The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
so trump was just waiting in his boxers to raw dog stormy when she arrived?
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 8th, 2024 5:37 AM Author: Beady-eyed bistre temple It was the courtroom face-off everyone was waiting for -- testimony of high legal importance, and salacious sexual content.
Donald Trump, the former US president who has always prided himself on being in charge and in control, was forced to sit and listen to a porn star describe in open court a bedroom encounter that he denies ever took place.
"When I opened the bathroom door to come out, Mr. Trump had come into the bedroom," Stormy Daniels told the New York court.
"The intention was pretty clear, someone stripped down to their underwear posing on the bed waiting for you."
Trump stared ahead through Daniels' testimony, which often veered into graphic sexual detail despite the judge's best efforts.
"My clothes and shoes were off, I think I still had my bra on. We were in missionary position."
Was he wearing a condom? "No."
Was it brief? "Yes." |
Date: May 8th, 2024 5:42 AM Author: bull headed talking library private investor it's soooo 180 we are not only prosecuting but also allowing irrelevant embarrassing testimony for politicians we don't like! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644346) |
 |
Date: May 8th, 2024 7:45 AM Author: Beady-eyed bistre temple his party has twice as many justices on the supreme court than his opposition's and it won't stop the 1/6 prosecution, his longest serving chief of staff said "god help us if he's reelected," and his own vice president won't endorse him. the guy who inherited $400,000,000 isn't the victim you think he is. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644436) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 7:52 AM Author: bull headed talking library private investor right, so your logic is trump = bad so it's totally ok to open the door on political prosecutions including admitting irrelevant and embarrassing testimony.
ive told you many times im not a trump guy, although i prefer him to biden. i would have supported almost any other populist over him. try to consider this if it wasn't trump on the stand. this is immoral and dangerous. it's not a good to celebrate this as a process even if you really don't like the guy it's being used against. |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 8:04 AM Author: Vigorous Digit Ratio lol at trying to reason with 60 IQ meth addicted trash (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644468) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 8:56 AM Author: Beady-eyed bistre temple it's relevant *because* it's embarrassing. you don't make hush money to conceal conduct that isn't politically damaging. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644519) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 9:55 AM Author: bull headed talking library private investor benzo, i know you're not a lawyer, but it is strictly not relevant to these charges. the details about the sex have nothing to do with anything. it doesn't matter if trump was chad thundercock or couldn't get it up. this is why the judge did exclude a lot of details and even had many stricken from the record. so if those details are irrelevant, than how are things like the encounter being "brief" relevant? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644584) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 5:38 PM Author: Beady-eyed bistre temple how is it prejudicial that he’s a premature ejaculator? who cares if he’s embarrassed. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47646038) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2024 1:34 PM Author: bull headed talking library private investor only relevant evidence is admissible. and even relevant evidence can be excluded if it's relevance is outweighed by other things, including embarrassment.
so, who cares if he's embarrassed? uh, the black letter rules of evidence. |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 5:39 PM Author: Claret coffee pot "it's ok when we do it do him" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47646042) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 11:11 AM Author: arousing sanctuary i dont see how you could give stormy any credibility as a witness. she has a pecuniary interest in making things sound as salacious as possible, and an emotional interest in ruining trump. her story has not stayed consistent over the years either.
of course none of this testimony should have been allowed in the first place, it's obviously very prejudicial and irrelevant to the alleged crime |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 11:24 AM Author: Bright Galvanic Marketing Idea (lib terror state disbars you for questioning their legal jihad) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644749) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2024 11:26 AM Author: bull headed talking library private investor i wonder if the defense offered to stipulate to the fact that michael cohen paid for her to sign an nda regarding an alleged sexual relationship. she had no independent knowledge of whether trump directed michael cohen to make the offer to her. whether the encounter actually occurred isn't relevant. and certainly the *details* of the encounter are not relevant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47644751) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2024 1:40 PM Author: Comical useless jewess field details of the encounter might be relevant as to the question of whether it's a campaign expenditure or not. The more embarrassing and salacious it is the more likely it was intended as a campaign expenditure. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47648354) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2024 1:23 PM Author: Beady-eyed bistre temple (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5526359&forum_id=2#47648305) |