The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

#1,476
#1,476
clarksvol00 said:
Ok. I reread your first post and understand more. Is he really elevating a misdemeanor to a felony; or is he saying a misdemeanor was committed and a subsequent felony was committed based on or to cover up the initial misdemeanor? Seems like an argument could be made either way.
Click to expand...

as I understand it he's mixing state and federal code to take misdemeanor (falsification of business records) and make it a felony because it's a violation of election law (or something like that).

DOJ and FCC passed on this being violation of election law. if it's just falsification then the statute of limitations (2 years) passed long ago. adding the felony angle makes the potential penalties higher and extends the statute of limitations to charge even though that is in dispute as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and W.TN.Orange Blood
#1,477
#1,477
clarksvol00 said:
Ok. I reread your first post and understand more. Is he really elevating a misdemeanor to a felony; or is he saying a misdemeanor was committed and a subsequent felony was committed based on or to cover up the initial misdemeanor? Seems like an argument could be made either way.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure where the whole “he’s trying to turn it into a felony” narrative is coming from, I really haven’t followed this story, but I would have a hard time with felony obstruction being applied to the cover up of a misdemeanor. That’s pretty ****ed up.
 
#1,478
#1,478
825VOL said:
Maybe it was just a bad question. You are asking people to give their opinions on other people's opinions. Bad form.

The better question might be,,,,, Is the ________ Party trying to destroy the country? If so, give one specific reason you believe that.

IMO this would be much better than trying to guess an arbitrary % and then waiting for you to argue with others about what our guess means. That seems pointless.
Click to expand...
I had a reason for asking the question I did. I'm not asking anyone to have an opinion about another individual's opinion, I was asking people to have an opinion about the collective opinion of the opposing party. Big difference. People are constantly expressing opinions about the opposing party, I don't know why this was different. (actually I think I do)
 
#1,479
#1,479
volinbham said:
as I understand it he's mixing state and federal code to take misdemeanor (falsification of business records) and make it a felony because it's a violation of election law (or something like that).

DOJ and FCC passed on this being violation of election law. if it's just falsification then the statute of limitations (2 years) passed long ago. adding the felony angle makes the potential penalties higher and extends the statute of limitations to charge even though that is in dispute as well.
Click to expand...
I don't think an NY ag gets to use federal criminal law to prosecute. If I'm right and he is, baseless and unacceptable. If he's using state law, try him and let the chips fall where they may.
 
#1,480
#1,480
RockyTop85 said:
I’m not sure where the whole “he’s trying to turn it into a felony” narrative is coming from, I really haven’t followed this story, but I would have a hard time with felony obstruction being applied to the cover up of a misdemeanor. That’s pretty ****ed up.
Click to expand...

I'll see if I can find the article but if I understood it's taking the falsification (misdemeanor) and saying because what was falsified amounts to a campaign violation it's a felony. IOW the falsification crime resulted in a second crime.
 
#1,481
#1,481
volinbham said:
I'll see if I can find the article but if I understood it's taking the falsification (misdemeanor) and saying because what was falsified amounts to a campaign violation it's a felony. IOW the falsification crime resulted in a second crime.
Click to expand...
It was posted earlier today.
Your explanation was close enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinbham
#1,482
#1,482
#1,483
#1,483
RockyTop85 said:
I’m not sure where the whole “he’s trying to turn it into a felony” narrative is coming from, I really haven’t followed this story, but I would have a hard time with felony obstruction being applied to the cover up of a misdemeanor. That’s pretty ****ed up.
Click to expand...

I don't have any idea, but I don't know what laws NY (or any other state) may have in place about falsifying business records for a corporation. My initial thought was that NY may have certain tax write-offs for legal expenses and classifying a hush money payment as a legal expense would qualify.
 
#1,484
#1,484
volinbham said:
the article I referenced

Bragg brings a criminal case back from dead, but may have reanimated Trump's chances

He is reportedly going to convert a misdemeanor for falsifying financial records into a prosecution of a federal crime.

The federal crime is reportedly the failure to report a payment of $130,000 to former porn star Stormy Daniels to hush up an affair.

That was just before the presidential election and Bragg is alleging that it was an effective campaign donation.
Click to expand...
I'm no scholar, but I'm not aware of how a state DA is authorized to prosecute a federal charge.
 
#1,485
#1,485
volinbham said:
I'll see if I can find the article but if I understood it's taking the falsification (misdemeanor) and saying because what was falsified amounts to a campaign violation it's a felony. IOW the falsification crime resulted in a second crime.
Click to expand...
luthervol said:
This is what I found:
Daniels payment was indicative of falsifying business records, a misdemeanor that he says could potentially be charged as a felony under New York law if intended to conceal a second crime: in this case, an alleged illegal campaign contribution.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: clarksvol00
#1,486
#1,486
2018

Does Trump Have an Edwards/Clinton Problem?

2023

https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...ecution-high-on-ratings-but-short-on-the-law/

Prosecutors working under Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus Vance Jr.,also reportedly rejected the viability of using a New York law to effectively charge a federal offense.
More importantly, Bragg himself previously expressed doubts about the case, effectively shutting it down soon after he took office. The two lead prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, resigned in protest.

Wow..remember all this now..Deja vu

While we still do not know the specific state charges in the anticipated indictment, the most-discussed would fall under Section 175 for falsifying business records, based on the claim that Trump used legal expenses to conceal the alleged hush-payments that were supposedly used to violate federal election laws. While some legal experts have insisted such concealment is clearly a criminal matter that must be charged, they were conspicuously silent when Hillary Clinton faced a not-dissimilar campaign-finance allegation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf and W.TN.Orange Blood
#1,488
#1,488
clarksvol00 said:
I'm no scholar, but I'm not aware of how a state DA is authorized to prosecute a federal charge.
Click to expand...

McDad's post helps - it's thread the needle angle. He's not prosecuting the campaign stuff but he's claiming because that was a crime it elevates the falsification to felony.

Still, he would have to prove it was indeed a campaign violation. As I understand it if there are other reasons he'd want to keep her quiet (his wife, his public reputation, etc.) then it fails the campaign violation standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#1,489
#1,489
luthervol said:
I had a reason for asking the question I did. I'm not asking anyone to have an opinion about another individual's opinion, I was asking people to have an opinion about the collective opinion of the opposing party. Big difference. People are constantly expressing opinions about the opposing party, I don't know why this was different. (actually I think I do)
Click to expand...

Most everyone knew you had a reason. That is probably why most people didn't bother to answer your question. I just made you admit to it. You were most likely trying to play a "gotcha" game" so you could respond with your preconceived answers. Try asking real questions and then analyzing the actual responses. You might learn something.

I sure hope this wasn't how you taught kids.

After saying all that, do you still think of me as your favorite poster?
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#1,490
#1,490
clarksvol00 said:
This just got to complicated for me to care about.

@volinbham @luthervol
Click to expand...
I'm with ya.

Falsifying business records sounds to me like the kind of thing that can be found if the right person looks hard enough.
Kinda like taxes....if the IRS looks hard enough they WILL find a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big Orange#1, clarksvol00, W.TN.Orange Blood and 1 other person
#1,491
#1,491
luthervol said:
I had a reason for asking the question I did. I'm not asking anyone to have an opinion about another individual's opinion, I was asking people to have an opinion about the collective opinion of the opposing party. Big difference. People are constantly expressing opinions about the opposing party, I don't know why this was different. (actually I think I do)
Click to expand...

This is why I didn't engage:

luthervol said:
I'm purposefully an agitator. I know what comes with that.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: volinbham
#1,494
#1,494
How did I miss this?
Lies that caused our nation so much angst. And I am to listen to these people?

Last year, the Federal Election Commission fined the Clinton campaign for funding the Steele dossier as a legal expense. The campaign had previously denied funding the dossier, which was used to push false Russia collusion claims against Trump in 2016, and it buried the funding in the campaign’s legal budget. Yet, there was no hue and cry for this type of prosecution in Washington or New York.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, W.TN.Orange Blood and volinbham
#1,495
#1,495
"The linkage to a federal offense is critical for another reason: Bragg’s office ran out of time to prosecute this as a misdemeanor years ago; the statute of limitations is two years. Even if he shows this is a viable felony charge, the longer five-year limitation could be hard to establish."
 
  • Like
Reactions: W.TN.Orange Blood
#1,496
#1,496
825VOL said:
Most everyone knew you had a reason. That is probably why most people didn't bother to answer your question. I just made you admit to it. You were most likely trying to play a "gotcha" game" so you could respond with your preconceived answers. Try asking real questions and then analyzing the actual responses. You might learn something.

I sure hope this wasn't how you taught kids.

After saying all that, do you still think of me as your favorite poster?
Click to expand...
Nope. That was shorter lived than TN's number 1 ranking. You're in the 34th percentile now.
I would hope that anyone and everyone would have a reason for asking a specific question. I would hope that anyone and everyone would assume I had a reason to ask the question I did. The whole thing has been an exercise in futility. It was honestly meant as nothing more than a question to facilitate thinking from a different perspective.

Real questions and actual responses.........lol. And this is 100% the way I taught classes.
I always had a big sign in my classroom that simply said "THINK". I recognized early in my career that it was an ability that many students had never developed. It seems there are plenty of adults with the same deficiency.
 
#1,497
#1,497
luthervol said:
Nope. That was shorter lived than TN's number 1 ranking. You're in the 34th percentile now.
I would hope that anyone and everyone would have a reason for asking a specific question. I would hope that anyone and everyone would assume I had a reason to ask the question I did. The whole thing has been an exercise in futility. It was honestly meant as nothing more than a question to facilitate thinking from a different perspective.

Real questions and actual responses.........lol. And this is 100% the way I taught classes.
I always had a big sign in my classroom that simply said "THINK". I recognized early in my career that it was an ability that many students had never developed. It seems there are plenty of adults with the same deficiency.
Click to expand...

Come on in @825VOL. The water is glorious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeburst
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top