Trump indicted over hush money payments in Stormy Daniels probe

If you have real evidence of the said accusation please provide your evidence and not an opinion.

 

The indictments were leaked and its all over the news. 34 counts covering every payment sent to Cohen.

That really isn't the point

Still not the point

If they were just hard core right wing garbage, you would be able to dispute them. It would be so easy to do.
But you can't.
So while you have chosen to ignore whats going on to focus on Trump, I can assure you, you are in the minority.

 

So you guys keep claiming . . . and none of you have provided any evidence.

Good thing that the claim looks fake so far.

[quote[Now that he's elected, the reports are that he is looking to charge Trump with a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations expired years ago.[/quote]You don't even know what the charges are yet, so it is silly to pretend that anything you just said is true.

Again, there is no evidence so far of your accusations. Not to mention, sounds like they have over 30 charges. This isn't just about paying off one of his many mistresses.

 

It's extremely dishonest of the anti-Trump brigade to deny that Bragg didn't go after Trump solely on the basis that he's a political foe of the Democratic Party. Dirty politics as usual is the prime motivator for the Trump arrest. Bragg is doing the deed for the Democratic Party. They are no different than Hitler and Stalin who had their political opposition arrested.

 

I already posted a link confirming that detail and it was ignored or stated I never did.

 

It's EXTREMELY dishonest to keep parroting and copy/pasting the talking point you've been provided and refusing, page after page, to provide any to provide any evidence for these looney conspiracy theory brainfarts.

 

I'm almost tired of all this "winning".

 

Historical events I provided you are not assumptions.
You obviously know the sealed indictment was leaked. Right?
You do know sealed indictments are never made public. They are sealed so the individual in those indictments doesn't find out they were charged. Or did you not know this?
Not only do you know that their is a sealed indictment charging Trump, but somehow you can't conceive the contents were leaked as well?
I literally find that amazing

 

No. You hid when asked for said supposed link.

 

No reaction from the forum's Republicans. They prefer talking about something else as do Republicans in Congress.

 

I'm sorry you don't like my opinion I expressed to CornPop. Perhaps you could try the ignore feature offered by the forum. There's likely to be more words between us as the thread evolves.

 

Where's he hiding?
Inquiring minds want to know.

 

It does make sense. That you are unable to make sense of it is revealing.

 

Good comparison... They let Hillary off for that which clearly wasn't a nothingburger, and hunt Trump over some more BS charges. They've been going after him for 6 years.

 

And that is a question for a judge (to determine if the evidence is valid: A matter of law) and jury (to determine if the facts of the evidence constitutes guilt: A matter of fact). To denigrate this process because you don't like the prosecutor or because you like the accused instead of basing it on the EVIDENCE is wrong.

And you CAN'T base any criticism on the evidence since you have no idea what the evidence is.

 

Even some among the democrats have acknowledged that this is political of Bragg to go after Trump. He campaigned on it in a predominantly democratic district. He had to deliver on that promise or else (of course Soros was probably egging him on). So, you're right. It is extremely dishonest.

 

That was a good (non) response to my point.

 

TypicalRepublican argument, blame Trump's difficulties on hate while totally ignoring Trump's role in all this.

The American people don't hate Trump. They hate what he did.

"Porn star and director Stormy Daniels met Donald Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in Lake Tahoe in July 2006, and the two allegedly began an affair.

"He was married to Melania Trump at the time, who had just given birth to their son Barron.

"Just weeks before the 2016 presidential election, Trump's longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen paid $130,000 so Daniels would keep silent about the alleged affair, which Trump has denied.

"In January 2018, news of the hush money broke, and Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, was thrust into the national spotlight.

">

 

You don't know this fact because you don't know what charges are part of the indictment. This is a supposition

You don't know this fact. See 1 above

Repeat 1 and 2

I've seen absolutely no evidence of a leak. What I have seen is a lot of people claiming to know what the indictment says without actually having seen the indictment.

See everything above.

If you are talking about the Mar-a-Lago documents, they WERE subpoenaed. They were asked for, some were turned over. They were subpoenaed, more were turned over. Trump attorneys signed paperwork saying that everything, at this point, had been turned over. A legally obtained and served warrant (not a "raid") turned up even MORE documents.

The evidence was not exculpatory so was not required to be turned over.

I'm done for now. I may address your other "facts" at a later time.

 

A lesson on using the search feature would be a waste of time for complainers.

 

Alvin Bragg is a DC operative who campaigned on promising to, "Get Trump".

 

Bragg campaigned on getting Trump, that proves he’s biased. The judge should toss this case.

 

Oh, there you are. You were never hiding.

 

So you are claiming you see no evidence of any leak, but you know about a sealed indictment?
Which means you don't even know what a sealed indictment is or why its sealed.
Amazing really.

They were? Then you can provide such, Right?
I'll wait while you dig those up for us

So now you don't even know what exculpatory means?
You mean like a video that shows the exact opposite of what the prosecutor was claiming?
Too funny really

 

And what was your point? That you don't like the fact that Bragg indicted Trump? We get that.
The problem is your reason for not liking the indictment has nothing to do with the facts of the case since we don't know the facts of the case.