Building a case based on paying hush money to floozies seems to be a poor vehicle for finally getting Trump. If I were a very wealthy politician, businessman and philanderer, I could think of dozens of reasons that have no criminal intent to pay hush money. An election clerk violating the rules in a small Georgia county will not get him either. Nor will Mr. Trump urging the Georgia Secretary of State to investigate the possibility of voter fraud. Nor will coercing the Ukraine president in the same fashion as Joe Biden did - it's just foreign policy - Obama's or Trump's. He might be guilty as hell but more proof than Trump's inarticulate statements and delusional thoughts will be required.
For sure the Republican party has wasted effort, public good will and winnable elections by continuing to promote Trump as a leader. He cannot be elected unless the current democrat administration screws things up unbelievably worse. Even then the abortionists might save the election for Biden or whoever is nominated.
You are correct: there's many reasons why hush money is paid, like reputation. I'm eagerly awaiting to see the evidence referred to in the SOF and whether they really did state, in writing, that the entire purpose of the payments was to keep it out of the election.
I did not have to read very far into your piece to reveal your Trump Derangement. Your first paragraph makes an assertion that the miscategorizeing of the expense was a deception. There is no evidence of a deception, it may have been an error or maybe it was an interpretation issue. Maybe an error or interpretation issue made by his tax accountant and not even the President. I can't imagine how the President did his own tax preparation. Hell, I don;'t and my return is only a dozen pages. His return is a hundred pages.
If it was an error or interpretation issue, he remains responsible and would likely have no problem with penalties levied. Unlike the Bidens who have received money and not reported it on his taxes, President Trump's deduction was for a legal expense which he actually paid out.
You actually did make that assertion, it was just not an original assertion on your part (or Braggs). In the case of the indictment, the assertion is alleged and not proven, your assertion did not note that. You do remember that right, even in the case of President Donald Trump, he is innocent until proven guilty.
"Unlike the Bidens who have received money and not reported it on his taxes, President Trump's deduction was for a legal expense which he actually paid out."
Your Biden Derangement is showing. Your assertion is alleged, and not proven, and your assertion did not note that. You do remember that right, even in the case of President Joseph Biden, he is innocent until proven guilty?
Building a case based on paying hush money to floozies seems to be a poor vehicle for finally getting Trump. If I were a very wealthy politician, businessman and philanderer, I could think of dozens of reasons that have no criminal intent to pay hush money. An election clerk violating the rules in a small Georgia county will not get him either. Nor will Mr. Trump urging the Georgia Secretary of State to investigate the possibility of voter fraud. Nor will coercing the Ukraine president in the same fashion as Joe Biden did - it's just foreign policy - Obama's or Trump's. He might be guilty as hell but more proof than Trump's inarticulate statements and delusional thoughts will be required.
For sure the Republican party has wasted effort, public good will and winnable elections by continuing to promote Trump as a leader. He cannot be elected unless the current democrat administration screws things up unbelievably worse. Even then the abortionists might save the election for Biden or whoever is nominated.
You are correct: there's many reasons why hush money is paid, like reputation. I'm eagerly awaiting to see the evidence referred to in the SOF and whether they really did state, in writing, that the entire purpose of the payments was to keep it out of the election.
I did not have to read very far into your piece to reveal your Trump Derangement. Your first paragraph makes an assertion that the miscategorizeing of the expense was a deception. There is no evidence of a deception, it may have been an error or maybe it was an interpretation issue. Maybe an error or interpretation issue made by his tax accountant and not even the President. I can't imagine how the President did his own tax preparation. Hell, I don;'t and my return is only a dozen pages. His return is a hundred pages.
If it was an error or interpretation issue, he remains responsible and would likely have no problem with penalties levied. Unlike the Bidens who have received money and not reported it on his taxes, President Trump's deduction was for a legal expense which he actually paid out.
I made no such assertion. However Alvin Bragg has made that assertion in the felony charges that were unsealed.
You actually did make that assertion, it was just not an original assertion on your part (or Braggs). In the case of the indictment, the assertion is alleged and not proven, your assertion did not note that. You do remember that right, even in the case of President Donald Trump, he is innocent until proven guilty.
"Unlike the Bidens who have received money and not reported it on his taxes, President Trump's deduction was for a legal expense which he actually paid out."
Your Biden Derangement is showing. Your assertion is alleged, and not proven, and your assertion did not note that. You do remember that right, even in the case of President Joseph Biden, he is innocent until proven guilty?
We could also talk about pro-Trump Derangement Syndrome, but it's likely not worth it.