Lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Doctor X
Posts: 67654
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Has thanked: 3427 times
Been thanked: 2174 times

Let us know if you find Hillary's missing e-mails.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." --gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

sparks
Posts: 14085
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!
Has thanked: 1966 times
Been thanked: 605 times

Already found in Puti's sock drawer.
You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think.

Anaxagoras
Posts: 21745
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan
Has thanked: 1410 times
Been thanked: 1234 times

WildCat wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 2:47 am
sparks wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 2:09 am
That's not what many articles are saying about that little maneuver.
Did any of them cite which federal law was violated? I'll bet anything the answer is "no". Here's Dershowitz's take:
Ever since the news broke that Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to finance laws and swore that candidate Donald Trump directed him to do so, I have been reviewing the morass of rules and laws that govern campaign finance. I have been teaching and practicing criminal law for more than a half century, and yet, I have to acknowledge that I am having difficulty understanding the laws as they relate to the allegations made by Cohen against President Trump.

A few things are clear. A candidate is free to contribute to his or her own campaign. It also is not criminal for a candidate to pay hush money to women whose disclosures might endanger his campaign. So if candidate Trump paid hush money to his two accusers, there would be no violation of any campaign or other laws. To be sure, if he did so for the purpose of helping his campaign — as distinguished from helping his marriage — his campaign would have to disclose any such contribution, and failure to do so might be a violation of a campaign law, but the payments themselves would be entirely lawful.

If, on the other hand, Michael Cohen made the payments by himself, without direction from the president, that would constitute an impermissible campaign contribution from a third party. But if Cohen was merely acting as Trump’s lawyer and advancing Trump’s payments, with an expectation of repayment, then it would be hard to find a campaign finance crime other than failure to report by the campaign.

Failure to report all campaign contributions is fairly common in political campaigns. Moreover, the offense is committed not by the candidate but, rather, by the campaign and is generally subject to a fine. Though it is wrong, it certainly is not the kind of high crime and misdemeanor that could serve as the basis for a constitutionally authorized impeachment and removal of a duly elected president.
http://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/40 ... nance-laws
Has Dershowitz been invited to any parties on Martha's Vineyard lately?

In all seriousness though, I think I agree with him. If the best they can come up with is "possible campaign finance violation," that's some pretty thin gruel.

I think laws should be clear, not ambiguous (open to multiple interpretations). If it is somewhat ambiguous, it should be interpreted narrowly, not broadly. If Trump paid these women off with his own money, it may look bad, but it isn't a crime. In the case of the National Enquirer, that woman was paid off by the Enquirer or its owner, David Pecker. That one seems to be more of a gray area. For a newspaper ostensibly in the business of reporting the news, they instead covered up this particular news, so it doesn't reflect well on them. But not many people had a high opinion of the Enquirer to begin with. I always saw it as a sordid gossip rag. They managed to expose John Edwards' affair back in '08, but they protected Trump when they could have exposed him because the owner is Trump's friend. Whether that counts as an "illegal campaign contribution" seems murky. It might be a bribe, although there was no quid pro quo as far as we know.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

Doctor X
Posts: 67654
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Has thanked: 3427 times
Been thanked: 2174 times

Anaxagoras wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:22 am
In all seriousness though, I think I agree with him. If the best they can come up with is "possible campaign finance violation," that's some pretty thin gruel.
Indeed.

My fear is that impeachment becomes something the Loser does when it "gets the House" to sooth its collective butt-hurt. That is not what it is "suppose to be."

This would be really, really, really weak.

So, then, the next Democrat President will have to be impeached the minute the Republicans have a majority in the House. And what is the point of that?

As much as I hated Her Turn and love poking Her Turn's apologists, I would not have supported "IMPEACH" her over some of the infractions she did like the server. I remind that there was a Republican on the House Judiciary--Google-Fu!--Article from Washington Post on that in September, 2016--who wanted to impeach Her Turn before she would be sworn in.

Plague on both their houses.

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." --gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

ed
Posts: 33309
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

It seems that in a time of bitter divisions, serial impeachments might be the order of the sday.

I was reading Ian Kershaw's "To Hell and Back" a history of europe in the 20th c. and was struck by the (at least superficial) similarities between France and Spain to the situation here, now. They, too, experienced bitter, bitter divisions between the commie/socialists and fascists That sound very familiar.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

WildCat
Posts: 13999
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 348 times

ed wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:12 am
It seems that in a time of bitter divisions, serial impeachments might be the order of the sday.

I was reading Ian Kershaw's "To Hell and Back" a history of europe in the 20th c. and was struck by the (at least superficial) similarities between France and Spain to the situation here, now. They, too, experienced bitter, bitter divisions between the commie/socialists and fascists That sound very familiar.
Except here today it's commies/socialists against mainstream America.
Do you have questions about God?

you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj

WildCat
Posts: 13999
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 2:53 am
Location: The 33rd Ward, Chicago
Has thanked: 33 times
Been thanked: 348 times

Remember when John Edwards paid over $1 million to his mistress to shut her up? https://abcnews.go.com/2020/John_Edward ... id=9687954 Do you have questions about God? you sniveling little right-wing nutter - jj Giz Posts: 1266 Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm Location: UK Has thanked: 164 times Been thanked: 273 times ### Re: Impeach Trump, already! Doctor X wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 9:53 am Anaxagoras wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:22 am In all seriousness though, I think I agree with him. If the best they can come up with is "possible campaign finance violation," that's some pretty thin gruel. Indeed. My fear is that impeachment becomes something the Loser does when it "gets the House" to sooth its collective butt-hurt. That is not what it is "suppose to be." This would be really, really, really weak. So, then, the next Democrat President will have to be impeached the minute the Republicans have a majority in the House. And what is the point of that? As much as I hated Her Turn and love poking Her Turn's apologists, I would not have supported "IMPEACH" her over some of the infractions she did like the server. I remind that there was a Republican on the House Judiciary--Google-Fu!--Article from Washington Post on that in September, 2016--who wanted to impeach Her Turn before she would be sworn in. Plague on both their houses. --J.D. Right. Best cases are that Mueller either finds something completely damning, or exonerates. If he is reduced to a process crime (a la Martha stewart) then half the country will see it as a coup (the other half will hail him as a modern day Elliot ness). Bad situation for the nation... but would mueller feel he could walk away from a possible gotcha? Skeeve Posts: 10461 Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am Has thanked: 65 times Been thanked: 80 times ### Re: Impeach Trump, already! Also worth noting: Former FEC Chairman Bradley Smith explains to Mark Levin why the NDA is not a crime for Trump Yesterday, Mark Levin had a guest on his radio show by the name of Bradley Smith, who was the FEC Chair from 2000-2005. He very clearly and unequivocally made the case that money spent to influence an election is not illegal as long as it does not come from campaign funds Cohen Pleaded Guilty to Charges That Are Not Crimes, Says Former FEC Chair Michael Cohen, formerly an attorney for President Donald Trump, pleaded guilty on Aug. 21 to campaign finance charges that are not crimes, according to former Federal Elections Commission chair Bradley Smith. ... Under the broad definition in federal law, anything of value used to influence any election for federal office constitutes a campaign contribution. Yet a personal-use prohibition under the same law narrows the scope of what can be counted as a campaign expense to exclude all payments “that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign.” “The prosecutors in these cases always want to just focus on the idea that it’s for the purpose of influencing the campaign,” Bradley said. “Many of them are not even aware of the other provision in this statute–the prohibition on personal use–that would seem to narrow that definition down.” ... “Michael Cohen plead [sic] guilty to two counts of campaign finance violations that are not a crime,” Trump wrote on Twitter on Aug. 22. “President Obama had a big campaign finance violation and it was easily settled!” Yea, well, that's different n stuff.... In other OpEd: Dershowitz: Trump 'more correct than his critics are' with claims about Daniels, McDougal payments Harvard Law School professor emeritus Alan Dershowitz said Wednesday that President Trump did nothing wrong if he gave Michael Cohen money out of his pocket to pay women to keep them quiet about claims they had sexual relationships with him more than a decade ago. "If the president had paid$280,000 to these two women, even if he had done so in order to help his campaign, that would be no problem," Dershowitz told Fox News' "Special Report." "The candidate is entitled to contribute a million dollars to his own campaign, as long as he reports it."
...
"If [the prosecution] believes Cohen, that the president directed him to do it, then it’s not a crime at all," Dershowitz said. "If he doesn’t believe Cohen, then Cohen has committed a crime, but not the president."

Dershowitz also took issue with the idea that Trump was an unindicted co-conspirator with Cohen, saying, "You don’t become an unindicted co-conspirator if your action is lawful, even though the action of the other person is unlawful."

Now, what does this have to do with some collusion with Russia, or hacked elections???
Then Skank Of America could start in...

sparks
Posts: 14085
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Friar McWallclocks Bar -- Where time stands still while you lean over!
Has thanked: 1966 times
Been thanked: 605 times

WildCat wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 12:19 pm
Remember when John Edwards paid over $1 million to his mistress to shut her up? https://abcnews.go.com/2020/John_Edward ... id=9687954 I'm sure we all do. The point that both sides are essentially unfit for command has already been conceded elsewhere in these August Pages. You can lead them to knowledge, but you can't make them think. Skeeve Posts: 10461 Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 7:35 am Has thanked: 65 times Been thanked: 80 times ### Re: Impeach Trump, already! sparks wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:05 pm WildCat wrote: Thu Aug 23, 2018 12:19 pm Remember when John Edwards paid over$1 million to his mistress to shut her up?

https://abcnews.go.com/2020/John_Edward ... id=9687954
I'm sure we all do. The point that both sides are essentially unfit for command has already been conceded elsewhere in these August Pages.
Again, what does this have to do with some Russian collusion???
Then Skank Of America could start in...

ed
Posts: 33309
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

Doctor X wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 9:53 am
Anaxagoras wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:22 am
In all seriousness though, I think I agree with him. If the best they can come up with is "possible campaign finance violation," that's some pretty thin gruel.
Indeed.

My fear is that impeachment becomes something the Loser does when it "gets the House" to sooth its collective butt-hurt. That is not what it is "suppose to be."

This would be really, really, really weak.

So, then, the next Democrat President will have to be impeached the minute the Republicans have a majority in the House. And what is the point of that?

As much as I hated Her Turn and love poking Her Turn's apologists, I would not have supported "IMPEACH" her over some of the infractions she did like the server. I remind that there was a Republican on the House Judiciary--Google-Fu!--Article from Washington Post on that in September, 2016--who wanted to impeach Her Turn before she would be sworn in.

Plague on both their houses.

--J.D.
yeah, impeachment (or endless discussions about it) preceded by "resistance" which, the more that I think about it, is fucking unconscionable.

What the Democrats are saying is that if you don't like the person who won a fair election, you are entitled (they would say obligated) to do everything within your power to negate their ability to govern.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

Giz
Posts: 1266
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 5:07 pm
Location: UK
Has thanked: 164 times
Been thanked: 273 times

There is a difference between obstructionism (aka checks and balances) and attempting to delegitimize the democratic process.

The first is a necessity. The second makes functional multi-party democracy impossible.

Anaxagoras
Posts: 21745
Joined: Wed Mar 19, 2008 5:45 am
Location: Yokohama/Tokyo, Japan
Has thanked: 1410 times
Been thanked: 1234 times

ed wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 3:31 pm
yeah, impeachment (or endless discussions about it) preceded by "resistance" which, the more that I think about it, is fucking unconscionable.

What the Democrats are saying is that if you don't like the person who won a fair election, you are entitled (they would say obligated) to do everything within your power to negate their ability to govern.
You don't seem to remember the Obama presidency. Republicans certainly did everything within their power to negate his ability to govern.
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare

ed
Posts: 33309
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

Nothing close to this.

The fucker sold us out to the Russians, essentially told the europeans that we are not to be trusted, gave us an abortion of a health care bill and gave a blow job to iran.

He did not have a majority for most of his terms.

AND he is a Kenyan to boot!!!!
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 71421
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3322 times
Been thanked: 1227 times

ed wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:58 pm
AND he is a Kenyan to boot!!!!
So. You think it's OK to boot Kenyans?
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

ed
Posts: 33309
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 11:52 pm
Title: Rhino of the Florida swamp
Has thanked: 451 times
Been thanked: 777 times

Would that be racist?

The one thing that I am 100%, nay, 110% sure of is that he is not a Kenyan. If he were, the criminal enterprise known as the Clinton family would have found the evidence.
Wenn ich Kultur höre, entsichere ich meinen Browning!

Abdul Alhazred
Posts: 71421
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 1:33 pm
Title: Yes, that one.
Location: Chicago
Has thanked: 3322 times
Been thanked: 1227 times

ed wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:03 pm
Would that be racist?

The one thing that I am 100%, nay, 110% sure of is that he is not a Kenyan. If he were, the criminal enterprise known as the Clinton family would have found the evidence.
Any man writes a mission statement spends a night in the box.
-- our mission statement plappendale

Doctor X
Posts: 67654
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 8:09 pm
Title: Collective Messiah
Has thanked: 3427 times
Been thanked: 2174 times

Anaxagoras wrote:
Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:11 pm
You don't seem to remember the Obama presidency. Republicans certainly did everything within their power to negate his ability to govern.
What special counsel investigated his criminal misuse of the IRS, collusion with Putin, obstruction of justice with regards to "Fast and Furious," et cetera?

--J.D.
Mob of the Mean: Free beanie, cattle-prod and Charley Fan Club!
"Doctor X is just treating you the way he treats everyone--as subhuman crap too dumb to breathe in after you breathe out."--Don
DocX: FTW.--sparks
"Doctor X wins again."--Pyrrho
"Never sorry to make a racist Fucktard cry."--His Humble MagNIfIcence
"It was the criticisms of Doc X, actually, that let me see more clearly how far the hypocrisy had gone."--clarsct
"I'd leave it up to Doctor X who has been a benevolent tyrant so far."--Grammatron
"Indeed you are a river to your people.
Shit. That's going to end up in your sig."--Pyrrho
"Try a twelve step program and accept Doctor X as your High Power."--asthmatic camel
"just like Doc X said." --gnome

WS CHAMPIONS X4!!!! NBA CHAMPIONS!! Stanley Cup! SB CHAMPIONS X5!!!!!

Grammatron
Posts: 33586
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 1:21 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Been thanked: 1747 times