Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 03:37:34 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: GUILTY. All 34 counts. Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 96 Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Tue, 04 Jun 2024 08:37:34 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 4858 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17d5c04978370f91$113113$3919488$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 5255 On 6/3/24 9:31 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote: > Adam H. Kerman wrote: >> BTR1701 wrote: >>> May 31, 2024 at 7:43:16 PM PDT, Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>>> shawn wrote: >>>>> Sat, 1 Jun 2024 10:54:32 +1200, Your Name wrote: >>>>>> On 2024-05-31 10:46:00 +0000, FPP said: >>>>>>> On 5/31/24 4:48 AM, trotsky wrote: >>>>>>>> On 5/30/24 4:17 PM, FPP wrote: > >>>>>>>>> GUILTY. All 34 counts. > >>>>>>>> I called it. Let the whining begin! > >>>>>>> Yup... I was shooting for Friday. Really surprised, since a half hour >>>>>>> before, the judge was shutting it down for the day. > >>>>>> Trump the Chump's whining startedd immediately and his braindead >>>>>> supports declared "war" not long after. > >>>>>> Not that this decision means anything in reality. The whole mess will >>>>>> drag on for years longer yet with numerous appeals, counter-appeals, >>>>>> etc. Trump the Chump and most of the witnesses will be dead of old age >>>>>> before it ends, and even then you'll probably have their kids trying to >>>>>> clear their names one way or another. > >>>>> Not that long but yes, it will likely go on for a couple of years. >>>>> There are two level of appeals at the NY state level and then Trump >>>>> can try to jump to the US Supreme Court if both levels of appeal fail >>>>> to overturn the verdict. > >>>> There's no direct appeal from state court to federal court. They have to >>>> find a federal issue to dispute. > >>> There is a federal issue. The predicate crime that the state used to >>> bootstrap the state charges despite it being beyond the statute of >>> limitations was a federal crime, and one that both the DOJ and the FEC >>> had already looked at and determined there was no violation. So the >>> question of whether the entire basis of the state's case was valid is >>> a federal question. > >> I am certainly not going to agree that the feds ever made a finding of no >> violation. Prosecutors never say that out loud, anyway, when there are no >> charges preferred against the target of the investigation. The FEC isn't >> doing its job if every entity those funds passed through didn't receive >> a letter in which they found campaign disclosure violations. Fines should >> have been issued. > >> Do we know why prosecution was limited to Michael Cohen? > >> Say, was Stormy Daniels herself obligated to make disclosure? > >> I don't see how the issue is moot because the underlying crime can no >> longer be charged. > >> Trump's complaints that Biden is behind the conspiracy are equal >> protection but I doubt there's an actual equal protection argument to >> make. Mark Levin's tweet, that I referenced elsewhere, had several due >> process arguments to make. > >> But the issue of the state law itself cannot be contested in federal >> court. > > Ok. The point BTR1701 made here has bothered me for days. Excellent. I didn't track > down the language of the criminal statute Trump was charged under, but I > found descriptions of what the charges were. I'll assume it's consistent > with the law, else Trump would have gotten the charges thrown out. > > In New York, in order for the charge of falsifying business > records to be bumped up to a felony, one must commit the crime > of falsifying business records when the "intent to defraud > includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal > the commission thereof." > > https://www.factcheck.org/2023/04/whats-in-trumps-indictment/ > > To provide the case, the state doesn't prove that there was a violation > of the underlying law. The state proves intent to commit another crime, > or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. > > The state must prove intent to commit the crime without, in fact, > proving that the underlying crime was committed? > > Can one intend to commit a crime be proven without the crime having been > committed? The intent is the criminal act for the purpose of the > criminal charge of fraud based on proving intent in the underlying > crime? > > I don't get it.