Jump to content

45 indicated


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure how important a conspiracy really is.

People always think it's worse than the underlying crime and it never is.  It's the same as the underlying crime and can be harder to prove.  It does allow for conviction of an offense that didn't actually occur, and that's about it.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

I'm not sure how important a conspiracy really is.

People always think it's worse than the underlying crime and it never is.  It's the same as the underlying crime and can be harder to prove.


everything will be hard to charge on the case 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A talking head points out:

11 reimbursement checks to Cohen

1 invoice per check

1 ledger entry per check.

That's 33 falsified business records.

Then a final count of consipracy to falsify business records.  So, maybe Trump didn't falsify any records, but he conspired with Cohen and others to falsify the above records.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Beau Vine said:

 

If true (and that's a big IF coming from brietbart via Donnie Cokehead), then the judge should recuse himself and hand this off to another judge.  Is it a legal ground for recusal?  Not sure.  But why give Team MAGA something to bitch about beyond the general bullshit far left lib label?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, South Austin said:

If true (and that's a big IF coming from brietbart via Donnie Cokehead), then the judge should recuse himself and hand this off to another judge.  Is it a legal ground for recusal?  Not sure.  But why give Team MAGA something to bitch about beyond the general bullshit far left lib label?

Well, Merchan is a Democrat, ran as one, presumably is a party member, etc.  I don't think that's grounds for recusal.

Certainly isn't for Clarence.

There is some thought that the Chief Judge should reassign.

  • Hook 'Em 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Hopefully, it means he has a say in his defense, because he's a fucking assclown.

He also had some of his shit seized by Jan6 investigator warrants. Just really fucking weird to see the streams crossing already. 

Gonna be interesting once they adjourn for today, seems like they've been in court for nearly 75 minutes now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TwiceHorn said:

Well, Merchan is a Democrat, ran as one, presumably is a party member, etc.  I don't think that's grounds for recusal.

Certainly isn't for Clarence.

There is some thought that the Chief Judge should reassign.

Sure, I don't think sharing party affiliation with the defendant's political opponent in 2020 should be grounds for refusal.  But if his daughter worked for the campaign of that opponent and that campaign is sort of the subject of the offenses in the indictment, then the optics are worse.  Again, legal grounds for recusal under New York law?  I don't know.  But I think it would be a good idea to avoid any low-hanging fruit for the defendant and his legions of mouth breathers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, South Austin said:

Sure, I don't think sharing party affiliation with the defendant's political opponent in 2020 should be grounds for refusal.  But if his daughter worked for the campaign of that opponent and that campaign is sort of the subject of the offenses in the indictment, then the optics are worse.  Again, legal grounds for recusal under New York law?  I don't know.  But I think it would be a good idea to avoid any low-hanging fruit for the defendant and his legions of mouth breathers.

I don't think it would be, and I get your point.  But the Legion of Dumb is going to bitch no matter what.  Now if the judge were related to Stormy (like say her "step-brother"), had produced one of her fine films, or had left a review of one of said films on Rotten Tomatoes or the like, it might be a little closer of a question. 

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dcbc said:

Now if the judge were related to Stormy, had produced one of her fine films, or had left a review of one of said films on Rotten Tomatoes or the like, it might be a little closer of a question. 

I don't think being a critic of fine film is grounds for refusal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, South Austin said:

Sure, I don't think sharing party affiliation with the defendant's political opponent in 2020 should be grounds for refusal.  But if his daughter worked for the campaign of that opponent and that campaign is sort of the subject of the offenses in the indictment, then the optics are worse.  Again, legal grounds for recusal under New York law?  I don't know.  But I think it would be a good idea to avoid any low-hanging fruit for the defendant and his legions of mouth breathers.

isn't the indictment re: paying off Stormy? that was 2016 when he ran against Clinton, not Biden.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Apparently a great deal of discussion about a protective order pertaining at least to discovery/evidence and social media.

They may wait until he spews some shit before going for an outright gag order.

My innuendo meter just red lined.

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23741577/read-trump-indictment-related-to-hush-money-payment.pdf

All related to accounting for the payments to Daniels, invoices, checks, and ledger entries.

No specific allegation of the "predicate" crime, rather, in violation of state and federal law.

No conspiracy.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • blacklab changed the title to 45 indicated


×
×
  • Create New...