Author Topic: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting  (Read 105779 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3397
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3815 on: December 12, 2018, 08:09:10 PM »
Isn't it illegal for a company (Trump Organization) to pay Cohen back for that illegal campaign contribution, then record it in financial statements as "legal Fees"?  And there were only a select few with check writing authority in the Trump Organization.  Alan Wieselberg, Donald Trump, and the Trump Kids.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Harmony

  • Posts: 446
  • Gender: Female
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3816 on: December 13, 2018, 08:40:36 AM »
Isn't it illegal to pay somebody to break the law on your behalf? Assuming Cohen isn't working pro boner (apt in this case) and that Trump knew he was doing it, which appears to be the case, doesn't this constitute criminal solicitation?

Generally, yes, but it has to be illegal for you too.  Here, it's not illegal for Trump.

Interesting.  I was always told - and even informed while serving on a jury at one point - that those who elicit a crime can be held equally liable for that crime.  In the case I was hearing a group of felons were hired by the defendant to steal all sorts of items from a construction site.  That person was found guilty of conspiracy.  IDK, maybe laws are different state to state in this regard?

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6475
  • Gender: Male
  • My wife is a cabriolet
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3817 on: December 13, 2018, 09:16:05 AM »
Isn't it illegal to pay somebody to break the law on your behalf? Assuming Cohen isn't working pro boner (apt in this case) and that Trump knew he was doing it, which appears to be the case, doesn't this constitute criminal solicitation?

Generally, yes, but it has to be illegal for you too.  Here, it's not illegal for Trump.

Interesting.  I was always told - and even informed while serving on a jury at one point - that those who elicit a crime can be held equally liable for that crime.  In the case I was hearing a group of felons were hired by the defendant to steal all sorts of items from a construction site.  That person was found guilty of conspiracy.  IDK, maybe laws are different state to state in this regard?

I think the difference is, a candidate can make unlimited contributions to his own election (I think that's what Stadler is referencing). For instance, if Trump would have paid the hush money directly himself, there would have been no violation of campaign laws and no one else would be implicated. In your example, if the defendant would have stolen the articles himself, he still would have been guilty of theft.

I suspect Trumps larger motivation for doing it the way he did was to hide the payments from Milania.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14502
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3818 on: December 13, 2018, 11:25:04 AM »
Isn't it illegal to pay somebody to break the law on your behalf? Assuming Cohen isn't working pro boner (apt in this case) and that Trump knew he was doing it, which appears to be the case, doesn't this constitute criminal solicitation?

Generally, yes, but it has to be illegal for you too.  Here, it's not illegal for Trump.

Interesting.  I was always told - and even informed while serving on a jury at one point - that those who elicit a crime can be held equally liable for that crime.  In the case I was hearing a group of felons were hired by the defendant to steal all sorts of items from a construction site.  That person was found guilty of conspiracy.  IDK, maybe laws are different state to state in this regard?

But fundamentally, that crime would be a crime for the "elicitor".  The  rule you're referring to is only intended to make sure that someone doesn't skate out on a technicality ("Oh, I didn't commit the crime; I paid HIM to!").  And for the record, being guilty of CONSPIRACY does not mean you are guilty of the underlying crime (in fact, "conspiracy" does not even require the underlying crime to have occurred).

This is not that.  Trump could have paid Stephanie Clifford $10 MILLION dollars to keep quiet, and there isn't one thing illegal about that.  Not campaign finance laws, not contract law, not any other law generally acknowledged. 

Who knows? An aggressive prosecutor may want to make the case that Trump IS essentially a conspirator.  But - and I welcome dissent here, because this is not my speciality - he's not likely liable as an accomplice.  The best example is in the sale of illegal drugs; if the statute that covers the illegal sale of, say, cocaine doesn't provide any punishment for the buyer, only the seller, then if the seller is arrested, they can't "back door" the buyer as an "accomplice".  It's likely the same thing here. 

EDIT:  What Podaar said.

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3397
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3819 on: December 13, 2018, 11:50:58 AM »
But Trump was the person didn’t pay, the Trump corporation did, then lied on financial statements about it.  That is illegal
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6747
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3820 on: December 13, 2018, 08:55:29 PM »
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/13/donald-trump-inauguration-spending-under-investigation-reports/2306247002/

Quote
The investigation is ...examining whether donors gave money in return for access to Donald Trump and his administration,

Now wait a second... people PAYING politicians, with the expectation they would have access to them? Certainly this doesn't happen.

Quote
The Journal, citing unnamed officials, reports the probe is in its early stages but aims to determine whether some of the donors to Trump's $107 million inauguration fund attempted to gain influence within the administration on policy decisions, something that could violate federal corruption laws.

And it's against the law? Isn't this basically how politics has operated since forever?

I may come across as a raging Republican in saying this, which I am not, (shut up, Adami!) but does the hatred Democrats have for Trump have no bounds? I get it, he shouldn't have even run, let alone won and beat out the self-appointed heir to the throne. He isn't part of your clique, he is surly, he isn't cultured and civilized like you all are. But damn the lengths you are going to in trying to find anything to discredit him is getting ridiculous.
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21141
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3821 on: December 13, 2018, 10:28:46 PM »
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/13/donald-trump-inauguration-spending-under-investigation-reports/2306247002/

Quote
The investigation is ...examining whether donors gave money in return for access to Donald Trump and his administration,

Now wait a second... people PAYING politicians, with the expectation they would have access to them? Certainly this doesn't happen.

Quote
The Journal, citing unnamed officials, reports the probe is in its early stages but aims to determine whether some of the donors to Trump's $107 million inauguration fund attempted to gain influence within the administration on policy decisions, something that could violate federal corruption laws.

And it's against the law? Isn't this basically how politics has operated since forever?

I may come across as a raging Republican in saying this, which I am not, (shut up, Adami!) but does the hatred Democrats have for Trump have no bounds? I get it, he shouldn't have even run, let alone won and beat out the self-appointed heir to the throne. He isn't part of your clique, he is surly, he isn't cultured and civilized like you all are. But damn the lengths you are going to in trying to find anything to discredit him is getting ridiculous.

Quote from: Major Riceman
You only made one mistake, huh?
You let someone see you do it.

Of course this happens all the time, but you're not supposed to get caught. Hell, if you know what you're doing it's pretty much impossible to get caught. But if you do, people are going to make a big stink about it. And your greater point goes both ways. You suggest that the democrats know no bounds by going after him for this, but what does it say of the republicans who bitch because they are going after him for it?

In any case, I don't think you can't possibly believe that A: we should just let it slide, and B: the republicans wouldn't be raising hell if it were a democrat. Personally, I'd be in favor of crucifying every damn member of congress that takes money for access, despite the fact particularly since it would take out 2/3 of those sorry bastards from both aisles.

Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline eric42434224

  • Posts: 3397
  • Gender: Male
  • Wilson
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3822 on: December 14, 2018, 04:46:59 AM »
Pay for play is not all they are looking at, especially as quid pro quo is very hard to prove in situations like this.
They are looking at the fact that the inauguration raised double what Obama did, yet looks like there was less or equal amounts of parties/services/etc to spend that money on.  Where did it all go?  The committee says they passed an audit "squeeky clean", yet they wont show it, nor give any info on it for over a year.  They are also looking at foreign money coming in through straw men.  El Barto is right.....everybody rolls stops signs....just don't get caught, and don't bitch and cry when you do.
Oh shit, you're right!

rumborak

Rumborak to me 10/29

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14502
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3823 on: December 14, 2018, 07:27:28 AM »
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/13/donald-trump-inauguration-spending-under-investigation-reports/2306247002/

Quote
The investigation is ...examining whether donors gave money in return for access to Donald Trump and his administration,

Now wait a second... people PAYING politicians, with the expectation they would have access to them? Certainly this doesn't happen.

Quote
The Journal, citing unnamed officials, reports the probe is in its early stages but aims to determine whether some of the donors to Trump's $107 million inauguration fund attempted to gain influence within the administration on policy decisions, something that could violate federal corruption laws.

And it's against the law? Isn't this basically how politics has operated since forever?

I may come across as a raging Republican in saying this, which I am not, (shut up, Adami!) but does the hatred Democrats have for Trump have no bounds? I get it, he shouldn't have even run, let alone won and beat out the self-appointed heir to the throne. He isn't part of your clique, he is surly, he isn't cultured and civilized like you all are. But damn the lengths you are going to in trying to find anything to discredit him is getting ridiculous.

Quote from: Major Riceman
You only made one mistake, huh?
You let someone see you do it.

Of course this happens all the time, but you're not supposed to get caught. Hell, if you know what you're doing it's pretty much impossible to get caught. But if you do, people are going to make a big stink about it. And your greater point goes both ways. You suggest that the democrats know no bounds by going after him for this, but what does it say of the republicans who bitch because they are going after him for it?

In any case, I don't think you can't possibly believe that A: we should just let it slide, and B: the republicans wouldn't be raising hell if it were a democrat. Personally, I'd be in favor of crucifying every damn member of congress that takes money for access, despite the fact particularly since it would take out 2/3 of those sorry bastards from both aisles.

I don't disagree with that at all, but at some point comes a reckoning.  You either drop the hammer ON the candidate, and punish the indiscretion, or you drop the hammer entirely and not bother.  Because this back and forth every couple years - depending on how popular a President is with the other side - is killing this country.    Yeah, both sides do it.   There is a school bus of celebrities that paid a ton of money to the Democrats and get to wear a t-shirt that says "I slept in the Lincoln Bedroom and all I got was this lousy t-shirt!", so yeah.   

But to watch the zeal with which some are characterizing what are low-level violations - not even "crimes" in the Criminal Code sense of the word - as impeachable offenses is very disheartening.   Obama paid a campaign finance violation and it was (rightfully) a slap on the wrist.   I spend a decent amount of time each week on places like Quora, not arguing opinion or point of view, but simply setting plain basic facts straight (the "Trump filed bankruptcy four times" is a common one; the "Trump should be in jail because Cohen admitted to a crime" is another).   

I really don't care what happens to Trump, but a little consistency, a little "long view" would be a refreshing change and a necessary step forward for our country.  Because we're headed to another four/eight years of this nonsense even after Trump, and it's only going to get worse given our tendency to "escalate". 

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6747
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3824 on: December 14, 2018, 11:43:44 AM »
That's the problem. For people on both sides it isn't "Hey, a crime might have been committed here, in the interest of the law we should investigate." It's "F8ck this a**hole, let's go after him/her with everything we've got. It will mess them up and make us feel good about ourselves in the process."
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline El Barto

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 21141
  • Bad Craziness
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3825 on: December 14, 2018, 12:09:56 PM »
That's the problem. For people on both sides it isn't "Hey, a crime might have been committed here, in the interest of the law we should investigate." It's "F8ck this a**hole, let's go after him/her with everything we've got. It will mess them up and make us feel good about ourselves in the process."
And the necessary flipside of that is that for people on both sides the response to getting caught is "well. . . they did it too!" Which is worse? And what's the solution? Allow both sides to be corrupt?
Argument, the presentation of reasonable views, never makes headway against conviction, and conviction takes no part in argument because it knows.
E.F. Benson

Offline Cool Chris

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 6747
  • Gender: Male
  • Rest in Peace
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3826 on: December 14, 2018, 12:12:23 PM »
Obviously that has been working for them for decades, why would they want to change now?
"Nostalgia is just the ability to forget the things that sucked" - Nelson DeMille, 'Up Country'

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14502
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3827 on: December 14, 2018, 02:45:37 PM »
That's the problem. For people on both sides it isn't "Hey, a crime might have been committed here, in the interest of the law we should investigate." It's "F8ck this a**hole, let's go after him/her with everything we've got. It will mess them up and make us feel good about ourselves in the process."
And the necessary flipside of that is that for people on both sides the response to getting caught is "well. . . they did it too!" Which is worse? And what's the solution? Allow both sides to be corrupt?

Honestly? I think at this point offer up TWO sacred cows.    I don't think it would literally happen this way, but someone has to be better, someone has to be more adult, someone has to take the long view and go after a sacrificial lamb on BOTH sides.

I thought it might be Mueller.   I think the best outcome - long term - is for the Mueller report to come out and go "You know what, Manafort, Cohen, Wasserman-Schulz and Podesta are all to be indicted under Chapter A, Verse B, and here's why.  In the light of that, we are bringing conspiracy charges against Candidate Trump for x, y, z, in relation to the Moscow Project and certain transgressions related to the campaign, as well as providing false information under oath in the written interrogatories, and Candidate Clinton for d, e, f, in relation to Fusion GPS, the Steele dossier, as well as providing false information to the FBI in relation to the security investigation surrounding the use of private servers."

It's the political equivalent of off-setting penalties, or concurrent minors in hockey.   Again, a pipe dream, but break the scar tissue of the partisan investigation once and for all.  It would be UNPRECEDENTED. 

Offline portnoy311

  • Posts: 937
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3828 on: December 15, 2018, 02:10:06 PM »
The Special Counsel arbitrarily going after political opponents of the President (who have already been investigated) as an appeal to some contrived 'balance' (between parties) would be the pinnacle of partisanship.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2018, 07:03:33 PM by portnoy311 »

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 14502
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3829 on: December 17, 2018, 10:12:14 PM »
The Special Counsel arbitrarily going after political opponents of the President (who have already been investigated) as an appeal to some contrived 'balance' (between parties) would be the pinnacle of partisanship.

It would be.  Good thing that's not what I called for.  :)

Offline portnoy311

  • Posts: 937
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3830 on: Today at 07:50:14 AM »
A "sacrificial lamb" who is being "offered up" (after already being investigated) by a special counsel investigating the POTUS would be exactly that.

Offline XJDenton

  • What a shame
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4623
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3831 on: Today at 10:57:04 AM »
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-trump-foundation/trump-charity-to-dissolve-under-agreement-with-n-y-attorney-general-idUSKBN1OH1TH

Quote
Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump’s namesake charitable foundation has agreed to dissolve under court supervision following a lawsuit by New York’s attorney general claiming Trump misused the foundation to advance his 2016 presidential campaign and his businesses, the attorney general said on Tuesday.

New York Attorney General Barbara Underwood, a Democrat, said the Donald J. Trump Foundation’s assets will be distributed to charities vetted by her office. The deal is subject to approval by a New York state judge.

The White House and a lawyer for the foundation could not immediately be reached for comment. Trump, a Republican, has previously said on Twitter that Underwood’s lawsuit was a concoction by “sleazy New York Democrats.”

The ruling came less than a month after Justice Saliann Scarpulla of the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan rejected Trump’s motion to dismiss Underwood’s lawsuit.

The motion had argued that the U.S. Constitution immunized Trump from Underwood’s claims alleging breach of fiduciary duty, improper self-dealing, and misuse of assets belonging to the Foundation.

Underwood sued Trump and his adult children Donald Jr., Eric and Ivanka on June 14, after a 21-month probe that she said uncovered “extensive unlawful political coordination” between the foundation and Trump’s campaign. The lawsuit remains pending.

Offline DragonAttack

  • Posts: 1481
Re: Trump's Presidency thread. v 100 days and counting
« Reply #3832 on: Today at 01:46:38 PM »
The continuing saga of DT going as far back as the USFL vs. the NFL.......I don't give a crap about X,Y or Z....I want it 'my way' and I'll prove you all wrong.  Don't give a crap if I 'win' and all it amounts to is three bucks and thousands of people become unemployed.  But none of it is 'my' fault.  Everyone is against me.

This narcissistic bipolar a-hole has been consistent for 35 years.   
'Discretionary posting is the better part of valor.'  Falstaff