Office of Special Counsel Launches Investigation Into Jack Smith

[Nostra]

Fake news

Weak. But expected from a single digit IQ troll like you.

 

[Blisterfinger]

Maybe so!

Anyway, back to the sitting President...

How many of your friends employ underage girls in their spas as masseuses? I imagine you would find such a thing distasteful.

Damn! Clinton coming before Congress! We all should be hearing about his pedophilic actions on the island. You know the one Trump has never been to? You is about to receive a reaming.

 

[ThisIsMe]

1 payment broken down into 34 checks to conceal it's purpose of paying off Trump's fuckdoll to keep quiet during eleciton.

So thats 34 falsified bussiness records, 34 count conviction.

It's not prosecutor's fault Trump has commited this fellony and it's not prosecutor's fault that you don't understand how law works.

7 checks, to cohen as a retainer fee. Not 34.

Look at all the charges. Most of them are invoice entries. Thats how they bloated it to 34 counts.

Once again. Who handles NDAs? Lawyers. What was cohen? A lawyer. When a lawyer handles an NDA, that's a legal action. What is it called when a lawyer bills for his work in a legal action, a legal fee. How are leg fees recorded in the books? As legal fees.

NDAs are not illegal, hush money is not illegal. So they charged him for falisfying business records to conceal a crime, but there was no crime to conceal.

Yes, I understand thats a very shady way of getting around the law, but it is legal in the technical sense.

Every presidential candidate tries to "influence" an election by hiding things that would hurt them. Look at the hunter biden scandal. People said they might have voted different if they knew the truth about hunter. Does this mean we need a trial for Joe and everyone who worked to conceal the truth?

.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Once again. Who handles NDAs? Lawyers. What was cohen? A lawyer. When a lawyer handles an NDA, that's a legal action. What is it called when a lawyer bills for his work in a legal action, a legal fee. How are leg fees recorded in the books? As legal fees.

Incorrect.

#1 Legal fees are charges by a lawyer for time and effort. Legal expenses are remitences back to the lawyer's expenses. Billed time and effort are income to the lawyer and as such taxable, however the reimbursement of expenses is not. There is a very fundamental difference on how it is treated. Cohen and company DID NOT, bill for time/labor to do the NDA. They conspired to hide the transaction by billing for a ficticious "retrainer" for future work. There wasd (a) no retainer, and (b) no work performed during the periiod the ficticious "retainer" was supposed to be operative. There was specific testimoney at trail that the "retainer" business was a lie and it was to pay Cohen for his past illegal activities. Hell, not only was their testimony, there was written evidence submitted in the CEO's own handwriting.

#2 If Trump had done it legallly, where he paid the $130,000 out of his own pocket to Cohen to reimburse him for the expense of the actual NDA, there would have been no crime on Trumps part. However that was not the case, he conspired with Cohen and executives at the Trump Organization to launder the money through the Trump Organization (a business entity) to hide the transaction. In other words to "cook the books" in an illegal way. Since it was done to aid in or conceal another crime (Cohen's see below), that was a felony.

#3 Funny thing is that he was trying to be to smart for his own good. If he'd done it legally, there would have been no crime. However, a candidate can make unlimited contributuions to their own campaign. But under federal law those contributrions MUST still be reported to the FEC and it becomes public record. They didn't want that.

NDAs are not illegal, hush money is not illegal. So they charged him for falisfying business records to conceal a crime, but there was no crime to conceal.

Actually there was a crime they were attempting to hide/aid in, that was Cohen's federal conviction for campaign finance fraud. Cohen had taken a loan out against his personal residence to get the money, they he used * * HIS * * money to pay the NDA. Why? To benefit the Trump campaign because the conspiritors didn't want the story to come out just before the election as it was seen as damaging to the results of voting.

New York law on felonious business record fraud, does not require that the individual committing the felonious fraud but the perpetrator of the crime that is attempting to be hidden. That crime, in this case Cohen's, can be committed by another.

Yes, I understand thats a very shady way of getting around the law, but it is legal in the technical sense.

No, felonious falsification of business records is not legal in any technical sense.

Every presidential candidate tries to "influence" an election by hiding things that would hurt them. Look at the hunter biden scandal. People said they might have voted different if they knew the truth about hunter. Does this mean we need a trial for Joe and everyone who worked to conceal the truth?

Partially true.

Trump wasn't charged and convicted with trying to influence an election - as you say that is perfectly legal.

Trump was charged with felonious business fraud to hide/aid in the concealment of a crime.

WW

 

[ThisIsMe]

Incorrect.

#1 Legal fees are charges by a lawyer for time and effort. Legal expenses are remitences back to the lawyer's expenses. Billed time and effort are income to the lawyer and as such taxable, however the reimbursement of expenses is not. There is a very fundamental difference on how it is treated. Cohen and company DID NOT, bill for time/labor to do the NDA. They conspired to hide the transaction by billing for a ficticious "retrainer" for future work. There wasd (a) no retainer, and (b) no work performed during the periiod the ficticious "retainer" was supposed to be operative. There was specific testimoney at trail that the "retainer" business was a lie and it was to pay Cohen for his past illegal activities. Hell, not only was their testimony, there was written evidence submitted in the CEO's own handwriting.

#2 If Trump had done it legallly, where he paid the $130,000 out of his own pocket to Cohen to reimburse him for the expense of the actual NDA, there would have been no crime on Trumps part. However that was not the case, he conspired with Cohen and executives at the Trump Organization to launder the money through the Trump Organization (a business entity) to hide the transaction. In other words to "cook the books" in an illegal way. Since it was done to aid in or conceal another crime (Cohen's see below), that was a felony.

#3 Funny thing is that he was trying to be to smart for his own good. If he'd done it legally, there would have been no crime. However, a candidate can make unlimited contributuions to their own campaign. But under federal law those contributrions MUST still be reported to the FEC and it becomes public record. They didn't want that.



Actually there was a crime they were attempting to hide/aid in, that was Cohen's federal conviction for campaign finance fraud. Cohen had taken a loan out against his personal residence to get the money, they he used * * HIS * * money to pay the NDA. Why? To benefit the Trump campaign because the conspiritors didn't want the story to come out just before the election as it was seen as damaging to the results of voting.

New York law on felonious business record fraud, does not require that the individual committing the felonious fraud but the perpetrator of the crime that is attempting to be hidden. That crime, in this case Cohen's, can be committed by another.



No, felonious falsification of business records is not legal in any technical sense.



Partially true.

Trump wasn't charged and convicted with trying to influence an election - as you say that is perfectly legal.

Trump was charged with felonious business fraud to hide/aid in the concealment of a crime.

WW

Cohen executed an NDA, and was paid for those NDAs. The entries were recorded as legal expenses. Were cohens services not technically legal expense? It doesn't matter what cohen claimed, the accounting entries were legally accurate, correct?

And the cover up of the hunter story could also be seen as an in kind donation, exactly like what they claim trump did

 

[toobfreak]

I think it's an excuse to go after someone who took your savior to the woodshed...

But most everyone in government and LE has gone after Trump, so now, the presumption is that they are good as gold and untouchable, and if Trump happens to prosecute any of them now for anything, the only reason possible is blatant, baseless retribution? Jack, you better loosen that necktie--- it is cutting off blood to your brain.

because your savior is corrupt.

Again, without any supporting proof of that. And of course, all those people who tried to get Trump, even though nearly all of it was THROWN OUT, Trump is still the corrupt one and not any of the rogue officials who twisted the meaning of laws to invent crimes that department officials looking at the cases for years deemed that no crime had been committed and was only being done directed to get Trump? Nope, no corruption there.

This is why Jack no one takes you serious and you have zero credibility on this site. You vacillate somewhere between absurdity and imbecility.

 

[toobfreak]

No. Biden isn't corrupt...

Must be why he issued a presidential pardon for his entire family and friends for unnamed crimes spanning the past decade.

and he isn't President right.

He isn't president now because he was an evil, corrupt, jackass bordering on treason.

 

[Marener]

Cohen executed an NDA, and was paid for those NDAs. The entries were recorded as legal expenses. Were cohens services not technically legal expense? It doesn't matter what cohen claimed, the accounting entries were legally accurate, correct?

Although Cohen was paid a little to execute the NDA, almost all of the money was to be funneled to Stormy Daniels. So no, they weren’t legal expenses. It was a cover up and it goes well beyond the notation in the ledger.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Although Cohen was paid a little to execute the NDA, almost all of the money was to be funneled to Stormy Daniels. So no, they weren’t legal expenses. It was a cover up and it goes well beyond the notation in the ledger.

Well again, technically, cohen paid Daniel's out of his own money. The money he was paid by trump was reimbursement.


The question is, as it relates to trump, is, was the falsifying business records accurate, if what was recorded in the journals was in fact accurate?

 

[Marener]

Trump is still the corrupt one and not any of the rogue officials who twisted the meaning of laws to invent crimes that department officials looking at the cases for years deemed that no crime had been committed and was only being done directed to get Trump? Nope, no corruption there.

I mean, that’s funny because it’s now the Trump officials twisting the meaning of laws and looking at cases that had been deemed to have not been crimes.

Did you guys forget Durham investigated all this nonsense for years already?

Nope. No corruption there.

 

[Marener]

Well again, technically, cohen paid Daniel's out of his own money. The money he was paid by trump was reimbursement.


The question is, as it relates to trump, is, was the falsifying business records accurate, if what was recorded in the journals was in fact accurate?

Cohen and Trump came up with false retainer agreements to mask the nature of the money being paid to him. They even agreed to increase the amount because they knew Cohen would have to pay taxes on it.

So no, they weren’t paying Cohen for legal services. The ledger itself is false and just one part of the false records.

 

[toobfreak]

Meanwhile, the current occupant of the White House...is a convicted felon and really does belong in prison.

A convicted felon, convicted following a set of rules guaranteeing a conviction by not even specifying the crime and leaving open the option to jurors to make up the crime they thought he was guilty of.

I could convict the Pope under those rules.

Further, Trump was not allowed to present exculpatory evidence and witnesses during the trial, but tell me Jack, how many people are doing hard time in the penn right now for paying off a legal extortion case levied at someone just when they were running for office, whose accountant recorded the payments as legal expenses?!

STOP THE PRESSES! Jack has found a dog-dirty convict here, despite the fact that he's never even been sentenced yet and the entire case stands on appeal!!!

Jack, you are more entertaining than a box full of puppies.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Cohen and Trump came up with false retainer agreements to mask the nature of the money being paid to him. They even agreed to increase the amount because they knew Cohen would have to pay taxes on it.

So no, they weren’t paying Cohen for legal services. The ledger itself is false and just one part of the false records.

Again, im talking specifically about the falsifying business records. What was false about the journal entries? Was what cohen did not technically legal expense?

Also, the cover up of a crime. The business records they are talking about were internal business records that the public was never going to see. So exactly who were they trying to cover up a crime for? Themselves?

 

[Marener]

Again, im talking specifically about the falsifying business records. What was false about the journal entries? Was what cohen did not technically legal expense?

Also, the cover up of a crime. The business records they are talking about were internal business records that the public was never going to see. So exactly who were they trying to cover up a crime for? Themselves?

I’m talking about the falsification of business records too. You’re trying to ignore facts and focusing solely on the notation of the ledger.

One would logically assume they were trying to hide it from the FEC as it’s a campaign finance violation.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Cohen executed an NDA, and was paid for those NDAs. The entries were recorded as legal expenses. Were cohens services not technically legal expense? It doesn't matter what cohen claimed, the accounting entries were legally accurate, correct?

No they were not recorded as legal expenses.

They were recorded as attorney fees for a services that didn’t occur for a retainer that didn’t exist.

Didn’t you follow the evidence presented at trial?

Not what you want to believed but the actual testimony, documents and evidence presented to the jury.

WW

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

A convicted felon, convicted following a set of rules guaranteeing a conviction by not even specifying the crime and leaving open the option to jurors to make up the crime they thought he was guilty of.

I could convict the Pope under those rules.

Further, Trump was not allowed to present exculpatory evidence and witnesses during the trial, but tell me Jack, how many people are doing hard time in the penn right now for paying off a legal extortion case levied at someone just when they were running for office, whose accountant recorded the payments as legal expenses?!

STOP THE PRESSES! Jack has found a dog-dirty convict here, despite the fact that he's never even been sentenced yet and the entire case stands on appeal!!!

Jack, you are more entertaining than a box full of puppies.

He is a convicted felon, toobcuck....
Farting about it with endless attempts to gain my affection won't change that.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

But most everyone in government and LE has gone after Trump, so now, the presumption is that they are good as gold and untouchable, and if Trump happens to prosecute any of them now for anything, the only reason possible is blatant, baseless retribution? Jack, you better loosen that necktie--- it is cutting off blood to your brain.

Except they haven't. Save for the fact your savior is corrupt. Why can't you just admit that?

Again, without any supporting proof of that. And of course, all those people who tried to get Trump, even though nearly all of it was THROWN OUT, Trump is still the corrupt one and not any of the rogue officials who twisted the meaning of laws to invent crimes that department officials looking at the cases for years deemed that no crime had been committed and was only being done directed to get Trump? Nope, no corruption there.

This is why Jack no one takes you serious and you have zero credibility on this site. You vacillate somewhere between absurdity and imbecility.

You type a lot without saying ANYTHING!
Admit it. He is corrupt..and you excuse it.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Must be why he issued a presidential pardon for his entire family and friends for unnamed crimes spanning the past decade.

Awww...he didn't want your savior starting his own personal vendetta against members of his family so he...oh..wait...isn't Skippy's DOJ starting their own vendettas now? ...nevermind.

He isn't president now because he was an evil, corrupt, jackass bordering on treason.

He isn't President. Trump is. And he owns everything. The shitty economic news, the absolute forthcoming disaster of his kneejerk immigration measure..his absolute incompetence...Jesus Freaky, I thought you had at least the beginnings of a spine. You are proving to be made of rubber. Easy to push you over. You have nothing.

 

[toobfreak]

He is a convicted felon, toobcuck....

**** off Jack. If he is convicted, what is his sentence and where is he serving his time???

Farting about it with endless attempts to gain my affection won't change that.

Gee Jack, why would I want something that you cannot even give away to others offering them bribes?
But that is OK. You think what you want. Meantime, we are pounding you a new mudhole.
If democraps don't pull out of their dive very soon, a year from now, you won't even have any party left.

 

[toobfreak]

Save for the fact your savior is corrupt.

Good one. A democrat calling someone else corrupt is like a hit and run driver yelling that other people cannot drive!