Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Your Name Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: GUILTY. All 34 counts. Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 16:14:44 +1200 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 121 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 06:14:45 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="cc55526be4af8d2f9c34bbfe331ed353"; logging-data="877188"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18JTsmyxfXeglWC05c0d7eZ8rAgrbkoDpo=" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZtH1jiYwoqwEWedjg7FGZgFK9sc= Bytes: 7029 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.