Jump to content
A Merry Christmas from Surly Horns to You. ×

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

Francisco 2.0

By Francisco 2.0
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

On this one, the facts seem pretty clean, there's a paper trail, establishing Trump's knowledge of the details may be hard.

But the legal theory that this is an "in kind" campaign contribution has never really been tested in a criminal context.  When Edwards was acquitted, it foreclosed any appeal to test it out.

And don't give me the Michael Cohen pled to it.  That just means it wasn't proven, and, again, not legally tested.  He also pled to five counts of tax evasion and one count of bank fraud so that three years was a substantial discount on a potential sentence.  That information against Cohen could have included general mopery for all it matters.

Even if he's convicted on it, and I think NYC is just the place to do that, I am greatly fearful that it might be overturned on appeal.

I'd hate to start out his criminal odyssey with an acquittal.

Whoop there it is.

Prosecutors tried to prove that Edwards conspired with his close aide, Andrew Young, and two wealthy donors—the Texas lawyer Fred Baron and Mellon, the Virginia heiress and Kennedy clan intimate—to conceal the affair with Hunter and the child he fathered with her. But they were hampered by a lack of witnesses who could say that Edwards knowingly violated campaign finance laws.

Young—the prosecution’s star witness—was the one person who most definitively stated that Edwards was aware of the money flowing to the coverup and about its possible illegality. But Young’s credibility was undercut by the financial motivations emphasized by Edwards’s defense team.

https://www.textise.net/showText.aspx?strURL=https%3A//www.washingtonpost.com/politics/john-edwards-acquitted-on-one-count-as-jury-deadlocks-on-five-others-and-judge-declares-mistrial/2012/05/31/gJQAffi34U_story.html#main-content

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 41.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • tx 3 putt

    1687

  • TwiceHorn

    1467

  • WhatTheBuck

    1322

  • atomheartbevo

    1315

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Beau Vine
Beau Vine

To be fair, President Trump’s four years in office weren’t so bad, except when when he incited an insurrection against the government, mismanaged a pandemic that killed nearly half a million Americans

Bama Chick
Bama Chick

Y’all about to get a great visual representation of Cullman, Alabama. Only good things to come out of Cullman are the Britt brothers (Roll Tide!) and orange rolls from All Steak restaurant. That pla

ChiTownDoc
ChiTownDoc

You seem really pissed off for a nontrumper.  Just laugh at the trumpers, bro.  They’re really gullible dumbfucks who worship this orange blob…you know, people completely unlike yourself.  

Posted Images

JohnnyRage

JohnnyRage 1617

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

On this one, the facts seem pretty clean, there's a paper trail, establishing Trump's knowledge of the details may be hard.

 

This one is going first because there is a Statue Of Limitations in NY that is running out of punts.

 

MV5BNjM3ZjZiNjgtODE0Yi00NDUxLWE4MDctMDEz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by JohnnyRage
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19458

Posted
Posted

^
Wasn't that a pretend movie on "Seinfeld".........Kramer kept calling it "Statue" and Jerry corrected him with "Statute".  One old man's tragic journey from Maralago to Manhattan?  Something like that.  Bombshell, Bombshell..........

Plus, I think that little statue is made from macaroni

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
YGIFS

YGIFS 19458

Posted
Posted

^

Yeah, good point that never seems to occur to MAGA nation.  Your dear leader didn't catch on after two years that people record and release his phone calls not out of admiration or nostalgia.  It was to cover their own ass down the road because they knew the entirety of the call was woefully illegal.  

The few times I've been deposed on video, I didn't walk away thinking "Wow, they must have taped it because I'm so handsome."  

I mean, the guy is dumb but it's impossible he's this dumb.

Back to day partying.  Do they have FoxNews on at Yellow Rose?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, JohnnyRage said:

This one is going first because there is a Statue Of Limitations in NY that is running out of punts.

 

MV5BNjM3ZjZiNjgtODE0Yi00NDUxLWE4MDctMDEz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That has been noted, but, unlike federal statutes of limitation, NY's "tolls" (stops running) when the defendant is outside of the state. 

Still, they can't screw around and risk it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 30644

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I gotta say I'm a bit worried about this one.  As has been alluded to, John Edwards beat a similar rap in 2011 that also included false statements to investigators.

This one adds a layer to it with the NY falsifying busines records thing, but they still have to prove the campaign finance violation to make it a felony.

It's going to suck if he manages to be acquitted, and as far as I can tell this is the weakest of the cases under consideration by the authorities, at least in terms of legal soundness.

Are we sure we know the charges he faces in his indictment? Might there be elements of which the public is unaware?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Are we sure we know the charges he faces in his indictment? Might there be elements of which the public is unaware?

Possible yes. Pretty credible reporting on the nature of the charges under consideration and we know of quite a few of the witnesses. 

It does seem like Bragg is bending over backwards to provide a "fair" grand jury.  Apparently giving the defendant the opportunity to testify is built in to NY law or custom, but they're going beyond that fairly substantially with Costello etc. 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mdmost

mdmost 44111

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Fox News is reporting that someone else will testify to the GJ tomorrow, so Trump won't be arrested until next week at the earliest.

Oh God. Another week of his whining about being arrested...eventually. Hopefully he won't do something dumb like say a lot of inflammatory things on Truth Social. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Your Mom

Your Mom 4983

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

Fox News is reporting that someone else will testify to the GJ tomorrow, so Trump won't be arrested until next week at the earliest.

The Daily podcast said the same thing yesterday. The guy they interviewed seemed surprised everyone took a tweet by Donald seriously and ran with it when there is clearly another witness on the list. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
'stache

'stache 22148

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Beau Vine said:

Fox News is reporting that someone else will testify to the GJ tomorrow, so Trump won't be arrested until next week at the earliest.

 

37 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Oh shit.  The barricades are for the witness going in to testify today and tomorrow.  The police presence is to protect them now, not Trump.  Interesting turn.  

 

16 minutes ago, Pescado_Rojo said:

So who would require that kind of security? Melania? Pence? 

Literally anybody who is testifying? If its a grand jury proceedings only prosecution witnesses testify, so anyone entering the courthouse for the proceeding will be to testify against the fat orange fuck and a target of every q and gravy seal fuckstick who shows up. Trump almost certainly doesn't know anything about how the system works but someone probably told him it was a grand jury and the common thought that grand juries can indict a ham sandwich. I've heard that phrase more with respect to federal courts since they are more selective in the cases they pursue but probably applies here too since the evidence of his wrongs have been pretty overwhelming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hermanator

Hermanator 7706

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

Are we sure we know the charges he faces in his indictment? Might there be elements of which the public is unaware?

I can't imagine they'd go through all this trouble for low level charges or on shaky evidence. It would just be a disaster if they do and they should know that. But who knows with people these days

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ten Bears

Ten Bears 2500

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

In the meantime, enjoy this repost from a page or two ago, of Junior melting down, and speculate about what he's on.

 

 

 

I read that last word as witchcuntery and thought it was pretty funny.  I think I will add witchcuntery to my repertoire but in Nandor's voice. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, 'stache said:

 

 

Literally anybody who is testifying? If its a grand jury proceedings only prosecution witnesses testify, so anyone entering the courthouse for the proceeding will be to testify against the fat orange fuck and a target of every q and gravy seal fuckstick who shows up. Trump almost certainly doesn't know anything about how the system works but someone probably told him it was a grand jury and the common thought that grand juries can indict a ham sandwich. I've heard that phrase more with respect to federal courts since they are more selective in the cases they pursue but probably applies here too since the evidence of his wrongs have been pretty overwhelming.

Trump was informed by his counsel that he could testify if he wanted to. That's the "leak."

 

Obviously, they declined, but apparently used the opportunity to bring their own witnesses such as Costello before the GJ. 

 

As stated by several, just another example of Trump flooding the channel with bullshit that winds up controlling the narrative, at least among the magat morons. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Hermanator said:

I can't imagine they'd go through all this trouble for low level charges or on shaky evidence. It would just be a disaster if they do and they should know that. But who knows with people these days

My fear is that Bragg is being an opportunist. 

He did apparently refuse to bring the James case as a criminal action, so that may be a data point against that.  And, to some extent, limitations is running, forcing his hand. 

I have confidence that Garland will bring as close to a winner as possible. I don't think we know much about Bragg really. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter 11194

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

I gotta say I'm a bit worried about this one.  As has been alluded to, John Edwards beat a similar rap in 2011 that also included false statements to investigators.

This one adds a layer to it with the NY falsifying busines records thing, but they still have to prove the campaign finance violation to make it a felony.

It's going to suck if he manages to be acquitted, and as far as I can tell this is the weakest of the cases under consideration by the authorities, at least in terms of legal soundness.

 

goddamn man, can you at least give us this one, for just a few hours?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted
Just now, High Plains Drifter said:

 

goddamn man, can you at least give us this one, for just a few hours?

 

Nah in addition to all of trump's lies, we've had a shit ton of breathless bad reporting about what comes next for him. 

I'm just saving you a massive case of blue balls. 

And hey I could be wrong and would be happy to be. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28941

Posted
Posted
40 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

What kind of idiots have meetings about an arrest and arrange extra police for today and then don’t do it. Clowns 

I think you have to take precautions about any kind of attack just based on Trump fake tweeting about one. Plus putting the word out that you’re deploying personnel and setting up barricades will probably discourage protesters from attempting an attack whenever an arrest is eventually made. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MonkeyDoughnut

MonkeyDoughnut 10812

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I think you have to take precautions about any kind of attack just based on Trump fake tweeting about one. Plus putting the word out that you’re deploying personnel and setting up barricades will probably discourage protesters from attempting an attack whenever an arrest is eventually made. 

I would think that would just bring them out in larger numbers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28941

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

My fear is that Bragg is being an opportunist. 

He did apparently refuse to bring the James case as a criminal action, so that may be a data point against that.  And, to some extent, limitations is running, forcing his hand. 

I have confidence that Garland will bring as close to a winner as possible. I don't think we know much about Bragg really. 

I’d like to know why Trump wasn’t arrested back in late January of 2021 for paying off Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. We knew he was Individual 1. We’ve seen the checks. What took them so long?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32110

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I’d like to know why Trump wasn’t arrested back in late January of 2021 for paying off Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. We knew he was Individual 1. We’ve seen the checks. What took them so long?

As I have stated, he was individual 1 on a piece of paper representing some 8 or 9 discrete criminal charges, all of which carried the same or a much greater penalty than the campaign finance violation. 

Most importantly, though, the allegations of that piece of paper were never proven, against Cohen or anyone else. He pled guilty. 

Limitations on that expired in October 2021 giving DOJ a pretty short window to prosecute something far from proven. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28941

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

As I have stated, he was individual 1 on a piece of paper representing some 8 or 9 discrete criminal charges, all of which carried the same or a much greater penalty than the campaign finance violation. 

Most importantly, though, the allegations of that piece of paper were never proven, against Cohen or anyone else. He pled guilty. 

Limitations on that expired in October 2021 giving DOJ a pretty short window to prosecute something far from proven. 

Everything that is true today that is leading them to bring charges now was true back then. No new shit has come to light. We all know what happened. I was asking the same question back then. What are they doing now that they couldn’t have done two years ago?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...