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

[Stacyhs]

It's always so much fun watching Trumpsters twisting themselves into pretzels in an effort to defend their Dear Leader.

 

[quadraginta]

Don't be a silly, Cohen, his lawyers, the prosecution and the judge are all wrong!

Not just the judge. The jury was wrong, too:

What jury? Plea agreements don't have anything to do with juries. They are between the prosecutor, the defendant (in concert with their lawyers), and the judge.

I do note that the judge acted very strangely during this trial and the jury appears to have as well.

Are you getting your trials mixed up? (Understandable, I suppose, since they came almost simultaneously.)

Thaiboxerken was referring to the Manafort trial, not the Cohen plea agreement.

 

[Dr. Keith]

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.

You weren't saying he wasn't guilty, you were saying it wasn't a crime. If it isn't a crime on its face as plead then the judge can not accept a guilty plea.

I pled guilty to driving 55 in a 55 mph zone. That isn't a crime. The judge won't accept that as a guilty plea. Unless I further pled that the conditions were such that may speed was dangerous. Then it is reckless driving, which is a crime. Any judge accepting that plea will have to agree that the conditions described in the plea are clear enough that my driving the posted speed was reckless. So, now you have a judge, prosecutors, the driver (also an attorney), and the driver's attorney all agreeing that the described conditions made driving the post speed a crime. But still on the internet someone will say that is impossible.

 

[quadraginta]

Oh, that morphed a few months ago into "any convictions for collusion yet?"

I'm eager to see what the next goalpost shift is.

That's easy. "Any convictions for collusion with Russians for tampering with the election?".

Closely followed by, "Any convictions which involve Trump collusion with Russians for tampering with the election?".

All the while insisting that there is no such crime as "collusion", so nobody can be guilty of anything anyway. So there.

 

[dasmiller]

I looked up the article again; nice title: Trump Tries to Deny His Crime With Cohen, Confesses by Mistake (by saying that the money didn't come from the campaign fund).

If I do a face-palm too hard, would I break my hand or get a concussion?

'cause I'm right on the edge . . .

 

[smartcooky]

Jeezus!! There are more stundies in the last two pages of this thread than there have been on the whole forum for the last year... and every one of them from supporters of the steaming pile of fecal matter currently masquerading as POTUS.

It has been most entertaining watching his supporters twisting and turning logic and reason inside out as they desperately clutch at straws, any straws, to try to vindicate the worst . president . ever to hold office in the US.

 

[Cain]

BTW, I read one article that said if the money had come from campaign funds, it probably wouldn't have been illegal. It was the contribution that was illegal.

Yes, but if it were paid officially through the campaign, then don't they have to account for to whom the money was given and for what purpose? "Hush payment to porn star" kind of goes against the whole idea...

ETA: However, if it were paid in October, they could probably file it after the election when it was too late. Maybe. I don't know. I'm not a scumbag, I mean lawyer.

 

[a_unique_person]

 

[acbytesla]

It's always so much fun watching Trumpsters twisting themselves into pretzels in an effort to defend their Dear Leader.

What I find amusing and frustrating at the same time is that THEY ALL KNOW that Trump is a lying POS. They know that Cohen on this occasion is telling the truth and Trump has been the one that is lying. They KNOW as the words tumble out of his mouth they are likely to be false.

They play this game because he's on their team. It's bizarre.........except we've seen this show before. Haven't we Stacy?

 

[The Big Dog]

Jeezus!! There are more stundies in the last two pages of this thread than there have been on the whole forum for the last year... and every one of them from supporters of the steaming pile of fecal matter currently masquerading as POTUS.

It has been most entertaining watching his supporters twisting and turning logic and reason inside out as they desperately clutch at straws, any straws, to try to vindicate the worst . president . ever to hold office in the US.

Do us a solid and explain how any posts are Stundie worthy.

 

[acbytesla]

"Oh, he didn't pay her off to keep her quiet because he's running for president, he did it because she started making noise" completely ignores the obvious conclusion that she started making noise because of his presidential campaign.

Nice attempt to spin, though.

Do you have any idea how contradictory that post was?

Yes she probably started to make noise because of the Presidential campaign. I agree with that. But it is absolute stupifying nonsense to say he didn't pay her off to keep her quiet because he was running for President.

They go together.

 

[Stacyhs]

What I find amusing and frustrating at the same time is that THEY ALL KNOW that Trump is a lying POS. They know that Cohen on this occasion is telling the truth and Trump has been the one that is lying. They KNOW as the words tumble out of his mouth they are likely to be false.

They play this game because he's on their team. It's bizarre.........except we've seen this show before. Haven't we Stacy?

Why, yes. Yes, we have.

 

[tyr_13]

[tl;dr] There are.


The handwaving by Trump supporters is extraordinarily fact-challenged and stupid.

Cohen plead guilty, described what he did, where and when he did it, and that he was directed to do so in that fashion by Trump himself and for the explicit reason of influencing the election. That blows most of the arguments defending Trump, but also, as has already been pointed out, not all campaign finance laws are the same. That's akin to saying that vehicular manslaughter is 'traffic offense'. False equivalency is so useful for whataboutism.

But on your point, after Cohen plead guilty to his crimes, the judge has to ask the prosecution to summarize the evidence they would use to support the case that Cohen had indeed committed this crimes. Their answer specifically for the felony counts that implicate Trump included documents and audio recordings seized from Cohen on the April 19th raid, bank records, testimony of witnesses, text messages, other electronic messages, documents obtained from these banks, documents and records obtained from these shell companies.

To go over that again, according to Federal Prosecutors speaking in court directly to a judge, the evidence they have that supports Cohen's statements in his guilty plea to two federal felonies that directly implicate Trump includes a lot, but also recordings of phone calls between the principles involved.

Trump directed Cohen to commit felonies, according to Cohen and prosecutors backed by seemingly overwhelming evidence.

Do you have any idea how contradictory that post was?

Yes she probably started to make noise because of the Presidential campaign. I agree with that. But it is absolute stupifying nonsense to say he didn't pay her off to keep her quiet because he was running for President.

They go together.

Again, one doesn't even need to resort to this inference. Cohen said it was to influence the election, and the government says in court it has evidence to back that up.

(And the thing I forgot from my last post was that election laws seek transparency, and that is another reason why this willful violation and cover up is not like some other violations.)

 

[The Big Dog]

Again, one doesn't even need to resort to this inference. Cohen said it was to influence the election, and the government says in court it has evidence to back that up.

(And the thing I forgot from my last post was that election laws seek transparency, and that is another reason why this willful violation and cover up is not like some other violations.)

No wai! The guy pleading guilty in a plea agreement said exactly what the government wanted him to say?

Here is my shocked face: o

 

[smartcooky]

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_6025b7df7a9b5931.jpg[/qimg]

Hell, Trump is such a petulant man-child. While this sort of snide and nasty comment is par for the course for this scumbag, can anyone honestly see any other past POTUS saying something like this in public.

It ought to be beneath the holder of the highest office in the US.

 

[C_Felix]

Hell, Trump is such a petulant man-child. While this sort of snide and nasty comment is par for the course for this scumbag, can anyone honestly see any other past POTUS saying something like this in public.

It ought to be beneath the holder of the highest office in the US.

Trump needs to be censured for malfeasance of office.

 

[The Big Dog]

Hell, Trump is such a petulant man-child. While this sort of snide and nasty comment is par for the course for this scumbag, can anyone honestly see any other past POTUS saying something like this in public.

It ought to be beneath the holder of the highest office in the US.

so, you are saying that you would endorse Mr. Cohen's services as an attorney then?

/lolz

 

[Strawberry]

so, you are saying that you would endorse Mr. Cohen's services as an attorney then?

/lolz

Are you saying you endorse that childish, spiteful comment from the President of your country?

 

[Stacyhs]

No wai! The guy pleading guilty in a plea agreement said exactly what the government wanted him to say?

Here is my shocked face: o

You ignore the fact that the prosecution also says they have the proof to back it up with video recordings, electronic devices, documents, text messages, emails, and witness testimony.
What does the Donald have? His word? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

 

[acbytesla]

Again, one doesn't even need to resort to this inference. Cohen said it was to influence the election, and the government says in court it has evidence to back that up.

(And the thing I forgot from my last post was that election laws seek transparency, and that is another reason why this willful violation and cover up is not like some other violations.)

And then there is the timing of the payment to Stormy which IIRC was 2 weeks before the election.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.