Comments by "Rick Vervoort" (@rickvervoort9536) on "Trump's defense working to poke holes in credibility of witnesses" video.

Prior to Bragg's indictment, Southern District of NY prosecutors investigated Trump's alleged campaign finance violations, as did the Federal Election Commission, but both declined to pursue the case because Trump used his own money, not campaign finance money, and because reimbursing someone for a hush-money payment does not fit the definition of an in-kind campaign contribution. In fact, candidates do not have to disclose expenses that would have been incurred even if no campaign existed.
10
@danielcortez2499 Nice swing and miss. I notice you failed to mention the Federal Election Commission, who by the way deal with these matters.
5
Really? Cough up the documents, because so far the prosecution witnesses have destroyed the prosecutions bogus case. That is even before the convicted perjurer takes the stand.
4
@philster6383 Yeah, now we know why Michael Cohen was working (aka: committing crimes) for Trump thanks to the prosecutors very own witness's testimony. Thanks for stopping by.
4
@philster6383 That's not what the prosecutions own witnesses are saying. and neither do the documents. But you keep dreaming.
4
@philster6383 It's sworn testimony my friend. You will have to take your disagreements up with them.
4