Debate Now Did Trump Really Violate The Law?

[forkup]

So self funded campaigns have to come to you for permission to give themselves money???



No proof required to just say it was for CAMPAIGN because the prosecutor says so.

NDAs are not illegal.

Political persecution by a Corrupt system.

Strawman much?

 

[WorldWatcher]

Cohen conviction doesnt mean Trump is guilty.

Correct.

The prosecutor still had the burden of proof to show that Trump falsified (or caused to be falsified) the business records to conceal Cohen's criminal activity. They did to the satisfaction of the jury.

Which Federal court convicted Trump??

None. (Yet) Trump was convicted in State court.

Oh thats right didnt happen.

Agreed, Trumps conviction was in State court.

Cohen was found guilty of Tax evasion. Did Trump file them for him? Item 2 on that POS Judge.

Cohen was also found guilty of two counted related to criminal campaign finance fraud.

Appeal will eventually overturn it. SCOTUS probably. But your side doesnt care because it will drag on past Nov 5th.

Cohen hasn't appealed his conviction so it stands and was the secondary crime Trump attempted to conceal.

You are Scum

When you lose the debate, go personal.

You must be a Trump cultist.

WW

 

[forkup]

Cohen conviction doesnt mean Trump is guilty. Which Federal court convicted Trump??

Oh thats right didnt happen.

Cohen was found guilty of Tax evasion. Did Trump file them for him? Item 2 on that POS Judge.

Appeal will eventually overturn it. SCOTUS probably. But your side doesnt care because it will drag on past Nov 5th.

You are Scum

Again, strawman much?

It's striking how often you misrepresent the positions taken.

I very much suspect, that you realize that you can't argue against what is said, so you pretend we are saying something else?

 

[Sunni Man]

Two Trumpers were jurists.... One used truth social as their main news source, the other Fox as their main news source, from all that I've read......???

So you're convinced of this by reading an article that somebody wrote?

 

[Care4all]

So you're convinced of this by reading an article that somebody wrote?

It was the 100 question forms that potential jurists had to fill out with the question of;

What is the primary source of your News?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

SCOTUS will eventually get it

Mow name the felony law broken spefic to each of the 34 MISDOMEANER counts.

Already done on the Board many times, so, no, "not just once more." You are unable to understand.

 

[White 6]

I completely see why you would be hesitant to suggest jail time is warranted. I even see how a judge would look at it in the same way.

I'm just of the opinion that if you're screwed no matter what you do. Just ignoring the consequences and doing what you would do otherwise is not a bad way to go.

In this case the defendant is a first-time offender, who's shown no sign of recognition that he even committed a crime, let alone expressed any remorse ,and who showed utter contempt for the legal system as a whole. I don't see how THAT defendant should be shown leniency by the court.

I'm pretty agnostic on the whole thing since there's upside and downsides to both positions. But when in doubt, do the right thing seems as good a position as any, and better than most.

I hear ya. Don't know how it will really turn out, but I would say, you have aired an even minded approach supporting your theory of how it might or should go as you suggest it might. At the same time, you seem to understand why my prediction makes sense. Unlike your agnosticism, I am know for somebody that disapproves of trump, yet still justifying probation and fines. I think we are still more realistic than those that seem to think the will or should be no consequences. It will be interesting to watch.

 

[White 6]

SCOTUS will eventually get it

Mow name the felony law broken spefic to each of the 34 MISDOMEANER counts.

You still need to go back and read the New York statute.

 

[White 6]

OJ was completely innocent too, right?

I doubt most of the Dream Team were Republican lawyers. They were successful with jury nullification. Do, I think OJ killed them? Yep. Is he innocent of the charges, officially yes. But, that was a totally different kind of case, also. Not sure what you are driving at or if it actually has bearing or meaning. Trump was in it up to the hilt, so the jury pronounced his guilt? Nah, even prosecutors failed to find a snappy line, having to depend facts, signed check, and testimony of Trump insiders from his organization.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I doubt most of the Dream Team were Republican lawyers. They were successful with jury nullification. Do, I think OJ killed them? Yep. Is he innocent of the charges, officially yes. But, that was a totally different kind of case, also. Not sure what you are driving at or if it actually has bearing or meaning. Trump was in it up to the hilt, so the jury pronounced his guilt? Nah, even prosecutors failed to find a snappy line, having to depend facts, signed check, and testimony of Trump insiders from his organization.

It’s not “totally different” both cases has prejudiced, dishonest juries

 

[White 6]

It’s not “totally different” both cases has prejudiced, dishonest juries

Tough for the prosecution, if so. Like in this case with the Trump Lawyers, the prosecution had ample opportunity to challenge jurors during the selection process. It looks like jurors were swayed by testimony and talented lawyers. The verdicts becoming official recorded law, not successfully appealed, at least on criminal side, only on the civil side, where burden of proof much more easily met.

 

[eagle1462010]

Correct.

The prosecutor still had the burden of proof to show that Trump falsified (or caused to be falsified) the business records to conceal Cohen's criminal activity. They did to the satisfaction of the jury.



None. (Yet) Trump was convicted in State court.


Agreed, Trumps conviction was in State court.


Cohen was also found guilty of two counted related to criminal campaign finance fraud.



Cohen hasn't appealed his conviction so it stands and was the secondary crime Trump attempted to conceal.



When you lose the debate, go personal.

You must be a Trump cultist.

WW

Which is aiding and abetting Cohen BS. Judge even used tax evasion. Did Trump file Cohens Taxes?

Trump paid lawyer fees and NDAs. How is that campaign finance?

Didnt use campaign money as he paid from his own money.

You actually just showed the appeals.

 

[eagle1462010]

Tough for the prosecution, if so. Like in this case with the Trump Lawyers, the prosecution had ample opportunity to challenge jurors during the selection process. It looks like jurors were swayed by testimony and talented lawyers. The verdicts becoming official recorded law, not successfully appealed, at least on criminal side, only on the civil side, where burden of proof much more easily met.

Hard core left area. 95% Dem. Hardly a fair venue.

 

[eagle1462010]

You still need to go back and read the New York statute.

I have. Got the pdf jury instructions. Clear the 34 book keeping charges have to show INTENT TO HIDE ANOTHER CRIME.

What are the ANOTHER CRIME charges?

 

[WorldWatcher]

I have. Got the pdf jury instructions. Clear the 34 book keeping charges have to show INTENT TO HIDE ANOTHER CRIME.

What are the ANOTHER CRIME charges?

They all go back to Cohen's criminal charges and conviction.

You still seem to think that Trump has to be "charged" with the predicate crimes. That is not true.

WW

 

[eagle1462010]

They all go back to Cohen's criminal charges and conviction.

You still seem to think that Trump has to be "charged" with the predicate crimes. That is not true.

WW

Baloney 750.10 requures it.

Your using aiding and abetting attempt from Cohen. Cohen charges arent Trumps

 

[WorldWatcher]

Baloney 750.10 requures it.

175.10 doesn't.

Your using aiding and abetting attempt from Cohen. Cohen charges arent Trumps

Correct, Trumps charges are Trumps. Cohen's was the crime Trump was trying to conceal as the predicate crime.

WW

 

[Cellblock2429]

Rules:

1. Stay on topic. (This means no deflection in changing the subject. Even if you can't answer a question.)

2. No lying and saying that a poster said something that they didn't and take their words out of context.


That's pretty much all I can think of actually. So, anyways, how did Trump violate the law by having sex with a porn star? Also, how does this even have anything to do with falsifying business records?

/——-/ Three possible answers:
Nope
No and
HELL NO.

 

[leftwinger]

Did Trump Really Violate The Law?

Technically? perhaps? the NY legislators apparently had to re-write the law to find a crime? There are no victims?

Bottom line: There is much worse going on in for DC Policiticans everday every minute (over decades) un-touched. ANTIFA BLM are guilty of burning FED buildings, State Police stations and historical sites.
This appears to be a targeted Political witch-hunt at the maximum level. No real crime, no real victims. Paperwork issue.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Tough for the prosecution, if so. Like in this case with the Trump Lawyers, the prosecution had ample opportunity to challenge jurors during the selection process. It looks like jurors were swayed by testimony and talented lawyers. The verdicts becoming official recorded law, not successfully appealed, at least on criminal side, only on the civil side, where burden of proof much more easily met.

Clearly the Trump jurors were swayed by Michael Cohen same way the OJ jurors believed the Juice.

You didn’t pay much attention to the trial did you?