Path: ...!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 02:06:03 +0000
From: BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: GUILTY. All 34 counts.
References: <v3aqcf$1rrag$1@dont-email.me> <v3n9sp$fgla$1@dont-email.me> <v3ndnn$g3ar$2@dont-email.me> <v3od8t$l8k0$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS
Message-ID: <UsqcneBPGe2RVcL7nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2024 02:06:04 +0000
Lines: 110
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-4dUHrONI8fwmwN1oGgiv+82+kTQ5EkAyD11c/B/9fQTo/i57+wD+x5C9pW0y3E3mM39hTmAvUVac0Jm!iE4+dqqYLWKw4+CEvXAPYrxpkAEkpLleUQI2zQooasN8T9E73hJKVll76xsSXUiwndlW71586wY+
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 6550
X-Original-Lines: 108

On Jun 4, 2024 at 5:59:11 PM PDT, "Dimensional Traveler" <dtravel@sonic.net>
wrote:

> On 6/4/2024 9:00 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>  Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>  On 6/3/2024 7:31 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>  Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>  BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>>  May 31, 2024 at 7:43:16 PM PDT, Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>  shawn <nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>  Sat, 1 Jun 2024 10:54:32 +1200, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> 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.