- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Conspiracy to Perform Lawful Act
Posted on 12/12/18 at 4:53 pm to Nguyener
Posted on 12/12/18 at 4:53 pm to Nguyener
quote:No, I am quite successful, thank you.
You went to law school and passed the bar though, correct?
I bet you suck at practicing.
I just have the good sense to seek advice from specialists when dealing with issues outside my field.
Crazy, right?
But I can see that the concept of “good sense” might baffle you.
This post was edited on 12/12/18 at 5:12 pm
2
Posted on 12/12/18 at 4:55 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:I have no idea where you fall on the ideological spectrum, but I want to thank you for providing a courteous response to a straightforward (even if complex) question.
Conspiracy, by definition, must involve at least two or more people. This act may involve illegal behavior to accomplish a legal act or LEGAL actions to achieve an illegal result. In other words, if two people act in a legal manner to accomplish an outcome that is NOT legal, it's still a criminal conspiracy.
Source: I'm a fed.
Many posters could learn a lesson from you. Far too many of them automatically react with rancor towards anyone they perceive is holding views leftward of the main stream for this forum.
This post was edited on 12/12/18 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 12/12/18 at 4:56 pm to AggieHank86
Here's my take:
1) There's nothing illegal about drafting an NDA and paying money to silence two women.
2) Trump has done this numerous times in the past to protect his brand so he can clearly demonstrate this isn't a campaign contribution.
3) The tapes in possession of law enforcement have Trump telling Cohen to do this on the up and up, so how can they show any agreement between the parties on how this was carried out?
What the media is doing with this is so obvious and despicable. I feel like I'm in an Orwell novel right now. This is an attempted coup we're watching.
1) There's nothing illegal about drafting an NDA and paying money to silence two women.
2) Trump has done this numerous times in the past to protect his brand so he can clearly demonstrate this isn't a campaign contribution.
3) The tapes in possession of law enforcement have Trump telling Cohen to do this on the up and up, so how can they show any agreement between the parties on how this was carried out?
What the media is doing with this is so obvious and despicable. I feel like I'm in an Orwell novel right now. This is an attempted coup we're watching.
This post was edited on 12/12/18 at 4:57 pm
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:01 pm to Nguyener
quote:
NARC! WE HAVE A NARC EVERYONE!
I may or may not be one as well.
Now, has anybody in here committed any crimes that cross state lines or is anyone currently hiding from arrest in another state?
Asking for a friend.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:03 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
quote:
quote:
If Trump repaid Cohen, would that not qualify as the “overt act” that you reference?
Paying a fee to an attorney for an executing an NDA? No.
Granted the subject matter makes it seem unethical, but this type of thing happens in corporate law with regularity.
I have settled countless claims in the last 30 years. Not once have I ever paid a settlement out of my own pocket without first consulting with the client, in the hope or expectation that he might choose to repay me.
Perhaps your experience is different.
I personally don't know a single attorney who would do this, but have crossed paths professionally with folks who you would consider "fixers". It is more common than people would like to admit with corporate and real estate law. Especially in the Northeast and the Rust Belt.
Dubious ethics, not necessarily illegal.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:05 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
No, I am quite success, thank you.
Much honor to you then.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:08 pm to SCLibertarian
I always appreciate your input, but that is not really the question I was asking. For purposes of this discussion, I have no interest in the Merritt (or lack there of) of the claims against Trump OR the claims against Cohen
For purposes of THIS discussion, we are making to assumptions. First, we ASSUME (for purposes of discussion) that Trump absolutely COULD have made this payment outside the context of a contested federal election. Second, we ASSUME (again, for purposes of discussion) that Cohen‘s actions would have been illegal absence Trump‘s involvement,
Under those circunstances, could Trump face criminal exposure for conspiracy?
ClientNumber9 seems to indicate that the answer is a fairly unequivocal “yes.”
For purposes of THIS discussion, we are making to assumptions. First, we ASSUME (for purposes of discussion) that Trump absolutely COULD have made this payment outside the context of a contested federal election. Second, we ASSUME (again, for purposes of discussion) that Cohen‘s actions would have been illegal absence Trump‘s involvement,
Under those circunstances, could Trump face criminal exposure for conspiracy?
ClientNumber9 seems to indicate that the answer is a fairly unequivocal “yes.”
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:38 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
No, I am quite successful, thank you.
Post your Tax Returns
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:44 pm to Nguyener
quote:frick off, Troll.
Post your Tax Returns
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:45 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
frick off, Troll.
I'm not trolling.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:48 pm to Nguyener
Are you really asking a stranger to post his tax returns on a message board?
This place sometimes
This place sometimes
Posted on 12/12/18 at 5:59 pm to AggieHank86
quote:You come to the Poli board of all places, ask a question that on its face is illogical, then try to twist the law to make a legal act an illegal act and call anyone that points out the stupidity of your argument as not intelligent enough to "understand" .
AggieHank86
Typical high brow democratic arrogance. Go frick yourself
Posted on 12/12/18 at 6:05 pm to ChexMix
It may sound illogical to a Lehman, but I suspected that this MIGHT be the law. An expert in the field confirms my suspicion. How about you “frick yourself” instead.
Think about it for a minute. If you intentionally help someone perform an act that you know is illegal for them to perform, do you really not think that there might be some liability?
EDIT: I am still trying to figure why Siri thinks "layman" is "Lehman." Context is lost on her.
Think about it for a minute. If you intentionally help someone perform an act that you know is illegal for them to perform, do you really not think that there might be some liability?
EDIT: I am still trying to figure why Siri thinks "layman" is "Lehman." Context is lost on her.
This post was edited on 12/13/18 at 7:09 am
Posted on 12/12/18 at 6:05 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Like driving a car, vs driving a getaway car, but claiming to be unaware of that?
Can one be guilty of conspiring to perform an act with a secnd person, when such act would be illegal for the second person to perform individually, but perfectly legal for the first person to perform individually?
Posted on 12/12/18 at 6:06 pm to Nguyener
quote:Then you are a low-grade moron. Take your pick.quote:I'm not trolling.
frick off, Troll.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 6:14 pm to AggieHank86
What if there was a recording of me telling the “co-conspirator” not to do anything illegal?
What of the act is the same act I have performed many many times in the past which would negate its illegality?
What of the act is the same act I have performed many many times in the past which would negate its illegality?
This post was edited on 12/12/18 at 6:18 pm
Posted on 12/12/18 at 6:25 pm to AggieHank86
quote:there is the rub. Trump would have had to have known for a fact Cohen was going to perform an illegal act, provided written or recorded oral confirmation of said knowledge of illegality, and directed Cohen to perform the illegal act in order to be held liable.
If you intentionally help someone perform an act that you know is illegal f
No verifiable proof exists; therefore, no liability. None.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 6:27 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:No, more like, go down to the store and pick me up a six pack of beer.
Like driving a car, vs driving a getaway car, but claiming to be unaware of that?
You go and rob the convenience store and steal my six pack and give it to me without me knowing how the frick you got it.
Posted on 12/12/18 at 7:46 pm to BBONDS25
quote:Interesting additions to the hypothetical, Barry. What are your thoughts?
What if there was a recording of me telling the “co-conspirator” not to do anything illegal?
What of the act is the same act I have performed many many times in the past which would negate its illegality?
Posted on 12/12/18 at 7:47 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Interesting additions to the hypothetical, Barry. What are your thoughts
Same as all sane persons. These are politically motivated horse shite prosecutions
Page 3 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News