Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 1001 posts

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#491

Post by carlivar »

sanderjd wrote: post #468
AustinDev wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Campaign finance violates are a dime a dozen. I don't think any serious candidate didn't have values similar or greater than what's discussed in this case. None of them got indicted criminally they all just paid fines. `The commission documents said Perkins Coie — where a partner at the time, Marc Elias, was representing the Clinton campaign — paid Fusion GPS slightly more than $1 million in 2016, and the law firm wa…

If they're a dime a dozen (I don't think they are), then we should either make sure to provide high visibility instances in order to dissuade others from breaking the law, or we should change the laws if we don't think they are worth enforcing.

Note that Hillary Clinton's campaign was fined for a campaign finance violation.

https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2022-03-30/dnc...

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#492

Post by thaumasiotes »

zaroth wrote: post #159
dmix wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it’s a conviction I hope the sentencing is appropriate. Wealthy men making sex workers wealthier in order to not disrupt their ostensibly conservative social values is pretty low on my own criminal punishment tier list (especially compared to something that happened during the presidency like the burglary of election-connected properties by Nixon, or more favourable to Clinton’s consensual acts vs his credibi…

There was nothing wrong or illegal about the payment. No one has ever pointed to a charge that related to the payment itself that I’ve heard. They are targeting the record keeping.

> No one has ever pointed to a charge that related to the payment itself that I’ve heard.

When the story rolled around the first time, people did indeed make the argument that the payment itself was illegal.

The campaign finance laws require expenditures that help your electoral chances to be declared as campaign expenditures.

They also prohibit declaring any expenditures that help you in your personal life.

This leads to the obviously terrible result that while you're campaigning for office, it's illegal to pay for anything that simultaneously helps you electorally ("the voters will never hear about my affair with a stripper!") and in your personal life ("my wife will never hear about my affair with a stripper!"). If you don't declare the campaign expense, you're violating the disclosure laws. If you do declare it, you're embezzling from the campaign.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#493

Post by TearsInTheRain »

laidoffamazon wrote: post #439
sashank_1509 wrote: post #199

Alright let me make the argument why indicting Trump is a horrible idea. It's really not hard to see why, if you have any insight into what the other side thinks: 1. First there are two alternative realities being played in real time in US: This arguably is the first time this has happened in US history (maybe civil war was another time) but two populations have become so isolated that they essentially live in 2 diff…

The most criminal president in history is Trump by virtue of two impeachments, with one getting huge crossover support.

8 years of investigations, two special prosecutor, two impeachments 3-4 non federal investigations all for different crimes... its almost comical to list all of that out and still have people think this isnt purely political.

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#495

Post by unit_circle »

jmyeet wrote: post #467
marcell wrote: post #389

I've scrolled through the top ~10 or so comments, and none of them, describe or comment on the nature of the charges against Trump. To be fair to the commenters, most stories are vague. The charges relate to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, but hush money is not a crime. It's also not a crime to have an affair with Stormy Daniels. So the most salacious parts of the story are not what the crime is. My understand…

It's too early to say if it's a weak case because we just don't know the details. There are (AFAIK unconfirmed) reports that there are 34 charges in the indictment. You wouldn't get that just from the Stormy Daniels payoff so, if true, there's more to this indictment. Maybe related to the Trump Organization fraud? We can only speculate. This will be unsealed when Trump is processed and arraigned. I believe this is se…

This is really all that's worth saying until next week

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#496

Post by askvictor »

pessimizer wrote: post #300
unethical_ban wrote: post #163

Let us assume, for the sake of discussion, that he is guilty of this crime. Should we ignore it? If we further acknowledge that he is a nitwit without an inkling of knowledge about history, respect for democracy or the United States unless it aligns with his aggrandizement, then is this not like trying to nail Al Capone for tax fraud? Are their supposedly intelligent people on this forum who truly believe Donald Trum…

Most countries immunize declared candidates for parliaments or the presidency, because it's a basic premise of democracy. If the population, by direct referendum, believes this person should be in government, whatever forces that are doing the prosecuting are a minority. Makes sense to have some minor flexibility in this standard, so people aren't continually running for elections in order to stay out of prison. But…

Do you have such a list of countries? Australia, for example, does not allow anyone with a criminal record to hold office (and they get kicked out if they are convicted while serving).

And how do you feel about convicted felons not having voting rights (as seems to be the case in many US states)?

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#498

Post by eldritch_4ier »

wodenokoto wrote: post #459
marcell wrote: post #389

I've scrolled through the top ~10 or so comments, and none of them, describe or comment on the nature of the charges against Trump. To be fair to the commenters, most stories are vague. The charges relate to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels, but hush money is not a crime. It's also not a crime to have an affair with Stormy Daniels. So the most salacious parts of the story are not what the crime is. My understand…

My understanding from legal eagle on YouTube is that the payment was done illegally. Both in terms of taxes and in terms of how you are allowed to spend money on campaigning (she was hushed to aid the presidential campaign)

[flagged]

Re: Grand jury votes to indict Donald Trump

#500

Post by dragonwriter »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #167

I know it is campaign finance fraud that is the actual charge, but that fact that of all the possible things they could have charged him with, it's something tied to a sexual act feels so both disappointing and so American. It's likely they can actually get a conviction, so I guess there's that. You can already assume right-wing media will spin this into "Really? All you could get him for was a BJ?" Feels a bit like…

> I know it is campaign finance fraud that is the actual charge

No, you don’t know what the actual charges are.

You know the central focus of the investigation was a particular campaign finance fraud.

What the–reportedly more than 30–charges that have come out of the investigation are, is another question. What are they? We’ll see.

Post reply on HN