Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 126,711
- 120,681
- 3,635
Never make a bet with a conservative. They never pay up when they lose.
We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong
- Thread starter Rumpole
- Start date
Never make a bet with a conservative. They never pay up when they lose.
Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 126,711
- 120,681
- 3,635
Looks like Bragg is.
Flopper
Diamond Member
If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right. However it an article is actually telling the public how to vote, that would be an election contribution.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
If a media outlet is posting news articles about a candidate, negative or positive it would not be considered an election contribution because it would be considered a 1st amendment right.
They have a 1st Amendment right to make a campaign contribution by influencing the election?
If paying a bimbo and then killing the story is a contribution, paying and publishing is as well.
Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 126,711
- 120,681
- 3,635
You're still going on about this? You're clueless.
52 U.S.C. § 30101
(9)(A) The term “expenditure” includes--
(B) The term “expenditure” does not include--
(9)(A) The term “expenditure” includes--
(i) any purchase, payment, distribution, loan, advance, deposit, or gift of money or anything of value, made by any person for the purpose of influencing any election for Federal office; and
(ii) a written contract, promise, or agreement to make an expenditure.
(ii) a written contract, promise, or agreement to make an expenditure.
(B) The term “expenditure” does not include--
(i) any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 120,219
- 124,538
- 3,645
Not even then. Newspaper editorial boards all endorse candidates in virtually every election.
So no attention needs to be given to this weird little red herring.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Oh, so some people can influence an election freely while others can't.
Thanks for clearing that up.
Fort Fun Indiana
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2017
- 120,219
- 124,538
- 3,645
It's almost as if a lot of people thought about your red herring before you did... like, waaaaay before...
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Some animals are more equal than others.
Vrenn
Platinum Member
- Feb 24, 2021
- 9,491
- 4,996
- 938
And you animals spread hate. But we are getting over it.
Flopper
Diamond Member
That might seem right but that is not how the FEC looks at it. I have always wondered why newspapers can make recommendations of how the public should vote for presidents and other offices on their editorial page and that is not considered an election contribution. Yet if I buy billboard that says elect Biden and set it up, that will be called an election contribution.
Flopper
Diamond Member
I think is a matter of enforcement and dollar value of the election contribution.
justoffal
Diamond Member
- Jun 29, 2013
- 38,447
- 31,382
- 2,905
Ah, yes, so it appears that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, has been receiving quite a bit of flak for pursuing a case against none other than Donald Trump. However, I must say that upon closer inspection, the charges brought against Mr. Trump are anything but weak. In fact, the charge of creating false financial records is not novel and has been used time and time again in New York to prosecute individuals who create fake documentation to cover up campaign finance violations - precisely the accusation leveled against Mr. Trump, or rather, defendant Trump.
It's worth noting that the Manhattan D.A.'s office is hardly your run-of-the-mill local cog in the judicial system. Rather, it is unique, with jurisdiction over the financial capital of the world, which means the office regularly deals with complex white-collar crimes, including those involving high-profile individuals. Indeed, the office recently secured a conviction of the Trump Organization and a guilty plea from one of its top executives, Allen Weisselberg, on charges related to a tax fraud scheme.
Moreover, the books and records counts laid out in the charging papers against Mr. Trump are the bread and butter of the D.A.'s office. He is the 30th defendant to be indicted on false records charges by Mr. Bragg since he took office just over a year ago, with the D.A. bringing 151 counts under the statute so far. Indeed, the Trump Organization conviction and the Weisselberg plea included business falsification felonies.
The 34 felony books and records counts in the Trump indictment turn on the misstatement of the hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels arranged by Michael Cohen in the waning days of the 2016 election and the repayment of that amount by Mr. Trump to Mr. Cohen, ostensibly as legal expenses. There are 11 counts for false invoices, 11 for false checks and check stubs and 12 for false general ledger entries. This allegedly violated the false records statute when various entries were made in business documents describing those repayments as legal fees.
While Mr. Trump's case may be unique in its particulars, his behavior is not. Individuals have often attempted to skirt the disclosure and dollar limit requirements of campaign finance regulations and falsified records to hide it. Contrary to Mr. Trump's protestations, New York prosecutors regularly charge felony violations of the books and records statute and win convictions when the crimes covered up were campaign finance violations, resulting in false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity.
All in all, my fellow members of this illustrious snakepit and a few ladies and gentlemen, it seems that Mr. Bragg is hardly navigating uncharted waters. His actions are supported by previous prosecutions in New York and elsewhere, which have demonstrated that state authorities can enforce state law in cases relating to federal candidates. It remains to be seen what will come of this case, but one thing is certain - Mr. Trump cannot persuasively argue that he is being singled out for some unprecedented theory of prosecution. He is being treated like any other New Yorker would be with similar evidence against him.
And let the war begin, the war of words, that is.
Cheers,
Rumpole.
Opinion | We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong (Published 2023)
There’s nothing novel or weak about Alvin Bragg’s case.www.nytimes.com
For weeks, Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, has come under heavy fire for pursuing a case against Donald Trump. Potential charges were described as being developed under a novel legal theory. And criticism has come not only from Mr. Trump and his allies, as expected, but also from many who are usually no friends of the former president but who feared it would be a weak case.
With the release of the indictment and accompanying statement of facts, we can now say that there’s nothing novel or weak about this case. The charge of creating false financial records is constantly brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York D.A.s. In particular, the creation of phony documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump stands accused of.
YAWWWWWWWWWN.....
Admiral Rockwell Tory
Diamond Member
You commented on a thread that has been dead for two years.
justoffal
Diamond Member
- Jun 29, 2013
- 38,447
- 31,382
- 2,905
I know....I get those warnings that pop up just like you do.You commented on a thread that has been dead for two years.
Considering how poorly this one aged I just couldn't resist.
candycorn
Diamond Member
Every charge stuck.Ah, yes, so it appears that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, has been receiving quite a bit of flak for pursuing a case against none other than Donald Trump. However, I must say that upon closer inspection, the charges brought against Mr. Trump are anything but weak. In fact, the charge of creating false financial records is not novel and has been used time and time again in New York to prosecute individuals who create fake documentation to cover up campaign finance violations - precisely the accusation leveled against Mr. Trump, or rather, defendant Trump.
It's worth noting that the Manhattan D.A.'s office is hardly your run-of-the-mill local cog in the judicial system. Rather, it is unique, with jurisdiction over the financial capital of the world, which means the office regularly deals with complex white-collar crimes, including those involving high-profile individuals. Indeed, the office recently secured a conviction of the Trump Organization and a guilty plea from one of its top executives, Allen Weisselberg, on charges related to a tax fraud scheme.
Moreover, the books and records counts laid out in the charging papers against Mr. Trump are the bread and butter of the D.A.'s office. He is the 30th defendant to be indicted on false records charges by Mr. Bragg since he took office just over a year ago, with the D.A. bringing 151 counts under the statute so far. Indeed, the Trump Organization conviction and the Weisselberg plea included business falsification felonies.
The 34 felony books and records counts in the Trump indictment turn on the misstatement of the hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels arranged by Michael Cohen in the waning days of the 2016 election and the repayment of that amount by Mr. Trump to Mr. Cohen, ostensibly as legal expenses. There are 11 counts for false invoices, 11 for false checks and check stubs and 12 for false general ledger entries. This allegedly violated the false records statute when various entries were made in business documents describing those repayments as legal fees.
While Mr. Trump's case may be unique in its particulars, his behavior is not. Individuals have often attempted to skirt the disclosure and dollar limit requirements of campaign finance regulations and falsified records to hide it. Contrary to Mr. Trump's protestations, New York prosecutors regularly charge felony violations of the books and records statute and win convictions when the crimes covered up were campaign finance violations, resulting in false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity.
All in all, my fellow members of this illustrious snakepit and a few ladies and gentlemen, it seems that Mr. Bragg is hardly navigating uncharted waters. His actions are supported by previous prosecutions in New York and elsewhere, which have demonstrated that state authorities can enforce state law in cases relating to federal candidates. It remains to be seen what will come of this case, but one thing is certain - Mr. Trump cannot persuasively argue that he is being singled out for some unprecedented theory of prosecution. He is being treated like any other New Yorker would be with similar evidence against him.
And let the war begin, the war of words, that is.
Cheers,
Rumpole.
Opinion | We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong (Published 2023)
There’s nothing novel or weak about Alvin Bragg’s case.
For weeks, Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, has come under heavy fire for pursuing a case against Donald Trump. Potential charges were described as being developed under a novel legal theory. And criticism has come not only from Mr. Trump and his allies, as expected, but also from many who are usually no friends of the former president but who feared it would be a weak case.
With the release of the indictment and accompanying statement of facts, we can now say that there’s nothing novel or weak about this case. The charge of creating false financial records is constantly brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York D.A.s. In particular, the creation of phony documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump stands accused of.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
And just look at the massive punishment for such serious charges. DURR
candycorn
Diamond Member
The convicted felon skated.
You seem pleased about that.
I thought you were all for law and order. I guess you were just lying about all of that. Not surprised.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
candycorn
Diamond Member
He hasn’t been punished.
I personally like it when convicted felons get punished. You seem to like it when they don’t.
Similar threads
