Octopus Overlords

This is actually a bit of a surprise and explains some. We deserve a full accounting but we probably won't get it. Garland is all in on burying DOJ's trash under Trump.

It's like something is happening this week and everyone is rushing out to let everyone know they weren't part of the problem.

"So you agree that the Justice Department was weaponized under the Trump administration?"

Former Trump national security adviser @AmbJohnBolton : "I can attest to it personally.”

Smoove_B wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 10:46 am It's like something is happening this week and everyone is rushing out to let everyone know they weren't part of the problem.

"So you agree that the Justice Department was weaponized under the Trump administration?"

Former Trump national security adviser @AmbJohnBolton : "I can attest to it personally.”

Malchior BAM'd you.

Hannity: places ball on tee.
Donald J Trump, 45th President of the United States of America: hits into triple play.

At some point, you have to start feeling bad for his lawyers. Not yet, of course, but I'm sure there is a point....

stessier wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:25 pm At some point, you have to start feeling bad for his lawyers. Not yet, of course, but I'm sure there is a point....

His lawyers are fine. Trump could whip out his penis and rub it on a Supreme Court Justice and nothing would happen to him. Most of this country is perfectly fine with letting him say or do whatever he wants.

Quoting the Hawk the Slayer video I posted earlier: "Some people just can't keep their mouths shut."

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:49 pm Quoting the Hawk the Slayer video I posted earlier: "Some people just can't keep their mouths shut."

Which is why I keep laughing at the suggestion that a gag order will be issued after he's indicted. Good luck enforcing that one.

I go away for Spring Break with no internet connectivity, and I return to find out Trump is being (or was) indicted and will be arraigned tomorrow.

We got him! Right? Right . . . ?

All along, I’ve been trying to understand the likely charges. I get that nothing about a “hush money” payment to Daniels is inherently illegal. I get that it’s a misdemeanor in NY to falsify business records, and so having Cohen pay Daniels $130K and then Trump paying back Cohen for “legal services” when no such services were performed may constitute falsifying business records. Where I get lost is how that payment by Cohen could ever be considered an illegal campaign contribution in violation of federal election law if Cohen was, in fact, paid back the $130K by Trump, which I understand is not disputed and is actually the basis of the initial charge of falsifying business records. And without the election law violation, the falsifying business records charge is just a misdemeanor. So what am I missing? Why should I be taking “all this criming” more seriously?

Also, as a side, I think there are going to be some arguments that settling a potential dispute with Daniels out of court is, in fact, a legal service, so characterizing the payments to Cohen to pay off Daniels as “legal services” isn’t actually false in the first place.

Let's not forget about this:

2017

January: Cohen seeks reimbursement from the Trump Organization for $180,035 — $130,000 for the payment to Daniels, plus a wiring fee and an extra $50,000. Trump Organization executives double the reimbursement to $360,000 and add another $60,000, for a total of $420,000 to be paid in monthly installments for 12 months.

Cohen sends invoices for $35,000 per month and receives $420,000 from the company over the course of the year.

Everyone seems to be speculating on one element of what is probably a much larger story.

Trump’s company “grossed up” Cohen’s reimbursement for the Daniels payment to defray tax payments, according to federal prosecutors who filed criminal charges against the lawyer in connection with the payments in 2018. In all, Cohen got $360,000 plus a $60,000 bonus, for a total of $420,000.

Cohen pleaded guilty to violating federal campaign finance law in connection with the payments. Federal prosecutors say the payments amounted to illegal, unreported assistance to Trump’s campaign. But they declined to file charges against Trump himself.

Trump reimbursing Cohen doesn't suddenly make rhe payments legal. If anything, it's an attempt to avoid recording the payment to avoid taxes and campaign finance law.


https://apnews.com/article/trump-stormy ... fbc6fe3c2a

Kurth wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:25 pm And without the election law violation, the falsifying business records charge is just a misdemeanor.

Except there *is* a charge of an election law violation. Prosecution will try to prove that the purpose behind paying off Daniels (and McDougal) wasn't just to hide the affair from Trump's wife but, in fact, to influence the election (namely, to prevent this information becoming public weeks before the 2016 election, when it might have swayed the voters).

There's also now precedent because Michael Cohen was already convicted of tax evasion, making false statements to a federally-insured bank, and campaign finance violations for the same transaction.

Kurth wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:25 pm I go away for Spring Break with no internet connectivity, and I return to find out Trump is being (or was) indicted and will be arraigned tomorrow.

We got him! Right? Right . . . ?

All along, I’ve been trying to understand the likely charges. I get that nothing about a “hush money” payment to Daniels is inherently illegal. I get that it’s a misdemeanor in NY to falsify business records, and so having Cohen pay Daniels $130K and then Trump paying back Cohen for “legal services” when no such services were performed may constitute falsifying business records. Where I get lost is how that payment by Cohen could ever be considered an illegal campaign contribution in violation of federal election law if Cohen was, in fact, paid back the $130K by Trump, which I understand is not disputed and is actually the basis of the initial charge of falsifying business records. And without the election law violation, the falsifying business records charge is just a misdemeanor. So what am I missing? Why should I be taking “all this criming” more seriously?

Part of the trouble is people are forming prejudicial viewpoints on the seriousness of the case based on public reports which may or may not be complete. We don't know enough to know any of this...yet. These might be the right questions but there might be more to it. They might have uncovered more detail. We just don't know and probably won't know even after tomorrow.

gilraen wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:39 pm

Kurth wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:25 pm And without the election law violation, the falsifying business records charge is just a misdemeanor.

Except there *is* a charge of an election law violation. Prosecution will try to prove that the purpose behind paying off Daniels (and McDougal) wasn't just to hide the affair from Trump's wife but, in fact, to influence the election (namely, to prevent this information becoming public weeks before the 2016 election, when it might have swayed the voters).

There's also now precedent because Michael Cohen was already convicted of tax evasion, making false statements to a federally-insured bank, and campaign finance violations for the same transaction.

We also now know that SDNY under Barr backed Vance off the case which makes the much ballyhooed idea that the Feds declined to charge him...a little more suspect now. It certainly begs a lot of questions about why DOJ declined to charge Trump even though Cohen did time for crimes committed at Trump's direction. It's a huge mess and the DOJ looking *crooked as hell* aspect is being severely underplayed right now.

Florida Man perp walk = dream come true.

Fully agree to all of his demands, then do the opposite.

The idea that this guy can dictate any of this is beyond a clown show. Not to mention he has a very public record of agreeing to things only to humiliate people afterward.

Honestly, put a bag over his head during the perp walk up the stairs to "protect his identity". Let him stumble a few times.

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 4:04 pm Fully agree to all of his demands, then do the opposite.

The idea that this guy can dictate any of this is beyond a clown show. Not to mention he has a very public record of agreeing to things only to humiliate people afterward.

Honestly, put a bag over his head during the perp walk up the stairs to "protect his identity". Let him stumble a few times.

I agree with this completely. We should not be letting him dictate anything.

TheMix wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 4:11 pm

GreenGoo wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 4:04 pm Fully agree to all of his demands, then do the opposite.

The idea that this guy can dictate any of this is beyond a clown show. Not to mention he has a very public record of agreeing to things only to humiliate people afterward.

Honestly, put a bag over his head during the perp walk up the stairs to "protect his identity". Let him stumble a few times.

I agree with this completely. We should not be letting him dictate anything.

The reality of it is that he has some leverage based on the NY DA presumably wanting to avoid having officers physically drag his body around. There is a limit to that leverage (there's a point at which doing that may be preferable to some of his other demands) but there is real leverage.

Taser solves all perp problems. Taser him in the privacy of his own home. Put him in a wheelchair, take him out past the cameras, then into a blacked out van.

He's going to claim he was tasered anyway. Might as well force him to tell the truth for once.

hepcat wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 12:31 pm His lawyers are fine. Trump could whip out his penis and rub it on a Supreme Court Justice and nothing would happen to him. Most of this country is perfectly fine with letting him say or do whatever he wants.

Maybe... if they got paid in advance.

He definitely has some leverage because of all the resources needed, and it's fine to make some exceptions to ensure everything goes smoothly.

But his demand to be played in by the NYPD Pipe Band with Flava Flav as his hype man during the perp ride in a tiger-drawn chariot is a wee bit too much.

That is thuggery of nearly Kanye West proportions.

I'd love to see him denied bail.

Has he been formally charged? Is he informed of the charges before the arraignment?

Alefroth wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 4:41 pm Has he been formally charged? Is he informed of the charges before the arraignment?

I believe the indictment is still sealed. His lawyer's might know some of the extent due to discussions with the DA but they likely will learn much tomorrow.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 4:28 pm He definitely has some leverage because of all the resources needed, and it's fine to make some exceptions to ensure everything goes smoothly.

But his demand to be played in by the NYPD Pipe Band with Flava Flav as his hype man during the perp ride in a tiger-drawn chariot is a wee bit too much.

Have you never seen Flava Flav? That sounds exactly like something he’d want to do. And he already has the tiger drawn chariot as he uses that to get around his lawn.

I'm wondering if there is enough coverage. I think I heard on MSNBC that Trump took a 'perfect dump' to make room for some of his hometown favorite eats - KFC.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 1:37 pm

Trump’s company “grossed up” Cohen’s reimbursement for the Daniels payment to defray tax payments, according to federal prosecutors who filed criminal charges against the lawyer in connection with the payments in 2018. In all, Cohen got $360,000 plus a $60,000 bonus, for a total of $420,000.

Cohen pleaded guilty to violating federal campaign finance law in connection with the payments. Federal prosecutors say the payments amounted to illegal, unreported assistance to Trump’s campaign. But they declined to file charges against Trump himself.

Trump reimbursing Cohen doesn't suddenly make rhe payments legal. If anything, it's an attempt to avoid recording the payment to avoid taxes and campaign finance law.


https://apnews.com/article/trump-stormy ... fbc6fe3c2a

Hmm. Maybe. But at some level, doesn't that depend a lot on when the payments to Cohen were made? My understanding is that Cohen made the payment to Stormy late October 2016 and started submitting invoices to Trump a month or so later in December. The first payments were made in January 2017 as part of the payment plan Cohen worked out with Trump and his minions in which they'd pay him back the $130K plus additional fees and costs. Setting aside the fact that Trump routinely stiffs anyone he possibly can, none of that really looks like a campaign contribution. It looks, at least on its face, more like payment for legal services rendered.

I guess I'm not sure I really understand that underlying Cohen conviction for a campaign finance violation. I'd understand it better if it was someone other than Trump funding the hush money. Then it truly would appear to be laundering a campaign expense (assuming the hush money is actually a campaign expense and not a personal one). But wouldn't Trump himself have been free to make the payment to Daniels, whether it were a campaign expense or not? There are not limits to how much money a candidate can spend on his own campaign, right? Is the issues that it wasn't Trump himself but, instead, the Trump Organization? That would make sense, I guess, but it still seems like a trivial thing given the incredibly slim distinctions between Trump and his Org.

In the end, if these really are the charges against Trump in NYC, I'm just left with the feeling like this is a really unfortunate thing to indict a former president over. The charges seem like a stretch and a very technical and persnickety one at that. Obviously it's odious to be be paying hush money to silence women about affairs. But it's not criminal. And it feels like a really bad precedent to start leveling technical, persnickety criminal charges in local courts against former presidents or those actively campaigning for the presidency.

Like others have said, we are largely guessing. Nobody outside of a handful have any real knowledge of what he's charged with or why.

Maybe it's nitpicking technicalities, or maybe it's a smoking gun. We just don't know.

Trump didn’t fund it. Cohen paid it. Lawyers are not in the business of using our funds to pay client settlements.

Trump acted to hide it from reporters during the election. Probably the only reason Cohen was repaid eventually was because it was so bad if Cohen wasn’t repaid. This story would have sunk any politician other than Trump.

Trying to manufacture a tax deduction from a settlement is fraud. Everything about how Cohen billed it shows and intent to defraud. This may not be the worst offense, but it is fraud for business and tax purposes. It makes a mockery of campaign finance restrictions.

Funny thing is trumps dalliances seem to make him more popular so it’s unclear why he didn’t boast about it except perhaps to avoid the wrath of his wife (not that seems to have stopped him before).

When interviewed evangelical supporters say he’s only human yet condemn Kamala Harris to hell merely for marrying a divorcee.

Yeah, but Harris is a WIMMEN!

Kurth wrote: ↑Mon Apr 03, 2023 6:52 pmIn the end, if these really are the charges against Trump in NYC, I'm just left with the feeling like this is a really unfortunate thing to indict a former president over. The charges seem like a stretch and a very technical and persnickety one at that. Obviously it's odious to be be paying hush money to silence women about affairs. But it's not criminal. And it feels like a really bad precedent to start leveling technical, persnickety criminal charges in local courts against former presidents or those actively campaigning for the presidency.

This is tough because we've been driven to this by many factors. That'd be in part due to a toothless DOJ and lawless conduct at the highest levels. That has culminated in some pretty big fissures opening up in our society as we watch "elites" run amok in plain sight including several President's who appear to have committed crimes. Making the problem worse was Nixon and Clinton were "saved" with irregular resolutions to their legal problems. In the same system that imprisons people at the highest incarceration rate in the world. It has been extremely corrosive to public trust and consequently has led to public order breaking down. It's an intrinsic ingredient to our problems IMO. It bred the environment that made Trump possible.

I share this concern about localities rising up to charge former Presidents but that's only happening because main DOJ suffers from a major case of risk aversion when it comes to high profile crime. The revelations from Berman's book about Barr's conduct at main DOJ, general knowledge of the Barr cesspool, and the recent discovery that Vance was told to stand down only are extremely damaging as well. SDNY let the charges in the Cohen affair die on the vine and are a direct line to what is happening in the Manhattan DAs office. Yes - they have very proper excuses - but that's what they are. Excuses. IMO that is why the thing to focus on instead of Bragg's conduct. This affair is much more about DOJ being in a failure state than anything else. It should be recognized as a major shame that systemic incapability has reached a point where local prosecutors have lost trust in the federal system to protect us from criminal conduct at the highest levels.

And that's the crux of it. We need to deal with someone who is as brazenly, openly criminal as Trump. It doesn't really matter that he is running for office. Trump announced his run for President shortly after it was discovered he likely committed serious national security crimes. Ostensibly to have "political persecution" as a vehicle to complain about. We need to put that problem squarely on Trump and his gross misconduct as a "leader". He constantly puts himself above all others and we shouldn't let that dissuade us from prosecuting his many crimes.

This is a case where the co-conspirator confessed to taking action at Trump’s direction. And the Trump Organization falsified business records to the level of criminal tax fraud, with its chief financial officer admitting guilt to take the blame.

This isn’t a slippery slope. Trump went off the train tracks and left wreckage down the hill.

If you have this much baggage and commit mayhem, maybe you shouldn’t be President. Because your actions are likely to be exposed.

Zarathud wrote: ↑Tue Apr 04, 2023 10:11 am

If you have this much baggage and commit mayhem, maybe you shouldn’t be President. Because your actions are likely to be exposed.

Counterpoint: That is exactly why you want to be president. With all the trappings of the office, there's a good chance to avoid the consequences.

Paying hush money wasn't a permanent solution, it just had to get him through the election. Nomination, really.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Tue Apr 04, 2023 11:19 am Counterpoint: That is exactly why you want to be president. With all the trappings of the office, there's a good chance to avoid the consequences.

Right. That's why this is important. Maybe Clinton and Nixon got off light but they accepted some level of accountability. Nothing compared to the way the "little people" get treated by this system but there was something. Trump thumbs his nose at accountability and he is exactly the sort of person we need to cut down to size if we are to survive. If we turn power into a license to commit crime, then we may continue to run towards embracing a Russian-style oligarchy and become a mafia nation.

Yeah! Only money should be a license to commit crime!