InvestorsHub Logo

sortagreen

06/09/24 2:44 PM

#478839 RE: hap0206 #478832

how they became fraudulent is the legal question for the Supremes



No, you treasonous moron. Findings of law are reviewable. The jury's decision is not.

The checks to Cohen were a repayment of his expenditure on behalf of the campaign. That was testified to, and the jury found that credible. It is therefor a finding of fact, and also not reviewable.

Did you get your accounting credential out of the same cereal box as your law degree? Again, how are you not in prison?

SoxFan

06/09/24 3:37 PM

#478843 RE: hap0206 #478832

Stop making shit up - What termination agreement?

janice shell

06/09/24 5:05 PM

#478861 RE: hap0206 #478832

when auditing large companies there was, usually, a check signing machine with the signature of a head honcho -- not always, but often

Are you in the habit of just making things up without checking to see whether they're true?

And you should know that The Trump Organization is not a "large company". It is a smallish family business. Trump has never been close to being one of the top New York City real estate developers.

fuagf

06/09/24 6:46 PM

#478911 RE: hap0206 #478832

hap0206, A termination agreement. The checks to Cohen all part of that. Wow. Thing is i can't find any corroboration of your insight. Blanche did not touch on your critically important observation at all in his close .. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/closing-arguments-trump-hush-money-trial-rcna153749 . How do you explain that, hap?

Are you really the only one who sees how a termination agreement was turned into a hush money case. The only one in the world??

Got a link to support your forensic perspective, hap? Must say it appears to be uniquely fanciful.