- Jan 8, 2026
- 1,568
- 1,740
- 1,893
I thought you Democrats loved convicted felons
Why Do Trump Supporters Have Such A Hard Time Admitting He's A Convicted Felon?
- Thread starter candycorn
- Start date
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
you can't accept that Cohen committed a crime
He sure did. He failed to declare millions in income to avoid federal taxes.
Trump had nothing to do with that.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
I don't give a rats ass what the "FEC" said or didn't say.
They do get to say whether something is a campaign contribution or not.
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
Not in criminal cases. The FEC is the civil enforcement arm, they can recommend prosecurtion to the DOJ/FBI. But it is the law enforcement arm and the courts that make the call.
The FEC has no criminal law enforcement powers.
WW
Commission approves Memorandum of Understanding between the FEC and Department of Justice - FEC.gov
FEC Record Commission Article Published April 27, 2023: Commission approves Memorandum of Understanding between the FEC and Department of Justice
www.fec.gov
Delldude
Sheep Dipped Boy Scout
SOL had expired.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
Not in criminal cases. The FEC is the civil enforcement arm, they can recommend prosecurtion to the DOJ/FBI. But it is the law enforcement arm and the courts that make the call.
The FEC has no criminal law enforcement powers.
WW
View attachment 1207960
Commission approves Memorandum of Understanding between the FEC and Department of Justice - FEC.gov
FEC Record Commission Article Published April 27, 2023: Commission approves Memorandum of Understanding between the FEC and Department of Justice
Paying off women isn't a campaign contribution.
No women were paid off with campaign funds.
Paying off women isn't a crime.
An NDA isn't a crime.
No law was broken to enforce.
They didn't recommend anything for the DOJ to "make the call".
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
No it hadn't. For a couple of reasons:
#1 The applicable SOL was for felony not misdeomeoner, felony SOL are longer.
#2 Time outside the state stops the tolling of the SOL, he moved to DC and to FL and spent little time actually in NY.
.
.
.
.
This was throughly litigated PRIOR to the trial even starting.
WW
After conviction, Trump questioned the New York statute of limitations. Here are the facts
Trump and his team have said the statute of limitations may be an issue in appealing his convictions. Here's what we know about the unusual timing.
www.usatoday.com
The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump - Feb. 15, 2024
www.documentcloud.org
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
It is when it's don't to protect the campaign.
The "source" of the funds is irrelevant.
Correct. Fraudulent campaign contributions is.
Correct. Fraudulent campaign contributions is.
False.
Cohen commited and was convicted of Federal Felony Campaign Finance Fraud.
Trump was convicted of felonious falsification of business records in laundering money to Cohen to hide his (Cohen's).
Criminal prosecutions don't need an FEC recommenation.
WW
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
It is when it's don't to protect the campaign.
It's not.
The "source" of the funds is irrelevant.
If the source of the funds was money contributed to the campaign, that could be a crime.
Correct. Fraudulent campaign contributions is.
I'm glad you realize your error.
Correct. Fraudulent campaign contributions is.
I'm glad you realize your error.
Cohen commited and was convicted of Federal Felony Campaign Finance Fraud.
He pled guilty, a jury did not convict him.
He didn't contribute to Trump's campaign.
Trump was convicted of felonious falsification of business records in laundering money to Cohen to hide his (Cohen's).
Yes, I remember the phony charges.
Criminal prosecutions don't need an FEC recommenation.
The FEC determines what is a contribution. They didn't say this was.
No contribution, no need for a prosecution.
Delldude
Sheep Dipped Boy Scout
Dead wrong here. SOL was for a misdemeanor. Bragg, with the help of Bidens WH counsel did some creative lawyering massaging the law.
It's not a violation of the law to pay off hookers ahead of an election.
It's probably going to go to federal court.
Toddsterpatriot
Diamond Member
No it hadn't. For a couple of reasons:
#1 The applicable SOL was for felony not misdeomeoner, felony SOL are longer.
#2 Time outside the state stops the tolling of the SOL, he moved to DC and to FL and spent little time actually in NY.
.
.
.
.
This was throughly litigated PRIOR to the trial even starting.
WW
After conviction, Trump questioned the New York statute of limitations. Here are the facts
Trump and his team have said the statute of limitations may be an issue in appealing his convictions. Here's what we know about the unusual timing.www.usatoday.com
The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump - Feb. 15, 2024
Time outside the state stops the tolling of the SOL,
Yeah, because NY state didn't know where he was. DURR.
No crime being committed means NO CRIME WAS COMMITTED no matter how bizarre your "novel" legal theory may be.
Trump was "convicted" of a misdemeanor who's statute of limitations had run out, and whose implementation REQUIRED an underlying felony to proceed. A underlying felony that was never charged.
Your entire claim is bullshit based on a corrupt house of cards.
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
There were two crimes Cohen's federal campiagn finance fraud and Trump's felony falsification of business records.
Denying it doesn't change reality.
No he was convicted of a felony.
Felony SOL had not run out, this was litigated.
#1 "underlying crime" not "underlying felony".
#2 But regardless, there was an underlying felony - Cohen's. The underlying crime supporting felonly falsefication of business record to hide a crime, can be a crime committed by others.
Yes, it was Cohen was charged and convicted.
These are not "my claims", they are the fact of the legal cases that have proceeded through the courts.
WW
Can you show me where this was presented during the trial?
It's a trick question. There was ZERO evidence presented at the trial of an underlying crime.
You are just making shit up. why is it so hard for you to admit that there was no named underlying crime at trump's kangaroo trial?
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
Cohen's conviction was entered in through testimony.
When a conviction occurs in court, the fact that the other conviction occurred is entered as an a priori statement of fact.
They didn't have to enter any "evidence" of Cohen's crime, becuase the conviction was the evidence. If the defense felt that the conviction had NOT occured, they could have objected. In which case the prosecution would have just presented the conviction records from the other Federal District Court. Such an objection would have been a waste of the courts time so the defense raised no objection since Cohen's conviction was an unchallenged fact.
WW
Cohen's conviction was never named as the underlying crime. Neither was anything else. Why is it so hard for you to admit that?
WorldWatcher
Platinum Member
Sure it was, both in testimony and the in the Judges instructions as one of the underlying motivating crimes.
Why do you not tell the truth?
WW
One of the crimes? So it was not the named crime. And the jury did not need to be unanimous on the underlying crime.
I am, you are the one lying.
In any case, this is why he was falsely convicted.
Similar threads
