• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Look What Was Just Found

Mycroft said:
There are no "easy trials" in a kangaroo court.
Click to expand...

I guess Trump should pay his hookers directly so he doesn't have to deal with these entanglements.

He could have just left Stormy alone to say whatever she wanted, and avoided the embarrassment of being caught trying to avoid the embarrassment.

But here we are, another own goal.
 
Cork said:
If you can't see it for yourself listen and learn from the people who had first hand experience with him.
Click to expand...
I don’t need to learn from others that I and America were far better off when Trump was POTUS.
 
Airyaman said:
Look what I just found!

Click to expand...

shrug...

That has nothing to do with what I said. We aren't talking about delaying the trial.

Your deflection is noted...and rejected.

You are dismissed.
 
Since Ms Clifford will be called as a witness in the upcoming NY trial, this "old news" letter will be relegated to the trash heap as it should be.
 
Mycroft said:
And that's the problem.

You remember when 51 Intel officials signed a letter saying Hunter's laptop was Russian disinformation? Everyone believed them. But guess what...we now know they were lying.
Click to expand...
Were they though? I notice the laptop is still not being used as proof of anything.

Even ignoring that the one person in my example is also known as a person who lies consistently. He stole from charity, the fraud that was Trump university? The fact that contractors had to sue him to get paid? Why listen to a person that is known to lie about anything when you have tons of people telling you he is lying?
 
WillyPete said:
I guess Trump should pay his hookers directly so he doesn't have to deal with these entanglements.

He could have just left Stormy alone to say whatever she wanted, and avoided the embarrassment of being caught trying to avoid the embarrassment.

But here we are, another own goal.
Click to expand...
???

Trump didn't make this all into a big deal. The Trump haters...from the Mueller pukes to this crooked DA...did.
 
Mycroft said:
???

Trump didn't make this all into a big deal. The Trump haters...from the Mueller pukes to this crooked DA...did.
Click to expand...

Correction....its not a big deal no matter who thinks it is.
 
Mycroft said:
???

Trump didn't make this all into a big deal. The Trump haters...from the Mueller pukes to this crooked DA...did.
Click to expand...

They did the capture and kill operation that resulted in the allegedly illegal contribution.

I'm not sure what the prospects were for that story to come out if he hadn't interfered, but if it did he could ignore/admit/deny it and boom no illegal contribution.
 
Mycroft said:
View attachment 67503830

Hell no, the fake news media won't report it and the corrupt judge and his kangaroo court will ignore it, too.
Click to expand...
You're saying no one has seen this for 7 years? If it's real, why then did Trump pay her to keep quiet? Even if it was true, Trump still violated NY reporting rules when he claimed the payments were attorney's fees. Which is why this case is really not about hush money or a porn star.
 
VySky said:
I don’t need to learn from others that I and America were far better off when Trump was POTUS.
Click to expand...
By nearly all statistical measures, Joe numbers are better and I'm not even counting the Covid year but don't let reality get in the way of propaganda. Just keep believing what you want to believe.
 
Mycroft said:
View attachment 67503830

Hell no, the fake news media won't report it and the corrupt judge and his kangaroo court will ignore it, too.
Click to expand...
She was under an NDA. She was legally not permitted to tell people she had an affair and that she was paid hush money to keep that affair secret.

Edit note: I didn't even read past the OP to write this as it was so old news I didn't need anyone else to tell me the reason that she was denying it until she wasn't. Anyone paying even the least bit of attention to this case, as a whole, knows that she signed an NDA about this, which was why she consistently denied it. We have the NDA and she was even sued for violating that NDA.
 
Mycroft said:
LOL!!

If the judge is stupid enough to use YOUR excuse for suppressing evidence, Trump doesn't have anything to worry about.

On the other hand, the jury could still come to a stupid verdict. After all, it's going to be full of New Yorkers. They probably think a signed and dated letter is hearsay like you do.
Click to expand...
Stupid excuse?
In the legal profession, it's called the rules of evidence. You know, the civil rules you claim you want the judge to follow, except when application of those rules does not favor Trump.
If Trump's legal team in this case is inept as what he had in the last defamation case, they will probably follow your lead and tell the judge that rule of evidence is stupid!

And Trump should have long ago figured out, if he believes NY Judges are all corrupt, and the juries are all stupid and biased, and he doesn't want them deciding his case- the fool proof method to avoid that is to not commit lots of crimes in that jurisdiction. It's like a drug smuggler caught in a country notoriously harsh on drug smugglers and then complaining that he is being treated harshly.

Lastly, here's a link to NY rules of evidence on hearsay. https://www.nycourts.gov/judges/evidence/8-HEARSAY/ARTICLE-8-RULES.pdf
Pretty closely follows Federal Rules. Only 103 pages long. Let me know when you've read it, think you understand it and then you can try to debate me on the application of the hearsay rule.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
ummm


Didn't the LameStream Media™ cover this years and years ago?

Maybe you missed it?
Click to expand...
The media isn't a court...well, except for the court of public opinion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom