Japan Today
world

Trump trial jurors finish first day of deliberations without a verdict

87 Comments
By Luc Cohen, Jack Queen and Andy Sullivan

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Thomson Reuters 2024.

©2025 GPlusMedia Inc.


87 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

"Mother Teresa could not beat these charges,"

Mother Teresa probably would not have had affairs with porn stars while her wife was pregnant.

He should continue to use Al Capone as a comparison, the gross fraudster's gangster ties are closer to him. But the previous guy's aim is to continue to undermine US systems, especially its judicial systems so grifters like him can continue to have easier times getting richer, while continuing to either not pay or only partly pay taxes, while they use more government services than the hoi polloi.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

A conviction will not prevent Trump, from trying to take back the White House. Nor will it prevent him from taking office if he wins.

-20 ( +4 / -24 )

“But Reuters/Ipsos polling has found that a guilty verdict could cost Trump support among independent and some Republican voters.”

Don’t worry. Losing voters is actually helping him, apparently.

65% of GoP voters in South Carolina will still vote for him. 35% loss isn’t so bad, right?

12 ( +14 / -2 )

Opinion polls show Trump and Biden locked in a tight race. But Reuters/Ipsos polling has found that a guilty verdict could cost Trump support among independent and some Republican voters.

Frankly I don't see it.

MAGA cult opinions won't change with a conviction.

They say the Daniels payment could have contributed to Trump's 2016 victory over Democrat Hillary Clinton by keeping an unflattering story out of the public eye.

Trump still did not know the depth of his cult's devotion at that time yet. When he said he could shoot someone on 5th ave. , I think he was truly amazed with what he could get away with with the MAGA cult.

And he has ridden that train ever since.

The other cases have more of a chance to derail him.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

The judge instructions said they can find Trump guilty of any of the 3 predicate crimes or any other crime they choose.

he told then to leave “the law” to him and just decide if Trump did “a” crime or not in their mind.

so now the jury can convict for something that isn’t even a crime as long as a juror thinks it is.

-17 ( +5 / -22 )

bass4funk

Ok, so now this conflicted judge opened the flood gates to a new norm in America, now they can go after political opponents for whatever reason.

Trump isn't the judge's political opponent and there is no evidence that he is conflicted.

I really find this whining about this being political tiring. Why do you find the need to make excuses for Trump for every. single. thing. Why is everybody else to blame for the undeniable actions of Trump?

9 ( +12 / -3 )

The judge instructions said they can find Trump guilty of any of the 3 predicate crimes or any other crime they choose.

No, the judge didn't say the jury could make up a crime.

he told then to leave “the law” to him and just decide if Trump did “a” crime or not in their mind.

Again misrepresenting what the honorable judge actually said.

so now the jury can convict for something that isn’t even a crime as long as a juror thinks it is.

Again, this isn't true. Unanimity in that at least one of the 3 predicate crimes were committed.

7 ( +10 / -3 )

The judge instructions said they can find Trump guilty of any of the 3 predicate crimes or any other crime they choose

he told then to leave “the law” to him and just decide if Trump did “a” crime or not in their mind.

so now the jury can convict for something that isn’t even a crime as long as a juror thinks it is.

Are you still banging on about this point? The framework in which this is being done is well-established. It isn't New York's problem that you don't like it or understand it.

But if you are really desperate to pick one, I suggest the one that Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to in relation to the Stormy Daniels payment, because he committed that crime at Donald Trump's behest.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Cohen pleaded guilty to in relation to the Stormy Daniels payment, because he committed that crime at Donald Trump's behest.

not a crime. That’s what I’m talking about. If you were a juror you would have just wrongly convicted someone based on poor and biased judge instructions.

-16 ( +4 / -20 )

There is NO evidence of a coordinated Democratic conspiracy to indict and convict Trump without merit.

why did you feel the need to add “without merit”? So there was a coordinated conspiracy, just Trump deserved it?

Unanimity in that at least one of the 3 predicate crimes were committed.

but not the same one. How odd of an instruction.

-15 ( +4 / -19 )

It's amazing (and depressing) to see the MAGA faithful's utter abandonment of fact and logic, just to protect the idol they're so emotionally invested in.

Word to y'all. Your loyalty to Trump is not mutual. He doesn't give a fig about you.

11 ( +15 / -4 )

not a crime.

Really? You think Cohen a trained lawyer, also represented by a trained lawyer pleaded guilty to something that wasn't a crime? That makes 0 sense. Why would anyone do that?

but not the same one. How odd of an instruction.

It isn't odd at all. The law does not state there needs to be unanimity with regards to the predicate crime.

11 ( +14 / -3 )

why did you feel the need to add “without merit”? So there was a coordinated conspiracy, just Trump deserved it?

You're overthinking it. The "without merit" is the accusation from Trump 'n' little friends, including you.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Why would a judge be able to tell a jury to not consider the law and “leave the law to me”?

clarified instructions might as well be that in any case you aren’t sure just choose “guilty. and if he’s not under the law, I will correct it.

of course he won’t.

-15 ( +4 / -19 )

Why would a judge be able to tell a jury to not consider the law and “leave the law to me”?

Um, besides the fact that in his rule as Judge (the title itself is self-explanatory), he is the expert in what the law is and how it is applied?

Oh, there’s also the fact that this is a perfectly normal and standard jury instruction.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

It's amazing (and depressing) to see the MAGA faithful's utter abandonment of fact and logic,

Quite the opposite. The facts and logic or shall we say the blue prints are looking right at us. Nothing to do with being MAGA, nice try. Lol

just to protect the idol they're so emotionally invested in.

Wait! We have to abandon the guy because the left are terrified of him? Says a lot about the left, so much so that they need to use the judicial system to try and take the guy out instead of doing it the old fashioned way and just take him on at the ballot box.

-17 ( +1 / -18 )

The jury already had to ask the judge to repeat his jury instructions.

seems they didn’t get all his vague hints and nudges about what he wants.

so he will have to speak more clearly tomorrow when he repeats them again.

the case will be overturned later largely on the lack of ONE identified predicate crime and these biased instructions telling the jury to not bother themselves about “the law”.

-16 ( +3 / -19 )

That makes 0 sense. Why would anyone do that?

cause it’s Cohen. You do know that later Cohen went back and said he wasn’t guilty of any of the crimes he pled guilty to, don’t you?

that idiot pled guilty to things that aren’t even crimes.

-17 ( +3 / -20 )

Um, besides the fact that in his rule as Judge (the title itself is self-explanatory), he is the expert in what the law is and how it is applied? 

Expert???? ROFL!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daily-memo/3020045/whatever-they-can-get-him-for-is-fine-with-me/

Oh, there’s also the fact that this is a perfectly normal and standard jury instruction.

Yeah, liberals would say that. I mean, it’s NYC

-16 ( +3 / -19 )

Oh, there’s also the fact that this is a perfectly normal and standard jury instruction.

it’s actually not.

how can I convict someone of a crime if I don’t know what the law says about whether what I heard in testimony is a crime or not.

Is a hush payment a crime? I dunno. But Guilty!

No, right?!

what am I basing my decision on if not the law?

I just don’t like the defendant? The attorney had a nice suit? I’m a Democrat and defendant isn’t? Now we are getting somewhere…..

-16 ( +4 / -20 )

that idiot pled guilty to things that aren’t even crimes.

Why did he go to prison?

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Is a hush payment a crime? I dunno. But Guilty!

Hush payment isn’t a crime. This was established on day one.

He also hasn’t been charged with making hush payments or sleeping with a porn start. Because adultery also isn’t a crime.

The jury know this as do you.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

Why would a judge be able to tell a jury to not consider the law and “leave the law to me”?

That isn't what he said. He was addressing the lawyers on both sides. From the Washington Post,

Before closing arguments began, Justice Juan Merchan instructed the lawyers not to talk to the jury about the law, saying they should leave that to him. Five-plus hours into the prosecution’s summation, he cut off Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass for doing just that. “I’ll explain the law, Mr. Steinglass,” he said. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/28/trump-hush-money-trial-live-updates-closing-arguments/

You'll notice how he cut off the DA, sounds pretty even-handed to me.

seems they didn’t get all his vague hints and nudges about what he wants.

Or that they're long and they want to make sure they're following the instructions. Seems like something we would want from a jury. By the way, jury instructions are pretty boiler plate for the most part, so it seems rather specious to claim Merchan's instructions were difficult to understand. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_instructions#:~:text=Jury%20instructions%20are%20typically%20drafted,issues%20present%20in%20each%20case.

cause it’s Cohen.

That's not an answer. Why would someone do that?

ou do know that later Cohen went back and said he wasn’t guilty of any of the crimes he pled guilty to, don’t you?

Oh, very interesting. The person you call a liar says he wasn't guilty, and therefor you believe him? I'm sure the jury will believe his testimony too :)

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Why did he go to prison?

Because he stupidly pled guilty to things he did that aren’t crimes

thinking he would be praised and invited to join the team to “get Trump” with financial compensation.

they put him in jail instead. imagine his shock.

They Didn’t know at the time Trump would be running again and they would need him once more.

-14 ( +3 / -17 )

You're overthinking it. The "without merit" is the accusation from Trump 'n' little friends, including you.

Not overthinking anything, that is just what we see. The left should relax. The more they go after this guy, the more it helps him, not sure why they’re not getting that.

-16 ( +1 / -17 )

Readers, please do not become obsessed with this topic. If you have already posted, please take a break for at least an hour.

He also hasn’t been charged with making hush payments or sleeping with a porn start. Because adultery also isn’t a crime.

The jury know this as do you.

yet these 2 things were 75% of the trial testimony. Why is that? 

Cause they were illegally presented as “other crimes” that prove Trump could have done the unrelated charged crimes too.

Those other uncharged “crimes” are supposed to be irrelevant to this case. But of course the biased judge allowed it.

Appeals will overturn that too.

it’s pretty telling that the cult now places all its hopes on a hypothetical scenario in which an appeal is successful. Doesn’t really say much about the merits of his “defense”.

Just like all the other times Trump has prevailed on appeal, eh?

Furthermore if convicted, unless and until an appeal is successful, Trump will be a convicted felon.

And this case is just the start.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Trump claimed today that even Mother Theresa couldn’t bear this charge. And that’s correct, if she had all the evidence against her he does, she wouldn’t be able to beat it either. That’s how the law works. It may consider personality during sentencing, but judgements are based on facts, and not excused by rhetoric.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

He’s setting up his supporters for his guilty verdict.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

I wonder if the extremists realize that there isn’t another trial for appeal and that the judges just review the existing trial records.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

*So there was a coordinated conspiracy, just Trump deserved it?*

Incompetent sophist is gonna sophistry.

When actions are done that may contravene laws and law enforcement and prosecutors coordinate with a judiciary to pursue a case it is a 'conspiracy', many individuals and organizations working together to pursue a goal that is not immediately transparent.

Millions of people worldwide experience it everyday.

The MAGA ignorance, some real and some pretended, produce a lot of heat but little light.

The definition of sophistry.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Latest polls.

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/favorability/donald-trump/

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

Trump, to anyone with a three digit IQ and an objective view, is guilty as sin. But the real test here is how many of the appointed jurors are brainwashed Trump worshippers. From common citiizens to Court Judges this is what enables Trump's disgraceful behavior and agenda to destroy the rule of law and democracy for the sake of protecting his buttocks.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

Why did he go to prison?

Because he stupidly pled guilty to things he did that aren’t crimes

So he pled guilty to crimes and was sentenced to jail for those crimes, but they weren't really crimes...

That makes about as much sense as Hannibal Lector is a "wonderful man"....

Welcome to MAGA-world...

10 ( +11 / -1 )

So he pled guilty to crimes and was sentenced to jail for those crimes, but they weren't really crimes...

Great point. What sentencing guidelines did the court use when handing down their punishment for this "non-crime"? Hilarious.

10 ( +11 / -1 )

I think if you have to use terms like MAGA and cult in your statements, you have no argument.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

Maybe he didn't. I wasn't there, none of us were, so...

Trump, to anyone with a three digit IQ and an objective view, is guilty as sin.

For what?

But the real test here is how many of the appointed jurors are brainwashed Trump worshippers.

Or how many jurors are politically compromised hacks that put their personal feelings first over the facts or lack of to be more blunt.

From common citiizens to Court Judges this is what enables Trump's disgraceful behavior and agenda to destroy the rule of law and democracy for the sake of protecting his buttocks.

The judge and DOJ already destroyed the rule of law, I can see why they are all panicking if Trump and the Republicans should win and I don't blame them either.

-15 ( +0 / -15 )

A conviction will not prevent Trump, from trying to take back the White House. Nor will it prevent him from taking office if he wins.

lots of variables there, if convicted he might not even be sent to prision.

multiple polls have shown the majority of voters wont vote for a candidate with a criminal conviction.

He could be sent to prision if convicted and he could theoretically serve as POTUS from prison if he wins. presidents cant pardon state crimes.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

I think if you have to use terms like MAGA and cult in your statements, you have no argument.

maga call themselves maga, and they most definitely act like a cult, defend their leader no matter what crimes her does

10 ( +10 / -0 )

maga call themselves maga, and they most definitely act like a cult,

Cult? When the left says that, gives me pride.

defend their leader no matter what crimes her does

If he did an actual crimes, but none were given specifically

Let's see how much damage the trumpyclown takes...

The courts are doing that already.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

bass4funk

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

Maybe he didn't. I wasn't there, none of us were, so...

He made the claims mouthing off outside the court.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

lots of variables there, if convicted he might not even be sent to prision.

multiple polls have shown the majority of voters wont vote for a candidate with a criminal conviction.

The polls said the same thing if he were to be impeached, failed, then the Dems impeached him again, and it failed, they tried the Mueller Russian collusion delusion hoax and it failed and yet, he still was popular, they indicted him more than any other human and his numbers continue to climb, so if he is convicted, it won't do anything, he might lose a few, but he's gaining more people, especially from the Black and Latino community.

He could be sent to prision if convicted and he could theoretically serve as POTUS from prison if he wins. presidents can't pardon state crimes.

No, that's just not going to happen, the scheme the Dems are trying is just backfiring in their faces.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

I don't care either way. maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

He made the claims mouthing off outside the court.

He tried to say a lot but wasn't allowed to, the first American in recent history who was charged with (God knows what or even why and the fact that it was based on a misdemeanor is even more baffling, but he's gagged.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

bass4funk

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

I don't care either way. maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

So you doubt Trump. Melania is very clear on the issue.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

bass4funk

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

Maybe he didn't. I wasn't there, none of us were, so...

Stormy was. And she testified under oath that it happened.

With Trump being the GLOAT (Greatest Liar Of All Time), I trust Stormy on this one.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Having sex with Stormy is now Trump arrived in court. He couldn't keep it in his pants. Hush, hush, on the QT. The hush, hush on Melania was given this week by an insider.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Sadly, Mr. Trump believed that he had carte Blanche to say and do whatever he felt like doing.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

the_sicilianToday  10:15 am JST

I think if you have to use terms like MAGA and cult in your statements, you have no argument.

MAGA is the nationalist term utilized by Trump to describe his xenophobic supporters. The opposition didn’t create it.

And it’s most definitely a cult as it meets the requirements (irrational belief in a messianic leader, rampant conspiracy theories, a stubborn resistance to objective reality).

If one doesn’t like being called a cultist, don’t be a member of a cult.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Having sex with Stormy is now Trump arrived in court.

This shows you the utter idiocy and desperation the Dems are in

He couldn't keep it in his pants. Hush, hush, on the QT. The hush, hush on Melania was given this week by an insider.

In that millions of people need to be prosecuted, millions.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

bass4funk 

Having sex with Stormy is how Trump arrived in court.

This shows you the utter idiocy and desperation the Dems are in

Unfortunately for you, I'm not a dem.

He couldn't keep it in his pants. Hush, hush, on the QT. The hush, hush on Melania was given this week by an insider.

In that millions of people need to be prosecuted, millions.

They were not standing for election for president or paying hush, hush money to hide it from the voters. But it's true Trump's adultery while his wife was pregnant was not illegal.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Unfortunately for you, I'm not a dem.

You are not a conservative, kind of narrows it down

They were not standing for election for president or paying hush, hush money to hide it from the voters. But it's true Trump's adultery while his wife was pregnant was not illegal.

Doesn't matter, In that case, millions of people need to be prosecuted, millions

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

I think if you have to use terms like MAGA and cult in your statements, you have no argument.

If you think that MAGA isn't a cult, you have no argument.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

You are not a conservative, kind of narrows it down

Good ol' binary thinking.

Because that's how all the intelligent people of the world operate, right?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Trump denies everything even claims he never had sex with Stormy.

I don't care either way. maybe he did, maybe he didn't.

Hmmm.....

https://newrepublic.com/post/182058/team-trump-stormy-daniels-revelations

He made the claims mouthing off outside the court.

He tried to say a lot but wasn't allowed to,

He could have taken the stand and said anything he wants to - but he didn't, even after saying he would...

Maybe because the last time he took the stand he "took the 5th" 450 times....

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/trump-deposed-ny-ag-civil-probe-business-practices-rcna42355

but he's gagged.

By Melania...then comes the golf club....ROFL...

6 ( +6 / -0 )

but he's gagged.

He chose not to testify. We cry nary a tear for his whining. He could have had his say on the record.

But we all know that would have been absolutely disastrous for him. Even he isn't stupid enough to think he could have testified.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

He chose not to testify.

Yes, because he wasn't allowed to address the people that accused him of alleged whatever...

But we all know that would have been absolutely disastrous for him. Even he isn't stupid enough to think he could have testified.

Doubt it, but being the political hit job that it is, why would they allow him to address the porn whatever she was, and the thief.

-8 ( +1 / -9 )

A conviction will not prevent Trump, from trying to take back the White House. Nor will it prevent him from taking office if he wins.

from a prison jail, it will be fun to watch how low the US can go with trump.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@B: He tried to say a lot but wasn't allowed to, 

Then he should take the stand, shouldn't he. But MAGAs should know well, he might put his foot in his mouth again, it seems difficult for them and him to recall all their flip-floppery, and recall which lies were told and when, and where he told them. The previous guy has no solid set of political beliefs beyond what can I get for me now, and no ethical standards whatsoever. His supporters laud him for that, use him as a model, perhaps they're unable to reason for themselves, like political slaves throughout history.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Yes, because he wasn't allowed to address the people that accused him of alleged whatever...

Sure he was, he could have called them as witnesses.

That would have been disastrous for him though.

Let's be clear though, he was so guilty, there wasn't a path that wasn't disastrous for him.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

bass4funk

He chose not to testify.

Yes, because he wasn't allowed to address the people that accused him of alleged whatever...

Absolutely he could. He could say that what Stormy said was a lie.

But that would be perjury.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Doubt it, but being the political hit job that it is, why would they allow him to address the porn whatever she was, and the thief.

Huh? He cross examined both of them. Did they not mention that on Fox (Fox lies you know).

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Yes, because he wasn't allowed to address the people that accused him of alleged whatever...

Yes, because when are charged falsifying business documents ranting about Hunter Biden, George Soros and the far-left Marxist deep State is going to be deemed irrelevant and out of order.

Trump has really infected his fellow travelers with a reality distortion virus that makes them able to resist basic factual information.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Huh? He cross examined both of them. Did they not mention that on Fox (Fox lies you know).

No one said anything about Fox, CNN is not FNC nor is CBS.

Sure he was, he could have called them as witnesses.

He was not allowed to speak in detail about Cohen and Stormy.

That would have been disastrous for him though.

Doubt it.

Let's be clear though, he was so guilty, there wasn't a path that wasn't disastrous for him.

Guilty of what?

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

No one said anything about Fox, CNN is not FNC nor is CBS.

Nor is it Fox (Fox lies you know. Cost them cool $billion!)

He was not allowed to speak in detail about Cohen and Stormy.

Sure he was. He chose not to testify.

That would have been disastrous for him though.

Doubt it.

So you're saying he didn't do something that would have benefited him? Ouch, so you doubt your dear leader's strategy.

Guilty of what?

The jury will tell you in a few days ;)

10 ( +10 / -0 )

bass4funk

He chose not to testify.

> Yes, because he wasn't allowed to address the people that accused him of alleged whatever.

In a court of law, all defendants question witnesses via their lawyers and not directly by themselves.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Trump could have taken the stand. He did not.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Nor is it Fox (Fox lies you know. Cost them cool $billion!)

?

Sure he was. He chose not to testify.

He was not allowed to speak in detail about Cohen and Stormy.

So you're saying he didn't do something that would have benefited him? Ouch, so you doubt your dear leader's strategy. 

Possible

The jury will tell you in a few days ;)

It won't matter, he will still run. :)

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

bass4funk

Sure he was, he could have called them as witnesses.

He was not allowed to speak in detail about Cohen and Stormy.

Absolutely incorrect. His lawyers could ask Cohen and Stormy any questions relevant to the case.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Nor is it Fox (Fox lies you know. Cost them cool $billion!)

?

heh, I guess they don't tell you about that on Fox either! (Fox lies you know)

Possible

Well, no one ever accused Trump of competence. Not even you apparently.

It won't matter, he will still run. :)

And the sky will still be blue too. Any other irrelevancies you want to bring up?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

heh, I guess they don't tell you about that on Fox either! (Fox lies you know)

No one mentioned anything about FNC.

Well, no one ever accused Trump of competence. Not even you apparently.

Biden?

And the sky will still be blue too. Any other irrelevancies you want to bring up?

Well, it does matter, so in that the left failed again.

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

bass4funk

And the sky will still be blue too. Any other irrelevancies you want to bring up?

Well, it does matter, so in that the left failed again.

No, they didn't. This has nothing to do with politics.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

And the sky will still be blue too. Any other irrelevancies you want to bring up?

?

No, they didn't. This has nothing to do with politics.

And John Lennon had nothing to do with the Beatles.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

Sure he was. He chose not to testify.

He was not allowed to speak in detail about Cohen and Stormy.

He could have testified to anything he wanted IF HE TOOK THE STAND UNDER OATH...

He could have testified he never had a one night stand with Stormy...

He could have testified he never told Pecker to catch and kill this story to protect his campaign...

He could have testified he never approved the fake company to hide the payments to Cohen...

He could have testified he never approved the plan by Weisselberg and Cohen to pay back Cohen in installments...

He could have testified that he never told Hope Hicks that he was worried about the story having an impact on his campaign...

BUT HE DIDN'T....game over...

10 ( +10 / -0 )

About the gag order, here’s what I posted last week:

The gag order is for specific extrajudicial comments. The honorable judge made it very, very clear that TFG would be allowed to testify about anything while on the stand. The gag order doesn’t apply there.

So, Trump is a whining chicken.

And I would now add that he vaguely knew the consequences of his testifying, and his lawyers clearly knew the dangers.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

It's shocking how Trump and conservatives are being SILENCED by the left. They aren't free to express their views anywhere due to being SILENCED. 

Well, apart from on TV. And in newspapers and on the internet. And radio, and books, and podcasts and in court, out of court, in the street, in the bar, in congress, in the senate, in the park etc.

Apart from those few outlets they are being SILENCED.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

He could have testified to anything he wanted IF HE TOOK THE STAND UNDER OATH...

He could have testified he never had a one night stand with Stormy...

He could have testified he never told Pecker to catch and kill this story to protect his campaign...

He could have testified he never approved the fake company to hide the payments to Cohen...

He could have testified he never approved the plan by Weisselberg and Cohen to pay back Cohen in installments...

He could have testified that he never told Hope Hicks that he was worried about the story having an impact on his campaign...

BUT HE DIDN'T....game over...

Sure, as long as he didn't violate the gag order which means, had he said something about the two, he could have been locked up, "it's a trap!" so instead he chose not to, now had it not been for the gag order, Trump would have crowned both of them, but thankfully he listened to his lawyers and didn't take the bait. Brilliant. Nice try.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

It's shocking how Trump and conservatives are being SILENCED by the left.

No, not when you own the judiciary, the DOJ, and the legislative branch.

They aren't free to express their views anywhere due to being SILENCED. 

Yes

Well, apart from on TV. And in newspapers and on the internet. And radio, and books, and podcasts and in court, out of court, in the street, in the bar, in congress, in the senate, in the park etc.

Hmmm...

Apart from those few outlets they are being SILENCED.

And saying anything about the liberal Kabal that is fast coming to its climatic crescendo.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

bass4funk

He could have testified to anything he wanted IF HE TOOK THE STAND UNDER OATH...

He could have testified he never had a one night stand with Stormy...

He could have testified he never told Pecker to catch and kill this story to protect his campaign...

He could have testified he never approved the fake company to hide the payments to Cohen...

He could have testified he never approved the plan by Weisselberg and Cohen to pay back Cohen in installments...

He could have testified that he never told Hope Hicks that he was worried about the story having an impact on his campaign...

BUT HE DIDN'T....game over...

Sure, as long as he didn't violate the gag order which means, had he said something about the two, he could have been locked up, "it's a trap!"

He wouldn't have had to say anything about the two, to testify to all of the above.

The gag order doesn't stop him from testifying, it stops him from intimidating witnesses.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Trump's gag order was only for outside of the court. Not in it. He could have taken the stand and said whatever he wanted to. We'll never know now unless he does at his appeals after his sentencing.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

He wouldn't have had to say anything about the two, to testify to all of the above.

Then he can't address the accusation without it. American law is different from overseas.

The gag order doesn't stop him from testifying, it stops him from intimidating witnesses.

This goes back to my original point, it depends on what Trump says that this sham court deems as intimidating and he's done, glad he didn't fall for that trick.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Well, apart from on TV. And in newspapers and on the internet. And radio, and books, and podcasts and in court, out of court, in the street, in the bar, in congress, in the senate, in the park etc.

Apart from those few outlets they are being SILENCED

It’s more of the fantasy world. A make believe world of running multiple companies, flying private, making fortunes on stocks, having multiple degrees in the sciences etc.

It’s a weird way to live your life.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Blacklabel

Yet silence for a judge who had shown bias

No bias at all shown.

because his daughter makes millions from Democrats.*

What? That would be ridiculous.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

bass4funk

He wouldn't have had to say anything about the two, to testify to all of the above.

Then he can't address the accusation without it.

Of course, he could. He could deny it.

American law is different from overseas.

Yup. But not on that point.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

2020hindsightsToday  12:33 pm JST

bass4funk

He could have testified to anything he wanted IF HE TOOK THE STAND UNDER OATH..

But he’s a coward, and guilty AF as well.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

bass4funk

The gag order doesn't stop him from testifying, it stops him from intimidating witnesses.

This goes back to my original point, it depends on what Trump says that this sham court

It's not a sham court.

deems as intimidating and he's done, glad he didn't fall for that trick.

Rightly so. Judges take witness intimidation seriously.

All he needs to do is avoid intimidating or attacking witnesses.

Conditions on his testimony are not breaking the law by intimidating witnesses.

Do you think he should be able to intimidate witnesses?

8 ( +8 / -0 )

BUT HE DIDN'T....game over...

Sure, as long as he didn't violate the gag order which means, had he said something about the two, he could have been locked up,

Wrong.

"it's a trap!" so instead he chose not to, now had it not been for the gag order, Trump would have crowned both of them,

ROFL...

but thankfully he listened to his lawyers and didn't take the bait.

Ridiculous - he chickened out...turned yellow....wimped out...

Brilliant. Nice try.

He'll need more than that to avoid joining his "wonderful" friend Hannibal Lector in jail...

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites