Hush Money Trial Judge dismisses Trump claim that Payoffs to Porn Stars paid by Money Laundering isn't a serious crime.

[Caswell Thomas]

Listened and watched the State of New York v. Trump in the Hush Money payments of over $130,000 Trump told his then fixer attorney Michael Cohen to pay Porn Star Stormy Daniels and hide the payouts through "cooked books" so they wouldn't show up in his business accounts despite being paid from those assets.  Trumps comments outside the court and inside by his attorney tried to claim that none of it was a crime, not a serious crime, and he shouldn't be there because the trial cut into his campaigning......however, the the Judge disagreed and Saud it definitely WAS a serious crime.  As to Trumps attorney saying that Trump shouldn't even be in the Courtroom because it cut into Trumps personal campaign time to be on the road ...the Judge asked Trumps attorney " What us your legal argument about that then?" to which Trumps attorney said " that was my legal argument".  and the Judge responded..."THAT IS NOT A LEGAL ARGUMENT ".      See you March 25th Mr. Trump......

[WestCanMan]

Ask yourself this question: If Trump gets away with this, will other politicians try it as well?

There's a rumour going around that some kind of congressional slush fund for hush money might be set up on account of this.

[suds]

14 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Ask yourself this question: If Trump gets away with this, will other politicians try it as well?

There's a rumour going around that some kind of congressional slush fund for hush money might be set up on account of this.

 

noun: slush fund; plural noun: slush funds

 

"a reserve of money used for illicit purposes, especially political bribery."

 

The difference is that a 'Congressional slush fund' is a slush fund financed by the taxpayers for such cases as sexual harassment that Congress would rather keep secret. Is it hypocritical? Of course it is.

 

 

 

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, suds said:

 

noun: slush fund; plural noun: slush funds

 

"a reserve of money used for illicit purposes, especially political bribery."

 

The difference is that a 'Congressional slush fund' is a slush fund financed by the taxpayers for such cases as sexual harassment that Congress would rather keep secret. Is it hypocritical? Of course it is.

 

 

 

Exactly.

I think the lesson to be learned here is that Trump shoulda used taxpayer money for his NDAs. Then libbies would be ok with it.

If Biden gets one of his kids or grandkids to sign an NDA, I'm sure it won't come out of his own pocket. 

Edited February 16, 2024 by WestCanMan

[Rebound]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Exactly.

I think the lesson to be learned here is that Trump shoulda used taxpayer money for his NDAs. Then libbies would be ok with it.

If Biden gets one of his kids or grandkids to sign an NDA, I'm sure it won't come out of his own pocket. 

You cannot use an NDA to prohibit someone from disclosing or testifying to illegal conduct. 

[WestCanMan]

31 minutes ago, Rebound said:

You cannot use an NDA to prohibit someone from disclosing or testifying to illegal conduct. 

Is having sex with a porn star illegal now? 

[Rebound]

33 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Is having sex with a porn star illegal now? 

It is if you pay her.  Or, in your case, if you pay him.  

Edited February 16, 2024 by Rebound

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Rebound said:

It is if you pay her.  Or, in your case, if you pay him.  

It was also illegal to coerce Monica Lewinsky not to talk. We know how much that mattered. 

[robosmith]

50 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

It was also illegal to coerce Monica Lewinsky not to talk. We know how much that mattered. 

Was it also illegal for Trump to dangle pardons to entice Manafort and other cronies from flipping?

What kind of coercion was applied to ML? AFAIK, she never wanted to "talk" about the affair, since it was her idea.

[WestCanMan]

46 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Was it also illegal for Trump to dangle pardons to entice Manafort and other cronies from flipping?

What kind of coercion was applied to ML? AFAIK, she never wanted to "talk" about the affair, since it was her idea.

Guess what stupid... The FBI's power to harm people is far greater than Trump's ability to pardon. 

[WestCanMan]

3 hours ago, Rebound said:

You cannot use an NDA to prohibit someone from disclosing or testifying to illegal conduct. 

Hey stupid, do you have a link that says Trump is being charged because he paid for sex, and then paid the money for the NDA? 

I just keep seeing that he paid for the NDA, which is pretty normal. 

[godzilla]

2 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Is having sex with a porn star illegal now? 

he was charged with falsifying business records. he claimed this as a business expense. among other campaign related issues.

[Caswell Thomas]

17 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Ask yourself this question: If Trump gets away with this, will other politicians try it as well?

There's a rumour going around that some kind of congressional slush fund for hush money might be set up on account of this.

Prove your " rumor", as I am online many hours a day and some is on Republican sites and I haven't heard even a tiny glimmer of anything like your alleged heard "rumor".

[WestCanMan]

17 minutes ago, godzilla said:

he claimed this as a business expense. 

🤡😂

[WestCanMan]

13 minutes ago, Caswell Thomas said:

Prove your " rumor", as I am online many hours a day and some is on Republican sites and I haven't heard even a tiny glimmer of anything like your alleged heard "rumor".

Not a rumour at all. There is, or at least was, a congressional slush fund that was used to pay hush money: https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/21/congress-sexual-harassment-slush-fund-255547

• It has all the makings of a serious scandal: more than $17 million in public money paid since 1997 to settle workplace disputes on Capitol Hill. 

  But the reality of what critics lambaste as a sexual harassment “slush fund” is more complicated, like much about Congress’ policy for handling harassment complaints. The money covers all sorts of settlements, just not for sexual harassment, and some lawmakers cut their own side deals with accusers.

It's fairly common knowledge, but not all of the money was used specifically for NDA's or to pay off victims of sexual harassment. 

Politicians get their little dinkies stinky and then they use taxpayer money to get their fat outta the fire. 

The only reason Clinton got into real hot water is that he lied about Monica Lewinski to a grand jury, or at least under oath for some reason. I didn't give a crap about his accusation but holier than thou politicians wanted to make a meal of it. I was more concerned about Hillary's lack of concern, and how poorly she dealt with it. She was cold as a snake. Her comments lacked class, decency, humanity and cleverness. Let's be honest, her answer did need to need clever. Her husband and her country required that of her at that moment and she laid an egg. 

[Rebound]

17 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Not a rumour at all. There is, or at least was, a congressional slush fund that was used to pay hush money: https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/21/congress-sexual-harassment-slush-fund-255547

• It has all the makings of a serious scandal: more than $17 million in public money paid since 1997 to settle workplace disputes on Capitol Hill. 

  But the reality of what critics lambaste as a sexual harassment “slush fund” is more complicated, like much about Congress’ policy for handling harassment complaints. The money covers all sorts of settlements, just not for sexual harassment, and some lawmakers cut their own side deals with accusers.

It's fairly common knowledge, but not all of the money was used specifically for NDA's or to pay off victims of sexual harassment. 

Politicians get their little dinkies stinky and then they use taxpayer money to get their fat outta the fire. 

The only reason Clinton got into real hot water is that he lied about Monica Lewinski to a grand jury, or at least under oath for some reason. I didn't give a crap about his accusation but holier than thou politicians wanted to make a meal of it. I was more concerned about Hillary's lack of concern, and how poorly she dealt with it. She was cold as a snake. Her comments lacked class, decency, humanity and cleverness. Let's be honest, her answer did need to need clever. Her husband and her country required that of her at that moment and she laid an egg. 

How did Melania’s response to Donald’s infidelity strike you? Did she react the “proper way”?  Was she a superior scored wife? 

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Rebound said:

How did Melania’s response to Donald’s infidelity strike you? Did she react the “proper way”?  Was she a superior scored wife? 

Family matters are just that. 

Hillary should have said "Bill's obligation to the country is all that we are concerned about right now. He will continue to dedicate himself entirely to that job and I will fully support him every day that he remains in office. When it's appropriate to bring our family matters to the forefront we will do that privately, but that will happen after the next inauguration. I have nothing further to say on this issue."

And that's if she even said anything at all. 

Do you think the whole world should be put into chaos every time a world leader sticks his dink where it doesn't belong?

Grow up, man. 

Hillary laughed it off, which was inappropriate. It was gross. They had enough spin-doctors and enough time to come up with a proper response and she just went on camera and presented herself to the world as a snake. 

[robosmith]

19 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Guess what stupid... The FBI's power to harm people is far greater than Trump's ability to pardon. 

Guess what; ^this stupid OPINION has nothing to do with the question I asked and you quoted.

But I understand why you want to deflect from a question which you cannot answer. LMAO

[robosmith]

19 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Hey stupid, do you have a link that says Trump is being charged because he paid for sex, and then paid the money for the NDA? 

I just keep seeing that he paid for the NDA, which is pretty normal. 

It's far from "normal" when it's the NDA is a political expenditure being booked as "legal expenses" by the Trump Org.

[WestCanMan]

18 minutes ago, robosmith said:

Guess what; ^this stupid OPINION has nothing to do with the question I asked and you quoted.

But I understand why you want to deflect from a question which you cannot answer. LMAO

I gave a perfectly fine answer to your stupid post, which was far more than you deserved.

14 minutes ago, robosmith said:

It's far from "normal" when it's the NDA is a political expenditure being booked as "legal expenses" by the Trump Org.

Fine. He tried to write off some hookers and we'll see if his excuse pans out. At least it was his own money, not from a slush fund with the taxpayers' dime.  

[robosmith]

Just now, WestCanMan said:

I gave a perfectly fine answer to your stupid post, which was far more than you deserved.

I asked you a question and you didn't come close to answering it. 

Let me refresh your memory: it was about Trump dangling pardons to PROTECT HIS OWN A$$.

Go ahead and prove you're clueless by deflecting AGAIN

[herbie]

What's wrong with cheating on your income tax? Aren't rich people allowed to do that?

What's the use of getting rich if you can't do that?

[Rebound]

17 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

I gave a perfectly fine answer to your stupid post, which was far more than you deserved.

Fine. He tried to write off some hookers and we'll see if his excuse pans out. At least it was his own money, not from a slush fund with the taxpayers' dime.  

Wouldn’t you agree that hookers are not a tax deductible business expense?

[WestCanMan]

10 hours ago, Rebound said:

Wouldn’t you agree that hookers are not a tax deductible business expense?

If they're trans it pretty much has to be. 

[Caswell Thomas]

On 2/15/2024 at 10:22 PM, WestCanMan said:

Ask yourself this question: If Trump gets away with this, will other politicians try it as well?

There's a rumour going around that some kind of congressional slush fund for hush money might be set up on account of this.

Ask yourself this instead what will be done with the Lord Haw Haw's who aided Trump by posting and aggressively supporting his conspiracy theories, and who boosted Trumps abilities to collect funds through aiding him in the presentation of false narratives and fraudulent activities in violation of U. S. Election Campaign Laws?.