Trump posts Stormy Daniels letter denying she had an affair with him.

If there was no affair, then there was no need for hush money.

………………..

Trump just posted a 2018 signed letter from Stormy Daniels on Truth Social that destroys the Democrats’ hush money witch hunt She says, “I am denying this affair because it never happened” Inconvenient for the fake news narrative!



https://twitter.com/DC_Draino/status/1778074499620934135?

 

Daniels had long ago disavowed her lie denying the skank humped her years ago.

The skank just violated his gag order again. The whiny bitch spewed,

"... two sleaze bags who have, with their lies and misrepresentations, cost our Country dearly!”​

The skank is a sleaze bag who spews lies and misrepresentations, of course, and has cost our country dearly.

 

I Wonder if the Russian spy Cohen's letter will be brought up in court? Cohen the star witness is a two time, maybe three time perjurer to the federal courts…

""A letter from Stephen M. Ryan, counsel for Michael Cohen, to Jeff Jordan, the Assistant General Counsel at the Complaints Examination & Legal Administration for the Federal Election Commission, reveals ex-Trump lawyer Michael Cohen paid Stephanie Clifford, AKA Stormy Daniels, from his personal funds; “neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was party.”"

https://hannity.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/McDermott.pdf


https://hannity.com/media-room/hann...-from-2018-blows-up-braggs-case-clears-trump/

 

He says. She says.

Who gives a crap except the democrats who want to use it as ammunition?

 

LOL! If they didn't have an affair, why would she need to write a letter denying it? Unless she was paid money to write the letter.

 

Maybe because people kept bringing it up for years????

 

The trial is not about having an affair. The trial is about filing false financial documents.

 

This is awesome! Look at how the lefties are now pretending they already knew there was no affair. I bet I can find posts from ALL OF YOU saying the exact opposite.
Also I thought Trump was good at the art of the deal, but, hush money with no sex doesn't sound like a good deal to me!
How many more lies do we have to catch the left on before NEVER taking them seriously again?

 

So what if she was? That isn't illegal.

 

False business records "with the intent to defraud" and to "cover up another crime".

1. Who was defrauded?

2. What crime was covered up?

 

There's no lie here. The allegation is that it doesn't matter, for Trump's trial, whether the affair happened or not. I don't see what's new here. This letter has been known about for a long time. She would deny the affair if it happened, but she was paid to say it didn't. She would deny the affair if it really never happened. Due to circumstances we all still suspect it really did happen, but few can know for sure.

 

1. Voters, primarily.
2. Filing fraudulent financial records (misdemeanor by itself, elevated to felony when also used to commit another crime) in order to help win an election. Using a crime to help win an election is a yet another crime in New York state.

A Complete Guide to the Manhattan Trump Election Interference Prosecution (justsecurity.org)

 

How were voters defrauded? Explain.

Link?

 

1. The American People and the State of New York

2. Falsifying financial records that covered up a payment to a porn star.

 

I don't know if there was an affair or not (I tend to believe there was) BUT (as has been pointed out) the money WAS paid to Stormy Daniels...that's just a cold hard fact.
The only question now is, how was that money recorded in Trump's business records.

 

The link I provided is very comprehensive. I will quote some relevant areas:

A Complete Guide to the Manhattan Trump Election Interference Prosecution (justsecurity.org)

"
b. State Election Law
New York Election Law § 17-152 prohibits a conspiracy to use “unlawful means” to promote or prevent a person’s election. The phrase “unlawful means” is interpreted broadly and is not limited to crimes but rather includes any conduct unauthorized by law. In denying Trump’s motion to dismiss, Justice Merchan upheld DA Bragg’s theory under this statute, namely: “the People allege that Defendant intended to violate N.Y. Election Law § 17-152 by conspiring to ‘promote the election of any person to a public office… by entering a scheme specifically for purposes of influencing the 2016 presidential election; and that they did so by ‘unlawful means,’ including by violating FECA through the unlawful individual and corporate contributions by Cohen, Pecker, and AMI; and… by falsifying the records of other New York enterprises and mischaracterizing the nature of the repayment for tax purposes.’ People’s Opposition at pg. 25.”

Also see: NYS Open Legislation | NYSenate.gov

Attempts to defraud voters (defraud in New York is not limited to financial loss): "In terms of part (2), intent to defraud, “courts in the First Department have interpreted this culpable mental state broadly. Intent to defraud is not constricted to an intent to deprive another of property or money. In fact, ‘intent to defraud’ can extend beyond economic concern. "

"

• The Access Hollywood tape and the public allegations of sexual assault that followed. DANY argued that the tape is evidence of Trump’s intent and motive—which make it admissible as Molineaux. Specifically, the tape and related facts can show Trump’s deep concern about potential harm to his standing with female voters that allegedly motivated his hush money payment scheme and the falsification of business records to conceal it. Trump claimed the tape and hearsay evidence of sexual assault allegations by three women are irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial.
  • The court ruled that the facts underlying the Access Hollywood tape are admissible as they relate to Trumps’ “intent and motive for making the payment to Daniels and then, attempting to conceal them.” However, the court ruled that to avoid undue prejudice, the tape itself should not be played or admitted—just testimony about the interview that was caught on tape.
  • The court reserved ruling on the admissibility of the allegations of assault that followed, pending DANY making a further offer of proof so the court is in a “better position to properly analyze” that evidence.
• Evidence that Trump discouraged witnesses from cooperating with law enforcement, which DANY argued demonstrates his consciousness of guilt. In response, Trump objected to this evidence as irrelevant and unfairly prejudicial. He also said the court should not determine the admissibility of any such evidence in advance of trial in a blanket pretrial ruling but rather based on the specific evidence sought to be introduced at the time DANY offers it.
  • The court explained, “attempting to threaten witnesses, imploring them to testify falsely and offering money to change their testimony could certainly be probative of consciousness of guilt,” but it reserved ruling on the motion until it can review the specific evidence being offered.

"

 

Money was illegally spent to perpetuate lie that could have made a difference in some people's vote.
I am beginning to wonder about some of you that think that following laws is optional.

 

The voters were defrauded because they had a right to know that Trump is a lying scumbag who cheated on his pregnant wife.
Extra marital affairs have tanked the political aspirations of many candidates before Trump...paying hush money to Daniels was an attempt to hide critical information from the voters.

 

Thanks for proving no one was defrauded...lol

Covering up dirty secrets isn't illegal under any campaign law; state, or Federal.

 

How was the money illegally spent? Explain.

There's no question that none of you people even know what the laws are...lol

 

Paying hush money isn't unlawful.

That's state law and doesn't apply to Federal elections.

 

Paying hush money isn't alleged to be unlawful. Falsifying business records about hush money is.

Well, it does apply. Here's how it was addressed in my link and in the court so far. It sounds like the question is resolved.

"
5. What happened on preemption?
DANY also defeated Trump’s claim that federal election law preempts New York’s state jurisdiction. Trump raised this defense as part of his attempt to remove the case, claiming that the charges against him are based on alleged violations of state and federal election laws and are therefore preempted by the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). As an author of this Guide explained:

Federal preemption refers to the circumstance where federal law renders a state law unenforceable. The Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution makes federal law ‘the supreme Law of the Land.’ As a result, when there’s some irreconcilable conflict between state and federal law (conflict preemption), when Congress’ legislation of an area of law is sufficiently pervasive (field preemption), or even when Congress just says so (express preemption), the federal law wins and the state law is unenforceable.

Rejecting Trump’s argument, Judge Hellerstein found, “The Indictment does not intrude on FECA’s domain.” The judge found that the case centered on document falsification, and that collateral impact of the kind presented here on a federal election failed to constitute a sufficient basis for federal preemption of state criminal charges. After a lengthy analysis of applicable cases and other authorities, he concluded that the “mere fact that Trump is alleged to have engaged in fraudulent conduct with respect to a federal election is not a basis for preemption.” Trump ultimately chose to abandon his appeal of Hellerstein’s ruling.
"

Same source: A Complete Guide to the Manhattan Trump Election Interference Prosecution (justsecurity.org)

 

It's a question of HOW they were covered up.
Money used to cover up things like that are considered a campaign contribution (money paid to affect an election). He tried to cover up the payments by declaring that they were payments to Cohen for "legal services"...THAT is the crime.

 

1. Campaign finance laws covering Federal elections are policed by the Federal Elections Commission, not the state. State campaign finance laws don't apply to Federal elections. The FEC said Trump didn't violate any campaign finance laws.

2. Trump can donate as much money to his campaign, however he wants.

 

1. It is illegal because the financial statement was falsified. That means a lie, ya know somewhat like perjury only written down.
2. I question your interpretation of the law. Show why the State of New York doesn't know the laws of New York or the Trump defense hasn't used your insight.