Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

April 29, 2026, 08:17:24 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Recent

Members
  • Total Members: 142
  • Latest: Hal9000
Stats
  • Total Posts: 178328
  • Total Topics: 1489
  • Online Today: 192
  • Online Ever: 4316
  • (October 16, 2025, 04:40:42 PM)
Users Online
Users: 0
Guests: 137
Total: 137

Let's talk about something we all can agree on...

  • 3539 Replies
  • 383483 Views

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

*

Judge Judy

  • *****
  • 11911
  • +120/-1809
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1770 on: May 26, 2024, 01:02:44 PM »
Not even sure what you guys are arguing about, but I’m on the side opposite Mn, because he’s almost always wrong.

But you’re never right, so I’ll take Mn’s side all day!
Because FOX News told me so…

HQ2 Cesspool March Madness champion 🏆

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31465
  • +607/-2431
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1771 on: May 26, 2024, 02:13:19 PM »
I'll settle this: you can never go wrong trusting content from  ThePAMan.
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

Somewhere in Mn

  • *****
  • 12598
  • +179/-2593
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1772 on: May 26, 2024, 02:40:14 PM »
Not even sure what you guys are arguing about, but I’m on the side opposite Mn, because he’s almost always wrong.
From what Ray has posted and what I have posted, I think it's fairly safe to say that if you are ever indicted you'll want me on the jury as opposed to Ray.
😂😂

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9238
  • +618/-2093
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1773 on: May 26, 2024, 04:37:26 PM »
You keep going back to the allegations.

In any similar situation, how would anyone not running for political office have categorized the expense ?

I would suggest anyone would not make 34 false entries in business records to conceal the original payment for the NDA.
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9238
  • +618/-2093
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1774 on: May 26, 2024, 04:57:40 PM »
Bragg's efforts to fulfill a campaign promise by using state law in a novel way to apply it to federal elections and federal campaign law while Democrats are saying that the case is election interference.

Huh? Wft are you even talking about? Trump probably did violate federal election laws, but Bragg backed off due to to jurisdictional questions.

The crime he committed was concealing the true nature of the payment to SD by falsifying 34 bidness records.

It rises to a felony because it was related to the election conspiracy under NY law.

Not something that is going to happens a lot.

Trump was covertly using his own dime to fund  “catch and kill” negative stories scheme. SD is part of that.

Why don't you read what Bragg has to say? 
« Last Edit: May 26, 2024, 04:59:59 PM by illiniray »
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

Somewhere in Mn

  • *****
  • 12598
  • +179/-2593
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1775 on: May 26, 2024, 06:38:46 PM »
Huh? Wft are you even talking about? Trump probably did violate federal election laws, but Bragg backed off due to to jurisdictional questions.

The crime he committed was concealing the true nature of the payment to SD by falsifying 34 bidness records.

It rises to a felony because it was related to the election conspiracy under NY law.

Not something that is going to happens a lot.

Trump was covertly using his own dime to fund  “catch and kill” negative stories scheme. SD is part of that.

Why don't you read what Bragg has to say? 
The distinction is whether or not the records are legal expenses or campaign expenses. Bragg must be saying that they are campaign expenses. There are charges for each transaction. Each invoice, each check etc are being treated as a separate felony.
The FEC would have jurisdiction over federal campaign expenses.

It's quite possible that the defense still has no idea what their closing arguments need to address on Tues. It was falsely assumed that the judge would give the prosecution and the defense the information they need to prepare closing arguments Thursday afternoon or Friday morning.

The assumption is that it's legal expenses vs campaign expenses unless Bragg comes up with a curveball or hard slider. The defense doesn't know what to expect on Tues so it's going to be seat of the pants closing arguments.

And the additional prosecutors that Bragg "hired" ?
Michael Colangelo stepped down from his #3 position at the DOJ to take a job assisting the local prosecuting DA.

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9238
  • +618/-2093
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1776 on: May 26, 2024, 07:16:12 PM »
The distinction is whether or not the records are legal expenses or campaign expenses. Bragg must be saying that they are campaign expenses. l prosecuting DA.

Sorry, but that is just plain wrong. Trump falsified business records, 34 of them, to conceal the payment to Daniels. Had he not falsified the records, the payment might have been legal.

Now, was that just a misdemeanor that has passed the statute of limitations?

It depends. Trump faked the records and concealed the payment for a reason. It was part of an election related conspiracy. That makes falsifying business records a felony in NY.

This has nothing to do with Trump's violation of Federal Election Laws.

Bragg floated including the latter, but there is the jurisdictional issue and he doesn't need it. The NY conspiracy law is enough.
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

Custard

  • *****
  • 12256
  • +235/-2962
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1777 on: May 26, 2024, 07:30:25 PM »
Sorry, but that is just plain wrong. Trump falsified business records, 34 of them, to conceal the payment to Daniels. Had he not falsified the records, the payment might have been legal.

Now, was that just a misdemeanor that has passed the statute of limitations?

It depends. Trump faked the records and concealed the payment for a reason. It was part of an election related conspiracy. That makes falsifying business records a felony in NY.

This has nothing to do with Trump's violation of Federal Election Laws.

Bragg floated including the latter, but there is the jurisdictional issue and he doesn't need it. The NY conspiracy law is enough.

How do you know?
Poster Boy for White Male Indifference

AOTC on basically everything measurable

“Custard, you were RIGHT!” -Tempo

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9238
  • +618/-2093
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1778 on: May 26, 2024, 07:43:15 PM »
I'm
How do you know?

Because I keep up.

“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

illiniray

  • *****
  • 9238
  • +618/-2093
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1779 on: May 26, 2024, 08:10:46 PM »
"Prosecutors say a misdemeanor state conspiracy statute spells out the underlying crime Trump aimed to conceal when he made hush money payments in 2016."
...

"The law — Section 17-152 of the state’s election code — makes it a misdemeanor for two or more people to “conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.” Trump is not being charged under that statute, ... though it is a key factor in his case. "
...

"The former president faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up $130,000 paid to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to keep her allegations of a sexual affair hidden from voters."
...

"In bringing the felony charges, prosecutors are required to prove not just that Trump doctored records, but that he did so to commit or conceal another crime. The underlying crime that motivated Trump’s alleged misconduct, prosecutors said in court, was a conspiracy to defraud voters in his presidential campaign."

'“The primary crime that we have alleged is New York state election law section 17-152,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass told New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan during Trump’s trial on April 23. “There is conspiracy language in the statute. The entire case is predicated on the idea that there was a conspiracy to influence the election in 2016.”"

"Prosecutors say Trump falsely recorded payments to his then-attorney Michael Cohen as a legal retainer instead of what they really were: reimbursement for the payoff to Daniels. In legal filings last year, Bragg’s team members cited statute 17-152 as one of three possible underlying crimes to help make their case. The others they cited were that Trump sought to skirt New York tax laws and that he violated federal campaign finance regulations."

"Anna Cominsky, associate professor at New York Law School, said focusing on the state election law statute is a way for prosecutors to present the most straightforward case to jurors. Bragg’s team does not have to prove Trump violated the statute but merely demonstrate that he was falsifying internal Trump Organization records as part of a broader scheme to improperly influence the 2016 election."

"prosecutors in Trump’s case might be leery about directly tying his charges to federal campaign finance law over concerns about legal jurisdiction.

“They may be trying to avoid that complication,” Smith said. “They can say, ‘We’ve got this New York law right here, a statute that says you cannot conspire to illegally promote or prevent an election,’ and they’re choosing that as a perfectly legitimate way to do that.”"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/06/trump-hush-money-trial-election-law/
“Taking a trip? Where to?”  -“Wherever I end up, I guess. -“Man, I wish I was you." -Well, hang in there.”

*

Somewhere in Mn

  • *****
  • 12598
  • +179/-2593
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1780 on: May 27, 2024, 08:00:33 AM »
"Prosecutors say a misdemeanor state conspiracy statute spells out the underlying crime Trump aimed to conceal when he made hush money payments in 2016."
...

"The law — Section 17-152 of the state’s election code — makes it a misdemeanor for two or more people to “conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.” Trump is not being charged under that statute, ... though it is a key factor in his case. "
...

"The former president faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up $130,000 paid to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to keep her allegations of a sexual affair hidden from voters."
...

"In bringing the felony charges, prosecutors are required to prove not just that Trump doctored records, but that he did so to commit or conceal another crime. The underlying crime that motivated Trump’s alleged misconduct, prosecutors said in court, was a conspiracy to defraud voters in his presidential campaign."

'“The primary crime that we have alleged is New York state election law section 17-152,” Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass told New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan during Trump’s trial on April 23. “There is conspiracy language in the statute. The entire case is predicated on the idea that there was a conspiracy to influence the election in 2016.”"

"Prosecutors say Trump falsely recorded payments to his then-attorney Michael Cohen as a legal retainer instead of what they really were: reimbursement for the payoff to Daniels. In legal filings last year, Bragg’s team members cited statute 17-152 as one of three possible underlying crimes to help make their case. The others they cited were that Trump sought to skirt New York tax laws and that he violated federal campaign finance regulations."

"Anna Cominsky, associate professor at New York Law School, said focusing on the state election law statute is a way for prosecutors to present the most straightforward case to jurors. Bragg’s team does not have to prove Trump violated the statute but merely demonstrate that he was falsifying internal Trump Organization records as part of a broader scheme to improperly influence the 2016 election."

"prosecutors in Trump’s case might be leery about directly tying his charges to federal campaign finance law over concerns about legal jurisdiction.

“They may be trying to avoid that complication,” Smith said. “They can say, ‘We’ve got this New York law right here, a statute that says you cannot conspire to illegally promote or prevent an election,’ and they’re choosing that as a perfectly legitimate way to do that.”"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/06/trump-hush-money-trial-election-law/
Thanks for clearing things up about the first felony trial of a former President in our nation's history that will go to a jury of peers from a jury pool that voted 85%+ for the opposition candidate.

Bragg's team only has to prove that it was a conspiracy. But if you don't agree with that, how about a tax charge ? And if neither of those fly, how about a federal election campaign finance violation but that's a little iffy.







« Last Edit: May 27, 2024, 08:06:33 AM by No one »

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31465
  • +607/-2431
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1781 on: May 27, 2024, 11:43:47 AM »
Guess he should have moved out of NY earlier and engaged in the coverup in Florida.
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31465
  • +607/-2431
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1782 on: May 27, 2024, 01:53:10 PM »
Wasn't John Edwards prosecuted under an analogous statute when he paid off his baby momma?
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

ThePAMan

  • *****
  • 31465
  • +607/-2431
  • Because "PussyMan" and "PenisMan" were trademarked
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1783 on: May 27, 2024, 01:56:48 PM »
Wasn't John Edwards prosecuted under an analogous statute when he paid off his baby momma?

Actually, he was prosecuted under federal election campaign laws for the payments to his baby momma.
Mark Carman: "The Whitlock!...Caleb Williams failed Wayne Whitlock." Been told I need to take my dick out my mouth so maybe I "wont [sic] sound like such a fucking faggot all the time[.]"

Tempo: "PAMan is a pot stirrer and agent provocateur"

*

Somewhere in Mn

  • *****
  • 12598
  • +179/-2593
    • View Profile
Re: Let's talk about something we all can agree on...
« Reply #1784 on: May 27, 2024, 02:28:37 PM »
Actually, he was prosecuted under federal election campaign laws for the payments to his baby momma.
And that's a no-no.