Originally posted by Juvenal
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Trump loses yet another case in court.
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by Mountain Man; 11-09-2019, 01:29 PM.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostAs we've pointed out several times, Cohen pleaded guilty to a crime he didn't commit in order to get a lighter sentence on crimes he did commit. The whole point was to give them something to use against Trump, and what did Cohen have to lose? Except the former chairman of the FEC says that the payment violated no laws, and as far as I know, the FEC hasn't even bothered to open a case against the President.
The WSJ opinion piece was dated 4/10/18, the day after the FBI raid on Cohen's offices, and months before Cohen's confession in August, hence factually deficient, as is the claim that Cohen did not commit the crime to which he confessed. Plea deals are offered for lesser offenses, not spurious offenses.
A prosecutor accepted a plea of guilty of an illegal campaign contribution, and a judge accepted it. It was a campaign contribution, in law, and in fact, or it was an act of gross prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. The latter would be a baseless conspiracy theory.
It was a campaign contribution.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostIt was a campaign contribution.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostNot at all. You didn't bother reading the article I posted and chose to dismiss it based simply on the date it was published.
He's on the fringe, but not a conspiracy theorist, and very high quality. His opinions are worth reading, and appear to be carefully fact-checked in keeping with the standard editorial oversight typical of the WSJ.
That does not mean his opinions encompass facts that would not be in evidence for months after his piece was written.
Cohen's false confession didn't change anything as far as the law is concerned.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostFrom all appearances, the charge that Cohen's confession was false is based on partisan convenience alone...
That is, of course, a rhetorical question.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostNo, it's based on the fact that the payments were a simple business transaction and violated no laws. The fact that they are trying to use this case to conduct a fishing expedition into Trump's tax records that have nothing to do with any of this should make you at least a little suspicious. They have Cohen's testimony; they have his confession; they have his files; they probably even have the receipts from the payments. In other words, if a crime was committed, then they should have all the evidence they need to press charges, so why won't they?
That is, of course, a rhetorical question.
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostObama's violations were amongst the most egregious ever documented and forced him to pay one of the largest fines ever levied against any campaign -- $375,000. And, of course to absolutely nobody's surprise nearly all of the MSM studiously ignored it, and if not, typically burying it deep in a passing mention in an unrelated story.
Yeah, irony.
For perspective, Cohen paid off a porn star to keep her revelations from preventing Trump's election, an illegal, i.e. criminal, campaign contribution, for which he is currently serving time, making him the third Trump aide to be sent up the river, following Manafort and Papadap, putting him well ahead of his latest consigliere, who's only seen two of his close associates arrested, but not yet convicted.
You're a slacker, Rudy.
I've said this before, and as much as I hate to harp, y'all really should get around to finding whataboutism's that are worse than the behavior you're deflecting from.
Originally posted by Terraceth View PostHonestly, considering Trump, I wouldn't be surprised if the reason he's fighting tooth and nail isn't because there's anything illegal in it, but because it would show he doesn't make as much money as he claims he does.
Could even show up in his tax returns, if they were really sloppy.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by JimLamebrain View PostBut regardless, it's under investigation...
The answer is obvious: they don't have enough to press charges because the payments broke no laws.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostI've said this before, and as much as I hate to harp, y'all really should get around to finding whataboutism's that are worse than the behavior you're deflecting from.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostSometimes your comments are witty, and even incisive.
This isn't one of those times.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Juvenal View PostYou can crop everything from the ? on from a url without spoiling the link.
The WSJ opinion piece was dated 4/10/18, the day after the FBI raid on Cohen's offices, and months before Cohen's confession in August, hence factually deficient, as is the claim that Cohen did not commit the crime to which he confessed. Plea deals are offered for lesser offenses, not spurious offenses.
A prosecutor accepted a plea of guilty of an illegal campaign contribution, and a judge accepted it. It was a campaign contribution, in law, and in fact, or it was an act of gross prosecutorial and judicial misconduct. The latter would be a baseless conspiracy theory.
It was a campaign contribution.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Don't forget the Steel Dossier and the entire impeachment inquiry, since you are listing off a slew of fake news stuff...That's what
- She
Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
- Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)
I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
- Stephen R. Donaldson
Comment
-
How about that one where Tulsi Gabbard and Jill Stein are Russian assets?I DENOUNCE DONALD J. TRUMP AND ALL HIS IMMORAL ACTS.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 07:25 AM
|
2 responses
13 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 07:37 AM
|
||
Started by eider, Today, 06:00 AM
|
5 responses
37 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 08:00 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 03:54 PM
|
1 response
16 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:25 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 12:05 PM
|
7 responses
59 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seanD
Yesterday, 05:10 PM
|
||
Started by seer, 05-09-2024, 04:14 PM
|
32 responses
191 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 04:50 AM
|
Comment