- Joined
- Apr 20, 2018
- Messages
- 10,257
- Reaction score
- 4,161
- Location
- Washington, D.C.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Except paying hush money isnt a crime. So, there goes your theory.
Except paying hush money isnt a crime. So, there goes your theory.
Trump just paid his lawyers to create 6 shell companies to make payments because that was easier than simply writing one check. Nothin' to hide...
Trumpers think that if Trump did it, it was legal.:roll:
I think it's more that they don't care if it is illegal, for any given "it" regarding Trump (unless perhaps they can use a word salad to blame liberals for a particular "it"). Things like morals are for other people.
What's it like having to constantly lie about things in common knowledge, Fletch? I can think of better ways to spend a Sunday...
You know perfectly well this is all about campaign finance law.
:shrug:
What's it like having to constantly lie about things in common knowledge, Fletch? I can think of better ways to spend a Sunday...
You know perfectly well this is all about campaign finance law.
:shrug:
Tax fraud, Making false statements to a financial institution, Unlawful corporate contributions and Excessive campaign contributions.
Trump just paid his lawyers to create 6 shell companies to make payments because that was easier than simply writing one check. Nothin' to hide...
Trumpers think that if Trump did it, it was legal.:roll:
Intellectual torpor and mental midgetry can make it appear that speaker/writer "A" is lying if listener/reader "B" presumed "A" be possessed of "normal" (or greater) measures and qualities of "good sense." As a listener, I, like you, have mistakenly accorded such credit to individuals who, in fact, weren't thus imbued.
Except paying hush money isnt a crime. So, there goes your theory.
Thats the type of mature response I expect from leftists who cant argue intelligently. But lets move forward. NDA's arent illegal, but somehow you want to claim the the ones Trump signed were. Trump might be on the hook for those had he created them. He did not. He has a perfectly legitimate defense that not one of you liberals even seek to educate yourselves on. If I hire a lawyer to do something for me and he doesnt follow the law, whose fault is it?
Red:
- Be that as it may, it's the sort of response you should expect each time you explicitly or tacitly proffer a straw man line. Nobody with any sense is going to reply with a rebuttal to any straw man line that doesn't personally asperse them, and of even some that do so berate them, most such lines are yet best disregarded.
So, the NDA which Trump wanted wasnt illegal, but the NDA that Cohen drew up was, right?
No....
So what is it then? There have been numerous people, including the former head of the FEC that have said the payments were a violation. Plus if you listen to the tape that Cohen made, it isnt of Trump 'directing' Cohen to do anything but of Cohen explaining to Trump how he, Cohen, is going to handle things. Remember, Cohen is the lawyer. If he did things that violate election laws which, by the way, I am certain neither man knew anything about, then it is Cohens problem, not Trumps
I was about to respond substantively to the "red" passage, and then I read on and encountered the "blue" one....
So, the NDA which Trump wanted wasnt illegal, but the NDA that Cohen drew up was, right?
In this case, there was a conspiracy to do something that is perfectly legal.
It's the kind of stuff law abiding citizens do every day.
Hiding the in-kind donation from the FEC was the crime.
edit: and the amount was also.
Tell that to Cohen’s excellent attorney and the judge who accepted the guilty plea. :roll:In this case, there was a conspiracy to do something that is perfectly legal.
Another internet “attorney”.:lamo
The leftist desperation is SO sad. From collusion...to this.
If a client asks a LAWYER to do something that the lawyer KNOWS or BELIEVES to be illegal...it is incumbent on THE LAWYER as...you know...the LEGAL expert...to advise and refuse.
But worse...there is LITERALLY nothing illegal in this. People WILLINGLY enter into cash settlement agreements ALL THE TIME. There was no force or coercion. For once...stormy Daniels was given money to keep her mouth CLOSED instead of opening it up for someone. She wasnt forced. She wasnt compelled. She WILLINGLY agreed.
Trump just paid his lawyers to create 6 shell companies to make payments because that was easier than simply writing one check. Nothin' to hide...
Trumpers think that if Trump did it, it was legal.:roll:
Actually, you have it backwards--Trump haters think because Trump did it its illegal. Paying these women isnt a crime. If Cohen set it up in such a way that it was, then that is 100% on Cohen, not Trump. UNLESS you can demonstrate that Trump ordered Cohen to do it the illegal way and not the legal way
Using campaign funds to pay off two women is 'perfectly legal'?
A) Cohen had already had the 2015 meeting between Cohen, Pecker and Trump in which they all three agreed that Pecker would surreptitiously conduct such tasks like "catch and kill" that would be necessary to "protect" the Trump Campaign. That makes it an agreed to campaign related activity in either the outright contribution of money or of something else of value to the Campaign. Hiding such activities makes them a Campaign Finance Violation as Pecker was already agreeing with Trump and Cohen to something of value to the Campaign that by agreement of all three, Trump, Cohen and Pecker would not be reported. As such there were all three of them already conspiring to commit the Crime which was committed in fact in the subsequent surreptitious Catch and Kill and Payments
B) Trump has tried to hide his involvement in multiple ways and at multiple times changing his story constantly and rather publicly all of which becomes evidence that he was involved in a conspiracy to commit a crime and knew he was committing a crime
C) Attorney/Client privilege goes out the window in the case of the execution of a crime
D) The Court has already determined that Cohen did NOT in any but the smallest percentage of his activities act as an Attorney for Donald Trump be they legal or illegal activities. He in the main acted as a business entity.
Cohen's first set of attorneys walked into that one with their eyes open the first day of Cohen's trial in SDNY when Cohen's attorney's claimed Attorney/Client privilege for the documents the FBI scooped up in the Warrant on Cohen's two residences and office. The Prosecution slowly rose to their feet and offered that Cohen's activities for Trump were business activities not the activities of a Practicing Private Attorney nor a Corp Attorney and therefore the haul from the Warrant was not subject to Attorney/Client privilege. Cohen's attorneys promptly turned pale and left, never to be seen in this case again.
An Evidence Master was deemed appropriate by the Judge. The Evidence Master then reviewed everything the FBI had scooped up in in the Warrant and the result was there was very little of what was scooped up in the FBI raid that was deemed covered by Attorney/Client privilege. In other words, both the Judge at Trial and the Evidence Master, another Judge agreed with the Prosecutors.
And:
That is just the stuff we can see! IMO, there is a mountain of additional taped, documented and interview corroborating evidence that sits behind that. They already have enough to Indict...easily enough to Indict and likely enough to Convict.
Cohen set this up and it is his in-kind donation that is the problem, right? So how is this Trumps fault ?
Using campaign funds to pay off two women is 'perfectly legal'?