Proof of Guilt!

[ecofarm]

And you've heard, like, 1% of the tapes?

Patience, my friend. No doubt Mueller is saving the best for last

I think it's wrong for him to let Cohen point fingers in a guilty plea and then not provide the proof. Is this a tv show teaser?

 

[Luckyone]

Still no proof I see, sorry but accusations are not proof of anything


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What you are saying is that even if there have been many robberies in your neighborhood and a suspicious man has been seen "casing" your house on several occasions and has even been seen with a gun in his pocket, you will wait until he breaks in and robs you before calling the police, right?

 

[Luckyone]

I think it's wrong for him to let Cohen point fingers in a guilty plea and then not provide the proof. Is this a tv show teaser?

Yes, he (Mueller) is using the same reality show suspense that Trump used in the past. Mueller is fighting fire with fire but Mueller has a fire gun and Trump has a match.

 

[ecofarm]

Yes, he (Mueller) is using the same reality show suspense that Trump used in the past. Mueller is fighting fire with fire but Mueller has a fire gun and Trump has a match.

I dunno. If Mueller has the goods, why present them via a sleazy lawyer and no proof?

 

[Luckyone]

I dunno. If Mueller has the goods, why present them via a sleazy lawyer and no proof?

You evidently have not been reading clearly.

This thing with Cohen has nothing to do with Mueller. Mueller is probably "aware" of what is happening and may want to use Cohen in the near future. Right now this is all about the State of New York against Michael Cohen and it is the New York prosecutors that are in charge and they are not necessarily interested in Trump but in Cohen.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Still no proof I see, sorry but accusations are not proof of anything


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tell that to all the mobsters in prison because their underlings flipped. Your claim is just silly.

Nobody is going to believe the Cohen acted on his own. I don't think even Trump supporters believe that. Do you believe that? Why are you wasting our time?

 

[ecofarm]

You evidently have not been reading clearly.

Spare us. The superior attitude is unearned.

 

[Lutherf]

Since I have been on DP, the one thing that all Trump supporters have said over and over again when given derogatory remarks about the President is "show proof of guilt". There was even one thread where another Trump supporter said "show proof that he has lied".

Today, in one fell swoop, proof of both has arrived. Egg in the face has now been splattered.

Cohen pleaded guilty to 8 charges, one of which was illegal campaign contributions at the bequest of President Trump in paying off the 2 women that were accusing Trump of having slept with them. These payments were made in order to influence the 2016 election.

Given that Trump has been asked repeatedly if he knew of those payments and having answered in a negative way, not only has it been proven that Trump has committed a crime but that he lied about it.

How will Trump supporters now handle this?

It has not been proven that Trump committed any crime. It hasn’t even been proven that Cohen committed a crime related to campaign finance.

First, Cohen plead guilty to committing a violation of campaign finance law. That isn’t the same as being found guilty. No trial was conducted and no contradictory evidence regarding the alleged crime was presented. The admission was totally self serving and in Cohen’s interest in avoiding trial and a potentially lengthy prison sentence.

Second, Cohen can not confess on behalf of Trump. He can accuse Trump but that isn’t proof that a crime was committed.

Third, while Cohen says Trump directed the payment there is an audio tape released by Cohen’s attorney which indicates that Cohen, not Trump, recommended payment to McDougal and arranged the whole transaction.

 

[gdgyva]

Since I have been on DP, the one thing that all Trump supporters have said over and over again when given derogatory remarks about the President is "show proof of guilt". There was even one thread where another Trump supporter said "show proof that he has lied".

Today, in one fell swoop, proof of both has arrived. Egg in the face has now been splattered.

Cohen pleaded guilty to 8 charges, one of which was illegal campaign contributions at the bequest of President Trump in paying off the 2 women that were accusing Trump of having slept with them. These payments were made in order to influence the 2016 election.

Given that Trump has been asked repeatedly if he knew of those payments and having answered in a negative way, not only has it been proven that Trump has committed a crime but that he lied about it.

How will Trump supporters now handle this?

the payoffs to Stormy Daniels and to whoever else was paid are NOT necessarily illegal

Even if the intent was to keep the women from talking, nondisclosure agreements in themselves are done daily around the world....and yes, payments are often attached to them

It depends on where the money came from....whose money it was....and whether or not anyone was coerced/forced to sign the agreements

 

[Lutherf]

To begin with, Tapes aren’t Worthless. To end this part of the post, Tapes aren’t Worthless.

Some are still willing to take the Word of One over the Word of Everyone Else.

That’s an interesting comment. See, the whole basis of our criminal justice system is that public opinion can not be used to assign guilt. The defendant always has the right to defend themselves.

With regard to tapes not being worthless, I agree. In fact, the tape which has been released related to the issue at hand indicates that Cohen, not Trump, initiated the plan to compensate McDougal.

 

[Lutherf]

Unsubstantiated claims made somehow in a guilty plea are not proof.

I'm not trying to "defend Trump", I'm trying to be realistic. Trump will claim he ordered the payments but not in an illegal manner, or he didn't know his request was in an illegal manner and no one told him. That is what "proof" is up against, and it's gonna need more than a scumbag lawyer's word.

People seem to be confused between the definition of “evidence” and the definition of “proof”. As you say, they are not the same thing.

 

[Mach]

Two charges, 7 & 8. Right now we have only Cohen's word, which is worthless.

No, we also have the financial records of Cohen's reimbursement, in a year he apparently did no "legal" work for POTUS. This goes to Luckyone's argument that Trump lied about knowledge of the payment.
Prosecutors say they have a lot more, but it's irrelevant unless they can charge POTUS which the cannot right now.

But Tuesday's filing offers the most detailed look yet into the full scope of Trump's payments to Cohen and how they were made.
Specifically, prosecutors say Cohen "sought reimbursement for that money by submitting invoices to the candidate's company, which were untrue and false."
The Trump Organization approved $420,000 in reimbursements to Michael Cohen related to his efforts before the 2016 election to silence women who claimed to have had affairs with President Donald Trump, according to new court filings.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-organization-reimbursed-michael-cohen-420000-dollars-2018-8

"They indicated that the reimbursement was for services rendered for the year 2017, when in fact the invoices were a sham," the document said.

I think it's wrong for him to let Cohen point fingers in a guilty plea and then not provide the proof. Is this a tv show teaser?

It would normally be followed by an indictment, and a similar chance for Trump to plea, or face trial, where they would get to prove their case.
They cannot indict him because of DOJ policy. The teaser is a result of Trump being president, and in some ways immune to prosecution while in office. And you think that's their bad?

 

[ecofarm]

It would normally be followed by an indictment, and a similar chance for Trump to plea, or face trial, where they would get to prove their case.
They cannot indict him because of DOJ policy. The teaser is a result of Trump being president, and in some ways immune to prosecution while in office. And you think that's their bad?

I think an indictment is largely irrelevant. Let's see Cohen's proof that Trump knowingly committed two campaign finance felonies. I think solid, undeniable proof is enough to talk impeachment.

A tape of Trump saying, "I know it's illegal and I don't care. Do it." could end his presidency. But if all we get is some paperwork that could be directed by who knows who... not the same.

 

[Mach]

It has not been proven that Trump committed any crime.

In layman's terms, sure it has. In mathematical terms, proofs are relevant to formal systems like mathematics not science.

It simply hasn't been taken up in court yet.

Just so you know Lutherf, courts also do not "prove" a crime was committed either. Courts can get it wrong both in convicting someone of a crime they did not commit, and failing to convict someone of a crime they did commit. So your argument is flawed any way you look at it.

It hasn’t even been proven that Cohen committed a crime related to campaign finance.

He's plead guilty to the crimes. All that is left now is for the judge to sentence him, then it's a conviction.
"proven" is just confusion on your part.

First, Cohen plead guilty to committing a violation of campaign finance law. That isn’t the same as being found guilty. No trial was conducted and no contradictory evidence regarding the alleged crime was presented.

It's also not relevant. He will be convicted of these crimes in short order, since he's plead guilt to them, and there were no extenuating circumstances.

Third, while Cohen says Trump directed the payment there is an audio tape released by Cohen’s attorney which indicates that Cohen, not Trump, recommended payment to McDougal and arranged the whole transaction.

Nonsense, it evidences Trump was aware of it, which is all that is needed at this point.
Recording of Trump's awareness.
Cohen's testimony.
The narrative it so neatly fits.
The cover up and denials to date.

Keep digging.

 

[ecofarm]

It's also not relevant. He will be convicted of these crimes in short order, since he's plead guilt to them, and there were no extenuating circumstances.

He's gonna be convicted of conspiracy without anyone else being charged let alone convicted? Is that really proving conspiracy? Let's at least see undeniable proof of conspiracy.

 

[Mach]

I think an indictment is largely irrelevant. Let's see Cohen's proof that Trump knowingly committed two campaign finance felonies. I think solid, undeniable proof is enough to talk impeachment.

It's irrelevant only because he's POTUS, is the point. They can't indict him, how are they gonna bring forth evidence that pertains to an investigation they cannot indict on? Maybe the House of Representatives will ask for the evidence so they can consider impeachment. <- not likely! Up to Dems after mid-terms and a Republican Senate that says it won't consider removing him? I wouldn't try that if I were Democrats.

A tape of Trump saying, "I know it's illegal and I don't care. Do it." could end his presidency. But if all we get is some paperwork that could be directed by who knows who... not the same.

What you seem to be saying you believe is that with a Republican held senate or house, no standard of evidence is high enough to warrant impeachment, short of 100% recorded admission to a crime, in your mind. You are not alone in that I'm sure. It just looks silly to me.

Did you vote for Trump?

 

[Mach]

He's gonna be convicted of conspiracy without anyone else being charged let alone convicted? Is that really proving conspiracy? Let's at least see undeniable proof of conspiracy.

He didn't plead to conspiracy, so the judge will not convict him on conspiracy. He will convict him on the 8 counts he plead to (2 of which were campaign fiance violations).

 

[Luckyone]

It has not been proven that Trump committed any crime. It hasn’t even been proven that Cohen committed a crime related to campaign finance.

First, Cohen plead guilty to committing a violation of campaign finance law. That isn’t the same as being found guilty. No trial was conducted and no contradictory evidence regarding the alleged crime was presented. The admission was totally self serving and in Cohen’s interest in avoiding trial and a potentially lengthy prison sentence.

Second, Cohen can not confess on behalf of Trump. He can accuse Trump but that isn’t proof that a crime was committed.

Third, while Cohen says Trump directed the payment there is an audio tape released by Cohen’s attorney which indicates that Cohen, not Trump, recommended payment to McDougal and arranged the whole transaction.

You are right............but Trump is guilty.

 

[Luckyone]

the payoffs to Stormy Daniels and to whoever else was paid are NOT necessarily illegal

Even if the intent was to keep the women from talking, nondisclosure agreements in themselves are done daily around the world....and yes, payments are often attached to them

It depends on where the money came from....whose money it was....and whether or not anyone was coerced/forced to sign the agreements

What is illegal are unreported campaign contributions, which Cohen has pled guilty to and said they were at the bequest of Trump.

In addition, Cohen also pled guilty to lying to the bank about what the loan to pay Daniels with was for. He stated, it was for fixing or buying a home.

All of these details and not important. The important thing is that Cohen said he did it at the bequest of Trump and also that Trump lied to the American people about knowing about them.

 

[ecofarm]

What you seem to be saying you believe is that with a Republican held senate or house, no standard of evidence is high enough to warrant impeachment, short of 100% recorded admission to a crime, in your mind. You are not alone in that I'm sure. It just looks silly to me.

Did you vote for Trump?

It's odd people are making this personal. I just want real proof such that something might actually happen. I'm not gonna get all excited about claims by some sleazeball lawyer. I guess I'm not easily impressed.

No, I didn't vote for Trump. I'm an environmentalist, feminist and social justice advocate. See signature.

 

[Mach]

It's odd people are making this personal. I just want real proof such that something might actually happen. I'm not gonna get all excited about claims by some sleazeball lawyer. I guess I'm not easily impressed.

I get that, it's tedious to watch unfold in process that takes years, when we have a daily news cycle.
If it were anyone other than a sitting president, he would have been forced out long ago, and this wouldn't be so dramatic. the combination of it being a sitting president, and the unavoidable building of charges/criminality against the dam of presidential immunity, is going to create that bubble like it or not. There is simply no remedy I am aware of to this. If they intend to charge him after he can be indicted, they simply cannot share that evidence before.

As to my question, I shouldn't have included that, in that particular post. I generally became curious over the last few weeks in your soft positions, it hinted of avoidance/shame, but I take your word for it. You don't post a lot on all this stuff for sure, so I just haven't paid attention to pre-Trump to see the trend.

 

[ecofarm]

He didn't plead to conspiracy, so the judge will not convict him on conspiracy. He will convict him on the 8 counts he plead to (2 of which were campaign fiance violations).

It appears you are correct, those charges do not include conspiracy. Then what is finger pointing doing in his guilty plea?

 

[Visbek]

the payoffs to Stormy Daniels and to whoever else was paid are NOT necessarily illegal

Yeah, it was.

Cohen plead guilty to it. He openly stated to the court that he accepted its judgment. He accepts that he violated federal campaign laws. He accepted that he committed criminal acts. That's pretty much the whole point of pleading guilty. And, he did it without striking any sort of deal with the prosecutors; he basically just rolled into court and said "I did it."

Even if the intent was to keep the women from talking, nondisclosure agreements in themselves are done daily around the world....and yes, payments are often attached to them

It depends on where the money came from....whose money it was....and whether or not anyone was coerced/forced to sign the agreements

Hush money is legal.

Having your fixer pay the hush money out of his own pocket, and failing to declare it as a campaign contribution, in order to avoid accountability and public disclosure laws, is illegal.

 

[ecofarm]

As to my question, I shouldn't have included that, in that particular post. I generally became curious over the last few weeks in your soft positions, it hinted of avoidance/shame, but I take your word for it. You don't post a lot on all this stuff for sure, so I just haven't paid attention to pre-Trump to see the trend.

I'm progressive on social issues except mild pro life (move deadline back two weeks) and very pro gun. I'm conservative on economics except market-based green initiatives. I'm an interventionist on foreign policy. I've been vegan and feminist (according to the gender department at the uni) for two decades. I sometimes vote republican, but not Trump.

 

[Mr Person]

Look back to what you wrote: he said/he said.

If you think I was doing anything remotely close to echoing ****ing Guilani, you completely and utterly misread what I said.