Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

billpalto t1_j6nkohs wrote

Just to be clear, Trump's lawyer went to prison for felonies that included this one. He did it at Trump's direction, and used Trump's money for the payoff. He went to prison for it.

When asked about it, Trump of course lied.

564

Beard_o_Bees t1_j6nxi1z wrote

Loyalty is a strictly one-way street with Velveeta Voldemort.

124

quats5 t1_j6ocnwd wrote

…that’s the best name I’ve seen for him so far. I’d give you an award if I had one!

27

EvilDonald44 t1_j6oqjju wrote

I think it was Colin Mochrie who said that "Donald Trump" was an anagram of "Lord Dampnut".

20

GentlemanBastard2112 t1_j6opjdq wrote

I concur, and I thought I’d heard/seen them all. Kudos 👍🏻

Will definitely be using this in the future.

6

Alis451 t1_j6orikw wrote

The Cheddar Chump
The Swiss Swindler
The Gouda Ghoul
The Muenster Mobster

I'm not sure why i started spouting off cheese related villain names, but they seem to fit.

12

cgerrells t1_j6pem2f wrote

Processed American cheese is the most fitting

5

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6nmnd0 wrote

There's the rub, though (no pun intended)...they'll have to prove that he lied.

If the CFO or Pecker flipped, their testimony, in addition to Cohen's, could possibly be the evidence that the case needs.

109

billpalto t1_j6o1lbi wrote

It's on video. When asked about the check to the porn star, Trump claimed he knew nothing about it, and they should ask Cohen. Of course, then Cohen produced the check that had Trump;s signature on it.

140

Funklestein t1_j6phjrl wrote

The check wasn’t to her though was it? I thought he paid off the Enquirer to buy any story regarding him.

She sold her story to The Enquirer and they decided not to run it as per their deal with Trump.

Considering that he successfully civilly sued her for violating the non-disclosure what is his criminality regarding this?

6

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6o1ww4 wrote

As a lawyer, I suspect, would explain, that's not enough to show intent.

−49

TheManassaBaller t1_j6o7fwd wrote

I think writing a check would show intent.

45

Art-Zuron t1_j6oeo9p wrote

For any other rube, yeah, but Trump is a demogogue with a cult following. They'd deny it if they literally watched him pay her off on film, had a hot mic, and had his personal confession.

17

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6or0us wrote

If you think so, make the argument. Show what the check pays for.

−24

Ferregar t1_j6osgnm wrote

Seeing as Trump JUST tweeted that he, in fact, did have an affair with Stormy Daniels (a long time ago, well past the statute of limitations he says), I think many obstacles just got push-broomed out of the aisle.

39

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6ot24l wrote

The word "it" does a lot of lifting in your interpretation of his tweet. Convince a jury that "it" means what you say that it means, and not what The Count of Mostly Crisco says it'll mean.

−26

Ferregar t1_j6otauu wrote

If you haven't seen the tweet itself, do recommend. As for the jury, I reckon the combination of signed check, imprisoned lawyer, recorded and written confessions will do a solid number on "reasonable doubt."

20

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6otscz wrote

Perhaps we're referring to different tweets. Can you share a link to the one you'd cite as a confession?

−9

Ferregar t1_j6otwsc wrote

https://www.reddit.com/r/WhitePeopleTwitter/comments/10q7ojy/trump_finally_admits_affair_with_porn_star_stormy/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

9

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6oudk0 wrote

OK, we're on the same page. That's the one that I thought would be shared.

What is "VERY OLD & happened a long time ago"?

(asking for the jury)

−5

Ferregar t1_j6ov8ne wrote

Questions for the bench!

But my answer is Donald Trump.

7

CoalCrackerKid t1_j6ovneq wrote

Ha!

You see my point. When you want to win, you setting ambiguity like this before you bring the case.

To reiterate my prior though, if Weisselberg or Pecker came forward with evidence that they've sat on all this time, it all might be academic (and the reason why the DA finally decided to go to the grand jury).

Strange times. We'll all find out eventually.

−1

David_ungerer t1_j6p9o0g wrote

Yes . . . They’ll (The Prosecutors)have to prove that he lied . . . So they(The Prosecutors) cover their asses with a Grand Jury Inditement (foot dragging) to hold off charges ! ! !

−6