Make America Great Again wrote:
You cannot violate campaign finance law unless you know that it's illegal. I don't think SDNY can prove that he knew it was illegal.
And even if it is illegal, it's not an "impeachable" offense because it happened before he became President.
Once he leaves office, Trump 46 can pardon him on her first day in office. He will never be indicted.
So, ignorance of the law is a legitimate defense when caught breaking the law?
Racket wrote:
Runningart2004 wrote:
Ya know he’s right Flagpole. Impeachment is pretty narrow. So far the only impeachable offense is the still unproven and hard to prove obstruction because it occurred WHILE he was president. Same for any “collusion”because it occurred before he took office, hence all the talk about “can you indict a sitting president?”
You can’t impeach someone for offenses that occurred before he took office.
Trump will serve all 4 years and will run against a Democrat and maybe even another Republican in 2020. He will have tons of trouble winning just due to the volume of talking points and tweets that his opponent can hit on and if the economy keeps on its current path and stagnates he’s a dead fish. Obamacare is still law and the Wall has not been built by Mexico.
Alan
Alan, I've been doing a lot of 5x5 at the gym, high weight low reps so I can be strong enough to punch a hole through a brick wall but not get too big since that's bad for running. Have you heard of the 5/3/1 training method? If so, thoughts?
Hey Racket don’t talk about running or weight lifting here. You are suppose to drone on, and on, and on, and on.....about Trump....?
no vote wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
Why would McConnell refuse to allow a vote?
Ever heard of Garrick Marland?
How about the hundreds of Obama judge nominations McConnell refused to consider?
How about McConnell's refusal to allow a Senate vote on preventing Mueller from being removed from the investigation?
Sure. Why would McConnell refuse to allow a vote . . . because "the judges".
All those votes require a simple majority. So a few defections would tip the scale. Conviction in an impeachment trial require 67 votes. There is no way 20 Republicans defect. And once the impeachment is defeated, it blows up in Dems' faces.
Rigged for Hillary wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
As a liberal and yet a patriot (they are not mutually exclusive) it was a shame that yesterday (Pear Harbor Day) didn't get the same attention as it has every December 7 since I have been alive. Thank the felonious Donald Trump for that.
Well, that's your own fault. I saw and heard plenty of Pearl Harbor stories yesterday, but you're too consumed with TDS and posting nonsense about Trump every single day.
Mueller never
Clownpole forever
Correct!
Some of us aren’t glued to the boob tube watching 24 hour cable news and posting on the internet. We actually have a life.
I attended a Pearl Harbor Day ceremony and spent some time with some great Americans.
I’m sure there was one in your town that you could have attended instead of watching the fall of Trump.
Make America Great Again wrote:
Why would McConnell refuse to allow a vote? He knows Dems don't have enough votes. I'd be surprised if more than a few Republicans betrayed the President. And once the impeachment is defeated, the Democrats will face a yuge backlash.
And once again, for the 1,758th time you show your true colors.
One can only betray someone to whom one owes their allegiance. Senators owe their allegiance to the United States of America, not to Donald Trump. But I know that this is a concept that escapes you entirely.
As has been said many times, Trumpettes, (and yes, you are one, Lying Gary), are NOT Americans!
IQ45=trump wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
Who is ignorant here?
"For a criminal prosecution, the Justice Department must prove that a defendant knowingly violated campaign finance laws."
From your link, ignorant one.
"It likely would have been difficult for Cohen to have tried to argue that his campaign violations weren’t willful given the allegations that he tried to conceal the purpose of the payments as legitimate legal expenses and used shell companies for the transactions.
"In court Tuesday, Cohen told the judge, under penalty of perjury, that he knew he was committing a crime by making the payments. He said he did so “at the direction” of Trump — identified as “Individual-1″ in court papers — “for the principal purpose of influencing the election.”
Yeah, COHEN knew it was illegal. That's why he pleaded guilty. It doesn't prove that Trump also knew it was illegal.
IQ45=trump wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
Who is ignorant here?
"For a criminal prosecution, the Justice Department must prove that a defendant knowingly violated campaign finance laws."
From your link, ignorant one.
"It likely would have been difficult for Cohen to have tried to argue that his campaign violations weren’t willful given the allegations that he tried to conceal the purpose of the payments as legitimate legal expenses and used shell companies for the transactions.
"In court Tuesday, Cohen told the judge, under penalty of perjury, that he knew he was committing a crime by making the payments. He said he did so “at the direction” of Trump — identified as “Individual-1″ in court papers — “for the principal purpose of influencing the election.”
To be fair, Cohen knowing that he was committing a crime is a different thing than Trump knowing he was committing a crime. Remember that Trump is WAY dumber than a rock.
WTF^n wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
You cannot violate campaign finance law unless you know that it's illegal. I don't think SDNY can prove that he knew it was illegal.
And even if it is illegal, it's not an "impeachable" offense because it happened before he became President.
Once he leaves office, Trump 46 can pardon him on her first day in office. He will never be indicted.
So, ignorance of the law is a legitimate defense when caught breaking the law?
That's not the case with 99% of the time. But campaign finance law is different. Read the AP article I linked above.
WTF^n wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
You cannot violate campaign finance law unless you know that it's illegal. I don't think SDNY can prove that he knew it was illegal.
And even if it is illegal, it's not an "impeachable" offense because it happened before he became President.
Once he leaves office, Trump 46 can pardon him on her first day in office. He will never be indicted.
So, ignorance of the law is a legitimate defense when caught breaking the law?
A stable genius would know the difference. Guess that does not apply to Trump.
Make America Great Again wrote:
IQ45=trump wrote:
From your link, ignorant one.
"It likely would have been difficult for Cohen to have tried to argue that his campaign violations weren’t willful given the allegations that he tried to conceal the purpose of the payments as legitimate legal expenses and used shell companies for the transactions.
"In court Tuesday, Cohen told the judge, under penalty of perjury, that he knew he was committing a crime by making the payments. He said he did so “at the direction” of Trump — identified as “Individual-1″ in court papers — “for the principal purpose of influencing the election.”
Yeah, COHEN knew it was illegal. That's why he pleaded guilty. It doesn't prove that Trump also knew it was illegal.
COHEN was directed by TRUMP to perform illegal acts.
To Be Fair wrote:
IQ45=trump wrote:
From your link, ignorant one.
"It likely would have been difficult for Cohen to have tried to argue that his campaign violations weren’t willful given the allegations that he tried to conceal the purpose of the payments as legitimate legal expenses and used shell companies for the transactions.
"In court Tuesday, Cohen told the judge, under penalty of perjury, that he knew he was committing a crime by making the payments. He said he did so “at the direction” of Trump — identified as “Individual-1″ in court papers — “for the principal purpose of influencing the election.”
To be fair, Cohen knowing that he was committing a crime is a different thing than Trump knowing he was committing a crime. Remember that Trump is WAY dumber than a rock.
Ahem, no. A mob boss cannot claim he did not commit a crime after he directs a hit man to kill someone.
Make America Great Again wrote:
WTF^n wrote:
So, ignorance of the law is a legitimate defense when caught breaking the law?
That's not the case with 99% of the time. But campaign finance law is different. Read the AP article I linked above.
LOL . ... campaign finance law IS NOT exempt from the laws of America.
You are one dumb mofo.
Make America Great Again wrote:
WTF^n wrote:
So, ignorance of the law is a legitimate defense when caught breaking the law?
That's not the case with 99% of the time. But campaign finance law is different. Read the AP article I linked above.
But notice that eligibility for criminal prosecution does not perforce mean that the law was not violated!
I believe that one of Barack Obama's campaigns broke federal campaign law, and had to pay a substantial fine as a result. There was no criminal liability IIRC because the violation was deemed to be an innocent one; yet the law was still violated.
at the direction of wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
Yeah, COHEN knew it was illegal. That's why he pleaded guilty. It doesn't prove that Trump also knew it was illegal.
COHEN was directed by TRUMP to perform illegal acts.
Just because Trump directed Cohen to make the payment, it does not prove Trump knew it was illegal. Try again.
present, esq. wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
That's not the case with 99% of the time. But campaign finance law is different. Read the AP article I linked above.
But notice that eligibility for criminal prosecution does not perforce mean that the law was not violated!
I believe that one of Barack Obama's campaigns broke federal campaign law, and had to pay a substantial fine as a result. There was no criminal liability IIRC because the violation was deemed to be an innocent one; yet the law was still violated.
Okay. So maybe the law was violated. But there is no criminal liability if you didn't know it was illegal. And Cohen is the only one who has criminal liability here.
no vote wrote:
Ever heard of Garrick Marland?
Ever heard of William Archibald Spooner?
Make America Great Again wrote:
at the direction of wrote:
COHEN was directed by TRUMP to perform illegal acts.
Just because Trump directed Cohen to make the payment, it does not prove Trump knew it was illegal. Try again.
LOL .... you are truly ignorant. .... It Trump did not know it was illegal then why has he tried so hard to obfuscate it? Why is he constantly lying about it? If he has nothing to hide why is he hiding it?
Keep it quite and .... wrote:
Make America Great Again wrote:
Just because Trump directed Cohen to make the payment, it does not prove Trump knew it was illegal. Try again.
LOL .... you are truly ignorant. .... It Trump did not know it was illegal then why has he tried so hard to obfuscate it? Why is he constantly lying about it? If he has nothing to hide why is he hiding it?
He was trying to hide it from Melania, not law enforcement officers. I guess you don't understand how marriage works.
Make America Great Again wrote:
Keep it quite and .... wrote:
LOL .... you are truly ignorant. .... It Trump did not know it was illegal then why has he tried so hard to obfuscate it? Why is he constantly lying about it? If he has nothing to hide why is he hiding it?
He was trying to hide it from Melania, not law enforcement officers. I guess you don't understand how marriage works.
Nope. Trump cares so much about Melania that he was banging other women while Melania was pregnant. He could give a rat's ass about her.
Try again.
hit mann wrote:
To Be Fair wrote:
To be fair, Cohen knowing that he was committing a crime is a different thing than Trump knowing he was committing a crime. Remember that Trump is WAY dumber than a rock.
Ahem, no. A mob boss cannot claim he did not commit a crime after he directs a hit man to kill someone.
Ahem, no. Your "counter-point" says absolutely nothing to counter the point that I made. Zip. Zilch. Zero.
Please try to master the English language before responding.