• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Recent content by Athanasius68

  1. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    The other crime is a misdemeanor about doing unspecified unlawful things.
  2. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    It tells us that perhaps Mr. Pecker committed a crime. Maybe. But he ain't the one on trial. So...
  3. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    Mrs. Clinton won the state of New York. Nor did the voters of New York have a reasonable expectation of a Clinton presidency. No damages. No fraud.
  4. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    That is not a crime. Federal campaign law isn't just about intent. Its about what the money is actually used for.
  5. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    The argument is it is unlawful to fight back against negative campaigning.
  6. A

    Pecker details the sleazy arrangement with Trump

    LOL-- A star witness spends two days describing lawful activity is the backstory to... something else.
  7. A

    Pecker details the sleazy arrangement with Trump

    So your argument here is that a prosecutor-- any prosecutor -- in a similar circumstance can simply assert that the person intended to commit the "other crime." There is no need to actually prove that intention based upon whatever the particular elements that the statute of the "other crime"...
  8. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    However, in New York state, damages must have occurred as a result of the fraud. What are the damages here? Or intended damages? As was pointed out, Mrs. Clinton won New York state and New York county. So no damages. Nor is it reasonable to say that the Clinton defeat for the presidency is a...
  9. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    In general, You are still trying to argue there is requirement that candidates for office divulge negative information about themselves. Also fraud requires some sort of damage. Mr. Trump did not win New York state or even New York County. Where is the damage?
  10. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    There is no legal obligation for a candidate to divulge negative information about himself or herself. Moreover, federal law does not require immediate and instantaneous reporting of campaign donations. Had Mr. Trump used campaign funds to pay off Daniels, there would have been no requirement...
  11. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    However, the state law require an intent to defraud. If the campaign donation is lawful (which the relevant authorities have not said or proved otherwise) then there is not an intent to defraud or conceal another crime.
  12. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    No it doesn't. It violates state law if there is an attempt to defraud. I am sure there are state laws about falsifying IDs What is the point?
  13. A

    Pecker details the sleazy arrangement with Trump

    Whether they are acceptable journalistic practices or not, they are not illegal practices. And that is all that matters here.
  14. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    I get it. But as a routine matter, nobody is looking at the books.
  15. A

    Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

    No. Because Ms. Clifford leveraged the campaign. In any event, it's an issue for the feds. Not Bragg. Then you stuck. NDA's are lawful. There is no law requiring that a candidate for office divulge personal negative information. He wasn't. But even if he was, the report would not have...
See more
Back
Top Bottom