House Speaker Mike Johnson describes himself as a Christian before anything else. He has said his “faith informs everything I do.” He has told people curious about his views to “pick up a Bible.” His wife reportedly runs a counseling service whose operating agreement, which he himself notarized, states, “We believe and the Bible teaches that any form of sexual immorality, such as adultery…is sinful and offensive to God.” He has said he and his son use a software program called Covenant Eyes to ensure neither is looking at porn.
Given all this, you may think that Johnson would not be comfortable showing up to a criminal trial to defend a guy who allegedly had an affair with an adult film star (according to the adult film star anyway, though Trump denies it), paid her to stay quiet about the alleged affair, and then was accused of covering up said payment. But you would think wrong!
On Tuesday, Johnson attended Donald Trump’s hush money trial in Manhattan, where—prior to the proceedings getting underway—the congressional leader nodded approvingly at Trump from behind a metal barrier, like a groupie at his favorite band’s concert.
Not accused. I thought the sex was already a forgone conclusion, which is why this is about the illegal payoff for her to keep it quiet
Defense tried to say that it never happened, which opened the door to Stormy telling the jury about what was effectively a rape by the defendant. They didn’t want to be arguing these facts, but that’s where they ended up!
Stormy came out a few years ago though and admitted they never had sex. She also said that she wasn’t a victim and wasn’t a part of the “me too” crowd. If you’re watching the MSM though, you probably don’t know about that
Or that didn’t happen and you think it did because you listen to and believe lying liars who lie.
Okay bud, whatever you say…
Damn, she must have crumbled when Trump’s lawyers brought that up when cross-examining her. As far as the jury is concerned, that would be game over for the prosecution.
Trump’s lawyers did bring that up, didn’t they?
I’m not in the court room, just look it up. It’s on video and I have seen that
Ah but how convenient it is that anything we look up that doesn’t fit your narrative can simply be dismissed as being the MSM which obviously has an anti Trump agenda and therefore is a lie. That’s pretty convenient, yes? It is almost like that’s exactly why Trump made up this whole MSM is liars who are out to get him thing. He has even tried to turn “doesn’t like Trump” into an insult that he then uses against anyone not supporting his lies to try to discredit them so that his own lies seem more believable.
I hope you can eventually see out of his cloud of lies, deception, and manipulation. It may be painful briefly, but you’ll eventually start seeing all the ways you have been manipulated. It will eventually feel good like a nice warm blanket to finally be free of it.
Btw, Trump didn’t just make it up about the MSM lying. It’s pretty obvious to anyone willing to venture outside the MSM bubble. Things like the Russia hoax, the burying of the Hunter laptop story, waiting until campaign season to bring every case they’ve got and then saying it’s not political, or spending 3 years telling everyone the border is secure and closed, refusing to say certain words or phrases such as illegal alien, and anytime someone calls them out on something they just tell everyone you’re a racist MAGA supporter, etc. are all examples of the fake news that Trump talks about.
I can say the same about your side when it comes to Fox news, Newsmax, etc.
Here’s an article on it where Bill Mahr talks about it. https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/bill-maher-dredges-up-2018-stormy-daniels-interview-that-totally-undermines-her-trump-trial-testimony/ar-BB1mgfe9
That’s not at all what the Maher article says. She said she wasn’t coerced, not that they didn’t have sex. It’s also not the point of the trial.
I never said that it was Mahr she said she didn’t have sex to. Word for word, this is the letter she signed in 2018.
What is the source of this?
She did sign that letter. But she had previously said they did have the affair (and described it in detail). And shortly after she signed that letter, she admitted to Anderson Cooper the letter was a lie. She explained that she lied because… Get this… She was concerned about legal complications because she had accepted the hush money to not reveal the affair.
She also admitted that statement was a lie during her recent testimony while under oath. Signing that statement was not likely a crime. But if she had lied under oath this month, that would be a crime.
So, she was clearly lying at some point. Why do you choose to believe the much less plausible option that she was truthful the one time in 2018 but she was lying all the other times? There’s no logical explanation for that, yet the opposite (lied in the 2018 statement you posted) has much more logical support. The only reason I can see to believe her only that one time when she had reason to lie is because it lets you believe Trump’s lies that you really wish were true.
Well why do believe that Cohen is honest now, but lied every other time in the past? Stormy came out the third time and said they slept together again to try and get some money, even telling her attorney to hurry it up before the election or she’ll lose her leverage to get paid. The point is that her and Cohen both just aren’t credible witnesses at all. They’re both making a living on Trump being guilty so they’ve got everything to gain from saying whatever they need to say to keep the money flowing
They were put in a box by Trump’s refusal to admit any guilt, even for things that are not crimes.
Any normal defense attorney would admit the fact that their client cheated on their wife and tried to cover it up. Those are not illegal, and are pretty defamatory, so you can have the judge exclude any testimony about the act.
Then it’s just a boring documents case. The jury doesn’t pay as much attention when the evidence is less interesting, so the prosecution’s case seems weaker.
It’s about falsifying business records although they still haven’t said what the actual crime was and Trump has always denied the sex allegations. Stormy even lost a defamation case against Trump and owes him 500k. The MSM tries to get you to think they slept together though
Falsifying business records is an actual crime.
So what? Even if he did falsify them (which they failed to prove) statute of limitations already ran up. They’re trying to claim he falsified them to influence the outcome of the election but that’s even possible considering that they weren’t labeled as a legal expense until after the election was over. Facts matter
Again, do you think they can just ignore things like statute of limitations and proceed anyway just because they don’t like Trump and are out to get him? The case would not be in progress if that claim of yours was accurate. The charges were indeed filled before the statute of limitations expired. This is a real court with real rules that apply and matter. It isn’t a clown sham court like Trump wants you to think it is. Facts do indeed matter. Stop fabricating them (or believing someone else’s fabrications) to fit a narrative that you want to be true.
You obviously don’t understand how it works. If you have a corrupt jusge and prosecutor, you can absolutely bring cases to court that doesn’t belong in court. They have the power to do so. The judge doesn’t have some boss standing over his shoulder telling him what he’s allowed to do or not do. They’ve got the power to just about anything they want. The judge can decide what evidence to allow and what evidence not to allow and right now, the judge doesn’t want the defense to allow an expert witness to testify and he has that power. The jury could decide in the end that Trumps not guilty and the judge even has the power to override the jury verdict and impose a sentence anyway. Sure, it’s not ethical, but he can certainly do it. The powers above him don’t come into play until the case is over and there is appeal made by the defense, and everything the judge did could be overturned. Our Justice system isn’t perfect at all and a judge having that much power is a big problem in my opinion and it largely goes unnoticed most of the time because like you, a lot people think that if it’s the court system it must be legit, but there’s more people waking up to it now that they’re using against political opponents so we’ll see if something changes down the road but as it stands a corrupt judge and prosecutor can destroy a completely innocent person with no problem
The statute of limitations ran up on the bookkeeping charge, so Bragg claimed that the false bookkeeping was done in order to hide another supposed crime which allows him to try and make a felony out of it, but they haven’t proved the first or second crime. Some say the second crime was election interference but the problem with that theory is that Trump didn’t sign the bookkeeping documents until well after the election was already over, so that wouldn’t make any sense. We’ve basically just gotta wait until the judge gives his directions to the jury to find out what this second crime is
Moving the goalposts I see.
How do you think they just skipped the parts where they would state the actual alleged crimes? They in fact didn’t skip that part.
Alright then, what is the folony crime they’re claiming he committed?
It’s falsifying business records, which becomes a felony when combined with it being a campaign finance violation.
Not as strong of a case as the docs one but it is a crime.
Right, that’s why the FEC and Braggs office declined to prosecute the case already, and then wouldn’t ya know, campaign season rolls around and all the sudden it’s being prosecuted. I’m just not that naive. I see it for what it is although I do expect a guilty verdict to come and then to get overturned on appeal
You’re just imagining facts that are convenient to what you want to think but are not true. This case has been in the works for years. It didn’t just happen recently all of the sudden because it is election season.
Yeah, it was in the works before and 2 courts declined to prosecute it, one being the very court that it’s being tried in now, the other being the Federal Election Commission. I’m not imagining anything. That’s just the facts bud