Conservatives call for charges against Biden after Trump indictment

I will say it again so you can re read everything over and over until you get it.
So keep repeating the following sentences until you understand so you can stop going in circles.
YOU WILL HAVE TO GET COHENS LAW FIRM to admit they lied in their letter to the Feds.
COHEN lied to the Feds, COHEN admitted he lied to the feds, not Cohens law firm.
This means that the LAW FIRM (NOT COHEN) has already made a statement to the feds claiming
(are you ready for this. Read it slow so you get it)
Trump or his campaign were not a party to the transaction.

Now, after the 3rd time of repeating the same thing over and over, you can now stop asking questions about Cohens law firm admitting they lied.

 

They already did! Cohen admitted he lied to his lawyers.
Again, that letter contradicts Trump and HIS lawyers lol
These defenses just ignore the obvious. They were trying to hide these payments.

 

republicans are having a hard time lying to defend Trump - lol

Trump's new nickname "President Fraud"

 

if it was not for the tapes, it would be much easier for the right to defend him, lol

 

I would like to know how many stories the National Enquirer buried for Republicans, be interesting to hear

I always wonder how they really made their money

 

They don’t let reality stand in the way!

 

Socially yes, fiscally less so.

No.

I think Donald Trump was an outsider a non politician and as such was not groomed for decades to play ball the correct way.

That's how I think about uniparty types. I do like DeSantis I think he'll be a good politician. But I also think he'll be more easily persuaded by the Lindsay ghrams and Mitch McConnells of the party.

Republicans are not conservative they are just slower Democrats. That's why I call them all the uniparty.

If you think Republicans good, Democrats bad, that's a bit tribalistic and it's the same dichotomy the Democrats and leftists are falling into.

 

Yet they whine about Twitter lol

 

Nope
Cohen pled guilty for making false statements to a federally-insured bank, Tax evasion, and campaign finance violations

Nope, Read it again

By admitting they paid?
Again, you have this problem with circle conversations

 

Saying they were campaign violations (stormy I mean) is saying that letter is a lie.
You won’t even say what you think happened, just nonsense gotcha that makes no sense.

 

Being inconsistent is the trump supporter strategy......as if..that makes logical sense..

They find more excuses for his dastardly behavior.........then their imagination can render.

 

I'm curious what you believe the judge's involvement in the process is, and what the grand jury's involvement in the process is?

The judge is literally the one who oversees the process, they are the one who swears in the grand jury, and when the grand jury comes to a decision (or fails to come to a decision), they report back to the judge. The grand jurors serve until they are discharged by the judge. There is a process for issuing an indictment, a process for choosing to go to trial, and finally the process of the trial itself. All of these steps in the legal process involve a judge to some degree, judges may also dismiss charges if it is deemed that the charges are not legally valid, be it before, during, or even after a trial.

 

Cohen pleaded guilty for his role as deputy finance chairman of the Trumps national GOP campaign.
It has little to do with the law firm.

 

Idk why you’re asking me. I’m just pointing out an error.

 

Do you deny that it is up to the judges who handle these legal proceedings to dismiss criminal charges when they are not legally valid?

 

More law and order fantasy here,. No, they go with the evidence. They have to make a determination if a person is lying to them or telling the truth, tf their "story" checks out, and so forth. But he is following the law. Penal 175.10 is quite clear. In that code, it does not determine or specify whether or not the crime committed has to be only state law violation in that state, or in other states, or even a possible violation of federal law, whatever that may be, for 175.10 to apply.

What is happening is the exact same circumstances with John Gotti is happening to Trump with his attorneys. And the Supreme Court has already ruled that attorney-client provildege does not exist if the attorney AND client were willing to commit fraud. The prosecutor who used that was none other than Rudy Giuliani. Remember him? And he did that with three of the John Gotti lawyers.

 

Well, there is that 1990 memo from thee DOJ that no sitting president can be indicted. GOP loved that and used that to protect Trump. And it applies to Biden. Now, if Biden loses the 2024 election, and there is evidence that he committed a crime, then the special prosecutor can indict him, can he. For local DA, that would mean local crimes or state crimes. And since Biden does not live in NYC or any other state, other than Deleware, there is no evidence I know of that he committed a local crime. There is that issue with classified documents found in his home, but a special prosecutor is investigating in the DOJ.

Congress does have the authority to try to impeach Biden, but given how slim a majority there is with the House, that is no guarantee that would pass. And right now, there are three bills on impeachment already filed with the current Congress, all of them by "freedom caucus members." The Senate will not get the necessary votes to remove him. And yes, the reality is a *****, isn't it?

 

I'm not concerned with any of that, at least in this thread. The point is, given the choice between DeSantis and Trump - it is Desantis all day and twice on Sunday. I mean, it's not at all close.
Here's another thing we ought to know: the left believes (and I think they are right) that they cant lose to trump. If we assume that is true, what would be viable strategies to ensure a democrat win next year?

 

No error in TCassa89 post on how the grand jury works. Most of the comments here remind me of various episodes of Law and Order in the 1990s. Although I like the program for pure entertainment purposes, it wasn't real. Somehow, the posters who are making these claims think it is for some rreason.

 

I don’t see that any where in any of the links posted.

 

So a judge sits in on it and determines if charges are even valid? Looking at the links provided, that does not appear to be the case.

 

that would depend on policy directives by the person campaigning or the issues involved. But since the GOP is not in a habit to do that for most issues concerning Americans, it will be like last time, the 2020 election.

 

A judge presides over the grand jury to make sure everything is "kosher" and that the evidence presented is relevant to the case. It is like the VP sitting in the Senate watching the Senate do the debates. That is all they are allowed to do. They provide the oath for them to take, and provide instructions to the grand jury members of what their duty is, which includes not trying the case, but seeing if enough probable cause exists and that they will only hear from the prosecution. The grand juror members may be allowed to ask pertinent questions or questions of point of order to either the judge or prosecutor. But that is all the judge does. Once the grand jury votes, everyone leaves the room or go into a jury room of their own to cast their vote. It is usually fairly quick, relatively speaking. The judge just makes sure all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed when they make the indictment. That is pretty much it.

It is very procedural in nature for the judge overseeing the grand jury.

 

Democrats are told who to vote for.

 

That may be an argument the defense may try to pursue if it goes to trial. However, you do have those recordings, and since NY State is a one party state for secret recordings, it may back up the claim. Then you have Stormy Daniels and McDougal who may testify that they received the payments and that the payments may have come through trump via Cohen.