• 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!

Throw the book at 'em!

Who's saying the NDAs were illegal? Nobody but apparently you, AFAIK.

Im saying that had these women come forward before the election, it would not have altered the outcome. Hell, it may have helped him.
 
There was also speculation that Cohen has additional information to dish. Is it common to be sentenced and then cooperate more robustly and receive an additional reduction of sentence?

Yes. This is a fundamental prosecution tool. If the convicted provides additional valuable testimony and cooperates fully, the prosecution can file a "Supplemental Sentencing Recommendation" to the court.

Don't feel too badly for Cohen. He'll be incarcerated in what amounts to a college dormitory in upstate New York. Close enough for his family to visit often without undue burden.

Cohen won't be staying at anything like Rikers Island in New York City.
 
Im saying that had these women come forward before the election, it would not have altered the outcome. Hell, it may have helped him.

I highly doubt multi-episodes of adultery would have helped Trumps electability.
 
Who here believes that Michael Cohen just recently found his “moral compass?”

https://apnews.com/d6dbb8b02a4446f6800de794b45523e6

There was also speculation that Cohen has additional information to dish. Is it common to be sentenced and then cooperate more robustly and receive an additional reduction of sentence?


Edit: Sentencing was today, but Cohen doesn’t begin serving until early March, wassup with that?

Red:
Well, it's at least plausible that he has.


Blue:
It's not so much that Micheal Cohen himself has or hasn't more to "dish." Cohen's a self-avowed liar; thus not much of what he says will, by prosecutors, be taken, prima facie, as true. Be that as it may, the feds retrieved "tons" of documents and recordings from him -- so much that it took, what, a month or two to review it all just to determine what among it all was privileged. Little of it was thus classified, so there's surely quite a lot of "additional info to dish," as you put it, that investigators/prosecutors may find useful for brining and proving a host of charges.


Pink:
I suspect his attorneys and prosecutors made a sufficiently compelling case that he had things to get in order prior to going to jail and that he wasn't a flight risk. It could also be that the prisons servicing the relevant jurisdiction are crowded enough there simply won't, until March, be a fitting space in which to incarcerate him. It could also be that the prosecutors want him out of jail because that makes it easier for them to interact with him. Whatever the reason(s), the state doesn't consider him a material flight risk. That they don't suggests there may very well be verity to his having "come to Jesus" as goes his moral compass.
 
I highly doubt multi-episodes of adultery would have helped Trumps electability.

People already knew that about him. Plus paying off these blackmailers isnt illegal anyway.
 
I highly doubt multi-episodes of adultery would have helped Trumps electability.

People already knew that about him. Plus paying off these blackmailers isnt illegal anyway.

I'm sure some folks knew. I'm among the folks who knew he'd wed and divorced several times, but I didn't know he is as serial/repeat adulterer.

Then again, in my social circle, Trump was disreputable on both professional and personal levels. Indeed, when he announced, my lack of first-person contact with him is why I, unlike several folks I know, was, when I first heard the scuttlebutt that he'd run for POTUS, willing to give him a chance. The people I know and who know him predicted my sanguinity would be futile. They were right, and had I known them better, I'd have taken their word for it from the get-go...Alas, they're acquaintances, not close friends.
 
I'm sure some folks knew. I'm among the folks who knew he'd wed and divorced several times, but I didn't know he is as serial/repeat adulterer.

Then again, in my social circle, Trump was disreputable on both professional and personal levels. Indeed, when he announced, my lack of first-person contact with him is why I, unlike several folks I know, was, when I first heard the scuttlebutt that he'd run for POTUS, willing to give him a chance. The people I know and who know him predicted my sanguinity would be futile. They were right, and had I known them better, I'd have taken their word for it from the get-go...Alas, they're acquaintances, not close friends.

People knew of his flaws. And voted for him in spite of them because they believed he could address the issues other politicians only talked about.
 
People knew of his flaws. And voted for him in spite of them because they believed he could address the issues other politicians only talked about.

Are you, with the above remark, entreating for a discussion of normative ethics?
 
Get with the times. They threw the e-book at him.

I don't understand the allegorical point of your post, but it's truly funny enough that it made me laugh....and there's nothing not to like about a good chuckle.
 
People knew of his flaws. And voted for him in spite of them because they believed he could address the issues other politicians only talked about.

People knew of his flaws and voted for him anyway because our ridiculous and corrupt duopoly is the only game they can play, voting for the devil you don't know to keep the devil you do know out of office.
 
People knew of his flaws and voted for him anyway because our ridiculous and corrupt duopoly is the only game they can play, voting for the devil you don't know to keep the devil you do know out of office.

Better the devil you know than the devil you don't know.
-- Richard Taverner, Prouerbes or adagies with newe addicions gathered out of the Chiliades of Erasmus [of Rotterdam] (closest translation I found on the Internet)
 
Back
Top Bottom