What do you mean?quash said:Sam Lowry said:Nope. Can you imagine the reaction if Trump had used the hard-earned dollars of his Rust Belt constituents to pay off the porn star? Because that's what y'all are saying he should have done. It's just the kind of abuse that the FEC is trying to discourage by interpreting campaign expenditures as narrowly as possible. You can be certain that Dems would be crying foul.quash said:Sam Lowry said:Potentially, I think he said. But in reality it's not a crime if it's not campaign money.quash said:Judge Nap, on Fox, puts the felony count at four.Sam Lowry said:That will be quite difficult to do since it was not in fact illegal.HuMcK said:
The whole point of this hearing is Cohen providing evidence that Trump conducted the scheme willfully and with full knowledge of it's illegality.
And that's why it's a crime.
It's not just the source, it can also be the purpose.
Cohen about to Flip
45,885 Views |
503 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by quash
No matter the source, if it is for a campaign purpose and is not reported as a campaign expenditure.Sam Lowry said:What do you mean?quash said:Sam Lowry said:Nope. Can you imagine the reaction if Trump had used the hard-earned dollars of his Rust Belt constituents to pay off the porn star? Because that's what y'all are saying he should have done. It's just the kind of abuse that the FEC is trying to discourage by interpreting campaign expenditures as narrowly as possible. You can be certain that Dems would be crying foul.quash said:Sam Lowry said:Potentially, I think he said. But in reality it's not a crime if it's not campaign money.quash said:Judge Nap, on Fox, puts the felony count at four.Sam Lowry said:That will be quite difficult to do since it was not in fact illegal.HuMcK said:
The whole point of this hearing is Cohen providing evidence that Trump conducted the scheme willfully and with full knowledge of it's illegality.
And that's why it's a crime.
It's not just the source, it can also be the purpose.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
True, but still only if campaign purpose is narrowly defined.quash said:No matter the source, if it is for a campaign purpose and is not reported as a campaign expenditure.Sam Lowry said:What do you mean?quash said:Sam Lowry said:Nope. Can you imagine the reaction if Trump had used the hard-earned dollars of his Rust Belt constituents to pay off the porn star? Because that's what y'all are saying he should have done. It's just the kind of abuse that the FEC is trying to discourage by interpreting campaign expenditures as narrowly as possible. You can be certain that Dems would be crying foul.quash said:Sam Lowry said:Potentially, I think he said. But in reality it's not a crime if it's not campaign money.quash said:Judge Nap, on Fox, puts the felony count at four.Sam Lowry said:That will be quite difficult to do since it was not in fact illegal.HuMcK said:
The whole point of this hearing is Cohen providing evidence that Trump conducted the scheme willfully and with full knowledge of it's illegality.
And that's why it's a crime.
It's not just the source, it can also be the purpose.
Sooooo............The dust has settled on the "Cohen flip/testimony" and as predicted way back early in the thread it all ended up being just one more hyped up sure fire smoking gun that's going to drive Trump from office - that ended up fizzling and dying without phasing the man or his Presidency.
Feels good to be vindicated. Again.
Feels good to be vindicated. Again.
One very big difference between us and the lefties is that we are looking at corruption not covered by MSM while they're regurgitating MSM narratives.Johnny Bear said:
Sooooo............The dust has settled on the "Cohen flip/testimony" and as predicted way back early in the thread it all ended up being just one more hyped up sure fire smoking gun that's going to drive Trump from office - that ended up fizzling and dying without phasing the man or his Presidency.
Feels good to be vindicated. Again.
And guess whose wrong 100% of the time? The left.
Who on here said it was going to drive him from office?Johnny Bear said:
Sooooo............The dust has settled on the "Cohen flip/testimony" and as predicted way back early in the thread it all ended up being just one more hyped up sure fire smoking gun that's going to drive Trump from office - that ended up fizzling and dying without phasing the man or his Presidency.
Feels good to be vindicated. Again.
You call that vindication? Cohen's testimony merely set the ground for further investigation. You boys still haven't learned where to spike a damn football.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
No it didn't. Congress can subpoena, but they can't run criminal investigations.quash said:Who on here said it was going to drive him from office?Johnny Bear said:
Sooooo............The dust has settled on the "Cohen flip/testimony" and as predicted way back early in the thread it all ended up being just one more hyped up sure fire smoking gun that's going to drive Trump from office - that ended up fizzling and dying without phasing the man or his Presidency.
Feels good to be vindicated. Again.
You call that vindication? Cohen's testimony merely set the ground for further investigation. You boys still haven't learned where to spike a damn football.
How the **** are you a lawyer?
FormerFlash said:You realize the two statements I bolded above can't both be true right? You're right that the majority of Americans didn't vote for Trump. Therefore, the majority are actually in favor of the government being involved in their very private business. A vote for the Democratic party is a vote for broad federal government oversight, over-involvement, and overreach.xiledinok said:Baby killing platform? 70 percent of Americans believe Roe v. Wade should not be overturned. They want government kept out of their very private business.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:xiledinok said:RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:xiledinok said:Who cares, I told you who I planned to vote for a month ago. It was a Republican.RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:xiledinok said:Sure buddy. They are all about to throw their careers and great benefits to bump Trump. Not every is corrupt and stupid enough to throw it all away.Doc Holliday said:The SDNY is a federal prosecutorial agency that terrorizes the masses and "investigates" opponents to find evidence of any political transgressions or opponents whose political views they disagree with.xiledinok said:Maybe in your business people are crooked, corrupt and always looking for that deal that gets them ahead but these are people who are doing their jobs. They can go home at night without having to screw someone to make a buck. I doubt they have trouble understanding the elements that make up the crimes they charge people with in United States District Courts.Doc Holliday said:They (SDNY) can believe it all they want, but they can't misinterpret the law and actions as they are doing and expect to get anywhere with it.HuMcK said:Doc Holliday said:HuMcK said:Doc Holliday said:The DOJ accepted it.HuMcK said:
The whole point of this hearing is Cohen providing evidence that Trump conducted the scheme willfully and with full knowledge of it's illegality. The circumstance you describe where filings can be amended is in the case of mistake or undiscoverability, not after payments were knowingly concealed.
The SDNY would have brought up charges against POTUS. They didn't.
I rest my case.
Trump remains an unindicted co-conspirator because it is DOJ policy at this time to not indict a sitting President, he was however implicated in the same criminal scheme that Cohen plead guilty for. The designation Individual-1should ring a bell for that reason.
This Count Eight transaction surrounds a payment to Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels) of $130,000 for a nuisance claim. Who says it is a campaign contribution? The SDNY does, no-one else. Not even the FEC considers this a campaign contribution.
Count eight is a political charge/plea specifically included for the purpose of pulling Donald Trump into the SDNY Cohen case. There is no FEC violation here. *Note it is not the Federal Election Commission making the claim, only the SDNY prosecutors.
it is not a campaign contribution for a candidate to instruct his attorney to pay-off a nuisance claim to avoid any issues or embarrassment. It is not a campaign donation for Donald Trump to reimburse his attorney for paying the claim.
The issue of the Cohen payment being an "in kind" campaign contribution is the bottom line question which underpins the charge.
There is no FEC rule or law that says a candidate cannot pay-off an accuser to avoid further issues, a nuisance claim. Paying an accuser to avoid controversy or embarrassment, is no different than a candidate buying an American made car -with personal funds- to gain the beneficial public optics of not driving a foreign car. Neither expense example makes the payment an aspect of am "in kind" campaign contribution.
There is no connected claim that President Trump used campaign funds to repay his attorney for eliminating the nuisance claim. President Trump, a businessman, used his own business income to repay his attorney; an attorney on a monthly retainer.
The entire charge of Cohen making a campaign contribution, or campaign finance violation, is a manufactured claim, made only by the SDNY, for political benefit.
That's lot of words to dance around an admission that SDNY Prosecutors (the only prosecutors with jurisdiction over this matter btw) believe they have uncovered criminal conduct by Individual-1 in conspiracy with Cohen.
That scheme you talked about where Cohen gets paid "retainer" fees to cover up the use of money is exactly what Cohen described as the unlawful scheme used to avoid disclosure req's. Huge coincidence I guess that those $35k installments all eventually added up to exactly what was paid to Stephanie Clifford.
As a side note, remember when Trump played dumb about this whole thing and said it never happened? It's crazy how much Trump has shifted the goal-posts at this point where he can blatantly lie to his followers' faces and still count on their unwavering support. What's more, not only do they still support him blindly, y'all continue to believe him when he spouts obvious lies. It's disheartening really, in a 1984 kind of way.
So which candidate in the Democratic Clown Car are you voting for? Or maybe you're waiting for old man Biden or young Robert O'rourke?
The assumption these folks are going to throw away their careers to set up Trump is assinine. Common sense is really lacking.
Kasich is not running. Most Republicans no longer consider him a Republican.
I don't blame you one bit for pleading the 5th on my question considering who you have to pick from.
Do you make decisions on who you will vote for 21 months from the election?
You forget the Democrats win the popular vote. You make it read like you are in the majority. Are you in the majority or is just your imagination?
The majority? I am about to send Howard Schultz a few bucks. Am not going to vote for him but want him to do well. With the Socialist and baby-killing platform of the Democratic Party, I will be voting for Donald Trump. Only this time I won't be holding my nose.
Yes, the majority of Americans didn't vote from Trump. He won't win any of those states in the North in 2020 he won in 2016.
Roe v. Wade is going to stick.
Both parties get in people's business. It how people's wallets are effected determines for most what is right and wrong.
Doc Holliday said:No it didn't. Congress can subpoena, but they can't run criminal investigations.quash said:Who on here said it was going to drive him from office?Johnny Bear said:
Sooooo............The dust has settled on the "Cohen flip/testimony" and as predicted way back early in the thread it all ended up being just one more hyped up sure fire smoking gun that's going to drive Trump from office - that ended up fizzling and dying without phasing the man or his Presidency.
Feels good to be vindicated. Again.
You call that vindication? Cohen's testimony merely set the ground for further investigation. You boys still haven't learned where to spike a damn football.
How the **** are you a lawyer?
Who said criminal? How the **** are you literate?
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Reminder: the RNC finance committee consisted of 3 men, 1 an accused money laundering casino magnate who stepped down after being accused of rape (Steve Wynn), 1 money laundering GOP operative who paid his mistress to get an abortion (Elliot Broidy), and the now felon personal lawyer to Donald Trump who says he has evidence of illegal Chinese money flowing into the RNC. Basically, the Republican's money handlers appointed by Trump were all criminal scumbags, but Trump hires only the best people or whatever...
Michael Cohen's original plea agreement stated he had provided all evidence he had in his possession. He is now coming forward trying to negotiate a better deal with "new" evidence of wrongdoing. This guy is such an idiot he just violated his own plea agreement.
Keep fighting the good fight, though. I'm sure you guys will get Trump this time.
Keep fighting the good fight, though. I'm sure you guys will get Trump this time.
Sic Everyone.
This thread is almost a year old. When PB said Cohen was "about to flip", what exactly is that timetable?
contrario said:
This thread is almost a year old. When PB said Cohen was "about to flip", what exactly is that timetable?
"Flipping" generally means providing evidence against someone else, which Cohen did and continues to do. For example, it's likely that Cohen's cooperation forms the basis for Elliot Broidy's pending money laundering charges. The office of the Presidency is immune from criminal prosecution, however, which allows Trump's supporters to pretend like he hasn't done anything illegal.
I'm thinking the impact of his information has been oversold, at least what we know of it so far.HuMcK said:contrario said:
This thread is almost a year old. When PB said Cohen was "about to flip", what exactly is that timetable?
"Flipping" generally means providing evidence against someone else, which Cohen did and continues to do. For example, it's likely that Cohen's cooperation forms the basis for Elliot Broidy's pending money laundering charges. The office of the Presidency is immune from criminal prosecution, however, which allows Trump's supporters to pretend like he hasn't done anything illegal.
FormerFlash said:
Michael Cohen's original plea agreement stated he had provided all evidence he had in his possession. He is now coming forward trying to negotiate a better deal with "new" evidence of wrongdoing. This guy is such an idiot he just violated his own plea agreement.
Keep fighting the good fight, though. I'm sure you guys will get Trump this time.
How does it violate his plea agreement, which provision?