Trump verdict in

[Sangre Naranjada]

Can I take a moment to digress to a related—well, intertwined—issue that is extremely important?

It is the NYT vs Sullivan case, 1964.

The plot line after this MLK scenario was the the NYT ran an ad criticizing the public officials and police in Montgomery AL for arresting MLK on these felony charges. The statements were found by a local jury in Montgomery to be false, libelous, and they tagged NYT with a verdict that was large enough to threaten NYT’s continued existence.
The US Supreme Court, to preserve the well-respected NYT, and eliminate the verdict that seemed to unfairly project a local (and likely one-sided) jury’s opinion on the whole nation, changed the law regarding suing the media. From then on, actual malice must be shown to bring a case against any media outlet, making them essentially immune from facing any jury over lies they tell.
I’m not necessarily saying it was wrong, because it does expand first amendment protections, but at that time (and both my parents had Journalism degrees from UT) journalism had a prevailing professional ethic that restrained them. Over time, that ethic vanished, and we are now deeply in the problem that is the natural consequence. Everyone else in the country has to go to work and be non-negligent: doctors, lawyers, nurses, contractors, truck drivers—everyone except the media. They can say whatever they want and never have to look a jury in the eyes.
So, this kind of overreaching leads to bad consequences—overreaching to tag MLK with a felony, overreaching to have a local Alabama jury try to put the NYT out of business, overreaching by the USSCT to save the NYT with a rule that destroyed journalistic integrity.
Nothing good will ever come from this Trump trial.

Well said. Thanks for your perspective.

 

[mchammer]

 

[mchammer]

Well... did Cohen pay her? Was he directed by Trump to do it? Did Trump deduct this expense on his business and tax records/returns? Is the intent to keep her quiet in time for the election breaking the law?

I'm just asking.

Hillary did similar campaign finance malfeasance and was not indicted for a felony:

DNC, Clinton campaign agree to Steele dossier funding fine

 

[mchammer]

 

[mchammer]

 

[mchammer]

 

[mchammer]

Well... did Cohen pay her? Was he directed by Trump to do it? Did Trump deduct this expense on his business and tax records/returns? Is the intent to keep her quiet in time for the election breaking the law?

I'm just asking.

Here you go:

https://thehill.com/opinion/judicia...-manhattan-could-prove-short-lived-on-appeal/

 

[LonghornCatholic]

I'm too busy to watch much tv. Is this a civil or criminal matter? Are they sending him to prison?

 

[nashhorn]

What it is LC is a media circus fiasco that has taken on a VERY serious turn showing the power and determination of the Democrat machine.

 

[mchammer]

I'm too busy to watch much tv. Is this a civil or criminal matter? Are they sending him to prison?

Yes Trump is going to prison for a campaign fine.

 

[mchammer]

Well... did Cohen pay her? Was he directed by Trump to do it? Did Trump deduct this expense on his business and tax records/returns? Is the intent to keep her quiet in time for the election breaking the law?

I'm just asking.

Hey by, this poster just tweeted the same request as you (more or less) that elicited a great thread response.

 

[bystander]

Tax law isn't my area, but what you posted the snippet of would suggest that any impropriety is by the Organization, NOT the individual.

DJT isn't an accountant. He didn't classify the expense. Signing a check is NOT the same as making the journal entry.

Corporations pay hush money all the time though, often with an NDA. The general public calls them settlements...

But a settlement is most likely about a cause of action or demand brought against a particular entity that was accused of harming someone.

In this case, there was no lawsuit. There was the threat of adverse publicity to Trump. Trump supposedly paid his lawyer through an entity that wasn't Trump and directed him to pay her to be quiet. What is the business purpose of the deduction on the books and the tax return?

 

[mchammer]

But a settlement is most likely about a cause of action or demand brought against a particular entity that was accused of harming someone.

In this case, there was no lawsuit. There was the threat of adverse publicity to Trump. Trump supposedly paid his lawyer through an entity that wasn't Trump and directed him to pay her to be quiet. What is the business purpose of the deduction on the books and the tax return?

To protect the value of the Trump brand? Please note that Trump Org is a privately-owned company and thus Trump has wide latitude on how he wants to spend his money.

 

[bystander]

To protect the value of the Trump brand? Please note that Trump Org is a privately-owned company and thus Trump has wide latitude on how he wants to spend his money.

But if it's a separate legal entity, then where is the business purpose for that entity? We "know" why the payment was made. It goes to influencing the electing. Why influencing? Because the American voters did not know about it. He didn't want them to know about it.

 

[mchammer]

But if it's a separate legal entity, then where is the business purpose for that entity? We "know" why the payment was made. It goes to influencing the electing. Why influencing? Because the American voters did not know about it. He didn't want them to know about it.

It also influences his family, friends and business associates. I don’t believe it was campaign violation for the reasons stated in the tweet thread posted above.

 

[Mr. Deez]

I'm too busy to watch much tv. Is this a civil or criminal matter? Are they sending him to prison?

It's a criminal matter. Too early to know if he's going to prison. He'll be sentenced on July 11. I suspect that he will be sentenced to prison. I know that would be outside the norm for something like this, but this entire case is out of the norm. It would make little sense to do something this high profile and give him a slap on the wrist.

 

[mchammer]

But if it's a separate legal entity, then where is the business purpose for that entity? We "know" why the payment was made. It goes to influencing the electing. Why influencing? Because the American voters did not know about it. He didn't want them to know about it.

Regardless the felony conviction required a 2nd crime. What was the second crime?

 

[nashhorn]

The real crime is being a Republican presidential candidate polling in significant numbers above the Democrat incumbent.

 

[Horn6721]

Crime
or Victory

 

[OrangeShogun]

He'll be sentenced on July 11. I suspect that he will be sentenced to prison.

The day they attempt to imprison Trump will be the first day of the second U.S. Civil War. There will be blood.

 

[Monahorns]

The day they attempt to imprison Trump will be the first day of the second U.S. Civil War. There will be blood.

Nah. The police will arrest a bunch of conservatives, lock them up, and throw away the key. Just like they did on J6. The Republican Party leaders will explain why the conservatives were wrong for doing it and do absolutely.

 

[Mr. Deez]

The day they attempt to imprison Trump will be the first day of the second U.S. Civil War. There will be blood.

You don't start a second civil war over a guy banging a porn actress, paying her to shut up, and screwing up the accounting for it. I think Bragg is disgusting for bringing this prosecution while not giving a crap about violent crime that actually hurts people. However, let's not pretend that Trump didn't do something massively stupid and gross. It's not worthy to be tacitly condoned through any kind of righteous violence. And keep in mind that we chose this dilemma with our own bad judgment. We couldn't have stopped it, but we could have kept it from being our problem.

 

[Vol Horn 4 Life]

You don't start a second civil war over a guy banging a porn actress, paying her to shut up, and screwing up the accounting for it.

You're right, you start it because the democratic party imprisoned their political opponent unlawfully to keep control so they can continue spreading propaganda dividing and killing our country.

 

[bystander]

I think we have a new political tool: Influencing an election. Every lie that is told is now a crime.

Or is that just a New York thing?

Every denial of Hunter's malfeasance by Biden should be prosecuted.

 

[huisache]

My lefty cousins are giddy over the verdict and salivate over the vision of Trump in chains and orange jumpsuit. My rightish cousins seethe with rage

I detest him and Biden and look forward to watching our version of 1860 unfurl

let the bad times roll?

 

[nashhorn]

I think they are rolling.

 

[HornHuskerDad]

Every denial of Hunter's malfeasance by Biden should be prosecuted.

WINNER

 

[bystander]

WINNER

Ha ha... I thought you might like that.

But, if you think about the charge, then that's where they went and that's where the Republican's need to go. Political lying is now a crime. And it's a felony because of the circular reasoning used about the underlying intent of a crime, which would be to influence an election. I'm pretty sure that's how it was stated (along with two other "intended" crimes; intended meaning not actually committed).

 

[Mr. Deez]

You're right, you start it because the democratic party imprisoned their political opponent unlawfully to keep control so they can continue spreading propaganda dividing and killing our country.

So if you run for president, that should basically be a get out of jail free card?

 

[bystander]

Let's break it down. One question:

When Stormy was paid, and assuming it was paid at Trump's direction to Cohen, from a company Trump owned, and was deducted on the business records and tax return as a legal expense, and Cohen was directed by Trump to pay Stormy to keep her mouth shut.

What was the law, at the time, in that exact scenario?