Starshine

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,834
No problem! I mean, I definitely understand why all of this is just so draining, exhausting, infuriating, demoralizing, and anxiety inducing, but in the end, the only thing we can do about it is vote this November. And yes, I very much hope he once again loses, this time in a larger capacity than last time, and with no attempt at insurrection.

This is Trump we're talking about, however, so I imagine a loss will probably result in him doing more criminal shit.

I'd be very happy if he's at least found guilty once this trial wraps. That's up to the jury to decide, so I'll be hoping/praying for that outcome for sure, then doing my part to vote in the fall.

It's so annoying that we have to deal with him again this election cycle...

My heart just sank with dread. What if he who shall not be shamed, runs for a third time even if he loses a second?!?!! Argghhh!
 

BWoog

Member
Oct 27, 2017
38,597
My heart just sank with dread. What if he who shall not be shamed, runs for a third time even if he loses a second?!?!! Argghhh!

If Trump loses in this year, he's done. What's best is that if he loses, there's a very good chance that he destroys the GOP's chances in 2028. Could you imagine him trying to outdebate Gavin Newsome?
 

Mr Swine

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
6,103
Sweden
If Trump loses in this year, he's done. What's best is that if he loses, there's a very good chance that he destroys the GOP's chances in 2028. Could you imagine him trying to outdebate Gavin Newsome?

Trump would be a coked up, drooling zombie whose brain fires its two remaining brain cells every time someone says "cocaine", 'Joe Biden" and "Ivanka" in the debate. Then he would ramble like a rabid dog while his blood red eyes turn white
 

chimpychi

Member
Oct 27, 2017
602
If he loses, I doubt he runs again. His brain will be far too impaired. He's barely able to say much now other than the same phrases over and over again. I do think he's going to stick around and try to be the GOP king maker. Asking everyone that runs to kiss the ring and he'll send his voters to them..
 
Oct 25, 2017
30,322
Tampa
If he loses, I doubt he runs again. His brain will be far too impaired. He's barely able to say much now other than the same phrases over and over again. I do think he's going to stick around and try to be the GOP king maker. Asking everyone that runs to kiss the ring and he'll send his voters to them..

Trump has been trying to delay his days in court on the predication of making it all go away like Creaser if gets back into power. There probably isn't enough gum for 4 years should he fail.
 

Sheepinator

Member
Jul 25, 2018
28,181
Yes, by paying them upfront with his own money instead of using intermediaries and the either stiffing (Pecker) or recompensing (Cohen) them.
I know it's a reply to an older post of yours, but I was thinking about this again earlier as I saw the clown in the news at some rally going on about "no crime".

So if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime? Why didn't he do that then, since it would have been cheaper overall? He thought avoiding a direct paper trail was preferable to committing a federal crime?

Also, was the payoff to Karen the exact same thing as this? And if so, why is all the focus on the Stormy one only?

It strikes me as ironic that he has spent his whole life doing shady stuff insulated by intermediaries and shell companies etc., to avoid repercussions reaching him, but in this case had he acted directly instead, there would have been no crime.
 

Jedi2016

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,086
I know it's a reply to an older post of yours, but I was thinking about this again earlier as I saw the clown in the news at some rally going on about "no crime".

So if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime? Why didn't he do that then, since it would have been cheaper overall? He thought avoiding a direct paper trail was preferable to committing a federal crime?

Also, was the payoff to Karen the exact same thing as this? And if so, why is all the focus on the Stormy one only?

It strikes me as ironic that he has spent his whole life doing shady stuff insulated by intermediaries and shell companies etc., to avoid repercussions reaching him, but in this case had he acted directly instead, there would have been no crime.
I think it honestly never occurred to him to do it any differently than he'd always done it. I doubt he's ever really handled his own money in his whole life. Like everything else, all he knows how to do is tell other people what to do and they go and do it. He never thinks to ask how it's being done, because he just doesn't care.
 

SilentPanda

Member
Nov 6, 2017
14,270
Earth

Trump's 'multi-tasking' defense is falling apart in court


Trump's lawyers say he didn't pay attention to his checks reimbursing Michael Cohen for hush money, too busy running the country.
According to witness testimony and records shown so far at the trial, held in a chilly 15th-floor courtroom in downtown Manhattan, Cohen fronted the hush money out of his own pocket in October 2016 using a shell company he created. Trump then reimbursed him, prosecutors say, in a series of 11 checks, nine of them bearing his handwritten signature.

Some of the payments to Cohen came from his personal bank account, others through a Trump Organization account.
"I always sign my checks, so I know where my money's going," Trump said. "In the same spirit, I also always try to read my bills to make sure I'm not being overcharged."
But with him in the White House, employees had to figure out another way to have him sign off on expenses. They devised a system where they'd cut the checks and print invoices in New York, then FedEx a pile of them to Washington, DC, a few times a month. They'd pass through the hands of Trump's bodyguard-turned-White House employee Keith Schiller, then make their way to the Oval Office. Trump would review and sign them, and then send them back to Manhattan — all with the logistical assistance of taxpayer-funded government employee
But Trump didn't automatically put his signature on every check. Occasionally, he'd write "VOID" on one he didn't want to be paid, according to Trump Organization employee Deborah Tarassoff.

"It was signed in a Sharpie in black," Tarassoff testified. "That is what he usually uses."
While Trump was making life-or-death decisions in the Oval Office, the billionaire was also discerning about trivial-seeming expenses. Prosecutors presented an invoice from the Winged Foot Golf Club, located north of New York City, for Trump's dues, that was sent to the White House from New York. Rhona Graff, his executive assistant at the Trump Organization, asked if he wanted to suspend his membership for four years — or to "continue paying annual dues + the food minimum."
Trump wrote in felt-tip pen: "Pay- ASAP OK" and signed "D."
If Trump had a question about a check, he'd talk with a Trump Organization employee about it, Westerhout testified.

"I think I remember, maybe, a couple times him having a question about a check and then calling Allen Weisselberg or somebody else in the Trump Organization to ask for clarification," she said.

www.businessinsider.com

Trump's 'multi-tasking' defense is falling apart in court

Donald Trump's lawyers say he didn't pay attention to his checks reimbursing Michael Cohen for hush money because he was too busy running the country.
 

turtle553

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,279
I know it's a reply to an older post of yours, but I was thinking about this again earlier as I saw the clown in the news at some rally going on about "no crime".

So if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime? Why didn't he do that then, since it would have been cheaper overall? He thought avoiding a direct paper trail was preferable to committing a federal crime?

Also, was the payoff to Karen the exact same thing as this? And if so, why is all the focus on the Stormy one only?

It strikes me as ironic that he has spent his whole life doing shady stuff insulated by intermediaries and shell companies etc., to avoid repercussions reaching him, but in this case had he acted directly instead, there would have been no crime.

The payoff to Karen was done by David Pecker with the expectation Trump would pay it back. Also $30k to the doorman with a story about Trump's love child that was false. But Trump didn't pay it back so Pecker didn't want to put out any more money he wouldn't get back. He also had legal advice that getting paid back could be a criminal act so he didn't collect.

That's why Trump used Cohen since the inquirer wouldn't do it anymore. The millionth time Trump has hurt himself by cheapness and stubbornness.
 
OP
OP
phisheep

phisheep

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes
Member
Oct 26, 2017
4,964
I know it's a reply to an older post of yours, but I was thinking about this again earlier as I saw the clown in the news at some rally going on about "no crime".

So if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime? Why didn't he do that then, since it would have been cheaper overall? He thought avoiding a direct paper trail was preferable to committing a federal crime?

Also, was the payoff to Karen the exact same thing as this? And if so, why is all the focus on the Stormy one only?

It strikes me as ironic that he has spent his whole life doing shady stuff insulated by intermediaries and shell companies etc., to avoid repercussions reaching him, but in this case had he acted directly instead, there would have been no crime.

"if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime?"

Nope. If Trump had used his own money to pay off McDougal there would have been no crime. That's because a candidate can spend unlimited amounts of their own money on their campaign.

Pecker paying McDougal was an illegal campaign contribution at the time it happened. If Trump had then paid Pecker and covered it up in the accounts we'd have the exact same scenario as for Stormy. But he didn't pay, so it isn't. Of course it is still a crime for the Trump campaign to accept that contribution, but the DA can't charge it directly because (a) it is federal, not state and (b) statute of limitations lapsed. (all this IIRC)

So that's why all the focus is on Stormy - that's the one that we have business records for.

Honestly, this stuff is so hard to get right that my biggest worry about the case is that the defense can just blow some smoke about there being "no campaign funds involved" to completely confuse the jury.
 

Mamoui

Member
Oct 28, 2017
60
"if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime?"

Nope. If Trump had used his own money to pay off McDougal there would have been no crime. That's because a candidate can spend unlimited amounts of their own money on their campaign.

Pecker paying McDougal was an illegal campaign contribution at the time it happened. If Trump had then paid Pecker and covered it up in the accounts we'd have the exact same scenario as for Stormy. But he didn't pay, so it isn't. Of course it is still a crime for the Trump campaign to accept that contribution, but the DA can't charge it directly because (a) it is federal, not state and (b) statute of limitations lapsed. (all this IIRC)

So that's why all the focus is on Stormy - that's the one that we have business records for.

Honestly, this stuff is so hard to get right that my biggest worry about the case is that the defense can just blow some smoke about there being "no campaign funds involved" to completely confuse the jury.

Would trump paying himself makes it legal, or he would have to pay it himself and disclose it in some campaign disclosure form? Making the paiement kind of useless.
 

plagiarize

It's not a loop. It's a spiral.
Moderator
Oct 25, 2017
27,772
Cape Cod, MA
There may have been ways for Trump to pay off these people and legally obsfuscate those payments to help keep things hidden but he was more concerned about paying them off and hiding it than he was doing so legally. That's my read on it.
 
Oct 25, 2017
30,322
Tampa
"if Trump had spent spent his own money to pay off Pecker, no crime?"

Nope. If Trump had used his own money to pay off McDougal there would have been no crime. That's because a candidate can spend unlimited amounts of their own money on their campaign.

Pecker paying McDougal was an illegal campaign contribution at the time it happened. If Trump had then paid Pecker and covered it up in the accounts we'd have the exact same scenario as for Stormy. But he didn't pay, so it isn't. Of course it is still a crime for the Trump campaign to accept that contribution, but the DA can't charge it directly because (a) it is federal, not state and (b) statute of limitations lapsed. (all this IIRC)

So that's why all the focus is on Stormy - that's the one that we have business records for.

Honestly, this stuff is so hard to get right that my biggest worry about the case is that the defense can just blow some smoke about there being "no campaign funds involved" to completely confuse the jury.

This is what all of the paper trail evidence is for, to show where the money went and how it got there.
 

DarkstarIV

Member
Feb 21, 2018
8,883
Yup. Apparently JD Vance and Tommy Tuberville have both joined Trump in court today per CNN, which is leading to speculation that one of those two is going to be his VP pick as well.
 

Humidex

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,702
Tuberville would be a hilarious choice, please pick that guy
giphy.gif
 

FrostweaveBandage

Unshakable Resolve
Member
Sep 27, 2019
6,983
Tuberville would be a terrible pick which is why I hope Trump makes him his VP.
The greatest and most American thing ever would be for Trump to pick Tuberville and watch all the Alabama fans not vote for him because he dared to pick a former Auburn coach.

"This just in, CNN can now call that in a historic upset, the state of Alabama has been won by Joe Biden."
 

deimosmasque

Ugly, Queer, Gender-Fluid, Drive-In Mutant, yes?
Moderator
Apr 22, 2018
14,414
Tampa, Fl
The greatest and most American thing ever would be for Trump to pick Tuberville and watch all the Alabama fans not vote for him because he dared to pick a former Auburn coach.

"This just in, CNN can now call that in a historic upset, the state of Alabama has been won by Joe Biden."
Has someone who used to live in Alabama. That's not as unlikely as I would think. I've literally seen fist fights start over Bama versus Auburn fans, Not any sort of argument just because one was a fan of the other team.
 

Jarrod38

Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,852
Yup. Apparently JD Vance and Tommy Tuberville have both joined Trump in court today per CNN, which is leading to speculation that one of those two is going to be his VP pick as well.
I wonder if Ohio residents who voted for Vance feel proud he has done nothing for them but joined Trumps Kiss My Ass club.
 

poptire

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
10,176
As someone also from Alabama, the Auburn/Alabama effect won't happen unless Saban or some former Alabama player ran against Tuberville. He won the senate seat and doesn't technically live here.
Has someone who used to live in Alabama. That's not as unlikely as I would think. I've literally seen fist fights start over Bama versus Auburn fans, Not any sort of argument just because one was a fan of the other team.
Also an Alabama native, and yeah. Saban is the only "democrat" who would have a shot at winning a seat here. Alabama fans voted for Tuberville because "at least he wasn't a liberal".
 

Fnor

Member
Nov 7, 2023
502
I wonder if Ohio residents who voted for Vance feel proud he has done nothing for them but joined Trumps Kiss My Ass club.
I think the large portion of Ohioans who were willing to vote for Vance, a huckster and gross fraud, are more than fine with kissing the ass of Trump, a huckster and gross fraud.
 

Casa

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,746
MSNBC had been hyping up Cohen's testimony like he was a superstar artist about to drop a new album. Now that he's testifying a bunch of these guys they have on covering the trial are talking about him like he's going to self immolate on the stand and that he's going to get killed on cross examination. Basically, making him sound like a terrible witness.

Man, I hate not being able to SEE this stuff rather than getting a play by play from people reading a transcript.
 

Scott Lufkin

Member
Dec 7, 2017
1,554
MSNBC had been hyping up Cohen's testimony like he was a superstar artist about to drop a new album. Now that he's testifying a bunch of these guys they have on covering the trial are talking about him like he's going to self immolate on the stand and that he's going to get killed on cross examination. Basically, making him sound like a terrible witness.

Man, I hate not being able to SEE this stuff rather than getting a play by play from people reading a transcript.

Odd, I'm following this on Weissmann's twitter and he had this to say about 20 minutes ago:


View: https://x.com/AWeissmann_/status/1790031382007193847
 

Hollywood Duo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
42,818
MSNBC had been hyping up Cohen's testimony like he was a superstar artist about to drop a new album. Now that he's testifying a bunch of these guys they have on covering the trial are talking about him like he's going to self immolate on the stand and that he's going to get killed on cross examination. Basically, making him sound like a terrible witness.

Man, I hate not being able to SEE this stuff rather than getting a play by play from people reading a transcript.
He testified before Congress before, I'm sure he'll do fine over the course of the trial.
 

Tackleberry

Member
Oct 31, 2017
4,885
Alliance, OH
Cohen has NOTHING to hide.
Yes, he has an axe to grind over the guy who got him sent to prison.. TWICE..
But, he's also not going to fuck it up by being a cartoon character on the stand.

These are questions he has already answered in front of committees. Cohen's job is to tie the threads together and hand them right to Trump.
At the end of the day, this is a documents trial... and those documents all point to Trump being guilty as shit.


Also...
If someone avoids certain modes of communication because they believe it can "bring them down," doesn't that prove their awareness that they are committing crimes?