Without answering a single question...straight alright lol

From: Catscratch
27-May-24
KS, I'll explain it for you. For a very long time whenever you've responded to one of my posts it's filled with misquotes, anger, and inflammatory remarks. You've consistently treated me like and asshole. A couple of weeks ago (after one of your posts wrongfully calling me out) I decided I wasn't going to let you bully me anymore. You want me to be consistent? I I am being extremely consistent! Zero other people on this forum have treated me like the asshole you do so zero other people are going to be treated like a dick. I don't feel like being passive or trying to use tact anymore. So if it feels like I'm singling you out it's because I am, but make no mistake I am being very consistent and treating everyone equally.

28-May-24
"Jonathan Turley, the liberal Georgetown professor sums up the case pretty well at the link."

good article mint.

alan dershowitz and jonathan turley (both self described liberals) have been voices of reason throughout this whole "trial."

From: CaptMike
29-May-24
"alan dershowitz and jonathan turley (both self described liberals) have been voices of reason throughout this whole "trial." It is refreshing to see people with different beliefs who are not thunderstruck with TDS.

From: Will
29-May-24
Well, after yesterday's closings, I'm looking forward to a verdict. I'm also looking forward to the amazing thread should he be found guilty by a jury that he/his legal team ok'd. But, as my late father-in-law used to Joke, and as DJT has thoroughly lived his life: "If it's a success, I did it, and if it's a failure, it's your fault."

Judge Luttig, life long conservative, basically thinks DJT is toxic sludge who should have been out of any shot at the Presidency many times over by this point.... George Conway, lifelong republican lawyer who agrees with Luttig. Liz Cheney, lawyer, lifelong republican who clearly articulates DJT's 80zillion faults and reasons he should not be pres. I could keep going. This is a legal case with facts presented, which the jury saw / heard... And most of us saw some form of politicized talking points.

Lets see what comes out of it.

From: TRnCO
29-May-24
" I'm also looking forward to the amazing thread should he be found guilty by a jury that he/his legal team ok'd. "

so you're not looking forward also to an amazing thread should he be found NOT guilty. LOL. Just as likely to happen..

From: xtroutx
29-May-24
I tend to stay away from political threads but, what ever the verdict is, this was the worst example of judiciary/political bias I have ever seen in my lifetime.

From: 2Wild Bill
29-May-24
"Lets see what comes out of it."

Have you seen the biased location, no. Have you seen the biased judge, no. Have you seen the distortion of the law construed for the prosecution, no. Have you heard the state Governor declare to people outside the trial that they shouldn't worry about New York treating anyone else with these accusations, no.

How can you expect us to grasp that you wiil see anything but what you want to see?

29-May-24
"I'm also looking forward to the amazing thread should he be found guilty by a jury that he/his legal team ok'd."

"...a jury that he/his legal team ok'd?"

thats funny. what choice did they have after they were denied a change of venue?

if trump is found guilty...will you look forward to the thread when its overturned on appeal? or is it just the "convicted felon" moniker that youre hoping for in this election cycle?

From: Nyati
29-May-24
Well, they never did actually state what the additional crime was that elevated the old misdemeanor into a felony. Judge just gave them an option of possible crimes and if all jurors think he committed one even if they disagree on which one then he is guilty. WTH ????????

This is CRAZY

That’s like picking someone up and running a trial and saying we don’t know what he’s guilty of but we’re going to put on a case then leave it up to jury to decide what he’s guilty of and if 4 think it’s murder, 4 thinks it’s , trespassing, and 4 think it’s Jay walking then he’s guilty of a felony for something??????

29-May-24
I have kept quiet up until now. I have a question . If the person accepting hush money accepts it then tells of the indiscretion are they not in breach of contract?

From: Glunt@work
29-May-24
She also owes Trump hundreds of thousands in court awarded judgments that she hasn't paid.

From: Mint
29-May-24
"Well, after yesterday's closings, I'm looking forward to a verdict. I'm also looking forward to the amazing thread should he be found guilty by a jury that he/his legal team ok'd"

I see you know nothing about how a jury is picked with this ridiculous statement.

From: Nyati
29-May-24
Mint, which would u choose. A hot poker up the rectum or a hot poker in your eye ?

That’s the choice the defense gets in a district that is 90+% democratic.

From: Glunt@work
29-May-24
I'm no legal expert but the multiple choice predicate crimes seems crazy. One of those has to exist to make the charges in this trial valid. Has he been charged and convicted of them? Odd to have jury decide his guilt on these charges which are only valid and dependant on alleged crimes that haven't been prosecuted or defended.

Regardless of politics and bias, you would think the first case against a US President would be so monumental that it would be a clear, cut and dried situation.

From: DanaC
29-May-24
"so monumental that it would be a clear, cut and dried situation. "

You mean like 'impeachable'?

From: scentman
29-May-24
The Dems would impeach a ham sandwich if it stood in their corrupt way, there is no crime! This is a President of America for God sake... when Trump gets in and he will, the hammer comes down. scentman

From: sundowner
29-May-24
“CaptMike- do you think all liberals are conniving and deceitful?”

I don't know about CaptMike, but I do. Leftists and progressives are worse.

From: Recurve Man
29-May-24
What’s really sad is when a lot of these people pass into eternity is when Justice will be served. Read into this how you wish. I do promise you this someday some of these wacko’s will spend eternity in Hell.

Shane

From: Nomad
29-May-24
It's all for the optics & low information voters......plus the useful idiots!

From: scentman
29-May-24
Recurve hit the bullseye, no "sin" there. scentman

From: spike78
29-May-24
This case is so cut and dry there was no verdict reached. And that’s in liberal NY! This case should be held in a swing state like NH not where Trump has already been fined and the governor announced don’t worry we won’t be going after anyone else.

From: CaptMike
29-May-24
The liberals who are not conniving and deceitful are overly naive, unintelligent, emotional thinkers.

From: DanaC
30-May-24
"This case is so cut and dry there was no verdict reached."

The deliberating jury is taking their time deliberating. Why is that a bad thing? Have you ever sat on a jury?

From: HunterR
30-May-24
"Well, they never did actually state what the additional crime was that elevated the old misdemeanor into a felony. Judge just gave them an option of possible crimes and if all jurors think he committed one even if they disagree on which one then he is guilty. WTH ???????? This is CRAZY That’s like picking someone up and running a trial and saying we don’t know what he’s guilty of but we’re going to put on a case then leave it up to jury to decide what he’s guilty of and if 4 think it’s murder, 4 thinks it’s , trespassing, and 4 think it’s Jay walking then he’s guilty of a felony for something??????"

Yes it is crazy, the fact that those in charge are able and allowed to continue with this scam should be a good sign that IF Trump is allowed to run and IF he gets the majority vote it won't matter and we will never know, they'll make up shit just like in 2020. I think we're in for 4 more years of brain dead Joe and the good ole USA turning into more of a pathetic joke than it is right now. #Reality.

From: CaptMike
30-May-24
Deliberating what?

From: sundowner
30-May-24
"Have you ever sat on a jury? "

I have. But God willing you haven't.......and never will. Jurors should possess sound judgement.

30-May-24
This thread is 11 days running now. Any changed minds, problems solved, or widely accepted new ideas? Or just nonstop complaining and time wasting for nothing?

From: DanaC
30-May-24
I have. You look at the facts,and you look at the law.

(And I would excuse out if I were 'prejudiced' with regard to the specific case. Have done so. If you're arguing that I should not sit on the Trump case, you're absolutely correct! >;-) )

From: DanaC
30-May-24
"Deliberating what? "

The facts presented and the applicable laws. The defense lawyers would probably say that the slow pace of deliberations works in their favor.

From: Canepole
30-May-24
Poor Boggs, you may as well take your ball and go home.

From: CaptMike
30-May-24
"The facts presented and the applicable laws." Do you mean the "facts" as testified by a convicted perjurer and known liar? Are you referring to the misdemeanor charges that are beyond the statute of limitations? Will they deliberate based on the judge's instructions that go against the law?

From: spike78
30-May-24
Boggs they are deliberating on the case today for the verdict so why the hell would this thread be over? You must be bored.

From: 70lbDraw
30-May-24
“I have. You look at the facts,and you look at the law.”

Lol, lol, lol, lol, is that statement one of YOUR facts?!?! lol, lol.

From: 70lbDraw
30-May-24

From: DanaC
30-May-24
My experience.

From: CaptMike
30-May-24
Boggs does not like this thread yet he continues to check in. LOL!

From: Zbone
30-May-24
I don't get a charge does NOT have to be unanimous on these 34 charges???

I thought being tried by 12 jurors had to be unanimous with all 12 jurors... How do they determine a charge conviction, 1 juror, 4 jurors, 6 jurors, 7 jurors, what? How many jurors does it take to get a receive a guilty verdict???

30-May-24
"Or just nonstop complaining..."

do you happen to own a mirror?

From: Nyati
30-May-24

Nyati 's embedded Photo
Nyati 's embedded Photo
New NPR/PBS poll This shows that the American people see the Trump trial for the sham that it is.

76% makes no different AND a conviction will make most of the rest of the difference MORE LIKELY to vote for him.

My interpretation is that Americans see it for what it is ,a political ploy that isn’t fooling anyone

From: DanaC
30-May-24
Could be the 76% plan to vote _against_ him regardless of the verdict >;-)

From: CaptMike
30-May-24
No Dana, not that many ignorant people in this country.

From: spike78
30-May-24

spike78's Link
Here’s an opinion from MO state AG about this trial. This trial is unreal and everyone should be appalled as any one of us could face a crooked judge one day.

From: Michael
30-May-24
I have a couple of questions. First question is these payments were made in 2017. How could they be tied to the election? The election was over.

Second question. Supposedly these payments were made while Trump was in the whitehouse. That is in Washington DC. How does the state of New York get to prosecute?

From: DanaC
30-May-24
captain, the point is that the poll is incomplete, because we don't *know* which way the 76% lean to begin with. This is how polls are used to mislead.

From: 70lbDraw
30-May-24
“captain, the point is that the poll is incomplete, because we don't *know* which way the 76% lean to begin with. This is how polls are used to mislead.”

Misleading or not, it seems to have garnered your attention? Of course, he’s still jamming venues with supporters, so I doubt that helps your theory…of conspiracy.

From: Mint
30-May-24
Michael, you are correct they weren't tied to the election since he didn't have to disclose them until the election was over in the first place. NY gets to prosecute since it is a NYC company.

30-May-24
Look at the way that poll is worded, Fellas…. If he is found Not Guilty, 14% say that they’re MORE LIKELY to vote FOR him. Logically, that means that they are LESS LIKELY to vote for him if a Guilty verdict should come through.

That means that they DO care about the outcome.

And apparently 9% of those polled didn’t really understand the question, because the implication is that a Guilty verdict would make them MORE likely to vote Trump, which really makes no sense…. Unless they actually DO prefer a candidate with a Felony conviction on his record…. Either that, or they are believing the “Witch Hunt” line, but a Not Guilty outcome would derail his claim that the whole thing is Fixed and they’d lose sympathy for him and be more likely to vote for Joe….

Sadly, Dana, the 76% are not certain to vote against The Donald; it’s just that 76% have already decided one way or the other, and they’re either A) willing to overlook whatever he tells them to, or B) they’re either so Sold on Biden (unlikely) or so Soured on Trump that a guilty verdict might please them, but it’s not going to make them reconsider him as a tolerable or viable choice.

What all the Trump Fans can’t get through their heads is that there are a lot of people in this country who really don’t like Biden any more than they like Trump, but they view Biden as the Lesser Threat to Democracy and the Constitution….

I guess the other thing they don’t understand about people who are willing to hold their noses and vote Biden is that insulting their intelligence is not an effective approach to changing Hearts and Minds….

From: DanaC
30-May-24
Corax, the point is *still* that we don't *know* - because the pollsters held back, or failed to gather *complete* information.

70, that ain't 'conspiracy', just a fundamental distrust of 'statistics'.

From: 70lbDraw
30-May-24
“Sadly, Dana, the 76% are not certain to vote against The Donald; it’s just that 76% have already decided one way or the other”…

…that you must have “evidence of a crime”, and a non-corrupt judge. America knows you have neither. I bet I know where the 76%is coming from!

From: DanaC
30-May-24
Do you? Enlighten us. Give us the data the pollsters did NOT.

Look at who commissioned the poll, then maybe you'll know which lie is being propagated. But get the facts first.

From: spike78
30-May-24

spike78's Link
Here’s an opinion from MO state AG about this trial. This trial is unreal and everyone should be appalled as any one of us could face a crooked judge one day.

From: Zbone
30-May-24
Verdict is in...

From: spike78
30-May-24

spike78's Link
Here’s an opinion from MO state AG about this trial. This trial is unreal and everyone should be appalled as any one of us could face a crooked judge one day.

From: CaptMike
30-May-24
It is obvious that 76% are not all for nor all against him. Even the crooked liberal machine can not manufacture a 76% vote for Biden.

From: TRnCO
30-May-24
"I thought being tried by 12 jurors had to be unanimous with all 12 jurors... How do they determine a charge conviction, 1 juror, 4 jurors, 6 jurors, 7 jurors, what? How many jurors does it take to get a receive a guilty verdict???" That's a good question, but from what I heard if one juror found him guilty on any ONE single charge, that was enough for the judge to charge him as guilty. CRAZY if true...

From: scentman
30-May-24
Like Gowdy stated, Judges orders were a road map to a guilty verdict... jurors had no choice... damn you lefties are sneaky. scentman

  • Sitka Gear