Can anyone explain the crime Trump did?

a reply to: Annee

No, there are so many constitutional lawyers because there are so many people (now) running afoul of the Constitution.

And, let's not forget who those people are! Those running afoul of the Constitution are not average Jacks and Jill's like you and I, they are judges and justices who increasingly attempt to legislate from the bench.

Virtually any lawyer worth his Grape Nuts cereal is enough of a 'constitutional lawyer' to represent most people in criminal and civil cases at the local and county and district court level. It's one of the first things you learn in Law School. (heck, you get it beaten into your skull in pre-law as an undergrad even).

Where true lawyers specializing in Constitutional Law come into play is at the circuit, appellate and Supreme court level, and these counsels are taking lower court judges and attorneys to task.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Annee

No, there are so many constitutional lawyers because there are so many people (now) running afoul of the Constitution.

And, let's not forget who those people are! Those running afoul of the Constitution are not average Jacks and Jill's like you and I, they are judges and justices who increasingly attempt to legislate from the bench.

Virtually any lawyer worth his Grape Nuts cereal is enough of a 'constitutional lawyer' to represent most people in criminal and civil cases at the local and county and district court level. It's one of the first things you learn in Law School. (heck, you get it beaten into your skull in pre-law as an undergrad even).

Where true lawyers specializing in Constitutional Law come into play is at the circuit, appellate and Supreme court level, and these counsels are taking lower court judges and attorneys to task.

Are you a lawyer?

What I’ve seen recently in the behavior of grown men is appalling.

Power corrupts absolutely . . .

This opinion is without bias. Is yours?

a reply to: Annee

No, I am not a lawyer.

Objective? Yes, I feel my opinions are very objective.

a reply to: budzprime69

Anymore discussion about what law was broken is a waste of time.

This tells me you have no idea how laws work nor their application.

It also tells me that you are unfamiliar with legal process and courts.

Perhaps equipping yourself with the above knowledge before spouting nonsense would make you more valuable of a poster.

....perhaps.

a reply to: JinMI
They will make more sense after you read this;

From state-sponsored propagandists using paid troll armies, to commercially motivated data analytics firms selling their toolkits to politicians, ....

journals.sagepub.com...

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: Annee

No, I am not a lawyer.

Objective? Yes, I feel my opinions are very objective.

More so than some — for sure.

originally posted by: TheMisguidedAngel
And just to add to this "the promoting someone to office" was the silencing of Stormy, so the voting public didn't know Trump cheated on his wife with a Porn Star. That's why Trumps lawyers argued that the the payment wasn't to promote him for office it was to save face with his wife and his family. If the Jury would have believed the payment was just to save face with his wife and family and not for political reasons then it would have only been a misdemeanor for falsifying business records. The jury believed the payment to Stormy (and the falsifying) was done for Trumps political reasons though so that's why it got bumped up to a felony.

This is the point that really matters, in my opinion. Here are the charges and dates of the payments of "hush money":

1 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Feb. 14, 2017

2 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842457 Feb. 14, 2017

3 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842460 Feb. 14, 2017

4 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account, bearing check number 000138 Feb. 14, 2017

5 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust March 16, 2017

6 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number
846907 March 17, 2017

7 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account, bearing check number 000147 March 17, 2017

8 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump April 13, 2017

9 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858770 June 19, 2017

10 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002740 June 19, 2017

11 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump May 22, 2017

12 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 855331 May 22, 2017

13 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002700 May 23, 2017

14 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump June 16, 2017

15 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858772 June 19, 2017

16 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002741 June 19, 2017

17 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump July 11, 2017

18 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 861096 July 11, 2017

19 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002781 July 11, 2017

20 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Aug. 1, 2017

21 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 863641 Aug. 1, 2017

22 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002821 Aug. 1, 2017

23 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Sept. 11, 2017

24 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 868174 Sept. 11, 2017

25 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002908 Sept. 12, 2017

26 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Oct. 18, 2017

27 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 872654 Oct. 18, 2017

28 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002944 Oct. 18, 2017

29 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Nov. 20, 2017

30 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 876511 Nov. 20, 2017

31 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 002980 Nov. 21, 2017

32 Guilty Invoice from Michael Cohen, marked as a record of Donald J. Trump Dec. 1, 2017

33 Guilty Entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 877785 Dec. 1, 2017

34 Guilty Check and check stub, Donald J. Trump account, bearing check number 003006 Dec. 5, 2017.



And here's the date of the election they said that Trump tried to promote himself to:

November 8th, 2016.



Which one or multiples of these payments do you think influenced the election? Because every single payment was paid after the election had already happened. And remember, people can't claim that Trump had a time machine. And don't listen to the people that say he "falsified the records." Because these records are accurate and true - they were entered in as evidence of their validity, and they weren't falsified. (Unless somebody from the Prosecution or the Judge forged them, which I have no knowledge of one way or the other.) There's your case for you, or rather, that's not a real, legitimate case. It can't be legitimate because if people would just look at the facts, they would know. Just saying he falsified records when he didn't is not a crime.

a reply to: JinMI

Then explain it to us. Because from where I sit you are the one that doesn't understand the specific laws broken in the state and city.
You don't have to agree with a law to understand it. How is this a complicated matter for you to understand JinMi?

originally posted by: budzprime69
a reply to: JinMI

Then explain it to us. Because from where I sit you are the one that doesn't understand the specific laws broken in the state and city.
You don't have to agree with a law to understand it. How is this a complicated matter for you to understand JinMi?

Then by all means.

Tell us what the underlying crime was. Because that's the crux of all these arguments.

a reply to: Station27

The wire transfer to Stormy was Oct 27, 2016. After calls with Pecker and 1 day after the two calls from Cohen to Trump. The reimbursement to Cohen occurred after the election. The Special Counsel determined it was to influence the election and not to protect his family, as Trump knew as early as 2011 that she may go public and never tried to make any deals with her until days before the election.

This is one geopolitical perspective of the crimes going on here,

originally posted by: JinMI

originally posted by: budzprime69
a reply to: JinMI

Then explain it to us. Because from where I sit you are the one that doesn't understand the specific laws broken in the state and city.
You don't have to agree with a law to understand it. How is this a complicated matter for you to understand JinMi?

Then by all means.

Tell us what the underlying crime was. Because that's the crux of all these arguments.

The exact laws have already been posted JinMi. This "crux" you speak of is very clearly out and very much for public to view.
How about we try this from an approach that you seem to enjoy. Why don't you explain to the class how the laws already specified are not illegal?

a reply to: budzprime69

Again, you may keep repeating your absolutely baseless nonsense.

Doesn't make it true. Infact it proves you to be a liar.

Even the jury verdict form doesnt contain the underlying crime.


Any more lies you wish to sell me on?

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Station27

The wire transfer to Stormy was Oct 27, 2016. After calls with Pecker and 1 day after the two calls from Cohen to Trump. The reimbursement to Cohen occurred after the election. The Special Counsel determined it was to influence the election and not to protect his family, as Trump knew as early as 2011 that she may go public and never tried to make any deals with her until days before the election.

any idea why Trump paid off the doorman and the Playboy model?

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: Station27

The wire transfer to Stormy was Oct 27, 2016. After calls with Pecker and 1 day after the two calls from Cohen to Trump. The reimbursement to Cohen occurred after the election. The Special Counsel determined it was to influence the election and not to protect his family, as Trump knew as early as 2011 that she may go public and never tried to make any deals with her until days before the election.

Perhaps I missed it. When was this special council brought up in trial?

Also, regarding the phone calls. Was there anything there that spoke to an underlying crime?

Thanks.

a reply to: network dude

They were both paid off through AMI as part of the catch and kill scheme. Pecker testified he was to be reimbursed for McDougal but he wanted to use a company outside AMI specifically because he did not want a record of a check from the Trump Organization being deposited into AMI’s accounts. He called off being reimbursed in Oct 2016 as he was worried it would "raise to many questions".

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: network dude

They were both paid off through AMI as part of the catch and kill scheme. Pecker testified he was to be reimbursed for McDougal but he wanted to use a company outside AMI specifically because he did not want a record of a check from the Trump Organization being deposited into AMI’s accounts. He called off being reimbursed in Oct 2016 as he was worried it would "raise to many questions".

so this was the first time anyone had used the "catch and kill" method. Interesting.

a reply to: JinMI

It was not. However Stormi testified that she was approached in 2011 for her story, was paid 15g for an interview but the story never ran. She was never paid by Trump until after the access Hollywood recording got out and there was interest from the National Enquirer for her story before the election. Trump had Cohen pay her off then.

a reply to: network dude

No, people like Harvey Weinstein and I'm guessing other powerful people used it too.

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: network dude

No, people like Harvey Weinstein and I'm guessing other powerful people used it too.

but they weren't running for president. Why on God's green Earth would anyone use this method if not for altering the results of an election?