• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday pt 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ziggurat said:
First, if the payment wasn't a crime (and I don't believe it was, despite Cohen's plea deal), then nobody was covering up a breach of the law. Bank fraud is a crime in its own right, but that may be entirely on Cohen. Lying to the public isn't a crime, and you can be sure politicians will never make it one. I have seen no evidence that Trump lied to federal investigators. Have you? If so, please share with the class.
Click to expand...

1/ On what basis would you -- in contrast with federal prosecutors, a federal judge, Cohen's lawyers and Cohen himself -- conclude that making six-figure payoffs to influence the outcome of a presidential election and lying about them is not a crime? You think Cohen could have won a trial, or what?

2/ Trump hasn't had a chance to lie to federal investigators because his lawyers won't allow him to talk to them. They themselves insist he will perjure himself.
 
Dr. Keith said:
What did he plead guilty to, then? Jaywalking?
Click to expand...

The question isn't what he pled guilty to, but whether he actually is guilty. Can you honestly not envision why he might plead guilty to something he's not actually guilty of? Because it's really a no-brainer.
 
Ziggurat said:
The question isn't what he pled guilty to, but whether he actually is guilty. Can you honestly not envision why he might plead guilty to something he's not actually guilty of? Because it's really a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

One common reason to plead guilty is to evade prosecution for more -- and more serious -- crimes. That doesn't mean that the defendant didn't commit the crimes he admitted, or that those acts weren't part of larger crimes.
 
Ziggurat said:
Because that's when she started making noise. Same reason he didn't pay her when he launched his campaign. He's paid hush money to other mistresses long before he ever ran for office, so there's clearly precedent.
Click to expand...

And then there is this case showing that he didn't pay it until he started running for President. Why is that less precedent than the case you cite? Because it's convenient for you?

ETA: Do you have a link to something show she started making noise first? It kind of looks like she was approached rather than she was the one doing the approaching.
 
Last edited:
Ziggurat said:
The question isn't what he pled guilty to, but whether he actually is guilty. Can you honestly not envision why he might plead guilty to something he's not actually guilty of? Because it's really a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

I expect there will be plenty of corroboration in among those 1 million or so documents seized by the FBI from Cohen's office.
 
Bob001 said:
One common reason to plead guilty is to evade prosecution for more -- and more serious -- crimes. That doesn't mean that the defendant didn't commit the crimes he admitted, or that those acts weren't part of larger crimes.
Click to expand...

A plea deal isn't just about avoiding prosecution, it's also about minimizing the penalty. The penalty for campaign law violation he pled to isn't going to be large. It can be more than made up for by softening the recommended sentence of the other crimes. So the prosecutor could easily offer Cohen a deal where he comes out ahead by pleading to a crime he didn't commit.

Now, this is obviously not proof that it wasn't a campaign law violation. You have to argue on the merits, and I have done so. But this analysis of plea incentives does demonstrate that the existence of a plea cannot constitute proof that he's actually guilty of that crime.
 
Ziggurat said:
First, if the payment wasn't a crime (and I don't believe it was, despite Cohen's plea deal), then nobody was covering up a breach of the law. Bank fraud is a crime in its own right, but that may be entirely on Cohen. Lying to the public isn't a crime, and you can be sure politicians will never make it one. I have seen no evidence that Trump lied to federal investigators. Have you? If so, please share with the class.
Click to expand...

One, it was a crime. Just because his orangeness says it wasn't doesn't make it so. A prosecutor nor a judge is going to allow one to plead guilty to that which isn't.

Two, the candidate Trump directed him to do it which make a Trump as guilty.

Three, there certainly has been other crimes including multiple counts of obstruction of justice, Conspiracy to defraud the United States. And this is almost certainly the tip of the iceberg. When Trump writes his son fallacious statement and Jr. testifies to that before congress he is subborning perjury. Trump's inclination to fight and lie at every junction is not serving him well.

Trump has no ethics. Never has. It's catching up to him. As President, it is impossible to avoid scrutiny.
 
Last edited:
WilliamSeger said:
Best twitter response (paraphrased): "You can't give me a ticket! Everyone speeds!"
Click to expand...

I've not forgotten my father's words about Nixon: "Every President commits crimes." We were in the middle of an argument. Funny how relevant that excuse is to this day.

As for Dershowitz, he had a reasonable reply that when Trump paid Cohen the money for the two payoffs, that was personal money and not campaign money.

Couple problems, no declarations were made about the expenses and I doubt Trump can show that money didn't come out of some campaign related fund. He was right though a good attorney could show Cohen was motivated to lie that the money was campaign related. OTOH, why pay the women off at that time, OTOH, it still would have been legal for Trump to pay them off with his own money.

I'm sure Mueller has a lot more to come.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
And what a coincidence, Trump has a medal of honor to award today. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

are you suggesting that the award ceremony that was announced in July 2018 and scheduled for today to honor Sergeant John Chapman for his actions during the Battle at Takur Ghar was some sort of set up?

huh.
 
Ziggurat said:
I think you've missed the point, which is that complete compliance with federal election laws is essentially impossible. Hillary certainly didn't pull it off....
Click to expand...
Cohen's conviction of a felony contradicts your personal opinion.

And aren't you comparing some questionable donations the Clintons (respectively) had to give back? The analogy fails on over-generalizing kinds of campaign election violations.
 
Last edited:
The Big Dog said:
are you suggesting that the award ceremony that was announced in July 2018 and scheduled for today to honor Sergeant John Chapman for his actions during the Battle at Takur Ghar was some sort of set up?

huh.
Click to expand...

I'd say it's more to point out the hilarity of a man with literally no honor at all handing out a medal for such.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom