Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!news.mixmin.net!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Anonymous <anon@anon.net>
Newsgroups: misc.phone.mobile.iphone,comp.mobile.android
Subject: Re: DOJ is correct that Apple iPhone is far less secure than Android
 when RCS messaging is involved
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 00:32:40 -0400
Organization: Mixmin
Message-ID: <v024ta$1mmr6$1@news.mixmin.net>
References: <uud0lh$13jd4$1@paganini.bofh.team> <uukmmf$6op7$1@dont-email.me>
 <uuks3l$7ss7$1@dont-email.me> <uuktv2$88f6$1@dont-email.me>
 <uul0n2$ciq7$1@dont-email.me> <uulbg4$22k53$1@news.mixmin.net>
 <uuttdi$2o2ua$1@dont-email.me> <uv500e$3d51p$2@news.mixmin.net>
 <uv5j4u$rkil$1@dont-email.me> <uv7ldo$3kigb$5@news.mixmin.net>
 <uv95uq$1q4ch$1@dont-email.me> <uva7qt$3r9oj$3@news.mixmin.net>
 <uvb8t1$2bs3g$1@dont-email.me> <uvfp97$9dr7$5@news.mixmin.net>
 <uvftjc$3gk7l$2@dont-email.me> <uvi4hf$f8km$3@news.mixmin.net>
 <uvi9vv$3imo$1@dont-email.me> <uvl177$mdmk$1@news.mixmin.net>
 <uvmgun$13bev$2@dont-email.me> <uvum88$1eigo$5@news.mixmin.net>
 <uvupkm$37gtn$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2024 04:32:46 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: news.mixmin.net; posting-host="c4af4a3027e8317d29ea238d8aa6bb2f616aa3fc";
	logging-data="1792870"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@mixmin.net"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <uvupkm$37gtn$3@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2992
Lines: 36

Alan wrote:
> On 2024-04-19 14:04, Anonymous wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Those are upgraded misdemeanors, because there is allegedly an UNDERLYING
>>>>>> felony. Show us the UNDERLYING felony.
>>>>>
>>>>> You don't understand the law.
>>>>>
>>>>> There doesn't have to be an "underlying felony".
>>>>>
>>>>> There just has to be an underlying crime that the falsification was 
>>>>> undertaken in furtherance of.
>>>>
>>>> Fine, then what was the underlying crime?
>>>
>>> Federal election contribution crimes.
>>
>> And Bragg has no authority to prosecute that. He's pulling shit out
>> of his ass.
> 
> He doesn't need authority to prosecute those crimes.
> 
> The statute simply requires that there ARE crimes that the falsifications of 
> business records were intended to cover up.
> 
> You agree that Trump did falsify the records, right?
> 
> :-)

Those are misdemeanors. Bragg suggested four _possibilities_ of underlying
crimes to turn them into felonies, meaning he was an ape flinging shit at
the wall trying to see what would stick. Now he is claiming campaign
finance crimes, but that "underlying crime" didn't occur until AFTER Trump
won, in 2017, and the payments reimbursing his lawyer's payments are only
illegal if construed as a campaign contribution. But if they were illegal
campaign contributions, as opposed to personal expenditures, why didn't the
Justice Department prosecute Trump for that?