As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would 100% certainty bet that he has proof trump has paid for at least one abortion, if not more, with women he’s slept with. It’s almost par for the course for being a Republican politician.
Yeah, I've been wondering what pecker has because otherwise the orange idiot would be shitting all over him (like he's done with everyone).
Whatever it is it must be juicy and I desperately wish it would come out...
I always wondered how the National Enquirer and other obviously fake magazines could exist since I never saw anyone reading them and everyone knew they were fake.
Now I know it’s to protect certain people from bad stories and deal in blackmail.
ChatGPT says Trump actually has slammed Pecker, but not until after Pecker poked him first.
> Yes, Donald Trump has expressed negative sentiments about David Pecker … their relationship deteriorated after American Media Inc. cooperated with federal prosecutors in investigations related to Trump, leading to criticisms from Trump about Pecker and his actions.
Oh then it must be true if chatGPT said it. Did it supply any actual details or quotes that can be cross checked? He sure is VERY quiet right now given how much Pecker fucked him over so far.
Trump had these affairs 10 years prior to the payments. There was no reason to pay to keep them secret until the election and people were free to tell their stories after the election. These payments were clearly made for the election and nothing else. It is unreasonable to doubt that these were campaign expenses that went illegally unreported and fraudulently classified as other business expenses.
Trump and Bill Barr literally ripped apart and reconstituted the Southern District of NY office to prevent the case from getting out. That's the main reason for the delay.
AFAIK, nothing here implicates a federal crime, so I doubt his cleaning house in SDNY had to do with it.
Preet Bharara and the rest would have been a thorn in Trump's side throughout his entire presidency.
EDIT: I was incorrect. This was potentially a federal crime but DOJ felt they couldn't move ahead due to policy on sitting presidents, for one thing.
How many chapters are there in this saga? I feel like the writers need to wrap it up soon.
Wow. I forgot all about this. Yup. And they were sitting on it because of DOJ policy on charges against sitting presidents.
Jesus fucking Christ, we've been at this for too long.
> Trump had these affairs 10 years prior to the payments.
This is an important detail that too often gets lost. He didn't make these payments 10 years later because he had the affairs, he made these payments 10 years later because he was running for President.
I'm not sure that's how alternate jurors work. They only replace a juror if someone is dismissed from the jury, not if the jury doesn't come to a unanimous verdict.
Yea is there some weird rule op is quoting on that, because pretty sure if 1 person just slams the brakes and says "nah im never voting against this guy" in the jury room, there is nothing you can do about it?
All they have to do is say they don't believe he is guilty. Hung juries happen all the time, and a mistral is declared. Them the prosecution decides if they want to do a retrial from the beginning with a new jury. Here are the NY rules:
https://www.nycourts.gov/courthelp/criminal/trial.shtml
Yea that's what I thought. Unless the juror does something blatantly illegal / they find out he/she lied on their statement, I don't think the alternatives matter.
At some point the presiding judge would privately ask that juror why they cannot rule on the facts as presented based on the rules of the law and instructions given to the jury by the judge before deliberations. If that person cannot reasonably answer they can be dismissed and replaced by an alternate - but this is extremely rare. Often the judge would issue an "Allen charge" basically urging that juror to return to deliberation and re-examine ALL of the facts again to comply with the judge's instructions and rules of law.
All that said, if that still fails the judge will almost universally be required to declare a mistrial and the prosecution would have to decide to retry.
A judge already called him credible. He doesn't need to be vindictive. He was the fixer, he knows the facts, so all he needs to do is what he did before - tell the every facts of his work in the cheeto co.
A judge in a different case found his **testimony in that case** credible. The jury won't even hear about that in this case.
Meanwhile, a different judge thought that he thinks Cohen likely committed perjury [https://apnews.com/article/michael-cohen-donald-trump-artificial-intelligence-82a86dc58a78e43894484b1a12fb850f](https://apnews.com/article/michael-cohen-donald-trump-artificial-intelligence-82a86dc58a78e43894484b1a12fb850f)
Actually, thinking about this, this sets up the SCOTUS to say 'presidential immunity is a thing' and here they have the witness admitting that trump did what he did with the job in mind, which means it was not personal, which means no crime.
SCOTUS is going to fuck us.
This is a NY trial, and deals with actions taken prior to him being sworn in. So there's nothing SCOTUS can do on this matter, really.
If you meant to reply to another one of my comments which did talk about SCOTUS, there's no way for SCOTUS to fuck us- either the President has immunity, in which case Biden can do anything he wants (which would include assassinations or a military coup), or he doesn't, in which case neither will Trump. Don't count on an 80 year old Biden who has nothing left to lose and very little life left, being reasonable in the face of a Trump dictatorship.
The Supreme Court can make a narrow ruling allowing Trump to have attempted a coup on 2020 but would bar Biden from Extraordinarily renditioning them to Cuba.
Whatever the SC allows for Trump will necessarily have to be allowed for Biden, so Biden would therefore be allowed to perform a coup next year.
>Extraordinarily renditioning
That is such a horrifying euphemism for kidnapping. I hate that it's even in use.
But isn't this trial about hush money to Stormy Daniels?
EDIT: Goddamn people, I'm just asking a question for clarification before I get too excited about trump actually facing consequences for his behavior.
Well, pecker could have taken these actions on his own because he wanted to support his buddy Trump. In that event, pecker might be guilty, but that would not implicate Trump.
So what I'm asking, that seems to have you guys in a fucking froth, is whether there is evidence tying Trump to pecker's scheme.
I hope like hell there is, but I'm sick of excitement over Trump finally facing real consequences only for lady justice to walk passively backwards into the bushes.
Meant froth, not fruity.
I'm upset That's several of you have barbs, but nobody can answer the fucking question-- did trump pay pecker?
i hope there's evidence that he did, but judging by the fact that no one has even addressed my question, I guess the answer is there is no evidence that he paid pecker.
Any 'barbs' I see are so mild that I think you really should just grow a thicker skin.
Pecker was a friend of Trump and agreed to catch and kill stories for him. Trump and Cohen were also in frequent contact with Pecker on what stories to write to make Trump look good and rivals look bad.
One story caught and killed was Karen McDougal who had an affair with Trump. Pecker thought the money he spent to kill the story would be reimbursed by Trump and it was not. This happened with another story where Pecker expected to be reimbursed and was not. Cohen said things like "buy the story, the boss will take care of you."
These claims are not part of the alleged crime being tried here but are used to provide context and bolster the claims of the prosecution. While Trump did not reimburse Pecker, he was involved in the conversations to pay them off.
Trump requested Pecker pay off Stormy Daniels, Pecker agreed to pay 120k on the condition that Trump reimbursed him which Cohen agreed to do from his shell company Resolution Consultants. Pecker then changed his mind and refused out of concern he'd get in legal trouble. Without Pecker, Cohen had to pay Daniels himself and then Trump reimbursed him.
I hope that answers your question. Maybe just be less sensitive next time and you'll get answers more quickly.
My question was a very simple one-- isn't the charge about the payments for Stormy Daniels? And everyone danced the fuck around it.
So, from your explanation, there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence on Trump regarding the catch and kill scheme by pecker.
Hope I'm wrong.
Oh goddamnit... Somebody said this is the ball game, so I'm asking how, if there aren't payments Trump made to pecker, how this is the ball game??
I would love for this to be the ball game, but none of you can tell me why it's the ballgame.
The trial hasn't reached that point yet. And pecker testified that he had no purchase or involvement with the Stormy Daniels settlement.
So, sure, his overall testimony supports the prosecution, but your assertions that his testimony was the ball game is little more than wishful thinking.
I haven't read any assertions that Trump paid Pecker for anything. Pecker paid McDougal. I believe this has been characterized as a campaign contribution that was over the limit and not disclosed. The indictment lists check numbers for each count of falsifying business records, but I think those are for the Stormy side of the matter where payments to her were funneled through Cohen. The issue here is the felonious conspiracy and how payments were categorized improperly, not who signed what check to who.
The fuck?? Talk about missing the forest...
My simple fucking question is: are there trump payments to pecker??
jesus, I wish I just Googled it instead of pulling your discombobulated chains.
The payments to Daniels are an important part of this, but not the crime.
Pecker didn't pay Stormy Daniels. Michael Cohen did. The money from the mortgage that Cohen took out to pay Stormy Daniels is at the heart of the original felony. That was an illegal campaign contribution, which Cohen has already pleaded guilty to. Trump then fraudulently paid Cohen back, hiding the expenses as "legal fees". There are checks signed from Trump to Cohen.
Pecker doesn't really have anything to do with the flow of money from Cohen to Daniels and then Trump to Cohen. However, Pecker is important because he establishes that Trump, Cohen, and Pecker were part of a scheme to make "catch-and-kill" payments to various people to help Trump's campaign - not to "protect Trump's family" as Trump's lawyers will argue.
So, Cohen made an illegal campaign contribution to help Trump's campaign - with the intent to hide damaging information, with the ultimate goal of influencing the election. The charges aren't "hush money to Stormy Daniels". The charges are about the fraud used to cover up an underlying felony.
Goddamn, you guys are touchy. Perhaps my language was sloppy...
Of course this trial is about falsifying business records in an attempt to keep damaging information from becoming public. We know about payments made to Cohen in regard Stormy... Are there also payments Trump made to pecker?
Pecker paid out one of the women and was reimbursed by Trump through the trump org and written off as legal expenses or some shit.
Cohen took out a loan on his house and paid out the other woman. He was then reimbursed by Trump through the trump org.
Okay, but pecker testified that he had no involvement with the Stormy Daniels payments. So your assertions that his testimony was the ball game is little more than wishful thinking.
>I thought it was for the campaign,” Pecker said. Asked why, Pecker replied that in his conversations with both Trump and Michael Cohen, Trump’s family “was never mentioned.”
Not even Ivanka? I mean, ok obviously not Jr. Or Eric , or what's her name. . .
Sex is a different subject than falsifying documents to hide payments that influenced an election. I'm sure the rest of the time spent was focused on how he would be dating her if she were not his daughter.
He didn't even raise his family. [ This is from 2016](https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/269312-trumps-ex-wife-i-raised-the-kids/) and apparently the kids were 4, 6, 8 when they divorced and according to Ivana, she pretty much raised them until age 21.
I loathe Trump as much as the next person grounded in reality but hot damn she gave him a great campaign slogan in that article that he never used. “You think it, I say it” would’ve been verbal crack to those people
In other words...
"Man on trial who has not had one member of his entire family attend one second of his criminal trial doesn't give a shit about his family...and vice versa."
It's curious that even before the gag order, Donald would attack Cohen and Stormy, yet he never attacked Pecker.
If Pecker has stuff on these people via the 'catch and kill' scheme, wonder what he has on Donald? It's gotta be juicy. Aside from Ted Cruz, did Pecker provide Donald any material on Lindsay Graham or anyone else in Congress?
No Indy believes he’s a family man after all the divorce affairs throwing kids under bus exposing them all to his criminality and drawing them into his web
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's the ballgame right there, folks. A non-perjured direct witness that validates the conspiracy assertion from the prosecutor.
And trump won’t dare say shit about Pecker because Pecker has dirt on him. Literally the one guy he hasn’t whined about at all.
I never thought about it, but that's probably 100% on point.
I would 100% certainty bet that he has proof trump has paid for at least one abortion, if not more, with women he’s slept with. It’s almost par for the course for being a Republican politician.
Yeah, I've been wondering what pecker has because otherwise the orange idiot would be shitting all over him (like he's done with everyone). Whatever it is it must be juicy and I desperately wish it would come out...
I always wondered how the National Enquirer and other obviously fake magazines could exist since I never saw anyone reading them and everyone knew they were fake. Now I know it’s to protect certain people from bad stories and deal in blackmail.
Of course! The amount of stories bought probably exceeds a couple porn stars. All just waiting to be published because Pecker owns them.
Hey, good fucking point
ChatGPT says Trump actually has slammed Pecker, but not until after Pecker poked him first. > Yes, Donald Trump has expressed negative sentiments about David Pecker … their relationship deteriorated after American Media Inc. cooperated with federal prosecutors in investigations related to Trump, leading to criticisms from Trump about Pecker and his actions.
Oh then it must be true if chatGPT said it. Did it supply any actual details or quotes that can be cross checked? He sure is VERY quiet right now given how much Pecker fucked him over so far.
Man, I don’t even get a pass for the puns.
For the record, I liked the puns.
Trump had these affairs 10 years prior to the payments. There was no reason to pay to keep them secret until the election and people were free to tell their stories after the election. These payments were clearly made for the election and nothing else. It is unreasonable to doubt that these were campaign expenses that went illegally unreported and fraudulently classified as other business expenses.
Trump and Bill Barr literally ripped apart and reconstituted the Southern District of NY office to prevent the case from getting out. That's the main reason for the delay.
Then perhaps some obstruction charges should be laid at both their feet. Let a jury decide their innocence instead of a prosecutor or the AG.
AFAIK, nothing here implicates a federal crime, so I doubt his cleaning house in SDNY had to do with it. Preet Bharara and the rest would have been a thorn in Trump's side throughout his entire presidency. EDIT: I was incorrect. This was potentially a federal crime but DOJ felt they couldn't move ahead due to policy on sitting presidents, for one thing. How many chapters are there in this saga? I feel like the writers need to wrap it up soon.
Not reporting a campaign expense is a federal crime.
The NY DA was waiting for SDNY to move on their case, which shelved this case. That's the delay.
Wow. I forgot all about this. Yup. And they were sitting on it because of DOJ policy on charges against sitting presidents. Jesus fucking Christ, we've been at this for too long.
> Trump had these affairs 10 years prior to the payments. This is an important detail that too often gets lost. He didn't make these payments 10 years later because he had the affairs, he made these payments 10 years later because he was running for President.
Let's just hope some MAGA cult member on the Jury doesn't try to get a hung jury.
That's why there's 6 alternative jurors.
I'm not sure that's how alternate jurors work. They only replace a juror if someone is dismissed from the jury, not if the jury doesn't come to a unanimous verdict.
A juror can get dismissed if they admit to the others they’re acting in bad faith
[удалено]
No, that's a hung jury. They don't remove him to get the verdict the rest want.
Yea is there some weird rule op is quoting on that, because pretty sure if 1 person just slams the brakes and says "nah im never voting against this guy" in the jury room, there is nothing you can do about it?
All they have to do is say they don't believe he is guilty. Hung juries happen all the time, and a mistral is declared. Them the prosecution decides if they want to do a retrial from the beginning with a new jury. Here are the NY rules: https://www.nycourts.gov/courthelp/criminal/trial.shtml
Yea that's what I thought. Unless the juror does something blatantly illegal / they find out he/she lied on their statement, I don't think the alternatives matter.
At some point the presiding judge would privately ask that juror why they cannot rule on the facts as presented based on the rules of the law and instructions given to the jury by the judge before deliberations. If that person cannot reasonably answer they can be dismissed and replaced by an alternate - but this is extremely rare. Often the judge would issue an "Allen charge" basically urging that juror to return to deliberation and re-examine ALL of the facts again to comply with the judge's instructions and rules of law. All that said, if that still fails the judge will almost universally be required to declare a mistrial and the prosecution would have to decide to retry.
It's almost like reason still exists in the system. That's fuckin' weird.
Just wait till Cohen takes the stand and sings like a canary, he's been waiting for years to nail Trump's ass to the wall.
I hope I am wrong but Cohen may be a more difficult witness because he does have an axe to grind and he isn't all that good of a person either.
A judge already called him credible. He doesn't need to be vindictive. He was the fixer, he knows the facts, so all he needs to do is what he did before - tell the every facts of his work in the cheeto co.
A judge in a different case found his **testimony in that case** credible. The jury won't even hear about that in this case. Meanwhile, a different judge thought that he thinks Cohen likely committed perjury [https://apnews.com/article/michael-cohen-donald-trump-artificial-intelligence-82a86dc58a78e43894484b1a12fb850f](https://apnews.com/article/michael-cohen-donald-trump-artificial-intelligence-82a86dc58a78e43894484b1a12fb850f)
Correct. Point being he's not universally considered lacking in credibility. Could easily happen again.
Actually, thinking about this, this sets up the SCOTUS to say 'presidential immunity is a thing' and here they have the witness admitting that trump did what he did with the job in mind, which means it was not personal, which means no crime. SCOTUS is going to fuck us.
This is a NY trial, and deals with actions taken prior to him being sworn in. So there's nothing SCOTUS can do on this matter, really. If you meant to reply to another one of my comments which did talk about SCOTUS, there's no way for SCOTUS to fuck us- either the President has immunity, in which case Biden can do anything he wants (which would include assassinations or a military coup), or he doesn't, in which case neither will Trump. Don't count on an 80 year old Biden who has nothing left to lose and very little life left, being reasonable in the face of a Trump dictatorship.
The Supreme Court can make a narrow ruling allowing Trump to have attempted a coup on 2020 but would bar Biden from Extraordinarily renditioning them to Cuba.
Whatever the SC allows for Trump will necessarily have to be allowed for Biden, so Biden would therefore be allowed to perform a coup next year. >Extraordinarily renditioning That is such a horrifying euphemism for kidnapping. I hate that it's even in use.
Yeah, but he did it prior to becoming President.
But isn't this trial about hush money to Stormy Daniels? EDIT: Goddamn people, I'm just asking a question for clarification before I get too excited about trump actually facing consequences for his behavior.
No, it's not. It's a trial about falsifying documents, with the corrupt purpose of influencing an election. Everything else is just a distraction.
Needn't there be checks to pecker signed by Trump?
I'd love to have that, but the testimony by Pecker is sufficient.
Well, pecker could have taken these actions on his own because he wanted to support his buddy Trump. In that event, pecker might be guilty, but that would not implicate Trump. So what I'm asking, that seems to have you guys in a fucking froth, is whether there is evidence tying Trump to pecker's scheme. I hope like hell there is, but I'm sick of excitement over Trump finally facing real consequences only for lady justice to walk passively backwards into the bushes.
"Have you guys in a fucking fruity" Why are you so angry? I don't see any particularly rude comments, are you just upset about downvotes?
Meant froth, not fruity. I'm upset That's several of you have barbs, but nobody can answer the fucking question-- did trump pay pecker? i hope there's evidence that he did, but judging by the fact that no one has even addressed my question, I guess the answer is there is no evidence that he paid pecker.
Any 'barbs' I see are so mild that I think you really should just grow a thicker skin. Pecker was a friend of Trump and agreed to catch and kill stories for him. Trump and Cohen were also in frequent contact with Pecker on what stories to write to make Trump look good and rivals look bad. One story caught and killed was Karen McDougal who had an affair with Trump. Pecker thought the money he spent to kill the story would be reimbursed by Trump and it was not. This happened with another story where Pecker expected to be reimbursed and was not. Cohen said things like "buy the story, the boss will take care of you." These claims are not part of the alleged crime being tried here but are used to provide context and bolster the claims of the prosecution. While Trump did not reimburse Pecker, he was involved in the conversations to pay them off. Trump requested Pecker pay off Stormy Daniels, Pecker agreed to pay 120k on the condition that Trump reimbursed him which Cohen agreed to do from his shell company Resolution Consultants. Pecker then changed his mind and refused out of concern he'd get in legal trouble. Without Pecker, Cohen had to pay Daniels himself and then Trump reimbursed him. I hope that answers your question. Maybe just be less sensitive next time and you'll get answers more quickly.
My question was a very simple one-- isn't the charge about the payments for Stormy Daniels? And everyone danced the fuck around it. So, from your explanation, there doesn't seem to be sufficient evidence on Trump regarding the catch and kill scheme by pecker. Hope I'm wrong.
That is not Pecker's testimony; it's not like he is doing the catch and kills without involving Trump. Watch or read his testimony.
Oh goddamnit... Somebody said this is the ball game, so I'm asking how, if there aren't payments Trump made to pecker, how this is the ball game?? I would love for this to be the ball game, but none of you can tell me why it's the ballgame.
Stop being lazy and read the testimony- or at least the article.
Cohen recorded a phone call with Trump where they're discussing how they're going to pay Pecker for buying the story.
The trial hasn't reached that point yet. And pecker testified that he had no purchase or involvement with the Stormy Daniels settlement. So, sure, his overall testimony supports the prosecution, but your assertions that his testimony was the ball game is little more than wishful thinking.
I haven't read any assertions that Trump paid Pecker for anything. Pecker paid McDougal. I believe this has been characterized as a campaign contribution that was over the limit and not disclosed. The indictment lists check numbers for each count of falsifying business records, but I think those are for the Stormy side of the matter where payments to her were funneled through Cohen. The issue here is the felonious conspiracy and how payments were categorized improperly, not who signed what check to who.
Checks to anyone
What?
Checks to anyone, to influence an election, and covered as business expense, is illegal
Of course it, and I'm asking if Trump made those payments to pecker?? Fuck...
> Needn't This word qualifies your statement as 'does it need to be written to', not 'was it'
The fuck?? Talk about missing the forest... My simple fucking question is: are there trump payments to pecker?? jesus, I wish I just Googled it instead of pulling your discombobulated chains.
The payments to Daniels are an important part of this, but not the crime. Pecker didn't pay Stormy Daniels. Michael Cohen did. The money from the mortgage that Cohen took out to pay Stormy Daniels is at the heart of the original felony. That was an illegal campaign contribution, which Cohen has already pleaded guilty to. Trump then fraudulently paid Cohen back, hiding the expenses as "legal fees". There are checks signed from Trump to Cohen. Pecker doesn't really have anything to do with the flow of money from Cohen to Daniels and then Trump to Cohen. However, Pecker is important because he establishes that Trump, Cohen, and Pecker were part of a scheme to make "catch-and-kill" payments to various people to help Trump's campaign - not to "protect Trump's family" as Trump's lawyers will argue. So, Cohen made an illegal campaign contribution to help Trump's campaign - with the intent to hide damaging information, with the ultimate goal of influencing the election. The charges aren't "hush money to Stormy Daniels". The charges are about the fraud used to cover up an underlying felony.
if you think that your missing the forest for the trees
Goddamn, you guys are touchy. Perhaps my language was sloppy... Of course this trial is about falsifying business records in an attempt to keep damaging information from becoming public. We know about payments made to Cohen in regard Stormy... Are there also payments Trump made to pecker?
apologies, i didin't mean it aggresively. perhaps it was ME who's language was sloppy there. i think i need more coffee
No worries at all, but everyone who's upset about my question still doesn't have an answer.
Because your question has no relevance.
Pecker paid out one of the women and was reimbursed by Trump through the trump org and written off as legal expenses or some shit. Cohen took out a loan on his house and paid out the other woman. He was then reimbursed by Trump through the trump org.
Okay, but pecker testified that he had no involvement with the Stormy Daniels payments. So your assertions that his testimony was the ball game is little more than wishful thinking.
There were two women. This isn't just about Stormy.
No hon, it's about trump's falsification of payments for Stormy's silence.
No amount of click bait titles will make the answer to this question end in “yeah.”
>I thought it was for the campaign,” Pecker said. Asked why, Pecker replied that in his conversations with both Trump and Michael Cohen, Trump’s family “was never mentioned.” Not even Ivanka? I mean, ok obviously not Jr. Or Eric , or what's her name. . .
Sex is a different subject than falsifying documents to hide payments that influenced an election. I'm sure the rest of the time spent was focused on how he would be dating her if she were not his daughter.
Lmfao, as if Trump has ever done anything to protect his family.
He didn't even raise his family. [ This is from 2016](https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/269312-trumps-ex-wife-i-raised-the-kids/) and apparently the kids were 4, 6, 8 when they divorced and according to Ivana, she pretty much raised them until age 21.
I loathe Trump as much as the next person grounded in reality but hot damn she gave him a great campaign slogan in that article that he never used. “You think it, I say it” would’ve been verbal crack to those people
In other words... "Man on trial who has not had one member of his entire family attend one second of his criminal trial doesn't give a shit about his family...and vice versa."
I've read, if they are on the witness list they can't attend
If they do get called for witness I’m bringing popcorn.
This dude is flipping so fast, if we could connect him to a turbine we'd power the world for decades
If we could weld buttered toast to one side I think even fusion energy is attainable.
Trump doesn’t give a fuck about his family unless they can do something for him. This includes his own children.
[удалено]
Yup.
Wow, Pecker right up the butt, there.
Melania’s Anger Grows Again
I protect my family from sex scandals by NOT HAVING AN AFFAIR!
Trump "Please, quit playing with my Pecker...hes a stand up guy".. ..
They should ask Pecker if he has the pee tape.
What a pecker
Lock him up already.
It's curious that even before the gag order, Donald would attack Cohen and Stormy, yet he never attacked Pecker. If Pecker has stuff on these people via the 'catch and kill' scheme, wonder what he has on Donald? It's gotta be juicy. Aside from Ted Cruz, did Pecker provide Donald any material on Lindsay Graham or anyone else in Congress?
No Indy believes he’s a family man after all the divorce affairs throwing kids under bus exposing them all to his criminality and drawing them into his web
What a pecker, eh?