- 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: Liberal debates Trumps conviction and is asked what crime he committed
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:05 am to Bwmdx
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:05 am to Bwmdx
Tyrants and those who pay tribute to tyrants always rely on unequal application of the law and legal formalism BEYOND THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW to turn innocent men into guilty men. Considering the fact that on average we all commit numerous crimes per week, you’d think they would acknowledge the suicidal nature of allowing The State to redefine and reinterpret and “ create” new crimes.
But no, they revel in the legal formalism and savor crushing their political opponents. And then you realize that ethic and justice are completely irrelevant to these people who so thoroughly fetishize legal formalism. Right now you have rooms of State legal formalists looking for ways to creatively twist the laws to go after any and all political opposition. And there will be no shortage of third rate lawyers who will line up to applaud it. As SFP proves in every thread. We are among Fools.
But no, they revel in the legal formalism and savor crushing their political opponents. And then you realize that ethic and justice are completely irrelevant to these people who so thoroughly fetishize legal formalism. Right now you have rooms of State legal formalists looking for ways to creatively twist the laws to go after any and all political opposition. And there will be no shortage of third rate lawyers who will line up to applaud it. As SFP proves in every thread. We are among Fools.
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 10:09 am
0
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:08 am to SlowFlowPro
Dude, please stop - you are straining any credibility you might have with such disingenuous prevarication. And what you are talking about is a state misdemeanor.
The whole foundation for the felony (after a partisan governing body changed a law regarding statute of limitations for the state MISDEMEANOR), was that, somehow, all of this was from a poisoned treew of FEDERAL ELECTIONS LAW violations.
As many have said -myself included- this Federal Election Law basis ALONE disqualifies a state court from entertaining such a claim for case.
And that is only the BEGINNING of a plethora of reversible errors...
The whole foundation for the felony (after a partisan governing body changed a law regarding statute of limitations for the state MISDEMEANOR), was that, somehow, all of this was from a poisoned treew of FEDERAL ELECTIONS LAW violations.
As many have said -myself included- this Federal Election Law basis ALONE disqualifies a state court from entertaining such a claim for case.
And that is only the BEGINNING of a plethora of reversible errors...
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:09 am to OMLandshark
I think a court of appeal will reverse and render on the defense's motion to dismiss. It was legal error to advance the case to the jury on the showing made.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:10 am to SlowFlowPro
Cohen would not have been involved in journal entries. His flat charge could be considered additional over billing considering doing so afterwards and being caught. That determination of jury as you mentioned would be done but for defense purposes unless jury was kept from hearing and understanding which is what happened. This was a showboat of DEI , Soros and DOJ henchmen
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:13 am to SoggyBottomBaw
I dont trust the courts.
I'm becoming very fond of vigilantism though.
I'm becoming very fond of vigilantism though.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Who paid Stormy?
The $130k paid by a third party company to Stormy's reps
quote:So, just making sure I understand. You are claiming a law firm never hires outside corporations which in turn generate fees, fees which are paid by the firm, and then invoiced as expenses to the client?
How can a payment made by a company unrelated to Cohen's law firm (funded by Cohen personally, not his firm) be a legal expense of Cohen's law firm?
quote:Because he assigned those as his expenses in behalf of his client.
And why was Cohen reimbursed for the tax liabilities of his improper billing?
quote:They?
What I'm curious of is how they did the accounting for that unrelated LLC
You're assuming Trump had a hand in it?
What I'm curious about is if any of the eaten up TDS folks think there would be a difference in tax liability if the ledger reflected "PR expense" instead of "Legal expense"?
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 10:17 am
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:18 am to SoggyBottomBaw
quote:
The whole foundation for the felony (after a partisan governing body changed a law regarding statute of limitations for the state MISDEMEANOR), was that, somehow, all of this was from a poisoned treew of FEDERAL ELECTIONS LAW violations.
That is only one option.
Jury Instructions
In addition to that possible option, the jury was instructed they could find any of the following:
New York Election Law
Falsifying Business Records
Tax Laws (state or federal)
Cohen's crimes
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:19 am to NC_Tigah
This thread is going 9 pages of whataboutism, TDS, yada ...
And SFP will still be a retard scholar giving incorrect legal information like his buddy, boogie ...
Y'all are arguing with a troll idiot ...
At some point, SFP is gonna pull a Fauci ... "I Am The LAW" ... cause that's the only explanation for what has taken place ...
And SFP will still be a retard scholar giving incorrect legal information like his buddy, boogie ...
Y'all are arguing with a troll idiot ...
At some point, SFP is gonna pull a Fauci ... "I Am The LAW" ... cause that's the only explanation for what has taken place ...
This post was edited on 6/4/24 at 10:21 am
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:19 am to SlowFlowPro
What felony?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:20 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
legal error that will send reverse the conviction
Then, IMO, there is no need to argue to support the prosecution, even if some points made by them are correct.
quote:
The factual determinations needed to assess the crimes are up to the jury.
The judge did not allow the facts to be introduced to support the defendant. Thus, the jury could not have come to a just decision.
-This entire trial is a political prosecution and would not have been brought against anyone else. It is Lawfare by definition.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:24 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Who paid Stormy?
The third party company.
quote:
You are claiming a law firm never hires outside corporations which in turn generate fees, fees which are paid by the firm, and then invoiced as expenses to the client?
I think you may need to clean up the language of this question.
quote:
They?
You're assuming Trump had a hand in it?
They as in the coordinated effort of Cohen and representatives of the Trump Corporation.
quote:
What I'm curious about is if any of the eaten up TDS folks think there would be a difference in tax liability if the ledger reflected "PR expense" instead of "Legal expense"?
However you want to describe the expense, it should have been handled directly and billed specifically. Trying to hide it is what led to the scheme that brought this prosecution.
Lesson learned is don't try to hide payments and expenses of obfuscate the discovery of either, especially if you're a business in New York
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:24 am to JellyRoll
quote:
What felony?
Look at the 2nd response to OP
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:24 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm giving objective legal analysis.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:25 am to deathvalleytiger10
quote:
Then, IMO, there is no need to argue to support the prosecution,
Nothing I say "supports" the prosecution. I'm explaining their strategy and arguments.
And even if the case is remanded, there will be a re-trial.
quote:
The judge did not allow the facts to be introduced to support the defendant.
Which facts?
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:27 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
could find any of the following
Fine, another of about eleventy billion errors: 6th Amendment.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:30 am to SoggyBottomBaw
quote:
Fine, another of about eleventy billion errors: 6th Amendment.
I literally commented about this on page 2.
Giving the jury the option for associated crimes is fine, but the non-unanimity is going to lead the conviction to be overturned and the case remanded for re-trial with a requirement of unanimity for the associated crime.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:32 am to Nosevens
quote:
Cohen would not have been involved in journal entries. H
For the associated crime?
quote:
His flat charge could be considered additional over billing considering doing so afterwards and being caught.
That is a credibility determination for the jury.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:32 am to SlowFlowPro
I'm only trying to help you; obviously you don't have to accept...
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:33 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Which facts?
Don't play dumb. You know full well that the Judge did not allow in testimony that he felt would "confuse" or support the defendant. That is well documented.
Look it up if yourself.
Posted on 6/4/24 at 10:33 am to SoggyBottomBaw
quote:
I'm only trying to help you
Help me by telling me something I already said?
Page 5 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News