Hypocrisy on the Stormy Daniels front

[CCCCCCC]

This is nothing but Democrats grasping for straws. I mean, they have had a team of seasoned lawyers and FBI agents dig thru Donny T’s life for the past year and a half. This is what they find? Oh by the way, we have to believe that his shady lawyer who is admittedly guilty of a host of other crimes is actually telling the truth about Trumps knowledge of the events. Very few could stand up to this level of scrutiny and still be so clean.

 

[CCCCCCC]

Pardon the interruption of this circle jerk, but it looks like at least some people here are completely holding Trump non-responsible for the campaign violations?

Am I reading that right?

Do you guys think Trump maybe had Cohen do some stuff he shouldn't have done, while knowing he shouldn't have done it?

Trump was working with his lawyer to settle a ongoing case that dated back to 2011. His lawyer who is a legal expert, advised him on how to proceed. It is not against campaign finance to pay for anything otherwise legal out of your own pocket btw. And if there were any violations, wouldn’t they be on the “expert” lawyer who advised his client? What am I missing here?

 

[Hohn]

The average American should be taking away one key insight: the federal criminal statutes, and those that prosecute violations of them, are completely out of control.

Read those books on "three felonies a day" and such. There are so many laws on the books that anyone can be prosecuted for anything at just about anytime. There is NO due process attached to the decision about whom to prosecute, and unlike police (who have *qualified* immunity), the prosecutors have absolute immunity over whom to prosecute. "Malicious prosecution" is incredibly difficult to prove, and has to do with *how* a case is prosecuted, not whom.

I remember the Kenneth Starr days. And yes, there was a ton of stuff in the Clintons that did (and does) deserve investigation/prosecuting.

But modern prosecution is essentially a carte blanche of unlimited authority, unlimited resources, unchecked discretion. A prosecutor can tear up your home, ruin your life, end your career and utterly devastate you.

Even if you're perfectly innocent and have done nothing but cooperated.

And what happens when they do this unjustly? "My bad." If you even get that.


There are lots and lots of protections built into the justice system to protect due process once you are prosecuted. But each of us is completely exposed and without any protection at the most important stage of all: whom to prosecute.

One thing that might help is banning plea bargains. These are as close to "fruit of the poisonous tree" as you can get and still be legal.

But nothing would help so much as reining in the out of control federal administrative bureacracy. You can get indicted and go to jail for violating a regulation-- not a law, but a regulation-- promulgated by an agency run by people that NOBODY voted for and who operates with almost complete impunity.

Remember those news articles back in the ammo shortage days about the Feds buying billions of rounds for all their Federal LEO divisions?

What was missed in all those stories was the REAL scare: that there are dozens of armed police agencies enforcing at gunpoint the rules and regs that issued not from Congress, but from unaccountable and unelected agencies. Some bureaucrat three layers below anyone appointed can creatively interpret rules in a way that utterly ruins your life. And you won't even know you broke the law until your in prison pondering this insanity for 10-25 years.

You think the Lois Lerners of the world are the fluke? You think nobody in the other agencies are waging the own personal crusade with their own private police force?


What has this to do with Trump? Everything. Since everyone in power seems to hate him, we are seeing just how corrupt the whole apparatus is.


Mueller has essentially unlimited time and money to go fishing into the life of anyone who ever did anything with anyone who ever did anything with Trump. It's the prosecutorial version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon. Only with subpoenas and indictments.

In theory, this is about some collusion with Russia. So how is it that they are filing (and winning) cases about tax evasion? Campaign finance?

My view: IC should only be able to file charges-- or refer them-- within the scope of its mandate. When you combine the power of plea bargains and leverage with the ability to prosecute any crime found, you have what Trump has called it: a witch hunt. If the IC is looking for a collusion case, the collusion case is ALL it should be able to find.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Pardon the interruption of this circle jerk, but it looks like at least some people here are completely holding Trump non-responsible for the campaign violations?

Am I reading that right?

Do you guys think Trump maybe had Cohen do some stuff he shouldn't have done, while knowing he shouldn't have done it?

I'd say it's more of the fact what Trump is has already been baked into the cake. So far, what he's done, if it ever proves to be true is nothing more than any of his predecessors have done....and again, it's baked into the cake. Trump is scratching a certain itch right now and he's their man, so unless they find him in a cloak closet with an alter boy, they're not going to turn on him.

 

[T.Lex]

I'd say it's more of the fact what Trump is has already been baked into the cake. So far, what he's done, if it ever proves to be true is nothing more than any of his predecessors have done....and again, it's baked into the cake. Trump is scratching a certain itch right now and he's their man, so unless they find him in a cloak closet with an alter boy, they're not going to turn on him.

[The rep anti-papacy says I need to spread some rep around before giving you any more, which I was going to do for the callback to a totally separate thread.]

 

[actaeon277]

 

[T.Lex]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45301884

Sounds like the Trump corporate (not campaign) finance manager has also been granted immunity.

This may be surprising to some, but I really hate that this is going to turn into a YUGE double feature dumpster fire and **** show.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45301884

Sounds like the Trump corporate (not campaign) finance manager has also been granted immunity.

This may be surprising to some, but I really hate that this is going to turn into a YUGE double feature dumpster fire and **** show.

I really hate the whole "granting immunity" thing in general. If you have to grant immunity to someone, to me at least, that means they have something illegal to hide themselves. That seems like it should speak volumes about their character and credibility. If I were a juror, I would take that into account, and probably wouldn't believe a word they said. If I were a judge, I would instruct the jury to disregard their testimony.

 

[nonobaddog]

Yup, granting immunity is another hole in our moral fabric.

Marshall Dillon never granted immunity.

 

[Trigger Time]

The average American should be taking away one key insight: the federal criminal statutes, and those that prosecute violations of them, are completely out of control.

Read those books on "three felonies a day" and such. There are so many laws on the books that anyone can be prosecuted for anything at just about anytime. There is NO due process attached to the decision about whom to prosecute, and unlike police (who have *qualified* immunity), the prosecutors have absolute immunity over whom to prosecute. "Malicious prosecution" is incredibly difficult to prove, and has to do with *how* a case is prosecuted, not whom.

I remember the Kenneth Starr days. And yes, there was a ton of stuff in the Clintons that did (and does) deserve investigation/prosecuting.

But modern prosecution is essentially a carte blanche of unlimited authority, unlimited resources, unchecked discretion. A prosecutor can tear up your home, ruin your life, end your career and utterly devastate you.

Even if you're perfectly innocent and have done nothing but cooperated.

And what happens when they do this unjustly? "My bad." If you even get that.


There are lots and lots of protections built into the justice system to protect due process once you are prosecuted. But each of us is completely exposed and without any protection at the most important stage of all: whom to prosecute.

One thing that might help is banning plea bargains. These are as close to "fruit of the poisonous tree" as you can get and still be legal.

But nothing would help so much as reining in the out of control federal administrative bureacracy. You can get indicted and go to jail for violating a regulation-- not a law, but a regulation-- promulgated by an agency run by people that NOBODY voted for and who operates with almost complete impunity.

Remember those news articles back in the ammo shortage days about the Feds buying billions of rounds for all their Federal LEO divisions?

What was missed in all those stories was the REAL scare: that there are dozens of armed police agencies enforcing at gunpoint the rules and regs that issued not from Congress, but from unaccountable and unelected agencies. Some bureaucrat three layers below anyone appointed can creatively interpret rules in a way that utterly ruins your life. And you won't even know you broke the law until your in prison pondering this insanity for 10-25 years.

You think the Lois Lerners of the world are the fluke? You think nobody in the other agencies are waging the own personal crusade with their own private police force?


What has this to do with Trump? Everything. Since everyone in power seems to hate him, we are seeing just how corrupt the whole apparatus is.


Mueller has essentially unlimited time and money to go fishing into the life of anyone who ever did anything with anyone who ever did anything with Trump. It's the prosecutorial version of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon. Only with subpoenas and indictments.

In theory, this is about some collusion with Russia. So how is it that they are filing (and winning) cases about tax evasion? Campaign finance?

My view: IC should only be able to file charges-- or refer them-- within the scope of its mandate. When you combine the power of plea bargains and leverage with the ability to prosecute any crime found, you have what Trump has called it: a witch hunt. If the IC is looking for a collusion case, the collusion case is ALL it should be able to find.

Beautiful post. This is everything I've thought and observed but you were able to eloquently put thoughts into words. Bravo. THIS is what's wrong with the justice system

 

[Trigger Time]

This needs to go viral

 

[Trigger Time]

I really hate the whole "granting immunity" thing in general. If you have to grant immunity to someone, to me at least, that means they have something illegal to hide themselves. That seems like it should speak volumes about their character and credibility. If I were a juror, I would take that into account, and probably wouldn't believe a word they said. If I were a judge, I would instruct the jury to disregard their testimony.

Yep. Its dirty and the prosecution knows its dirty. Immunities is NOT blind and equal justice, it is weaponizing testimony to fire at an adversary that you now have a personal beef with because you are too consumed by winning a case you have lost touch with your mandate.

 

[T.Lex]

I really hate the whole "granting immunity" thing in general. If you have to grant immunity to someone, to me at least, that means they have something illegal to hide themselves. That seems like it should speak volumes about their character and credibility. If I were a juror, I would take that into account, and probably wouldn't believe a word they said. If I were a judge, I would instruct the jury to disregard their testimony.

Immunity generally is another tool in the toolbox. There are a couple different kinds, so it may be important to talk about specifically what it is, and what it is not. Like any other tool, it can be abused and applied in ways that it wasn't intended.

But, one area that it works really well is with a conspiracy or cover-up. Someone "small" who may have been complicit in something illegal, but isn't the real criminal, can help authorities find and prosecute the person who is really responsible. That seems like a worthy goal.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Immunity generally is another tool in the toolbox. There are a couple different kinds, so it may be important to talk about specifically what it is, and what it is not. Like any other tool, it can be abused and applied in ways that it wasn't intended.

But, one area that it works really well is with a conspiracy or cover-up. Someone "small" who may have been complicit in something illegal, but isn't the real criminal, can help authorities find and prosecute the person who is really responsible. That seems like a worthy goal.

Fair enough, but would the Trump (corporate) CFO be considered one of these "small fish"?

 

[T.Lex]

Fair enough, but would the Trump (corporate) CFO be considered one of these "small fish"?

Relatively, yes - absolutely. Speculating, I don't think this would be a role that allowed someone to use much discretion. That is, he stands between Trump and Trump's money. He probably only spent it on stuff that Trump approved.

 

[Trigger Time]

So the Democrats funded a fake dossier which top Democrats then used to lie to fisa judges to get warrants to spy on Americans and the trump campaign and now we find out the federal government under Obama then paid a known Russian spy to infiltrate the trump campaign and set up meetings with the Russians to try to entrap members of the Trump campaign into doing illegal things with Russia which they still never did. And the government used all of this and their fake made up **** to then get a special prosecutor appointed.
This is the poison fruit weve been looking for. Every investigation and conviction that's came out of the Mueller investigation has been based on an illegal investigation and therefore should be overturned and the special prosecutor fired. These Democrat traitors who set all of this up need prosecuted to the fullest extent

 

[rob63]

Ironically, as near as I can tell, the only people that ever told us the truth about what was actually going on with the election was the Russians.

 

[jamil]

Immunity generally is another tool in the toolbox. There are a couple different kinds, so it may be important to talk about specifically what it is, and what it is not. Like any other tool, it can be abused and applied in ways that it wasn't intended.

But, one area that it works really well is with a conspiracy or cover-up. Someone "small" who may have been complicit in something illegal, but isn't the real criminal, can help authorities find and prosecute the person who is really responsible. That seems like a worthy goal.

But, can easily be misused to forgive one “real criminal” to take down a political enemy.

 

[T.Lex]

But, can easily be misused to forgive one “real criminal” to take down a political enemy.

Even assuming that's what's going on in this situation (I don't think it is; I think there are more real criminals), how often does that really happen? I mean, this would certainly be a YUGE situation to do that, but I can't think of another time immunity has been used for such a thing. I'm only on my first coffee (or covfeve), so maybe I'm just not thinking hard enough.

I'm generally against scuttling an entire toolset just because its being misused in an isolated subset of cases.

 

[KLB]

What is the definition of real criminals being used here?