The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today
-
Sorry, when you've got three videos in a row, the likelihood is that nobody watches any of them.
Always remember, Operation Valkyrie was an act of sedition.
Warning: I post things that interest me. Read and comment at your own discretion. -
@Jolly said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Sorry, when you've got three videos in a row, the likelihood is that nobody watches any of them.
Yeah, but they're all different viewpoints....
By the way, what are George Conway's conservative bonafides? I'd never heard of the guy until 2016.
-
Juror Misconduct?
Me/rry/Christmas
-
-
This is a little easier to read
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GPf5dMpW4AApx1f?format=jpg&name=large
-
-
https://newrepublic.com/post/182623/did-trump-admit-another-felony-probabation-interview
New York City Department of Probation officials questioned the convicted felon and Republican presidential nominee Tuesday in a presentencing interview, and part of the discussion concerned a gun registered to him in the state. Under federal law, convicted felons are not allowed to have guns or ammunition.
-
NYC has tough gun laws. Trump had a permit. I'm sure they were talking about the revocation of that permit.
Ain't it going to be a kick in the pants if Hunter wins an appeal based on the 2nd?
-
Nah. If it furthers the 2nd, let the SOB walk.
-
-
@Axtremus said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Should the SCOTUS’ “presidential immunity” ruling void the NY “hush money/falsification of business records” conviction?
Discuss.
Not at all. Happened as candidate Trump, and had nothing to do with his duties as president.
It should be voided for myriad other reasons.
Me/rry/Christmas
-
@LuFins-Dad said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
@Axtremus said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Should the SCOTUS’ “presidential immunity” ruling void the NY “hush money/falsification of business records” conviction?
Discuss.
Not at all. Happened as candidate Trump, and had nothing to do with his duties as president.
It should be voided for myriad other reasons.
Pretty much, although I saw where Trump's lawyers were going back through the case to see if anything applied.
-
Here’s what I don’t understand, doesn’t the change of the statute of limitations after the fact violate the principle of ex post facto law changes? They can change the statute of limitations going forward, but not after. That was settled in Stogner V California
-
BTW, that's Congresswoman Elsie Stefanik.
If Donald J. Trump is elected, and especially if the GOP retains control of the House...Even better if the GOP controls House, Senate and Executive...I submit that there are serious ethical, judicial and civil rights violations within the State of New York. I think it only appropriate that the Federal Government do a thorough investigation on what appears to be a corrupt system and ensure that no illicit funds are changing hands, federal elections are not being interfered with, that no collusion or conspiracy exists between state and former DOJ/White House official to interfere with Federal elections and that the city of New York or the state of New York is attempting to supersede Federal election law.
