BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
i second that....
TRUMP CONVICTED
- Thread starter jimihendrix1
- Start date
compassionateExotic
Well-Known Member
compassionateExotic
Well-Known Member
Nugnewbie
Well-Known Member
Prosecutors appeal dismissal of some charges against Trump in Georgia election interference case
A Georgia district attorney is appealing a ruling dismissing some of the criminal charges against former President Donald Trump and other defendants in a 2020 election interference case.
apnews.com
compassionateExotic
Well-Known Member
ambitiousgreenthumb
Well-Known Member
He will be vindicated at this point. They have no case against him anymore. Heresy of prosecutions witnesses fell apart.
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
So u got any evidence?
Let's debate the subject not the person, thanks!
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Your word against a mountain of substantiated documentary evidence that was corroborated by witnesses under oath. The only witness for the defense was shown through more documentary evidence to have been working for Trump when he was trying to convince Cohen to lie to the DOJ. But you say otherwise. OK.
I don't know what the jury will decide. Most likely Trump will be convicted, less chance that there will be a hung jury, no chance Trump will be acquitted
If he's found guilty will you admit you were mistaken when you made that post of yours?
Not that guilt matters to Trump's cult. They are going to vote for him anyway.
topcat
Well-Known Member
Heresy? 'nuff said.
Hugo Phurst
Well-Known Member
He says it was an accounting mistake about a reimbursement.
Why wasn't the accountant who made the mistake called to testify. "Oops, yes I did that, my bad" & that would have been the end.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
I think maybe he meant hear-say?
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
you mean, the twice convicted for perjury Trump loyalist that neither the prosecution or the defense could trust to give testimony they wanted to provide to the jury?
Yeah, neither side wanted a part of that. Given the quality of witnesses, such as a porn star who extorted money in exchange for her silence, a lawyer-fixer who was convicted of perjury and admitted to stealing $30,000 from Trump in a pique and a lawyer for the defense who was shown to be giving false testimony when the guy's own e-mails contradicted his testimony and the guy had to be slapped down hard by the judge just to keep him from tainting the jury. That the accountant was deemed an unfit witness by both sides says something about him.
Nugnewbie
Well-Known Member
translation error
topcat
Well-Known Member
Did he mean vindicated, or something else?
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
Did she extort? Iirc that man and his co-criminals took the initiative on general principle.
The antonym rather leaps to mind, but I remain guardedly neutral until that man is chained to real consequence.
CANON_Grow
Well-Known Member
It actually makes sense if written about the cult MAGA-sphere.
heresy
(the act of having) an opinion or belief that is the opposite of or against what is the official or popular opinion, or an action that shows that you have no respect for the official opinion.
a belief that is against the principles of a particular religion.
Benefit of the doubt, really clever satire; possibly the jokes just write themselves.
Hugo Phurst
Well-Known Member
no idea, Trump didn't specify
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
He never does, does he? And yet, thousands of people showed up on the right day as he planned and together they almost ended democracy in the US.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
more self harm is planned for the Trump campaign.
They are talking about suing the film's producer over his factually depicting Trump as a rapist.
Imagine the spectacle of this trial during the campaign. The movie producer filmed the re-enactment of an act by Trump upon Ivanka that she described as causing her to feel "violated" and referred to "as rape" at the divorce proceedings. Trump denies it happened and is threatening to sue. I thought the Stormy Daniels trial was a low point but if Trump presses charges and this one goes to trial, new lows will be reached.
Or is he just blustering.
They are talking about suing the film's producer over his factually depicting Trump as a rapist.
Imagine the spectacle of this trial during the campaign. The movie producer filmed the re-enactment of an act by Trump upon Ivanka that she described as causing her to feel "violated" and referred to "as rape" at the divorce proceedings. Trump denies it happened and is threatening to sue. I thought the Stormy Daniels trial was a low point but if Trump presses charges and this one goes to trial, new lows will be reached.
Or is he just blustering.