A story about a pathetic man's downfall [34 Felony Convictions]

[Neonmoon 38127]

16 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

No one verifies shit like this when the applications are submitted?

 

8 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Yeah, learn me on this. For banking, loans, etc can businesses just flat out lie about real estate valuations without any check?  I thought that was all public database type stuff / appraisal based etc.  Could he not just "find" someone who agreed with him otherwise? Like what is the basis of he grossly over valued it if it is subjective??

It is verified for conventionally lending (regular joe Fannie/Freddie/Jumbo loans). But this isn’t conventional lending. This is Beaucoup Richie Rich lending. There are no rules (technically there are, fraud is fraud, but as you can see, proving it requires big money to fight back) Banks can do whatever the fuck they want. Wheels are greased. Reports are made to work. Etc. 
 

Édit: Also, technically all appraisals are subjective. They are one man’s opinion of value. (But they follow a set of rules). That’s why many big Jumbo loans require multiple appraisals so you can’t use one paid off guy to get easy money

Edited September 21, 2022 by Neonmoon

[Brisketexan 104624]

He's going to skate.  On all of it.

Why?  How?  I truly have no idea.  I've quit trying to understand.  Some things defy all logical explanation or understanding.  I am simply well aware that it is an ironclad, inviolable law of nature: Donald Trump is bulletproof.  Somehow, some way, for some reason (probably because humanity needs to be punished for something), that's the way it is.

There's no point in arguing "but not really, see the facts of this particular case, and this one.  And see the law.  There's no getting out of that!"  Yes there is.  How, I don't know...but there is.

He was 100% correct when he said he could shoot a man in the face and his supporters would stand by him.  He should have gone further, and said the remainder of the truth: he could do that without facing ANY consequences.  It's insane.  It's maddening.  It's the worst timeline imaginable.  But it's true.  

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

He's going to skate.  On all of it.

Why?  How?  I truly have no idea.  I've quit trying to understand.  Some things defy all logical explanation or understanding.  I am simply well aware that it is an ironclad, inviolable law of nature: Donald Trump is bulletproof.  Somehow, some way, for some reason (probably because humanity needs to be punished for something), that's the way it is.

There's no point in arguing "but not really, see the facts of this particular case, and this one.  And see the law.  There's no getting out of that!"  Yes there is.  How, I don't know...but there is.

He was 100% correct when he said he could shoot a man in the face and his supporters would stand by him.  He should have gone further, and said the remainder of the truth: he could do that without facing ANY consequences.  It's insane.  It's maddening.  It's the worst timeline imaginable.  But it's true.  

You could’ve just used the meme about ol Donny wriggling out of this jam - or smashed your hand with a hammer

[C-Man 27055]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

This right here.  And she has referred a lot of stuff to the IRS and SDNY.  Criminal charges will come out of those.  Trump has fucked around.  The finding out stage is commencing.

 

[Satchel 6908]

Bill Cosby thought he had gotten away with years of raping women. He considered himself rich, entitled and untouchable. Then, a comedian told a joke…

[The Dog 43805]

6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

He's going to skate.  On all of it.

Why?  How?  I truly have no idea.  I've quit trying to understand.  Some things defy all logical explanation or understanding.  I am simply well aware that it is an ironclad, inviolable law of nature: Donald Trump is bulletproof.  Somehow, some way, for some reason (probably because humanity needs to be punished for something), that's the way it is.

There's no point in arguing "but not really, see the facts of this particular case, and this one.  And see the law.  There's no getting out of that!"  Yes there is.  How, I don't know...but there is.

He was 100% correct when he said he could shoot a man in the face and his supporters would stand by him.  He should have gone further, and said the remainder of the truth: he could do that without facing ANY consequences.  It's insane.  It's maddening.  It's the worst timeline imaginable.  But it's true.  

aren't you a defense lawyer?

How about telling us how you'd defend him against this rap sheet. 

it'd be a cool pivot IMHO.

[safe sex 11682]

2 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Bill Cosby thought he had gotten away with years of raping women. He considered himself rich, entitled and untouchable. Then, a comedian told a joke…

I mean, his conviction was vacated and he's out of jail, but I guess he was punished a little bit for his horrific rapes 

[chainsaw 9838]

12 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

 

It is verified for conventionally lending (regular joe Fannie/Freddie/Jumbo loans). But this isn’t conventional lending. This is Beaucoup Richie Rich lending. There are no rules (technically there are, fraud is fraud, but as you can see, proving it requires big money to fight back) Banks can do whatever the fuck they want. Wheels are greased. Reports are made to work. Etc. 
 

Édit: Also, technically all appraisals are subjective. They are one man’s opinion of value. (But they follow a set of rules). That’s why many big Jumbo loans require multiple appraisals so you can’t use one paid off guy to get easy money

That's what I gathered from Inventing Anna. At a certain level there are banks that will give you $250k as an appetizer before doing any real diligence.

[YGIFS 19449]

4 minutes ago, The Dog said:

aren't you a defense lawyer?

How about telling us how you'd defend him against this rap sheet. 

it'd be a cool pivot IMHO.

That's one of his legal skill sets.  I know him and his reputation in real life.  And I used to think he'd one of my first calls if I ever got into some serious shit. 

But now I know, at my arraignment, he'd just show up half in the bag and shout, "My client claims the Trump Defense."  And the judge would ask, "Counselor, what in the hell is the Trump Defense?"  To which Brisket would shout louder, "That's the fuck I wanna know!  I rest my case.  Deomnibus, epluribus, get on the fucking bus!  

[HornPhD 1364]

25 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

No one verifies shit like this when the applications are submitted?

I’m reminded of this scene in The Big Short

https://youtu.be/H-XINT-hL5I

 

[TwiceHorn 31282]

1 hour ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Lawsuit?  How about fucking charging them as criminals?

Fucking weak shit.

I'm not sure Letitia James has criminal jurisdiction, many AGs do not.  It appears that the Manhattan DA has chickened out, but maybe that will change.

[Satchel 6908]

2 minutes ago, trauma babe said:

I mean, his conviction was vacated and he's out of jail, but I guess he was punished a little bit for his horrific rapes 

His reputation was ruined. (Baylor even took back his honorary doctorate!!!!) He went to prison. In his old age he was revealed before the world to be a criminal sexual predator and sociopath. I would call this getting away at all.

[Aqua Buddha 14519]

 

[TwiceHorn 31282]

23 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

 

It is verified for conventionally lending (regular joe Fannie/Freddie/Jumbo loans). But this isn’t conventional lending. This is Beaucoup Richie Rich lending. There are no rules (technically there are, fraud is fraud, but as you can see, proving it requires big money to fight back) Banks can do whatever the fuck they want. Wheels are greased. Reports are made to work. Etc. 
 

Édit: Also, technically all appraisals are subjective. They are one man’s opinion of value. (But they follow a set of rules). That’s why many big Jumbo loans require multiple appraisals so you can’t use one paid off guy to get easy money

The good news is, at least for federal bank/mortgage fraud, that the lender "knew otherwise" and that the loan was paid off (or refinanced paying off that loan) is not a defense to the crime.  The lie in the application is sufficient in most or every case.

[YGIFS 19449]

2 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

 

I could see Melania taking one for the team and sticking with Donald until Barron is 18 or 6'10", whichever comes first.  Bad jokes aside, while she is a horribly worthless cunt of a whore...she does seem protective and loving of Barron...gotta giver her that.  She stood by Donald through much worse than a tax fraud investigation that'll take years.  If she has a half-smart Slovenian divorce attorney (those guys are good, right?)...she has a decent buyout clause she can trigger at the first sign of serious financial trouble.  She just gets some $10mm payout and go without cause/fault.  Then again, she was sucking Balkan dick for cash when he married her so $37,000 and a Buick probably sounded good at the time.  

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

 

[Beau Vine 54003]

54 minutes ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

also

 

[Gil Bang 25898]

36 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

Yeah, learn me on this. For banking, loans, etc can businesses just flat out lie about real estate valuations without any check?  I thought that was all public database type stuff / appraisal based etc.  Could he not just "find" someone who agreed with him otherwise? Like what is the basis of he grossly over valued it if it is subjective??

My former employer stole $4 million dollars from a bank in PA, and got away with it.  He took an advance for medical equipment that didn't exist.  They sued him, he filed BK, and that was pretty much that.   And I'm the motherfucker that tipped off the bank that the equipment didn't exist. 

This snitch got no stitches.  And no satisfaction. 

[Bozo_Casanova 26283]

I am literally in love with Mallory McMorrow

 

[C-Man 27055]

13 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

My former employer stole $4 million dollars from a bank in PA, and got away with it.  He took an advance for medical equipment that didn't exist.  They sued him, he filed BK, and that was pretty much that.   And I'm the motherfucker that tipped off the bank that the equipment didn't exist. 

This snitch got no stitches.  And no satisfaction. 

[chainsaw 9838]

13 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

My former employer stole $4 million dollars from a bank in PA, and got away with it.  He took an advance for medical equipment that didn't exist.  They sued him, he filed BK, and that was pretty much that.   And I'm the motherfucker that tipped off the bank that the equipment didn't exist. 

This snitch got no stitches.  And no satisfaction. 

Did they ever find out it was you?

 

[Gil Bang 25898]

Just now, chainsaw said:

Did they ever find out it was you?

 

I called the fucker and told him. 

[henrygandorf 29177]

ok, busy morning and pac time and all that, if you miss a little, you miss a lot.

but circling back to @TwiceHorn and the explanations and the bricks of coke and whatnot, here is my issue.  not sure if i speak for a lot of people, but this is where i am on it.

trump was involved in a diamond heist from the diamond store.  knowing he was kind of a big shot in the world of jewelry with a lot of connections, the diamond police (dp) was like, hey, we know you have a bunch of diamonds from the diamond store, we're willing to keep this quiet, just please return them, no need to make this a big deal.  for months he told them to get fucked, but then eventually when compelled, he returned some diamonds.

the dp was like, hey thanks, but we are pretty sure you still have more, we keep track of the diamonds pretty closely, and you need to cooperate.  he told them to get fucked again.  finally, the dp was like fuck all that, and went in, and went to his "secure" diamond storage room, and basically took everything not nailed down. 

they took his tools, his sacks with dollar signs on them, his rock hammer, a bottle of old harpers, the signed picture with him and james avery, and a bunch of diamonds marked "property of diamond store".  at this point they weren't sure if they needed everything they took, but they damned well knew the diamonds from the diamond store were not his and should be returned.

now in the real world for us non-attorneys (read - movies and tv shows), our brains tell us ok - he had his chance to cooperate, he had stuff he shouldn't have, he should be indicted and then he will have his chance to prove his innocence and obviously, the photo of him and james avery along with the rock hammer, paperweights, and doorstops will be returned to him.  there will be discovery and analysis, and experts will be brought in to verify the "property of diamond store" etchings, check alibis and talk to witnesses about whether he had access to where the diamonds were being kept (very few people on earth have this type of access).

in my mind, in this scenario, this is what we know to be fact:

-he had possession of the diamonds

-the diamonds are not his

-he was asked several times to return them

-the dp found them in his diamond storage area

there are some gray areas that could possibly be argued by his attorneys, but they have not been.  instead, we're haggling over what to do with the rock hammer while the diamonds are sitting right there.  this is why we're concerned.  it's a shell game and we all feel like marks.

i guess i don't personally understand the process that's going on now.  i understand what's happening, i just don't understand the need for this step.  i get that he's an ex-president, so there are privileges that wouldn't apply to normal folk, but the rest of it seems like stuff that would get sorted out during a trial or at the very least, during a plea agreement.

i mean, the dp has a history of playing dirty when they need to.  maybe the diamonds are fake.  maybe the etchings are fake.  but those claims haven't even been made yet.

[Neonmoon 38127]

22 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The good news is, at least for federal bank/mortgage fraud, that the lender "knew otherwise" and that the loan was paid off (or refinanced paying off that loan) is not a defense to the crime.  The lie in the application is sufficient in most or every case.

 Not to mention AG said Deutsche Bank was cooperating in the investigation. Probably why the person in charge of Trumps accounts “resigned” last year. And there’s a reason why Deutsche Bank was the only bank that would lend Trump money 

[Bama Chick 28596]

Bill Cosby thought he had gotten away with years of raping women. He considered himself rich, entitled and untouchable. Then, a comedian told a joke…

AND THEN THE JUSTICE SYSTEM SET HIM FREE AND HE’S STILL RICH.

HE DID GET AWAY WITH IT.

[Neonmoon 38127]

3 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, busy morning and pac time and all that, if you miss a little, you miss a lot.

but circling back to @TwiceHorn and the explanations and the bricks of coke and whatnot, here is my issue.  not sure if i speak for a lot of people, but this is where i am on it.

trump was involved in a diamond heist from the diamond store.  knowing he was kind of a big shot in the world of jewelry with a lot of connections, the diamond police (dp) was like, hey, we know you have a bunch of diamonds from the diamond store, we're willing to keep this quiet, just please return them, no need to make this a big deal.  for months he told them to get fucked, but then eventually when compelled, he returned some diamonds.

the dp was like, hey thanks, but we are pretty sure you still have more, we keep track of the diamonds pretty closely, and you need to cooperate.  he told them to get fucked again.  finally, the dp was like fuck all that, and went in, and went to his "secure" diamond storage room, and basically took everything not nailed down. 

they took his tools, his sacks with dollar signs on them, his rock hammer, a bottle of old harpers, the signed picture with him and james avery, and a bunch of diamonds marked "property of diamond store".  at this point they weren't sure if they needed everything they took, but they damned well knew the diamonds from the diamond store were not his and should be returned.

now in the real world for us non-attorneys (read - movies and tv shows), our brains tell us ok - he had his chance to cooperate, he had stuff he shouldn't have, he should be indicted and then he will have his chance to prove his innocence and obviously, the photo of him and james avery along with the rock hammer, paperweights, and doorstops will be returned to him.  there will be discovery and analysis, and experts will be brought in to verify the "property of diamond store" etchings, check alibis and talk to witnesses about whether he had access to where the diamonds were being kept (very few people on earth have this type of access).

in my mind, in this scenario, this is what we know to be fact:

-he had possession of the diamonds

-the diamonds are not his

-he was asked several times to return them

-the dp found them in his diamond storage area

there are some gray areas that could possibly be argued by his attorneys, but they have not been.  instead, we're haggling over what to do with the rock hammer while the diamonds are sitting right there.  this is why we're concerned.  it's a shell game and we all feel like marks.

i guess i don't personally understand the process that's going on now.  i understand what's happening, i just don't understand the need for this step.  i get that he's an ex-president, so there are privileges that wouldn't apply to normal folk, but the rest of it seems like stuff that would get sorted out during a trial or at the very least, during a plea agreement.

i mean, the dp has a history of playing dirty when they need to.  maybe the diamonds are fake.  maybe the etchings are fake.  but those claims haven't even been made yet.

Using your analogy. It is way worse. Trump is arguing that the diamonds with the “diamond store” etchings could be covered by owner privilege, as there is no case law stating it can’t be, and therefore should be returned to him with his rock hammer and box of old Harpers, even though there is no evidence he claimed owner privilege, and still does not claim as much. Nor has he refuted they are diamond store etching diamonds. 

[SimonBolivar 10931]

1 hour ago, trauma babe said:

No one verifies shit like this when the applications are submitted?

Depends on the customer/loan/officer. As a loan officer, I can't tell you the amount of bullshit some of my fellow loan officers came up with when we required income verification for simple loans. They went ballistic.

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

Yeah - bullshit. His unwillingness to bring the case is why the two lead prosecutors on the case already resigned.  Maybe I’m not remembering right but wasn’t there also a grand jury empaneled that Bragg sent home?

[Pig Bellmont 8691]

Also notice how James said she made referrals to SDNY and the IRS? Manhattan DA’s office isn’t doing shit

[SydneyCarton 47884]

I believe a Civil case is also less onerous to "prove" than a criminal one, correct? 

[Js1 85110]

52 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

I called the fucker and told him. 

[Brisketexan 104624]

1 hour ago, The Dog said:

aren't you a defense lawyer?

How about telling us how you'd defend him against this rap sheet. 

it'd be a cool pivot IMHO.

I'd do exactly what his legal team has always done.   Bluff, delay, threaten, and bullshit.  The facts don't matter, and the law doesn't matter.  I don't understand how or why it works that way.  It just does.

It's like magnets.  Except, you know, we actually DO know how those work.  But as for Trump, I really can't explain or understand why the rule of law doesn't apply to him, like, at all.  I just know that somehow, for some reason, it doesn't.

[Tuco 5076]

1 hour ago, YGIFS said:

I could see Melania taking one for the team and sticking with Donald until Barron is 18 or 6'10", whichever comes first.  Bad jokes aside, while she is a horribly worthless cunt of a whore...she does seem protective and loving of Barron...gotta giver her that.  She stood by Donald through much worse than a tax fraud investigation that'll take years.  If she has a half-smart Slovenian divorce attorney (those guys are good, right?)...she has a decent buyout clause she can trigger at the first sign of serious financial trouble.  She just gets some $10mm payout and go without cause/fault.  Then again, she was sucking Balkan dick for cash when he married her so $37,000 and a Buick probably sounded good at the time.  

I don't know why she would bail now.  I would be very surprised if she still fucks him or that she abstains from fucking around.  Trump Org is not Donald Trump.  That can go belly up, and he will still in expensive homes.  And, when he is dead, she can hawk ugly shit on QVC anytime she is looking for cash.  Trump has something that no court can take away: millions of devoted idiots who will send him money.  

[TwiceHorn 31282]

1 hour ago, henrygandorf said:

ok, busy morning and pac time and all that, if you miss a little, you miss a lot.

but circling back to @TwiceHorn and the explanations and the bricks of coke and whatnot, here is my issue.  not sure if i speak for a lot of people, but this is where i am on it.

trump was involved in a diamond heist from the diamond store.  knowing he was kind of a big shot in the world of jewelry with a lot of connections, the diamond police (dp) was like, hey, we know you have a bunch of diamonds from the diamond store, we're willing to keep this quiet, just please return them, no need to make this a big deal.  for months he told them to get fucked, but then eventually when compelled, he returned some diamonds.

the dp was like, hey thanks, but we are pretty sure you still have more, we keep track of the diamonds pretty closely, and you need to cooperate.  he told them to get fucked again.  finally, the dp was like fuck all that, and went in, and went to his "secure" diamond storage room, and basically took everything not nailed down. 

they took his tools, his sacks with dollar signs on them, his rock hammer, a bottle of old harpers, the signed picture with him and james avery, and a bunch of diamonds marked "property of diamond store".  at this point they weren't sure if they needed everything they took, but they damned well knew the diamonds from the diamond store were not his and should be returned.

now in the real world for us non-attorneys (read - movies and tv shows), our brains tell us ok - he had his chance to cooperate, he had stuff he shouldn't have, he should be indicted and then he will have his chance to prove his innocence and obviously, the photo of him and james avery along with the rock hammer, paperweights, and doorstops will be returned to him.  there will be discovery and analysis, and experts will be brought in to verify the "property of diamond store" etchings, check alibis and talk to witnesses about whether he had access to where the diamonds were being kept (very few people on earth have this type of access).

in my mind, in this scenario, this is what we know to be fact:

-he had possession of the diamonds

-the diamonds are not his

-he was asked several times to return them

-the dp found them in his diamond storage area

there are some gray areas that could possibly be argued by his attorneys, but they have not been.  instead, we're haggling over what to do with the rock hammer while the diamonds are sitting right there.  this is why we're concerned.  it's a shell game and we all feel like marks.

i guess i don't personally understand the process that's going on now.  i understand what's happening, i just don't understand the need for this step.  i get that he's an ex-president, so there are privileges that wouldn't apply to normal folk, but the rest of it seems like stuff that would get sorted out during a trial or at the very least, during a plea agreement.

i mean, the dp has a history of playing dirty when they need to.  maybe the diamonds are fake.  maybe the etchings are fake.  but those claims haven't even been made yet.

The process is almost wholly unrelated to whether he committed a crime or not or the evidence of the crime.

While the documents are indeed the "fruits" or "instrumentalities" of the crime, the ability to compare them to inherently unexpressive and unprivileged items like kilos of cocaine and diamonds and stolen 100 dollar bills ends right there.

A separate determination, apart from any criminal investigation, is taking place as to whether these instrumentalities of crime MAY be subject to claims of privilege, and then, to evaluate the claims of privilege, using the context that they are in fact instrumentalities of the crime.

The only really decent analogy is if an attorney and client communicated by writing on some of those stolen 100 dollar bills.  The 100 dollar bills are still evidence of the crime, but the writing on them is privileged and the contents of that writing cannot be used to prosecute the crime.  You can sit there and scream about crime-fraud exception like an infant, or you can actually look at what the writing says and whether it is in fact attorney-client privileged, or love notes, or a conspiracy to do more crimes (which then in fact would be subject to the crime-fraud exception).

Edited September 21, 2022 by TwiceHorn

[Horndog 2218]

2 hours ago, The Dog said:

he's gonna get nailed for tax evasion.

just like capone.

The difference is that Capone didn't have the possibility of a pardon from the next GQP president.

[TwiceHorn 31282]

25 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

I believe a Civil case is also less onerous to "prove" than a criminal one, correct? 

Correct, "preponderance of the evidence" (more likely than not) vs. beyond a reasonable doubt..

[yoladu 4067]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

Bill Cosby thought he had gotten away with years of raping women. He considered himself rich, entitled and untouchable. Then, a comedian told a joke…

umm, he kinda did.

 

 

.

Edited September 21, 2022 by yoladu

[Biff Tannen 45495]

1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

I am literally in love with Mallory McMorrow

 

Deep cut from the early 2000s.  Love it.

[SydneyCarton 47884]

5 minutes ago, Horndog said:

The difference is that Capone didn't have the possibility of a pardon from the next GQP president.

He can't get a pardon for having his company dissolved. It's a State civil issue. Presidential pardons are only for federal crimes. 

[WhatTheBuck 28712]

2 hours ago, The Dog said:

 

Don’t tell me about the pain. Show me the baby. 

[WhatTheBuck 28712]

1 hour ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

Could post that daily. 

[C-Man 27055]

4 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

He can't get a pardon for having his company dissolved. It's a State civil issue. Presidential pardons are only for federal crimes. 

I tend to believe the theory that Trump is simply trying to delay until after the mid-terms and then he'll announce he's running in 2024. Why that is supposed to shield him from DOJ persecution is beyond me, though, and then he'll either win the nom or "throw it" in favor of supporting DeSantis in exchange for a pardon on the classified documents shit. That really makes the most sense. It would be fantastic, though, if the grand scheme went up in flames when Biden is re-elected in '24.

[SydneyCarton 47884]

4 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I tend to believe the theory that Trump is simply trying to delay until after the mid-terms and then he'll announce he's running in 2024. Why that is supposed to shield him from DOJ persecution is beyond me, though, and then he'll either win the nom or "throw it" in favor of supporting DeSantis in exchange for a pardon on the classified documents shit. That really makes the most sense. It would be fantastic, though, if the grand scheme went up in flames when Biden is re-elected in '24.

I think he believes he can run on and win with the "persecution" of him and his family. Whether that is true or not, who knows. I'm not sure his continued legal troubles gain him any new voters he doesn't already have. It can't play great with most Independents. 

[RomaVicta 29793]

2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

 

It's a hoax. I never claimed that. I said meters not feet. This is just a socialist, LGBTQ scam even though I've done more for the LGBQZs than anybody. Witch hunt. I said meters not feet. Big difference but the losers in the AGs office are too stupid to get it. Sad.

[Neonmoon 38127]

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The only really decent analogy is if an attorney and client communicated by writing on some of those stolen 100 dollar bills.  The 100 dollar bills are still evidence of the crime, but the writing on them is privileged and the contents of that writing cannot be used to prosecute the crime.  You can sit there and scream about crime-fraud exception like an infant, or you can actually look at what the writing says and whether it is in fact attorney-client privileged, or love notes, or a conspiracy to do more crimes (which then in fact would be subject to the crime-fraud exception

Let me get this straight. If I rob a bank, and I write correspondence to my attorney on all the money, and the government arrest me for stealing money.  The government can’t use the correspondence on the money to prosecute me. Fine. But can’t the government use the fact that I have possession as evidence of a crime? 

[henrygandorf 29177]

23 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

The only really decent analogy is if an attorney and client communicated by writing on some of those stolen 100 dollar bills.  The 100 dollar bills are still evidence of the crime, but the writing on them is privileged and the contents of that writing cannot be used to prosecute the crime.  You can sit there and scream about crime-fraud exception like an infant, or you can actually look at what the writing says and whether it is in fact attorney-client privileged, or love notes, or a conspiracy to do more crimes (which then in fact would be subject to the crime-fraud exception).

while i understand what you're saying, doesn't the stolen hundo remain a stolen hundo, whether there's privileged writing on it or not?  you don't need to use the contents of the notes to understand whether the bill itself was stolen/never belonged to the perp in the first place.

[F250 28689]

1 hour ago, Gil Bang said:

My former employer stole $4 million dollars from a bank in PA, and got away with it.  He took an advance for medical equipment that didn't exist.  They sued him, he filed BK, and that was pretty much that.   And I'm the motherfucker that tipped off the bank that the equipment didn't exist. 

This snitch got no stitches.  And no satisfaction. 

lol I worked somewhere where someone in senior management got busted embezzling a couple million because he got caught trying to expense a brothel charge while in Amsterdam. The whore monger quit and moved out of state and never faced any legal consequences.

[Biff Tannen 45495]

18 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I tend to believe the theory that Trump is simply trying to delay until after the mid-terms and then he'll announce he's running in 2024. Why that is supposed to shield him from DOJ persecution is beyond me, though, and then he'll either win the nom or "throw it" in favor of supporting DeSantis in exchange for a pardon on the classified documents shit. That really makes the most sense. It would be fantastic, though, if the grand scheme went up in flames when Biden is re-elected in '24.

If the Rs take the House in November, they will not certify the votes in 2024 and Biden won't win.  That is the plan.  

[Satchel 6908]

49 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I'd do exactly what his legal team has always done.   Bluff, delay, threaten, and bullshit.  The facts don't matter, and the law doesn't matter.  I don't understand how or why it works that way.  It just does.

It's like magnets.  Except, you know, we actually DO know how those work.  But as for Trump, I really can't explain or understand why the rule of law doesn't apply to him, like, at all.  I just know that somehow, for some reason, it doesn't.

Because laws are crafted in such a way that the rich and powerful benefit from them. Do you even CRT, man???

[Aqua Buddha 14519]