Office of Special Counsel Launches Investigation Into Jack Smith

[JackOfNoTrades]

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

LOL. I love that I get under your skin. He is in the eyes of the law a convicted felon...eat it.

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.

Jesus dude, do you have ANYTHING? Except your just and righteous anger? And your endless obsession with me?
You are like the girl who didn't get invited to the prom and are still angry about it.....50 years later.

 

[toobfreak]

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. 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.

Whatever Jack, I won't waste words with you. If your bullshit makes you somehow feel better and helps you forget the absolute ass-pounding you all on the left are taking, so be it. Your delusions won't change a thing.

Or maybe you are just too uninformed to realize just how badly you are being fucked over by President Trump.

 

[toobfreak]

LOL. I love that I get under your skin.

Jack, do you have perceptual problems? Or maybe you are on drugs to think that you /EVER/ bested me in a single argument in your life much less ever "get under my skin?" Wow.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Whatever Jack, I won't waste words with you. If your bullshit makes you somehow feel better and helps you forget the absolute ass-pounding you all on the left are taking, so be it. Your delusions won't change a thing.

Or maybe you are just too uninformed to realize just how badly you are being fucked over by President Trump.

toobcuck!!.....I get it. You have nothing so you just repeat the same BS and run away declaring a non-existent victory. I own you. Best you just come to terms with it.

Trump isn't ******* anyone over...except himself.
Incompetence will do that do you. Already, no migrants to pick farmers crops, build homes to keep the housing market afloat, and soon, a minus in the hospitality industry. Republicans sent home by the good Christian Speaker Johnson (Epstein enabler) are getting HARPOONED!! by their constituents. And let's not even start with how bad Kennedy is. Hell, Trump himself may actually remove RFK Jr..cause he's making the boss look bad.

 

[toobfreak]

toobcuck!!.....I get it. You have nothing so you just repeat the same BS and run away declaring a non-existent victory. I own you. Best you just come to terms with it.

Trump isn't ******* anyone over...except himself.
Incompetence will do that do you. Already, no migrants to pick farmers crops, build homes to keep the housing market afloat, and soon, a minus in the hospitality industry. Republicans sent home by the good Christian Speaker Johnson (Epstein enabler) are getting HARPOONED!! by their constituents. And let's not even start with how bad Kennedy is. Hell, Trump himself may actually remove RFK Jr..cause he's making the boss look bad.

Wow. You've gone total idiot now. I see the stress of losing to Trump and getting the shit kicked out of you for six months has driven you down into the idiocy muck along with IM2, John Horses, and Dr, Phosphorous.

By the end of Trump's term, there will be nothing left of you but a puddle of goo.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

Wow. You've gone total idiot now. I see the stress of losing to Trump and getting the shit kicked out of you for six months has driven you down into the idiocy muck along with IM2, John Horses, and Dr, Phosphorous.

By the end of Trump's term, there will be nothing left of you but a puddle of goo.

Except it isn't, slugger. I have zero idea what sad puddle of crap you wake up to every day, but I'm doing quite well, even with Skippy's fumbling of the economic ball. There's no losing here. But then again, unlike you, I've won in every past President's term.

C'mon. Get real. What do you have? Show me something.
Jack Smith had your savior dead to rights before the Gen-Z crowd stayed home and half of America lost their minds (which they are paying for now).

Can you really say that this isn't a vendetta?

 

[ThisIsMe]

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.

But in law, you have to work off the letter of the law, not what is assumed.

In the technical sense, what was recorded was accurate. They paid a legal expense, not to mention, there was no cover up. These were internal records, who what were the covering, and from whom?

 

[ThisIsMe]

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

was the money not paid to an attorney for a service he provided?

Where was the cover up? If the records they recorded as "legal fees" were internal documents not for public consumption, what exactly is the cover up?

 

[WorldWatcher]

But in law, you have to work off the letter of the law, not what is assumed.

In the technical sense, what was recorded was accurate. They paid a legal expense, not to mention, there was no cover up. These were internal records, who what were the covering, and from whom?

#1 They were not billed as "Legal Expense", they were will as attorney fees for services rendered as part of a retainer that didn't exist for services not performed.

#2 There was a coverup, there was extensive testimony along with documents, including hand written notes by the Trump Organization to falsely bill over time instead of a lump sum payment specifically to hide the transactions.

#3 The Trump Organization is a business organization, as such they were attempting to hide the transaction from those whose job it is to ensure businesses comply with New York State business law.

WW

 

[Marener]

But in law, you have to work off the letter of the law, not what is assumed.

In the technical sense, what was recorded was accurate. They paid a legal expense, not to mention, there was no cover up. These were internal records, who what were the covering, and from whom?

Of course there was a cover up. That’s the purpose of the whole ruse to send the money through Cohen, then they pretended that Trump didn’t even know about it and Cohen did it all on his own.

 

[ThisIsMe]

#1 They were not billed as "Legal Expense", they were will as attorney fees for services rendered as part of a retainer that didn't exist for services not performed.

#2 There was a coverup, there was extensive testimony along with documents, including hand written notes by the Trump Organization to falsely bill over time instead of a lump sum payment specifically to hide the transactions.

#3 The Trump Organization is a business organization, as such they were attempting to hide the transaction from those whose job it is to ensure businesses comply with New York State business law.

WW

Hide it from whom? Those records would have never been known until Bragg brought them into the public. Those were internal records.

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts

Billed as legal services/expenses.

 

[WorldWatcher]

was the money not paid to an attorney for a service he provided?

No, the money was paid to hide an illegal campaign contribution that the attorney made, was charged with and was convicted of in federal court.

Where was the cover up? If the records they recorded as "legal fees" were internal documents not for public consumption, what exactly is the cover up?

Because if properly reported they would not have been internal only documents.

Federal election law sets limits on the amount of personal contributions and loans that can be made to a campaign. Cohen broke the law and was convicted of it.

Trump * * COULD * * have paid Daniels directly without attempting to launder the money through his his business entity. However, while candidates can make unlimited donations to their own campaign, those donations must still be reported to the FEC for accounting purposes and those * * ARE * * public records.

Now, you are likely to comeback and say such a transactions isn't a campaign matter. Which is false. #1 Cohen was convicted of campaign fraud in federal court for his actions. #2 There was testimony at trial that Trump personally made it about the campaign. Testimony at trial was that Trump tried to delay the payment to Daniels until after the election, at which point they could "stiff her" (pun intended). If it had been about protecting the Trump Reputation (which is funny in it's own right as Trump was a known horn dog), or if it had been about keeping the information from Melania (false since she already knew) - the election would have been irrelevant. But TRUMP wanted to make the payment contingent on the election occurring.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Hide it from whom? Those records would have never been known until Bragg brought them into the public. Those were internal records.

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts

Billed as legal services/expenses.

False.

The were not billed as legal expenses, they were bill for a retainer for attorney services, there was no retainer and there were no attorney services performed during the period of the invoice.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

was the money not paid to an attorney for a service he provided?

No.

They were billed to reimburse Cohen for an illegal campaign contribution he was convicted of making in federal court.

The payments were not for attorney services, the payments were for illegal activity. Which is why they are not valid legal expenses.

WW

 

[ThisIsMe]

No, the money was paid to hide an illegal campaign contribution that the attorney made, was charged with and was convicted of in federal court.



Because if properly reported they would not have been internal only documents.

Federal election law sets limits on the amount of personal contributions and loans that can be made to a campaign. Cohen broke the law and was convicted of it.

Trump * * COULD * * have paid Daniels directly without attempting to launder the money through his his business entity. However, while candidates can make unlimited donations to their own campaign, those donations must still be reported to the FEC for accounting purposes and those * * ARE * * public records.

Now, you are likely to comeback and say such a transactions isn't a campaign matter. Which is false. #1 Cohen was convicted of campaign fraud in federal court for his actions. #2 There was testimony at trial that Trump personally made it about the campaign. Testimony at trial was that Trump tried to delay the payment to Daniels until after the election, at which point they could "stiff her" (pun intended). If it had been about protecting the Trump Reputation (which is funny in it's own right as Trump was a known horn dog), or if it had been about keeping the information from Melania (false since she already knew) - the election would have been irrelevant. But TRUMP wanted to make the payment contingent on the election occurring.

WW

Im not interested in what cohen did; he plead guilty. My issue is how they went from recording the payment to cohen on INTERNAL company documents that the public would never see, to 34 counts of business fraud.

Had he recorded those on public documents that could have influenced public perception, a.k.a, a cover up, then I would get it, bimut these were internal documents. We only evem know about them because of Bragg.

Trump was charged with falsifying business records to conceal a crime. How does recording internal business transactions conceal a crime? They were not public records.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Im not interested in what cohen did; he plead guilty. My issue is how they went from recording the payment to cohen on INTERNAL company documents that the public would never see, to 34 counts of business fraud.

I now you think INTERNAL, is important but its not.

The Trump Organization is a business entity, subject to New York Business law.

Which is the funny part, if Trump had paid Daniels legally, a check/transfer from personal funds - there wouldn't have been felony fraud. But he thought he was smarter than the law enforcement arm of New York and attempted to launder the money through his business entity.

Had he recorded those on public documents that could have influenced public perception, a.k.a, a cover up, then I would get it, bimut these were internal documents. We only evem know about them because of Bragg.

Trump was charged with falsifying business records to conceal a crime. How does recording internal business transactions conceal a crime? They were not public records.

The crime he was attempting to conceal was Cohen's illegal campaign fraud.

WW

 

[Marener]

Hide it from whom? Those records would have never been known until Bragg brought them into the public. Those were internal records.

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts

Billed as legal services/expenses.

It’s clear from their behavior they were hiding it. From whom matters a little less but the most obvious answer is the FEC as paying the NDA would likely be considered a campaign expense. Or maybe they just were afraid of someone leaking it from inside. But it’s definitely a cover up.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I now you think INTERNAL, is important but its not.

The Trump Organization is a business entity, subject to New York Business law.

Which is the funny part, if Trump had paid Daniels legally, a check/transfer from personal funds - there wouldn't have been felony fraud. But he thought he was smarter than the law enforcement arm of New York and attempted to launder the money through his business entity.



The crime he was attempting to conceal was Cohen's illegal campaign fraud.

WW

If my lawyer goes to Walmart and buys a box of condoms, but I decide I want to change the receipt to "box of pregnancy preventers" instead, and take that receipt and write it down in my personal ledger "box of pregnancy preventers", exactly what public interest am I concealing the purchase from?

Trump wasnt charged with concealing cohens crime, he was charged with falsifying business records in furtherance of a crime.

The thing is, falsifying business records is a misdemeanor in New York, the only way it gets to be a felony is if it is tied to the committing or furtherance of a crime. How does falsifying an INTERNAL business transaction, further the crime?

 

[ThisIsMe]

It’s clear from their behavior they were hiding it. From whom matters a little less but the most obvious answer is the FEC as paying the NDA would likely be considered a campaign expense. Or maybe they just were afraid of someone leaking it from inside. But it’s definitely a cover up.

But trump wasn't charged with paying the NDA, he was charged with falsifying internal business records to conceal another crime, yet, his falsifying his own internal records doesnt conceal anything, if the public never even knew about it.

Also, its likely that trump uses an external accounting firm to handle the books. If THEY get a receipt that says "$130,000 payment to Michael cohen", then THEY are going to go "oh, must be a legal expense", unless trump specifically called them and said "make sure you write this down in this way".

 

[Marener]

But trump wasn't charged with paying the NDA, he was charged with falsifying internal business records to conceal another crime, yet, his falsifying his own internal records doesnt conceal anything, if the public never even knew about it.

Also, it’s likely that trump uses an external accounting firm to handle the books. If THEY get a receipt that says "$130,000 payment to Michael cohen", then THEY are going to go "oh, must be a legal expense", unless trump specifically called them and said "make sure you write this down in this way".

It would have obscured the transaction if it had ever come under scrutiny from the FEC.

Again, Trump is claiming this was all done independently by Cohen when that was obviously not the case. You can make any excuse you want, but it’s clearly a cover up.