Preparing For Trump's Acquittal

El OchoCinco said:
If the entirety of the case is the payment of money to teh lawyer who paid it to stormy to keep quiet, this thing is a case built on a pile of shit.... I would have never pursued this case unless there was more direct evidence of fraud or higher level of a crime. Paying stormy was not the crime, trump reimbursing stormy is what is being claimed is a crime because the DA is claiming it was a payment to further the cause of winning an election and in violation of federal election laws...

sorry.....it is a shit case because it is trying to stretch a story to fit the facts to meet the legal standard....those almost always end up as being too weak to prosecute.
More...

Also, even if you decided to prosecute it you might want to - and maybe I am being too pernickety here- check the statute of limitations. And in addition if you are going to indict the defendant, might be nice to identify the crime so as to let the defendant know what he is being charged with. Just sayin. That pesky little Constitution and Blll of Rights and all.

You have the media trying to help Alvin out by discussing various crimes that Trump could be charged with to make the indictment more specific or if there is a motion for a bill of particulars to specify the crime. Okay, but what was the grand jury asked to consider for a crime when they voted to indict? That would be the crime you must use. duh. If bootstrapping the misdemeanor up based on campaign financing felony is not looking viable, he can't just switch some other felony in. Again, what was the grand jury indicting on. It is possible that he indicted on more than one scenario and wants to drop one that is not lookin good. Fair enough. But if he indicted on the campaign financing scenario and is feeling shaky on that, well Alvin, you up the creek. You can't switch in some other crime that the grand jury did not indict on.

What a mess.
 
El OchoCinco said:
If the entirety of the case is the payment of money to teh lawyer who paid it to stormy to keep quiet, this thing is a case built on a pile of shit.... I would have never pursued this case unless there was more direct evidence of fraud or higher level of a crime. Paying stormy was not the crime, trump reimbursing stormy is what is being claimed is a crime because the DA is claiming it was a payment to further the cause of winning an election and in violation of federal election laws...

sorry.....it is a shit case because it is trying to stretch a story to fit the facts to meet the legal standard....those almost always end up as being too weak to prosecute.
More...

Bugger, I can't get a flight today. I have this notion in my head I could do with some clarity on.

Dennis Hastert, speaker of the house and still the highest ranking to he convicted of a crime was not prosecuted for his hush money payments to one of the men he abused as a serial pedophile but the way in which he tried to hide the payments.

For a month I've been wating to somebody to bring up Hastert on a show or something but there seems to be collective amnesia. "In May 2015, Hastert was indicted on federal charges of structuring bank withdrawals to evade bank reporting requirements and making false statements to federal investigators."

Was Trump not lying to investigators and structuring the payments by proxy?
 
delete.jpg
 
Bugenhagen said:
Bugger, I can't get a flight today. I have this notion in my head I could do with some clarity on.

Dennis Hastert, speaker of the house and still the highest ranking to he convicted of a crime was not prosecuted for his hush money payments to one of the men he abused as a serial pedophile but the way in which he tried to hide the payments.

For a month I've been wating to somebody to bring up Hastert on a show or something but there seems to be collective amnesia. "In May 2015, Hastert was indicted on federal charges of structuring bank withdrawals to evade bank reporting requirements and making false statements to federal investigators."

Was Trump not lying to investigators and structuring the payments by proxy?
More...


If I read it corectly.. the payments to Stormy are not illegal. the Da wants to claim that trump funneled campaign contributions to lawyer that were used to pay off stormy and stretch out a federal campaign violation....

hastert case seems more cut and dried

the charges are trying to put a federal case on a payment made with an inference that he broke a law......shitty case to make this whole thing out of like they got him red handed on tape admitting he stole money.
 
El OchoCinco said:
If I read it corectly.. the payments to Stormy are not illegal. the Da wants to claim that trump funneled campaign contributions to lawyer that were used to pay off stormy and stretch out a federal campaign violation....

hastert case seems more cut and dried

the charges are trying to put a federal case on a payment made with an inference that he broke a law......shitty case to make this whole thing out of like they got him red handed on tape admitting he stole money.
More...

Understanding the charging is different and the state/federal crossover but struggling to understand why Hastert got charged at all.

The statute of limitations had expired on Hasert's pedophilia so why was he prosecuted for the payments which he argued were done for anonyminity not to commit a financial crime the same as Trump.

Ack.. My brain is tired untangling the differences between 'structuring' and 'smurfing' :) When I get to the states in a day or so I'll ask a lawyer neighbour.

There are obvious parallels between the cases but it seems to me the major problem was lying to investigators which is present in both cases.

https://www.veriff.com/blog/what-is-structuring-in-money-laundering
 
Bugenhagen said:
Understanding the charging is different and the state/federal crossover but struggling to understand why Hastert got charged at all.

The statute of limitations had expired on Hasert's pedophilia so why was he prosecuted for the payments which he argued were done for anonyminity not to commit a financial crime the same as Trump.

Ack.. My brain is tired untangling the differences between 'structuring' and 'smurfing' :) When I get to the states in a day or so I'll ask a lawyer neighbour.

There are obvious parallels between the cases but it seems to me the major problem was lying to investigators which is present in both cases.

https://www.veriff.com/blog/what-is-structuring-in-money-laundering
More...


I think we are both too lazy and give too little a fuck to actually go dive in deeper haha
 
And now..the obvious truth of the day

ESPN's Stephen A. Smith defends Trump from racism allegations: 'He’s not against Black people'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top