• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Cohen Pleaded Guilty to Charges That Are Not Crimes, Says Former FEC Chair

That seems to be apparent on this thread judging by a few of the responses. Too bad one has to be so politically motivated, and anti-Trump that they won't even acknowledge that former FEC chair knows his stuff.

Of course. I saw a twenty something woman on one of the leftwing networks hilariously trying to school Alan Dershowitz. TDS makes its victims quite crazed.
 
Ah, the sweet, fetid stench of utter desperation.

So Cohen agreed to a plea deal, and a federal judge allowed it, for things that weren't actually crimes? And what he specifically plead guilty to wasn't specifically referenced, by federal code, in the deal?

Yeah. You run with that. Let us know how it all turns out.

Just because Cohen plead guilty does not mean he committed a crime. You really should read the O/P article to find out why.
 
Of course. I saw a twenty something woman on one of the leftwing networks hilariously trying to school Alan Dershowitz. TDS makes its victims quite crazed.

Dershowitz also agrees with former Federal Elections Commission chair Bradley Smith. Yeah, I could never figure our how armchair attorneys posting anonymously on message boards attempt to say Dershowitz has it all wrong. He calls Stormy "a nothing case." He likens Cohen's plea to jay walking.
 
Last edited:
Just because Cohen plead guilty does not mean he committed a crime. You really should read the O/P article to find out why.

LOL! So a federal judge allowed him to plead guilty to things that he cannot actually plead guilty to.

You should understand the basics of our legal and court systems to find out why that's not possible.
 
Plead guilty to charges that aren't crimes?

:lamo
 
I’ll need a lawyer to help me out; how does one plead guilty to something that is not a crime? In a court of law?


AS to the OP: ”The Epoch Times?” Chinese multi language paper?

Clearly, the judge was in on the Vast Liberal Conspiracy, and so was Cohen's lawyer.
 
Of course the former FEC chair knows CAMPAIGN LAW, and anyone who reads the above article and comes to a different conclusion is simply burying their head in the sand.

This is a nothing burger for Trump but it gives the illusion of guilt for him because of course it implicates him in campaign finance violation. Not that it matters now, but I am wondering if Cohen knew this when he plead guilty to two charges that aren't crimes...that this would not hurt Trump legally? Things to ponder.... :think:

I wish people would stop using the term "nothing burger".

It gets me hungry every time.
 
4d9.gif

OK, I had to give you a like for that one.
 
This is why anything Cohen would claim about Trump is rather worthless. People will say anything to save themselves in most cases. The funny part is that nothing about the payments to Daniels is illegal, regardless of whether Trump instructed Cohen or not. Seeing the orgasmic joy of the leftwing media at this scrawny morsel is amusing and sad at the same time. That being said, the GOP must hold the House as the Democrats will move to impeach regardless. Law and facts mean nothing to them.

Oh, do we need to add people testifying pursuant to cooperation agreements to the list of things Trump supporters suddenly pretend to be experts about (ie, FISA warrants and anything else that touched Team Trump)?



Please. None of you give a **** about that as a general matter, just like you didn't really give any ****s about FISA warrants. It's all just a game. You're expressing concern because and only because Cohen said Trump did something wrong. You're not going to be up in arms because someone accused of drug dealing and murdering to protect his business got convicted on testimony given pursuant to a plea bargain, or anyone else. It's Trump and just Trump.

Enough of the brazenly dishonest spin.
 
I’ll need a lawyer to help me out; how does one plead guilty to something that is not a crime? In a court of law?


AS to the OP: ”The Epoch Times?” Chinese multi language paper?

The facts and crimes in a charging information are only allegations of a crime. Cohen admitting to the truth of those facts alleged in the charging instrument, and pleading guilty to those factual allegations, renders Cohen guilty on the basis of his admission and plea of guilty but does not show or demonstrate the allegations made against the co-conspirators are true.
 
The quoted source in the OP didn't even say it wasn't a crime.

He said it probably wasn't a crime, and he based that not on the evidence the prosecutors have, but on what he saw in Cohen's indictment/testimony. He couldn't even bear to back Trump completely, no one can, unless they sign an NDA apparently.

I also like how Trump compared Obama's civil violations as though to imply Obama "got off" or something. Keep feeding them animal feed and they'll continue to act like animals.
 
Last edited:
The facts and crimes in a charging information are only allegations of a crime. Cohen admitting to the truth of those facts alleged in the charging instrument, and pleading guilty to those factual allegations, renders Cohen guilty on the basis of his admission and plea of guilty but does not show or demonstrate the allegations made against the co-conspirators are true.


If I understood the OP position, it was Cohen that pleaded to non crimes; no mention of a co-conspirator in my post. Sorry for the confusion.
 
I’ll need a lawyer to help me out; how does one plead guilty to something that is not a crime? In a court of law?


AS to the OP: ”The Epoch Times?” Chinese multi language paper?

they don't, this is typical right wing bull****. These people have absolutely no shame, they are worse than deplorables
 
If I understood the OP position, it was Cohen that pleaded to non crimes; no mention of a co-conspirator in my post. Sorry for the confusion.

Okay. Simple answer, there is the factual basis Cohen plead to and the factual basis is to constitute as a crime. Which is to say Cohen admitted to facts which met the statutory elements and the judge accepted the plea and factual basis.

Now, as a matter of law, there is always the question of whether the factual basis Cohen admitted to and pled guilty to does meet the statutory elements of the statute. The former FEC individual in the opening post is essentially arguing the facts upon which Cohen pled guilty to and admitted do not violate the statute.
 
Okay. Simple answer, there is the factual basis Cohen plead to and the factual basis is to constitute as a crime. Which is to say Cohen admitted to facts which met the statutory elements and the judge accepted the plea and factual basis.

Now, as a matter of law, there is always the question of whether the factual basis Cohen admitted to and pled guilty to does meet the statutory elements of the statute. The former FEC individual in the opening post is essentially arguing the facts upon which Cohen pled guilty to and admitted do not violate the statute.

He's also admitting to facts not supported by the evidence, which in and of itself is reversible error. No, he did this for one reason and one reason only. Davis told him that insodoing, he could get a much lighter sentence. The Optics is what Lanny was looking for, he knows, as any tenured lawyer knows, this campaign violation amounts to nothing, is extremely hard to prove for prosecution, and even if found in favor of the prosecution would levy a small fine at best.. Lanny, is heavily in the Hillary camp and was probably as shocked as everyone else that she lost. What he did, with Cohen, although not illegal, was ethically challenged. Having your client cop to a crime he wasn't even charged with, that under normal circumstances would NEVER even budge the prosecution in lowering your real criminal charges and sentence, smell of collusion between a decrepit (Obama leftover) DOJ, hell bent on Trump's removal from office.

It also really makes me start to wonder about just who is in control of our nation. Revelations of late, considering the intelligence apparatus, and various elements within the DOJ, FBI, and others, gives rise to real concern about our democratic republic. We all think that we elect leaders to be in control, and those leaders check the other leaders, but really the true power of our government seems to come from unelected bureaucrats, and that is a very dangerous thing, and needs to be addressed fully. Obama completely destroyed the DOJ, and various other government agencies by weaponizing them, and incoming Presidents simply can't remove everyone all at the same time. If nothing else, what we're seeing with the transition from the Obama years is many, many holdovers that still have it out for Republican's, and think they simply know better than the American people.

To me, this is the scary times, as we all thought it went on, but until recently, never understood to what scope the corruption really is.

Terrifying to me!

Tim-
 
Of course the former FEC chair knows CAMPAIGN LAW, and anyone who reads the above article and comes to a different conclusion is simply burying their head in the sand.

This is a nothing burger for Trump but it gives the illusion of guilt for him because of course it implicates him in campaign finance violation. Not that it matters now, but I am wondering if Cohen knew this when he plead guilty to two charges that aren't crimes...that this would not hurt Trump legally? Things to ponder.... :think:

Exactly -- and although a former FEC expert tries to set them straight -- they don't want to hear it. They stick their fingers in their ears to block out the truth.

I'm worried. Not about this affecting Trump, but rather about those who are so very, very desperate that they resort to these kinds of deceptions.
 
Exactly -- and although a former FEC expert tries to set them straight -- they don't want to hear it. They stick their fingers in their ears to block out the truth.

I'm worried. Not about this affecting Trump, but rather about those who are so very, very desperate that they resort to these kinds of deceptions.

We are living in scary times, there is no doubt about it.
 
Pleaded Guilty to Charges That Are Not Crimes, Says Former FEC Chair

I suppose if one is staring at a maximum of 63 years for serious crimes such as tax evasion, et al, they'd be smart to plea a sweetheart deal. Of course Cohen acted to save himself the expense and embarrassment of what would be a highly visible, and expensive jury trial.

At any rate, if the former FEC chair says Cohen didn't commit the two campaign violation crimes, I have to think the prosecution made it look like Trump is implicated in the "appearance" of those two crimes. Now tell me why they would do that just a couple of months before the midterm elections? Smells like a witch hunt to me.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The FEC is an independent regulatory agency whose job is relegated to enforcing campaign finance law. Serious violations, such as those deemed to be purposeful that appear to cross the line from being a regulatory infraction to being a criminal infraction are referred to the Justice Department for prosecution. The FEC doesn't do criminal prosecutions of campaign finance law violations. They only participate in civil suits. So if you truly want an expert opinion on what constitutes a crime involving campaign finance you should be consulting someone from the Justice Department who prosecutes that type of crime.
 
The FEC is an independent regulatory agency whose job is relegated to enforcing campaign finance law. Serious violations, such as those deemed to be purposeful that appear to cross the line from being a regulatory infraction to being a criminal infraction are referred to the Justice Department for prosecution. The FEC doesn't do criminal prosecutions of campaign finance law violations. They only participate in civil suits. So if you truly want an expert opinion on what constitutes a crime involving campaign finance you should be consulting someone from the Justice Department who prosecutes that type of crime.

Did you even bother to read the article?
 
Oh, do we need to add people testifying pursuant to cooperation agreements to the list of things Trump supporters suddenly pretend to be experts about (ie, FISA warrants and anything else that touched Team Trump)?



Please. None of you give a **** about that as a general matter, just like you didn't really give any ****s about FISA warrants. It's all just a game. You're expressing concern because and only because Cohen said Trump did something wrong. You're not going to be up in arms because someone accused of drug dealing and murdering to protect his business got convicted on testimony given pursuant to a plea bargain, or anyone else. It's Trump and just Trump.

Enough of the brazenly dishonest spin.

When a slow motion political coup for the presidency is happening, we'll expose it for what it is. Cohen can say whatever he likes. That doesn't make the thing he described a crime.
 
When a slow motion political coup for the presidency is happening, we'll expose it for what it is. Cohen can say whatever he likes. That doesn't make the thing he described a crime.

Coup? SAD!





Let me know when you aren't being victimized by the Vast Liberal Conspiracy

:roll:
 
This is why anything Cohen would claim about Trump is rather worthless. People will say anything to save themselves in most cases. The funny part is that nothing about the payments to Daniels is illegal, regardless of whether Trump instructed Cohen or not. Seeing the orgasmic joy of the leftwing media at this scrawny morsel is amusing and sad at the same time. That being said, the GOP must hold the House as the Democrats will move to impeach regardless. Law and facts mean nothing to them.

A scrawny morsel would be Cohen making these allegations after some sort of split from Trump ...ala Omorosa.

There is nothing scrawny about Cohen pleading guilty with a sitting Special Prosecutor looking into Trump wrong-doing. No...there is nothing scrawny about that.

Remember the nothing burger Trump supporter's gave Stormy Daniels' claims.
 
Back
Top Bottom