It is impossible for me to grasp how Cohen could be viewed as a reliable witness to actually prove Trump is guilty. The guy is a thief and serial liar. In what logical a non-biased circumstances is a guy like this viewed as being trustworthy?
*****OFFICIAL TRUMP CRIMINAL TRIAL THREAD*****
- Thread starter Huey Grey
- Start date
There is evidently a crime that trump committed allowed them to
Elevate the payments to felonies. We are waiting to see what that crime is
Hmmmmmm, who’s inner circle was he in for 15+ years?🤔
right...when you say "waiting", are you expecting a press conference or some grand public event?
because its referenced in the court documents...right on the first page
Loading…
www.politico.com
there's violations of election laws (like what cohen served time for) and tax laws
this isn't complicated, but there's a handful of people on here just steadfastly dedicated to not understanding it.
From jneffer's page 1:
"In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mis-characterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme."
Absolutely clear as mud...
"In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mis-characterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme."
Absolutely clear as mud...
you're saying that's not clear? i honestly don't get it
it cites two different laws that were allegedly violated - election laws and tax laws
i really don't understand why this is a thing...do you need specific statutes cited? do you think that would make things easier to understand?
is there any writing or articles about why this is more complicated than it seems to me? i fully acknowledge that i'm no lawyer or all that particularly well versed in the nuances of ny state law. so its completely possible that i am actually missing something here.
Last edited:
Don’t they need actually say what they are?
Like “jneffer violated a traffic law”
then you ask the court what they are and they tell you “it doesn’t matter” You are guilty
Yes,.. at some point the Prosecution will have to identify the specific statutes they are charging and basing their arguments on.
“I’m testifying. I tell the truth ….I mean, all I can do is tell the truth. And the truth is that there’s no case. They have no case.”
~Donald Trump, 5/9/24, Trial Day11
Finally -as promised- Trump will get the opportunity to tell his story to the jury. He will be placed under oath and take the stand this week.
~Donald Trump, 5/9/24, Trial Day11
Finally -as promised- Trump will get the opportunity to tell his story to the jury. He will be placed under oath and take the stand this week.
you understand that the contents of the public documents aren't the sole materials and information being presented during this weeks long trial, right?
I'm not saying Trump is a great guy or isn't even guilty of the crime. There is no way, however, that a star Witness like Cohen who is an absolutely untrustworthy person with an axe to grind should prove Trump's guilt to 12 jurors. That to me is unfathomable. Because of Cohen's past, it even shocks me he is able to convince one individual that this time he is telling the truth and he is "proving" Trump is guilty. Even in this trial, Cohen is admitting to crimes far worse than what Trump is accused of.
do they have to charge him with those additional crimes and prove he did them? or do they have to show that he falsified business records with the intention of committing other crimes (like the election law violations that cohen has already plead guilty to and served time for)?
i honestly don't know that part
i don't want to act like i have all the answers for everything here. but i've seen you specifically (and others) doing this "what could the other alleged crimes possibly be?" act...when its already been made clear what those other alleged crimes were
They will have to prove that Trump personally and intentionally falsified business records in support of the furtherance of some other crime chargeable by the State of New York...
I would hope they would have to. Can you imagine a legal system that wouldn’t require it
see...you say this, but the fact that you didn't understand things that were explicitly spelled out in the court documents makes me doubt you have any real idea what you're talking about
its why i asked if there was any other actual writing or reporting about this...
i've looked a little but haven't really found anything
is this a cable news talking point...this feels very "hannity-y" to me
That's fine,.. But the fact that you believe that anything is explicitly spelled out in these court documents tells me all I need to know about your understanding of this case.
It seems like they are going after a guy who falsified business records. How is that political?
Alphas testify, Donald. Betas let lady lawyers go out and make excuses about not testifying.
Even though Cohen’s lawyer, Roberto Costello testified:
Costello testifies that Cohen said "numerous times" that Trump didn't know about the payments
Roberto Costello testified, "Michael Cohen said numerous times that President Trump knew nothing about those payments. That he did this on his own. He repeated that numerous times." I am sure the Jury will believe Cohen over Costello. 🙄
Trump is such an honest business man and victim. Lol
lol, they have to prove his guilt. Costello is basically calling Cohen a liar again as he says Cohen said Trump did nothing wrong.
I wonder how much Trump paid Costello for his testimony?
I'm not a lawyer, but rolling your eyes at the judge, and being rebuked for sass mouth is a bad look. The jury was removed from the room, but that is going to stick with them when deciding what to believe about Costello's testimony.
I'm not a lawyer, but rolling your eyes at the judge, and being rebuked for sass mouth is a bad look. The jury was removed from the room, but that is going to stick with them when deciding what to believe about Costello's testimony.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 95,344
- 194,303
- 113
Yes they are.
One cannot get to trial in a criminal court without charging actual crimes.
Might want to do some investigating on that. It seems circumstances have changed
I don't think the word of either of them can be trusted. Both Cohen and Costello have an axe to grind.
- Sep 13, 2002
- 95,344
- 194,303
- 113
In every criminal case I’ve covered - probably several dozen ranging from homicide to drunk driving to white collar fraud - other criminals and liars testify. It’s the nature of criminality. The jury’s job is to sift through the testimony and decide what is relevant and accurate.
Criminals and liars make up a large percentage of those who successfully testify against other criminals and liars.
I just enjoy opening this thread up once every other day or so to see the Trump bootlicking keyboard warriors continue to do exactly what they do. It's hilarious, sad, and not surprising.
