The court accepted Cohen's guilty plea, I'm pretty sure that means the judge agrees it was a crime.
You have two choices. Which do you prefer?
- Thread starter Duck_walk
- Start date
Do you really think a judge would say "no, you can't plead guilty"?
Cohen got jail time for tax evasion not facilitating an NDA.
Wrong.
The Justice Department alleged that Cohen paid to silence the actress and another woman, a former Playboy playmate, "in order to influence the 2016 presidential election." And prosecutors charged that the payments were "coordinated with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments."
Cohen pleaded guilty to eight charges, including allegations that the payments violated campaign finance laws and unrelated charges that he lied to banks to obtain improper loans and lied to the government to avoid paying taxes.
You can't be this blind, he pled guilty to campaign finance violations AND several other issues. Why would a judge accept a guilty plea for something that is NOT a crime?
Yes, he plead guilty to MANY charges but the 3 years is a small sentence for tax evasion of the amount he was guilty of. The NDA payment guilty plea was part of the plea deal. Mueller needed something to connect this to Trump. Cohen giving him the appearance of that connection got him a lighter sentence on the actual crimes. The judge accepted THE DEAL the 2 parties came to.
You have to be completely ignorant to think a judge would accept a guilty plea for something that is NOT a crime. I'm pretty surely judges actually read the stuff put in front of them. If they accept a guilty plea included in everything else that is not a crime they should not be on the bench. The prosecutors have a LOT of stuff we don't know about yet, and may never know it all, but you can bet the farm they have corroborating evidence to go with anything Cohen and others have told them to get this far with it. BTW a lot of the stuff they are doing is in the state of NY, not the special prosecutors office.
If the judge is given a plea deal that is agreed to by both sides, I'm not sure the judge can legally throw it out.
You keep saying there's a LOT of stuff but you don't know of any! Any time there is the least damning info, it has not just leaked but spewed out.
Well I couldn't begin to remember and quote it to you so I'll just take what they put out in these filings they do in court when it's about time to sentence somebody. Even that is heavily redacted most of the time because they contain info on ongoing investigations. Hmmm, I wonder what those are? Stay tuned.
If the redacted parts were full of juicy details, why is the sentence virtually nothing or actually nothing? We have several people saying they were asked by Mueller to lie to get a sweetheart deal (compared to what they are threatened with) but were concerned they would then be charged with lieing to the FBI. They have seen and been told what has happened to Flynn and are willing to just stand by what they say is true.
And the Clinton campaign had connections with Russians... Bahahaa
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.a733023ad742
the Clinton campaign proactively sought dirt on Trump from Russian government sources. They did it through cutouts. In April 2016, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias retained opposition research firm Fusion GPS to compile incriminating information on Trump. Fusion GPS in turn hired Christopher Steele, a former British MI6 operative with sources among Russian government officials. The result was the salacious dossier, whose sources included “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” and “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.” Steele’s work was paid for by Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. That means a paid agent of the Clinton campaign approached Russian officials for damaging material on Trump.
the Clinton campaign proactively sought dirt on Trump from Russian government sources. They did it through cutouts. In April 2016, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias retained opposition research firm Fusion GPS to compile incriminating information on Trump. Fusion GPS in turn hired Christopher Steele, a former British MI6 operative with sources among Russian government officials. The result was the salacious dossier, whose sources included “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” and “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.” Steele’s work was paid for by Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. That means a paid agent of the Clinton campaign approached Russian officials for damaging material on Trump.
The dossier has been found to be correct over and over again.
Maybe you have heard about the rich republican that hired Fusion first to get dirt on Trump because didn't want him to get the nomination? When it became obvious Trump would be the nominee he dropped them and the DNC/Clinton campaign picked them up.the Clinton campaign proactively sought dirt on Trump from Russian government sources. They did it through cutouts. In April 2016, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias retained opposition research firm Fusion GPS to compile incriminating information on Trump. Fusion GPS in turn hired Christopher Steele, a former British MI6 operative with sources among Russian government officials. The result was the salacious dossier, whose sources included “a senior Russian Foreign Ministry figure” and “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.” Steele’s work was paid for by Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. That means a paid agent of the Clinton campaign approached Russian officials for damaging material on Trump.
Yeah. In fact, I’m starting to feel a little sorry for you. Just a little, though.
Similar threads
