Doc Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 6 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Because you say so? and you're always right?😂 btw, the Vegas bookies disagree with your Vegas propaganda source. you can get really good odds on trump escaping indictment. Did you place a bet? Who cares about indictment? It's a conviction that matters. 1
SoCal Deek Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 26 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Because you say so? and you're always right?😂 btw, the Vegas bookies disagree with your Vegas propaganda source. you can get really good odds on trump escaping indictment. Did you place a bet? I was just in Las Vegas. There was WAY WAY WAY more attention on March Madness. 😉 Maybe I was in the wrong sportsbook.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 (edited) 51 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: I was just in Las Vegas. There was WAY WAY WAY more attention on March Madness. 😉 Maybe I was in the wrong sportsbook. you're welcome. https://www.thesportsgeek.com/sportsbooks/political/ https://www.oddschecker.com/us/insight/specials/politics/20230321-donald-trump-indictment-odds-trump-given-92pp-chance-to-be-indicted-in-manhattan Edited March 26, 2023 by redtail hawk
SoCal Deek Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 1 hour ago, redtail hawk said: you're welcome. https://www.thesportsgeek.com/sportsbooks/political/ https://www.oddschecker.com/us/insight/specials/politics/20230321-donald-trump-indictment-odds-trump-given-92pp-chance-to-be-indicted-in-manhattan Thanks.....I still didn't see it in either Caesars Palace or the Bellagio. 😉
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 26, 2023 Posted March 26, 2023 31 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: Thanks.....I still didn't see it in either Caesars Palace or the Bellagio. 😉 Probably mob influence 1
Kemp Posted March 27, 2023 Author Posted March 27, 2023 21 hours ago, SoCal Deek said: Wrong. That is not the basis of the indictment. The case is essentially about bookkeeping. The issue is whether it’s illegal to use campaign funds for this sort of payment. It is NOT illegal for two people to willingly enter into a contract exchanging money for a ‘gag order’. (you gotta love the use of gag order 😉) You said the same thing I did. It's about whether the payout was legal ore not. 1
Kemp Posted March 27, 2023 Author Posted March 27, 2023 19 hours ago, Doc said: OK. You're on. For a felony conviction for each of the three cases you listed. You can put the check in the mail for the Stormy Daniels case, since that's, ahem, going down. Then right after put one in for the classified docs since taking Trump down means taking down Joke. Nice try. The bet is whether he gets one felony conviction from at least one of the three cases. I understand why you feel the need to change the bet. So does everyone else, here. I offered you a bet. If you don't feel comfortable taking it, that's fine. 16 hours ago, Doc said: Who cares about indictment? It's a conviction that matters. You can't bet this stuff in Vegas. You can bet it elsewhere. https://www.oddschecker.com/us/insight/specials/politics/20230321-donald-trump-indictment-odds-trump-given-92pp-chance-to-be-indicted-in-manhattan 1
All_Pro_Bills Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 1 hour ago, Kemp said: You said the same thing I did. It's about whether the payout was legal ore not. I think its clear using campaign funds for such a payment is illegal. But one claim is Cohen paid Daniels with "his own funds" which seems absurd as he had no relationship with her, it was Trump. But does the State of New York have any legal standing to bring charges for an alleged violation of Federal campaign law that the DOJ has declined to pursue? I think "no", but the Manhattan DA's office has translated this into a violation of some State law. There seems to be ongoing internal debate at the DA's office about the merit of such an argument. My guess is that's part of the hesitation to bring charges to this point. 1
SoCal Deek Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 1 hour ago, Kemp said: You said the same thing I did. It's about whether the payout was legal ore not. It is not whether the payment is legal. It’s about whether it’s been recorded legally per the business code. It’s similar to whether you’re allowed to write something off on your taxes. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 2 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: I think its clear using campaign funds for such a payment is illegal. But one claim is Cohen paid Daniels with "his own funds" which seems absurd as he had no relationship with her, it was Trump. But does the State of New York have any legal standing to bring charges for an alleged violation of Federal campaign law that the DOJ has declined to pursue? I think "no", but the Manhattan DA's office has translated this into a violation of some State law. There seems to be ongoing internal debate at the DA's office about the merit of such an argument. My guess is that's part of the hesitation to bring charges to this point. and therefore, if trump used campaign funds , he committed a crime and should be prosecuted somewhere. right??
SoCal Deek Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: and therefore, if trump used campaign funds , he committed a crime and should be prosecuted somewhere. right?? I’m certainly no expert on campaign funding laws but I’ve seen being said there are more than a few ‘problems’ with the currently contemplated charges, including the statute of limitations, the standing of local Justice office in a federal election case, the reliance on a convicted liar as the witness, and the elevation of this ‘crime’ from a misdemeanor to a felony. But you’re correct if the DA believes a crime was committed the DA can certainly bring charges. Edited March 27, 2023 by SoCal Deek
Doc Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 1 hour ago, Kemp said: Nice try. The bet is whether he gets one felony conviction from at least one of the three cases. I understand why you feel the need to change the bet. So does everyone else, here. I offered you a bet. If you don't feel comfortable taking it, that's fine. You posted odds for 3 separate cases. Now you want to combine them all? Who's changing the bet now?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 53 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: It is not whether the payment is legal. It’s about whether it’s been recorded legally per the business code. It’s similar to whether you’re allowed to write something off on your taxes. Doing your best spin again…bookkeeping. If this money was recorded as a campaign expense, do you think it was intentional?
SoCal Deek Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 Just now, redtail hawk said: Doing your best spin again…bookkeeping. If this money was recorded as a campaign expense, do you think it was intentional? The one federal prosecutor that I heard interviewed said that they already looked at the issue and that while questionable on face value, the payment is NOT in violation of what the statute is written to prevent. I’m going to trust that he knows the federal statute better than you or I do.
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 4 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: The one federal prosecutor that I heard interviewed said that they already looked at the issue and that while questionable on face value, the payment is NOT in violation of what the statute is written to prevent. I’m going to trust that he knows the federal statute better than you or I do. And I’m trusting the people that possess all the available information: the DA and his office. I’ve also heard federal prosecutors that believe the case has foundation but I’m not cherry picking Let’s see if and when the charges are announced 1
Doc Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 This was scrutinized heavily at the time it was first reported and everyone punted on it. Now some local DA thinks he knows better?
SoCal Deek Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 8 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: And I’m trusting the people that possess all the available information: the DA and his office. I’ve also heard federal prosecutors that believe the case has foundation but I’m not cherry picking Let’s see if and when the charges are announced So maybe you can explain to Kemp that the case isn’t about the payment itself but rather about whether it’s a legitimately recorded campaign expense.
LeviF Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 12 minutes ago, Doc said: This was scrutinized heavily at the time it was first reported and everyone punted on it. Now some local DA thinks he knows better? Let's say NY DA actually charge Trump. I have a surefire way to know if it is a political persecution vs. a legitimate prosecution: If Trump spends a single minute behind bars, it's a political/media stunt. 100% Those of you who know nothing about criminal justice in New York County need not reply. 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted March 27, 2023 Posted March 27, 2023 31 minutes ago, LeviF said: Let's say NY DA actually charge Trump. I have a surefire way to know if it is a political persecution vs. a legitimate prosecution: If Trump spends a single minute behind bars, it's a political/media stunt. 100% Those of you who know nothing about criminal justice in New York County need not reply. And if he’s acquitted? So, according to you, either way, it’s political persecution!
Recommended Posts