Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moviePig Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: GUILTY. All 34 counts. Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 14:31:52 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 131 Message-ID: References: Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 20:31:54 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9cdb67d93ac0ce7cf831e44bf69acecd"; logging-data="1141225"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX183SF70lGNJqhRQRRnCZTldYwo+i+JgoUc=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:tQqN5vqeJrUx+kXx7bowhUn+6eY= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 7798 On 6/5/2024 2:31 AM, shawn wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jun 2024 16:14:44 +1200, Your Name > wrote: > >> On 2024-06-05 02:26:33 +0000, shawn said: >>> On Wed, 05 Jun 2024 02:06:04 +0000, BTR1701 wrote: >>>> On Jun 4, 2024 at 5:59:11 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 6/4/2024 9:00 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>>>>> Dimensional Traveler wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/3/2024 7:31 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. 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. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Possession of tools to commit burglary. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm going to need a little more here to understand what the state must >>>>>> prove. Do the police need to find evidence of what property was about to >>>>>> be burgled? Otherwise I don't see how intent to commit the crime of >>>>>> burglary could be proved. >>>>> >>>>> I was meaning to point out that possession of the tools used to commit >>>>> burglaries is, in and of itself, illegal in most jurisdictions. There >>>>> is no need to prove that there was a burglary committed or even an >>>>> intent to commit one. Just having the tools to do so is illegal. >>>> >>>> There has to be more than mere possession because every typical American >>>> household contains the tools to commit burglary. >>> >>> Isn't it an issue of having the tools on your person while outside the >>> home? So it doesn't matter what you have at home. >> >> So how would you get your newly purchased hammer back home from the store?? >> >> It's a ridiculous "law", if indeed it is actually one ... which >> wouldn't surprise me in the least, since it *is* America, which is full >> of rather ridiculous laws. >> > > A hammer wouldn't be an issue. Having lock picking tools would be an > issue. A hammer IS my lock picking tool. I pick the lock that doesn't break...