Bonus question…

@shallow-blue said
The "Don't be an utter arse" principle?

At least you are taking a guess as to what the crime was. Morado not even do that.

@averagejoe1 said
At least you are taking a guess as to what the crime was. Morado not even do that.

Actually I directly told you what it was several times and even helpfully gave a link to the indictment.

That you want to believe right wing propaganda sources rather than your own eyes is your problem.

@shallow-blue said
No, he wouldn't! He's a plutocrat, and therefore, like you, a Republican.

like you, a buttocrat?

@no1marauder said
Actually I directly told you what it was several times and even helpfully gave a link to the indictment.

That you want to believe right wing propaganda sources rather than your own eyes is your problem.

What is the crime, for us peons please? Misdemeanor or felony?

@no1marauder said
Actually I directly told you what it was several times and even helpfully gave a link to the indictment.

That you want to believe right wing propaganda sources rather than your own eyes is your problem.

What sources of what? I don’t have tv or internet, a guy on the street told me Trump had been indicted. I asked him, What is his crime? He could not answer , can you? I can’t download a link, so you are my only source

@averagejoe1 said
What is the crime, for us peons please? Misdemeanor or felony?

Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree a Class E felony in NY.

How many times do you need to be told this?

@no1marauder said
Actually I directly told you what it was several times and even helpfully gave a link to the indictment.

That you want to believe right wing propaganda sources rather than your own eyes is your problem.

What I hear from right-wing sources is not relevant. It is not about me, Marauder. Libs make every post personal, it gets tiresome.

OUR ISSUE is ......has Bragg proven that the payments were actually connected back up to Trump..it is an untested legal theory to connect a biz record fraud violation back up to a Campaign Finance charge.....to put a misdemeanor into the realm of a felony.
Marauder, he has not done that, according to me and to right wing media. Has he done that according to you?
If the Forum votes on which of us has the simplest to-the-point take on all of this, I would win. Yours is a bunch of hyperbole, mine is basic fact. Has he been proven to have committed a felony? It is a yes or no, but you just do not do yes or no. LexNex just does not reason, and therein lies your rub.

@no1marauder said
Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree a Class E felony in NY.

How many times do you need to be told this?

what did he do to falsify business records? that is what is left out

@averagejoe1 said
What I hear from right-wing sources is not relevant. It is not about me, Marauder. Libs make every post personal, it gets tiresome.

OUR ISSUE is ......has Bragg proven that the payments were actually connected back up to Trump..it is an untested legal theory to connect a biz record fraud violation back up to a Campaign Finance charge.....to put a misdemeanor in ...[text shortened]... es or no, but you just do not do yes or no. LexNex just does not reason, and therein lies your rub.

Proof is done at trial.

Donald Trump signed 12 of the 13 reimbursement checks to Cohen; that kinda "actually connected" them to Trump.

@mott-the-hoople said
what did he do to falsify business records? that is what is left out

No, it isn't. The checks are labeled "legal expenses" and entered into company records as such. They were not and that is specifically alleged in the indictment.

@no1marauder said
No, it isn't. The checks are labeled "legal expenses" and entered into company records as such. They were not and that is specifically alleged in the indictment.

you are making it up as you go…and looking like a fool doing so

@no1marauder said
I must admit I'm at a total loss of what to think of people who are so brainwashed that they would rather believe what their propaganda sources tell them then their own eyes.

Yet, Mott, AJ and god knows who else here just cannot bring themselves to admit that they have been deluded into thinking the charge in nowhere in the indictment.

What can possibly explain it?

Some things just defy explanation.

"A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest."

-- Paul Simon

@mott-the-hoople said
you are making it up as you go…and looking like a fool doing so

It's right in the indictment which you obviously refuse to read.

@averagejoe1 said
I don’t have tv or internet

He has no internet!

And yet, he is on RedHotPawn!

A miracle has happened!

Praise the lord Trump, he has provided joe with a miracle!

(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

@no1marauder said
Proof is done at trial.

Donald Trump signed 12 of the 13 reimbursement checks to Cohen; that kinda "actually connected" them to Trump.

Then you are tryin it here?
Geez. You know all the facts which bump it to a felony ? Then since it hasn’t, why are you such a weenie, to not tell us that presently it is a misdemeanor? Why the word games marauder. It gets quite boring.
You are embarrassing. You say here that the proof will happen in the trial? So since proof that it is a felony happens after the trial begins., what is he charged with on day 1, a midemeanor? It is not yet proven to be a felony. So it is a misdemeanor , and you who fancies yourself a lawyer will not say that.
Why not, Marauder? Why, I think we have a new issue here. Why not?