Active Now

Malizz
Slartibartfast
my2cents
Discussion » Questions » Current Events and News » Anyone who bet Trump would be found guilty on ALL 34 counts in the hush money trial will be raking in the dough!!!

Anyone who bet Trump would be found guilty on ALL 34 counts in the hush money trial will be raking in the dough!!!

Jurors finally meted out justice.  Now, all Judge Merchan has to do is sentence this POS to the longest possible prison term.  

Posted - May 30

Responses


  • 34437
    In NYC, with the  instructions Merchan gave the jury....absolutely.  

    It will be appealed and thrown out.
      May 30, 2024 3:30 PM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    You know what I think is really sad?  The fact that his supporters have no problem rallying behind a convicted felon to hold the highest office in the land.  
      May 31, 2024 1:16 PM MDT
    2

  • 34437
    Yawn. Convicted of calling a legal expense a legal expense.  Overturn coming..... 

    We will vote for Trump even if he is sitting in a jail cell on Nov 5. 
      June 1, 2024 5:43 AM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    The entire point is that it was not a legal expense.  Twelve jurors unanimously agreed on that.  But, I guess some people cannot see that because the concept is too deep.   
      June 1, 2024 12:43 PM MDT
    1

  • 11089
    We have elected officials, many with law degrees, who are pretending this wasn't a campaign expense, so how can we expect people with zero expertise to figure it out? Remember all the outrage when Michael Cohen went to prison for campaign finance fraud for this exact same transaction?  Me neither.
      June 1, 2024 1:39 PM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    It's one thing to know this wasn't a campaign expense and those who pretend it wasn't.  I've read very clear writings explaining exactly why this was a felony.  It was not the common belief that it was Trump having a affair and paying hush money.  It was hiding the hush money payment by calling it a business expense, which is illegal.  
      June 1, 2024 2:12 PM MDT
    1

  • 34437
    Then what was it?  What is a NDA classified as for accounting purposes?
      June 1, 2024 6:19 PM MDT
    0

  • 11089
    I posted an answer to your question, listing various ways in which an NDA might be classified, based upon my knowledge,  education and experience. It was for information only. It was not an invitation to argue the merits of the jury verdict. Since you have seen the information, my answer has served its purpose, and I deleted it. 
      June 2, 2024 8:24 AM MDT
    0

  • 11089
    I was surprised. I don't expect a prison term.  A first time non-violent  offender, convicted of the lowest level felony rarely gets locked up. From what legal analysts are saying, probation is the most likely. The idea of someone having to be his probation officer is amusing. Personally, I would like the drama to be over, so I have no desire to see Trump imprisoned. The whining will be unbearable as it is.
      May 30, 2024 4:11 PM MDT
    2

  • 3824
    I agree that he will not likely spend a day in a cell, but it's nice to imagine.  I would rather see him get community service - maybe picking up garbage on the side of the road as I believe Nanoose suggested.
      May 31, 2024 1:14 PM MDT
    1

  • 11151

     

    I figure when Trump has to stand in front of a judge for sentencing he will show no remorse and also say something that will be in contempt of court - so he just might get some jail time. Cheers and happy weekend!


     

    This post was edited by Nanoose at May 31, 2024 3:37 PM MDT
      May 31, 2024 3:36 PM MDT
    0

  • 34437
    Why would he have remorse? His account called a legal expense a legal expense.  
    This will be overturned, the only question is how fast. 
      June 1, 2024 5:39 AM MDT
    0

  • 11151

    Why wouldn’t he show remorse? He knows he lied to his family, he knows he lied to his friends and he knows he lied to the American people. He also knows that his lies fuel violence but he keeps on lying instead of being sorry. Cheers and happy weekend!

      June 1, 2024 7:03 AM MDT
    0

  • 34437
    What lie?  He paid a woman he had an affair with (nearly 20 yrs ago) to shut up about their affair.  (Non disclosure agreements are legal)....he paid his attorney with personal money. (NOT campaign donations) And his accountant called it a legal expense. (It was) 

    Yawn...rich playboy acts like a rich playboy.    
      June 1, 2024 8:58 AM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    And, once again, you're okay with having a convicted rapist/convicted felon/rich playboy holding the highest office in the land.   This post was edited by Spunky at June 1, 2024 4:12 PM MDT
      June 1, 2024 2:15 PM MDT
    1

  • 34437
    I am fine with President Trump resuming office on Jan 20 2025.   

    Legal expense is a legal expense.  

    I simply do not believe crazy lady who named her cat Vagina. Called her non white husband a monkey. And has accused no less than 5 men of raping her.  (At least one almost same story as hers about Trump...just location is in an elevator  instead of a department store dressing room)

    I would never vote for Biden, a man whose daughter says he took showers with her. Or enjoyed the kids rubbing the hairs on his legs and jumping on his lap.   Who also has a woman who says he sexually assaulted her.

    Who I also agree with none of his policies. This post was edited by my2cents at June 3, 2024 1:18 PM MDT
      June 1, 2024 6:18 PM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    Then clearly you don't expect much from your president.  By the way, in case you haven't heard - 12 jurors decided that was NOT a business expense, but what do they know?  They only sat through weeks of testimony and were shown exhibits.  
      June 2, 2024 2:32 PM MDT
    0

  • 34437
    Same could be said for anyone supporting Biden...showing with his daughter and having kids rub on his legs and jump on his lap, etc.

    Acting Judge Merchan did NOT allow the expert witness former Federal Election Commission Chair and Comissioner to testify about the Federal Election Campaign laws.   But chose to let Cohen explain how the law was broken.   So I will not blame the jury for not understanding the law correctly. 

    It was not an election expense....Trump would have paid it regardless of the election.   

    So IF Trump would have claimed it as an election expense, would he have been legally correct? This post was edited by my2cents at June 2, 2024 3:19 PM MDT
      June 2, 2024 3:17 PM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    It was neither an election expense nor a business expense.  It was hush money to keep the affair quiet.  If election laws were broken, what does it matter who testifies as to how it was broken?
      June 3, 2024 8:11 AM MDT
    0

  • 34437
    NDA (Non disclosure agreement) is not illegal.  And if it was not a campaign expense there was NO crime.....

    It matters because the expert witness former FEC Chair and Commissioner was NOT permitted to testify about the supposed Federal Election law that was broken and elevated to a felony. (Extended the statute of limitations as well) 

    Why wouldn't it matter if an expert testified (former FEC Chair) or a convicted perjurier (Micheal Cohen) about a "broken" election law? Gee, I don't know....
      June 3, 2024 12:11 PM MDT
    0

  • 3824
    Michael Cohen may be a convicted felon, a liar and a thief, but there was sufficient corroborating evidence to bolster his testimony.
      June 3, 2024 2:31 PM MDT
    0

  • 34437
    But he is NOT an expert in the FEC laws....the former FEC Chair should have been allowed to testify about the rules/laws pertaining to the case.   This is one of the many reasons Trump will be able to get this overturned. 
      June 3, 2024 4:55 PM MDT
    0

  • 11089
    Including corroborating testimony from Trump loyalists, Hope Hicks and David Pecker. Instructions to the jury included being told not to rely solely on Cohen's testimony. But, it's puzzling to me why anyone would think it is legal to include non-business expenses in the Corporate ledger. No one claimed the NDA benefitted the Trump Organization which would be the logical defense for classifying it as legal expense or any other expense account. In my experience, he would have committed tax fraud if it wasn't a business expense.  I guess that's why the jury was told they didn't have to agree on which crime the falsified records were made for. This post was edited by Jane S at June 4, 2024 10:12 AM MDT
      June 3, 2024 5:02 PM MDT
    1

  • 3824
    Excellent points.
      June 4, 2024 10:12 AM MDT
    1