Status
Not open for further replies.
Let me pour some salve on that itch, yo:



FEC v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Comm., 454 U.S. 27, 37, 102 S.Ct. 38, 70 L.Ed.2d 23 (1981)

You see folks, the government has to prove that the person willfully violated the statute, and if they are relying on FEC guidance regarding what the statute means, well, that is all she wrote.

Cool, where did Trump or Cohen state that they were relying on FEC guidance when they structured this payment?

I probably just missed it as I haven't been paying close attention to these finer details.
 
And after playing his hand Cohen plead guilty. I wonder if Cohen's hand is related to Trump's hand.

Gonna go ahead and say no.

Because the game was Eight card stud, and the prosecutors were holding a straight flush to the queen (aka cohen's wife), with three trash cards while Cohen had three dueces.
 
To repeat folks:

"Cohen pleaded guilty to an illegal campaign contribution. That's an actual crime. But if the payment to Stormy wasn't a campaign contribution (and I do not believe it was, for reasons detailed already), then Cohen can't actually be guilty of it."

This has been explained ten ways to Sunday

Corpus Delecti demands that if no crime has been committed, then a defendant cannon be convicted of it, nor can he/she plead guilty to it. This is black letter law, and a cornerstone of western jurisprudence.

As you say, making an illegal campaign contribution is an actual crime. The fact that....

1. Michael Cohen (a lawyer) plead guilty to it.
2. Lanny Davis (a lawyer) allowed his client to plead guilty to it.
3. Prosecutor Robert Khuzami (a lawyer) allowed Cohen to plead guilty to it.
4. Judge Kimba Wood (a lawyer) allowed Cohen to plead guilty to it.

... is a cast iron indication that they are all satisfied a crime has, in fact been committed. Dozens of other lawyers all agree, but two Trump sycophants on this forum, you and Ziggurat, both with a combined experience in legal matters that amount to ZERO disagree and insist they are wrong.

As you are so keen on saying... Hooboy!
 
Rumors that Trump is going to Pardon Manafort, despite almost everybody telling him not to do it.
Go ahead Donnie do it!
I could not think of anything that could help the Democrats more come November.
 
It is interesting that we live at a time when certain political viewpoints have reached such a level of... commitment? dedication? near-religious belief? that any facts or events to the contrary are simply dismissed out of hand. It's fake news, ignore it! It's lies from "Deep State" or "Deep Justice," ignore them. Even a confession that is well-documented with facts and evidence is denied as potentially fake.

So what can one truly believe? Apparently only what one wants to believe. Anything else has possible holes in it and is not to be trusted.

Somehow I don't feel good about what this means for our future...
 
Corpus Delecti demands that if no crime has been committed, then a defendant cannon be convicted of it, nor can he/she plead guilty to it. This is black letter law, and a cornerstone of western jurisprudence.

It's cute that you think this principle is inviolable. Really, it's just totes adorbs.
 
Corpus Delecti demands that if no crime has been committed, then a defendant cannon be convicted of it, nor can he/she plead guilty to it. This is black letter law, and a cornerstone of western jurisprudence.

As you say, making an illegal campaign contribution is an actual crime. The fact that....

1. Michael Cohen (a lawyer) plead guilty to it.
2. Lanny Davis (a lawyer) allowed his client to plead guilty to it.
3. Prosecutor Robert Khuzami (a lawyer) allowed Cohen to plead guilty to it.
4. Judge Kimba Wood (a lawyer) allowed Cohen to plead guilty to it.

... is a cast iron indication that they are all satisfied a crime has, in fact been committed. Dozens of other lawyers all agree, but two Trump sycophants on this forum, you and Ziggurat, both with a combined experience in legal matters that amount to ZERO disagree and insist they are wrong.

As you are so keen on saying... Hooboy!

Kimba Woods did what now?

Anyhow, y'all are having a spectacular problem understanding what we have explained. Cohen pled guilty because he got something in exchange.

savvy?
 
It is interesting that we live at a time when certain political viewpoints have reached such a level of... commitment? dedication? near-religious belief? that any facts or events to the contrary are simply dismissed out of hand. It's fake news, ignore it! It's lies from "Deep State" or "Deep Justice," ignore them. Even a confession that is well-documented with facts and evidence is denied as potentially fake.

So what can one truly believe? Apparently only what one wants to believe. Anything else has possible holes in it and is not to be trusted.

Somehow I don't feel good about what this means for our future...

"Even a confession that is well-documented with facts and evidence is denied as potentially fake."

Y'all have seen the 'well documented facts and evidence"? Because we have not.

By the way, where did someone call something fake? It has been explained the Cohen enetred into a plea deal because he got something in exchange.

I would not worry to much about the future, posters here are cutting enough straw to make damn sure there is a soft landing.
 
What did he get?

It's in the plea agreement.

He got the prosecutor to recommend the punishment as calculated by a formula taking into account the number and severity of charges he plead to as well as his criminal history, among other things.

And no, there is nothing in there that says he got more lenient charges on the tax crimes because he plead to this specific crime. The implied quid pro quo simply does not exist.

The evidence indicates that he plead because they raided his offices before he had a chance to clean up. When they got everything, you fold quickly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom