You are opposed to agreements or treaties among countries?
Choices are made by governments, which, in a democracy, are headed by officers elected by the people in the jurisdiction. NoEnz has made this point, so I need not go further other than to say that those are the choices that matter, first and foremost.
Bill Barr is apparently making the same sort of argument—"there are these laws telling us what kind of cars and stoves to buy (not true) and that's a threat to democracy." Apparently that's why he's supporting Trump. Pathetic.
If anyone wants to have an actual discussion about what constitutes a real threat to democracy, watch the Levin video I posted below and then get back to me.
If you won't listen to my points, why should I listen to your's, who ever you may be.
And unlike someone who posted an hour long video for me to watch and then completely ignored my thoughts on it, I will address yours.
I have stayed away from this argument because of the sheer ridiculousness used to make the claim against Trump, et al.
I'm ready now. And I am starting with Levin's POV as my reference point.
I decline to refer to Mark Levin as a starting point for discussion of legal issues in this case. Although he's practiced as a lawyer, Levin is deeply biased and often misleading in his argument. For instance, the DOJ has already stated that this case does not constitute election interference—yet that seems to be one of the major points Levin is trying case. Another e.g.: Levin notes during a hypothetical conversation in court with himself as judge that the statute of limitations has expired for this matter but fails to address Bragg's argument that it has not.
A more impartial and legally experienced person to voice a legal opinion against trying Trump in this matter is Syracuse Law Professor Gregory Germain:
"I believe the District Attorney must show (1) that the payments were disguised as attorney fees to commit a fraud on someone, (2) that the underlying payments constituted an independent crime, (3) that Trump knew that the underlying payments constituted a crime, and (4) that the reason he covered up the payments was to disguise that crime. Those are going to be hard things to prove."
...
"Neither the Court nor the District Attorney has made it clear who was defrauded, what the independent crime is, or when an attempt to influence voters becomes âunlawfulâ and constitutes an independent crime.
There is also a question regarding the statute of limitations applicable to these claims. The statute of limitations on a misdemeanor in New York is 2 years, and would have expired long ago. NY Crim Proc 30.10(2)(c). The statute of limitations on âother feloniesâ is 5 years. NY Crim Proc. § 30.10(2)(b). The acts occurred in 2016 and 2017, and the District Attorney delayed filing the charges for several years. The District Attorney has argued that the statutes of limitations were tolled during COVID, or that they were extended when Trump left the state. These issues need to be addressed by the court clearly.
So while there is very strong evidence that Trump created false business record entries to cover up his hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, the District Attorney needs to show multiple difficult elements to establish that the entries were made to commit âfraud,â and for the purpose of covering up a separate crime.
Finally, what is the penalty if Trump is convicted of this Class E felony? He would be subject to a fine of up to $5,000 under NY Pen § 80.1. If he received some financial benefit, he might have to disgorge three times the amount of the benefit. It is difficult to see how these minor penalties would justify such an expensive investigation and prosecution.
So the goal must be to impose imprisonment. For a first time offender, the court could impose a prison term of up to one year under NY Penal law § 70(4), but it would be very unusual to impose prison time for a first time Class E felony, especially where no victim suffered financial harm."
Al Jazeera references Prof. Germain's thoughts in its coverage. It also touches on a possible argument from prosecution for allowing prosecution without specifying a victim of Trump's alleged fraud:
"Gregory Germain, a law professor at Syracuse University, said that argument highlighted the central legal question in the case, which is whether Trumpâs alleged falsification of business records, a misdemeanor, rises to the level of a felony crime under New York law.To be considered a felony, the falsification must have been committed with âintent to defraud and intent to commit another crimeâ.
Legal observers have noted it is somewhat unique â but not unprecedented â to charge a defendant in New York with felony falsification without charging him with a secondary crime.
Prosecutors will have to persuade a jury only that the falsification was done with âintentâ to cover up or commit another crime, not that Trump was successful in committing that crime.
In court filings, the prosecution has suggested that the secondary crime committed by Trump could be a violation of New York state law that criminalises schemes âto promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful meansâ.
It could also be a violation of federal election law governing spending disclosures or a violation of New York state tax law, they said."
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
May 2, 2024 - 5:03pm
kurtster wrote:
The Green New Deal and the Globalists who are pushing it are the real threats to democracy as we know it here in the US.
This would be Biden.
Democracy means choices to me, not mob rule. The above are all about eliminating choices. One size does not fit all.
You are opposed to agreements or treaties among countries?
Choices are made by governments, which, in a democracy, are headed by officers elected by the people in the jurisdiction. NoEnz has made this point, so I need not go further other than to say that those are the choices that matter, first and foremost.
If anyone wants to have an actual discussion about what constitutes a real threat to democracy, watch the Levin video I posted below and then get back to me.
If you won't listen to my points, why should I listen to your's, who ever you may be.
And unlike someone who posted an hour long video for me to watch and then completely ignored my thoughts on it, I will address yours.
I have stayed away from this argument because of the sheer ridiculousness used to make the claim against Trump, et al.
I'm ready now. And I am starting with Levin's POV as my reference point.
so.. you want to prove his innocence purely on procedural grounds? Or what is your argument? Trump is innocent of everything and all the shit thrown at him is a political vendetta?
not really cutting it. try harder.
If anyone wants to have an actual discussion about what constitutes a real threat to democracy, watch the Levin video I posted below and then get back to me.
If you won't listen to my points, why should I listen to your's, who ever you may be.
And unlike someone who posted an hour long video for me to watch and then completely ignored my thoughts on it, I will address yours.
I have stayed away from this argument because of the sheer ridiculousness used to make the claim against Trump, et al.
I'm ready now. And I am starting with Levin's POV as my reference point.
Me thinks you missed the point...neither side wants to yield, so what is the point of this discussion?
better to shake the dust from your feet and move on
A bit of a comedy watching this group admit they wonât yield and admit the faults of their team, and then go on to hit each other over the head arguingâ¦as if there is some hope to convert?
I don't think conversion is the goal. That has been abandoned long ago. At this point it's just passionate, frustrated discourse.
Add whatever other mix of ingredients you believe to be present.
A bit of a comedy watching this group admit they wonât yield and admit the faults of their team, and then go on to hit each other over the head arguingâ¦as if there is some hope to convert?
A bit of a comedy watching this group admit they wonât yield and admit the faults of their team, and then go on to hit each other over the head arguingâ¦as if there is some hope to convert?
The Green New Deal and the Globalists who are pushing it are the real threats to democracy as we know it here in the US.
This would be Biden.
Democracy means choices to me, not mob rule. The above are all about eliminating choices. One size does not fit all.
You're losin' it Kurt. The Right is all about eliminating choices...as I just posted.
as for the green new deal... It remains a popular program for the majority of Americans.
You should have choices... but you don't get to choose if you want to destroy everyone else's environment.
The Green New Deal and the Globalists who are pushing it are the real threats to democracy as we know it here in the US.
This would be Biden.
Democracy means choices to me, not mob rule. The above are all about eliminating choices. One size does not fit all.
Kurtster:
Democracy means the majority get to make the decisions, even if you disagree with them. That you call this mob rule is pure projection.
The cool thing about democracy is, we all get a chance to change our decisions every election cycle. What you are advocating is the opposite and true mob rule.
Srsly. Take a look at Russia. Is this really what you want for the U.S.? Because it is what you are pushing.
Well, itâs pretty obvious. He wants to get us all healthcare, and make sure weâre educated, and that citizens can vote. If thatâs not reprehensible, I donât know what is.
Don't forget the smaller details... Giving women the continued right to make choices their mothers had, allowing those who are uncomfortable with their sexual orientation to act as they choose, managing the opportunities of continued immigration, and attempting to reduce the number of military weapons in the hands of everyday citizens. Pure insanity.
Democracy ends when we stop telling people how to live their lives, as ordained under God's laws (that's the Christian God of course).
.How is Biden a threat to democracy, much less the real threat to democracy?
Well, itâs pretty obvious. He wants to get us all healthcare, and make sure weâre educated, and that citizens can vote. If thatâs not reprehensible, I donât know what is.
I understand you have policy disagreements with Biden and see those policies as being bad for America.
How is Biden a treat to democracy, much less the real threat to democracy?
He's not, but because Trump most definitely is... then Biden has to be.
It's the false equivalence dance that Kurt has been participating in from day one. That is, when he's not busy twisting himself in a pretzel to blindly justify his support of Trump.
Of course Kurt lost any credibility to be able to comment on democracy a long time ago.
Thats what happens when you unashamedly support a person who tried to do everything in his power to destroy democracy... in an effort to illegally remain in power. Some people wake up to smell the coffee while others never do.
I see Trump as the hope and Biden is the threat; the real threat to democracy.
Tell me again that you have no buyer's remorse with Biden.
I have said many times that Trump is an asshole. But he is my asshole just like Biden is your asshole.
As they say in Youngstown, have a nice day or we'll break your legs ...
You have been sold down the river by a Russian asset who wants to dismantle democracy in the west so that he can reign supreme.
I'd hold back on the hubris if I were you. Democracy is not a word that should be coming from anyone's lips supporting this charade.
Your country and the entire west is under attack and all you can do is support the enemy.