Possible Trump Indictment

[RumTumTugger]

Source: https://babylonbee.com/news/manhattan-da-announces-plan-to-get-trump-elected-in-2024

Manhattan DA Announces Plan To Get Trump Elected In 2024

MANHATTAN, NY — Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has announced a brilliant new plan to get Trump elected President in 2024.

"I will stop at absolutely nothing to put Trump back in the White House where he belongs," said Mr. Bragg. "I'm about to charge up his base like you've never seen!"

Mr. Bragg had carefully waited until the moment he could give Trump the biggest political boost to push forward with an indictment. "Check and mate, libs," laughed Mr. Bragg as he pulled on a MAGA hat. "I've already put in my request to be Trump's Transportation Secretary, I hear it's super easy. 2024, here we come!"

After lawyers of every political allegiance agreed there was no criminal case against Trump over hush money paid during his 2016 campaign, Mr. Bragg knew taking the hopeless case was his big chance. "The optics of Democrats indicting, even handcuffing Trump on charges that have no chance of sticking - what more could the Trump campaign ask for?" said MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. "Mr. Bragg might be the most brilliant Republican strategist this century. He's playing chess while the rest of us are out here playing checkers."

At publishing time, Governor Ron DeSantis was wondering what sort of crime he needed to be indicted for to keep pace with Trump.

© Copyright Original Source

I think you should have stated this is a parody site I am afraid certain members here who think they are more intelligent then the rest of us might believe that this is a real news source, and it makes more sense then what gonwannaland has been spouting.

[Gondwanaland]

But you already conceded that the checks did not specify that they were reimbursements, and as I recall from previous testimony, they were general retainer fees as opposed to repayment for any specific action taken by Cohen.

My understanding is that Cohen was a "fixer" who was kept on retainer, and his clients would tell him, "Make this go problem go away. I don't care how you do it, and I don't want to know," which is how the Stormy Daniels affair was handled and why the 2018 letter from Cohen's lawyer affirmed that President Trump had no direct involvement, and that Cohen was never directly reimbursed.

Again, the FEC never found cause to even fine the Trump campaign, and by all accounts, Bragg is serving up another big fat nothing burger.

Sure I "comceded" that Trumps company was not as completely braindead as to detail their crimes in writing on the memos of the checks they used to pay back Cohen.

But the checks are there and it's very clear reimbursement.

[Gondwanaland]

All I see here is a TDS sufferer grasping at non existent straws. I am under no obligation to believe that it was not the retainer fees as mentioned and that the absence of contrary evidence is proof that it wasn't; since as you have been told before in another thread we are under American law not British law you are not guilty till you prove you are innocent you are innocent till proven guilty and so far everything I am seeing show there is no there there.

And for those of you that wish to believe Trump is guilty until he proves himself innocent, Cohen is a convicted perjurer why should I believe he is telling the truth about anything. The case against Trump is looking more and more like the DA is trying to bail out a boat with a pasta strainer with all the holes built into it.

Who said you were under an obligation to believe anything?

If your threshold for being guilty of a crime occurring is someone being stupid enough to write down their confession on a check, then we'll, you've truly drunk every ounce of Koolade you can get your hands on

[Mountain Man]

Sure I "comceded" that Trumps company was not as completely braindead as to detail their crimes in writing on the memos of the checks they used to pay back Cohen.

But the checks are there and it's very clear reimbursement.

Obviously not so clear when you are forced to grudgingly admit that there was nothing in writing to identify them as reimbursements. And obviously not so clear that the FEC found any evidence of wrongdoing.

Think about it: if there was any there there, then the Democrats would have nailed the President's hide to the wall years ago instead of chasing one phony scandal after another and getting nowhere.

[Gondwanaland]

Obviously not so clear when you are forced to grudgingly admit that there was nothing in writing to identify them as reimbursements. And obviously not so clear that the FEC found any evidence of wrongdoing.

Think about it: if there was any there there, then the Democrats would have nailed the President's hide to the wall years ago instead of chasing one phony scandal after another and getting nowhere.

Correct, they were not braindead enough to put their crime in explicit writing on the thing they used to commit the crime.

[Mountain Man]

Correct, they were not braindead enough to put their crime in explicit writing on the thing they used to commit the crime.

Which is just another way of saying there is no evidence that a crime was committed.

[RumTumTugger]

Who said you were under an obligation to believe anything?

If your threshold for being guilty of a crime occurring is someone being stupid enough to write down their confession on a check, then we'll, you've truly drunk every ounce of Koolade you can get your hands on

No i am saying i believe Cohen a convicted perjurer is lying and i would need more then his say so to accept the checks as not a normal retainer payments to a fixer as the 2018 letter suggested.

So you would believe the testimony of a convicted perjurer who lost his licence to practice law rather then a practicing lawyer who would not only go to prison like Cohen but also lose his? who is drinking koolade now?

This is about a DA who promised when he ran for office he would get Trump and made up a crime aka Soviet Russia "you give me the man I'll makeup the crime stuff. Only those drinking the anti trump koolade would believe Bragg isn't playing politics.

[Mountain Man]

No i am saying i believe Cohen a convicted perjurer is lying and i would need more then his say so to accept the checks as not a normal retainer payments to a fixer as the 2018 letter suggested.

So you would believe the testimony of a convicted perjurer who lost his licence to practice law rather then a practicing lawyer who would not only go to prison like Cohen but also lose his? who is drinking koolade now?

This is about a DA who promised when he ran for office he would get Trump and made up a crime aka Soviet Russia "you give me the man I'll makeup the crime stuff. Only those drinking the anti trump koolade would believe Bragg isn't playing politics.

He sounds like Mad Maxine Waters.

"If there's no evidence that Trump committed a crime, it just means we haven't looked hard enough!"

[RumTumTugger]

He sounds like Mad Maxine Waters.

"If there's no evidence that Trump committed a crime, it just means we haven't looked hard enough!"

Yep

[CivilDiscourse]

No i am saying i believe Cohen a convicted perjurer is lying and i would need more then his say so to accept the checks as not a normal retainer payments to a fixer as the 2018 letter suggested.

So you would believe the testimony of a convicted perjurer who lost his licence to practice law rather then a practicing lawyer who would not only go to prison like Cohen but also lose his? who is drinking koolade now?

This is about a DA who promised when he ran for office he would get Trump and made up a crime aka Soviet Russia "you give me the man I'll makeup the crime stuff. Only those drinking the anti trump koolade would believe Bragg isn't playing politics.

Just for the record, multiple things can be true all at the same time:

1. Bragg is playing politics by bringing these charges against Trump.
2. The case that Bragg is bringing is weak, based on untested legal theory, has weak evidence, and could bolster Trump if it fails.
3. Trump actually DID know about the payment and helped hide the payment for the purposes of preventing damage to his campaign.

None of those are mutually exclusive.

[RumTumTugger]

Just for the record, multiple things can be true all at the same time:

1. Bragg is playing politics by bringing these charges against Trump.
2. The case that Bragg is bringing is weak, based on untested legal theory, has weak evidence, and could bolster Trump if it fails.
3. Trump actually DID know about the payment and helped hide the payment for the purposes of preventing damage to his campaign.

None of those are mutually exclusive.

4. Trumps purpose was to prevent damage to his campaign but it is not illegal.

[rogue06]

4. Trumps purpose was to prevent damage to his campaign but it is not illegal.

Ironically, when this story first broke several years ago, the MSM itself pretty much laid the groundwork for the defense.

You heard about how evil OMB was for putting his wife and family through this. Every day there were stories about how furious Melania was (pictures where she wouldn't hold his hand in public and rumors that she was sleeping in a different bed abounded).

At the same time the same folks would grouse that his supporters don't care and would vote for him no matter what.

So the MSM itself was showing that Trump could have legitimately been wanting to protect his family from the humiliation -- which they gleefully reported was a result of the story breaking. And that it wouldn't effect his support in the election.

No wonder that Bragg himself scoffed at all of this and stopped the investigation when he came into power only to be later pressured by donors to go ahead with it any way.

[CivilDiscourse]

4. Trumps purpose was to prevent damage to his campaign but it is not illegal.

That's true, but you seem to be missing the point.

[Gondwanaland]

Which is just another way of saying there is no evidence that a crime was committed.

Um, no it isn't, you utter dolt. By that logic most crimes that are prosecuted have no evidence because they criminal wasn't stupid enough to write a confession to their crime on the thing they used to commit the crime.

[Gondwanaland]

No i am saying i believe Cohen a convicted perjurer is lying and i would need more then his say so to accept the checks as not a normal retainer payments to a fixer as the 2018 letter suggested.

So you would believe the testimony of a convicted perjurer who lost his licence to practice law rather then a practicing lawyer who would not only go to prison like Cohen but also lose his? who is drinking koolade now?

This is about a DA who promised when he ran for office he would get Trump and made up a crime aka Soviet Russia "you give me the man I'll makeup the crime stuff. Only those drinking the anti trump koolade would believe Bragg isn't playing politics.

Ah, gotcha, so you believe the convicted perjurer was telling the truth when he wrote a letter saying something you like about your KKKult leader Trump, and that he was lying when checks exist showing the payments he got.