Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: shawn Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: GUILTY. All 34 counts. Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 02:31:11 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 126 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 08:31:12 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="64731f48cd82b81af6a5ce93bc00d592"; logging-data="915707"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19rY8z7db3u1XFA2TWqDhMp8VhFQ2Kzr5A=" User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 Cancel-Lock: sha1:r0aC6jVFI1DOCigI6etDZUNs4yU= Bytes: 7354 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.