Comments by "J Nagarya" (@jnagarya519) on "Alina Habba Appears Desperate as Trump's Court Case Goes Down In Flames" video.

Witness intimidation is ILLEGAL. Jury tampering is ILLEGAL. That's why the gag order.
17
Trump had his lawyers ask the judge to amend the gag order to allow him to attack Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen. That's his lawyers being loyal to Trump instead of to the rule of law. The judge said: "Nope," and pointed out that Trump could take the witness stand and testify under oath. Trump will never testify under oath.
8
Where is your EVIDENCE? In fact, Daniels WON the cross-examination.
3
Stop the stupid.
2
@COLDB33R That was the response to Trump's lawyer. He was distinguishing between the gag order, and testifying under oath. Trump is doing all his bloviating OUTSIDE court because he WILL NOT testify -- because that would subject him to cross-examination, and he would PERJURE himself. He DOES have the Constitutional right to NOT testify. But it is also SOLELY HIS decision whether to testify. The judge was saying that if Trump wants to say what the gag order BARS him saying, then he can do so as TESTIMONY UNDER OATH. What he is doing is -- his word - "unfair": he is attempting to intimidate witnesses and jury-tamper -- both of which are illegal and the REASON for the gag order without having to answer for it under cross-examination. NOT testifying is not the equivalent of asserting the 5th; THAT can be done DURING UNDER OATH testimony, as he's done HUNDREDS of time during depositions. Trump won't testify because the only way to avoid committing perjury would be to either admit that charges are true, or plead the 5th. He isn't going to campaign on pleading the 5th.
2
@TonyBassManiac He doesn't know. He's just desperate to continue to believe he hasn't been hoodwinked by Trump, so is just throw stuff at the truth in effort to hide from it. I have a sister like that: when she doesn't like a thing, she attacks it. If someone says something she doesn't like, she attacks the person with made-up nonsense.
2
Loon.
1
@MauricioGomez-ii3ns WITNESS intimidation is ILLEGAL. Jury tampering is ILLEGAL. If Trump wants to MOUTH OFF, then let him take the stand and do so UNDER OATH. Look at the FACTSS for a rare fucking time, Trumpeting moron: Trump had his lawyers file a motion asking that the gag order be "amended" so he could attack witnesses -- which is ILLEGAL. It was, of course, an effort to get AROUND the gag order. That LEIGITIMATE alternative is to take the stand and testify UNDER OATH. THAT'S HOW LAW WORKS. There is no "alternative" law that makes it "legal" to be a CRIMINAL. EVERY CONTEMPT charge against Trump for his violations of the gag order is a CRIMINAL finding. If it were YOU, YOUR ass would be IN JAIL. NO ONE is above the law -- including third-generation NEW YORK con man and career felon TRUMP, regardless you're being TOO DAMNED STUPID to recognize that he HAS YOU CONNED, and couldn't care LESS about you. Look at the reality: he put HUNDREDS of you stupid assholes in jail -- then went and PLAYED GOLF, EVEN THOUGH he could have pardoned them between January 7 and the inauguration.
1
@MauricioGomez-ii3ns The HONEST way to do that, punk, is for him to get on the witness stand and testify UNDER OATH. But we already know from past depositions and testimony that he invariably LIES. Look at this interesting detail from the E. Jean Carroll deposition -- he had been denying that he ever met or knew E. Jean Carroll: He was shown a photography with three people in it: Trump. Trump's previous wife. E. Jean Carroll. Remember: he has claimed to have the greatest memory: When asked to identify the people in the photo, he correctly identified: Himself. But he identified E. Jean Carroll as being his wife. He said nothing about his actual wife. And that was under oath, with his "perfect" memory. That is the CON MAN you are suckered by.
1
@MauricioGomez-ii3ns You don't have logic; you avoid the issue by accusing others instead of looking at yourself. That is intellectually dishonest.
1
@MauricioGomez-ii3ns You are avoiding REALITY. And I spelled that out for you.
1
@MauricioGomez-ii3ns He can do that LEGALLY by taking the stand and testifying UNDER OATH. But he WON'T, because he would have to admit to the crimes with which charged, OR commit PERJURY. He is doing all his dumb-assed name-calling, and insulting, and smearing OUTSIDE court because he WILL NOT testify -- despite his LIE that he would. How many fucking times must Trump LIE before you stop PRETENDING he isn't a constant liar, and DEFENDING and REPEATING his lies? But I'll bite: tell us how you are being MORAL by doing exactly that. And tell us how your accusing of OTHERS of lying -- while YOU are lying -- is not the immorality of hypocrisy?
1
@MauricioGomez-ii3ns Based on ACTUAL EVIDENCE, YES. But NOT on the basis of the Republican tradition of Fear and Smear politics. Florida has had Republican government for years. It is a shithole basket case economically, and people are leaving it in droves. Vote Republican, get corporate Republinomics -- then hide behind smearing Democrats.
1
@thelapander You mean Bill Maher? You mean when she was still silenced by the NDA, REQUIRED by Trump, so she denied the facts in order to comply with the NDA? Guess who else lies -- constantly: DONALD TRUMP. Why are you okay with Donald Trump's constant lying? Is it because you are a morally bankrupt hypocrite who is only "morally" concerned when (1) it is someone else lying about Trump -- which Michael Cohen did in DEFENSE of Trump, or (2) it is someone else telling the TRUTH about Trump? Your position is bogus as it requires you to defend Trump EVEN AGAINST THE RULE OF LAW and the KNOWN FACTS. "HANG MIKE PENCE!" -- Trump's MAGA "tourists". Clue, lying punk: not only because of the COVID pandemic, but also because it was the peaceful transfer of power ceremony, tourism was SUSPENDED at the Capital. What we are watching in New York's criminal trial is -- as seasoned lawyers and prosecutors have repeatedly pointed out, is a MOB trial. The witnesses for the prosecution are typically not people who attend the "Christian" Sunday mass that YOU don't attend either. They are mostly, themselves, WITNESSES to the crimes about which they are testifying BECAUSE they were perpetrators of the crimes. THIS is how LEGAL REALITY WORKS, law-illiterate liar: whatever the witnesses testify to UNDER OATH is CORROBORATED by HARD EVIDENCE. The New York criminal trial is a DOCUMENTS case. The DOCUMENTS were generated by and obtained from the Trump criminal enterprise, and other WITNESSES including TRUMP ALLIES who testified UNDER OATH to FACTS that prove the PROSECUTION'S case. And we know why you choose to be ignorant, to be stupid, to NOT KNOW the FACTS: because you HATE it being put in your face that "celebrity" Trump is a morally bankrupt degenerate pig who puts on an ACT that you fell for. He is a third-generation NEW YORK con man and career criminal. Trump is a SERIAL adulterer -- "Thou shalt not commit adultery" -- "God". And constant liar -- "Thou shalt not lie." -- "God. And constant defamer -- "Thou shalt not lie against others." -- "God". That's why, based on TRUMP'S LIES about it, you DID NOT watch the January 6th Committee hearings -- to which testified, UNDER OATH, ONLY TRUMP REPUBLICANS from Trump's White House, DOJ, and campaign. THEY provided the first extensive evidence to the public of Trump's CONSTANT COMMISSION OF CRIMES. And you want to call Stormy Daniels a liar for COMPLYING with Trump's REQUIRED NDA!? Trump doesn't comply with the RULE OF LAW, BEGINNING with the Constitution. AND he has promised to CANCEL the Constitution. CLUE: what happens to YOUR rights as secured in the Constitution if TRUMP CANCELS them? THEY NO LONGER EXIST. Stop the lying. More important: Stop the stupid, which is the equivalent of you cutting your own throat for a degenerate thief who couldn't care LESS about you.
1
@thelapander Stormy Daniels filed lawsuit, in California, against Trump. In the court papers from Trump he expressly stated that the $130,000 dollars were REIMBURSMENT (not "legal fees"). The prosecution submitted that DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE in the New York criminal trial. So tell us, Trump-worshipping sucker: In the New York trial, Trump sez it wuz "legal fees," not "reimbursement". In the California case, he said it wuz REIMBURSEMENT. In view of the fact that BOTH can't be true, then WHICH of the Trump assertions ISN'T the LIE? And see the video of Trump's lawyer Giuliani saying that the $130,000 came from Trump's personal account -- was not "campaign" money -- and was REIMBURSEMENT funneled through "a law firm". The straight facts, as SUBSTANTIATED by the DOCUMENTS in the New York case: The money -- it was actually the total of $420,000 -- came from Trump's personal account, as the checks prove, as 12 REIMBURSEMENTS to Michael Cohen. But we know you know none of that, because you are desperate to AVOID ALL FACTS in order to preserve the "purity" of your being HOODWINKING by TRUMP.
1
Who are you talking about?
1