212
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
212 points (89.8% liked)
News
23305 readers
3527 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I honestly think it’s more likely that like almost every business, nonprofit and other organization I’ve had any experience with, trump doesn’t have a “proactive” filing regimen.
An old ass accountant I used to work with explained why it’s like this: why give them something to beat you over the head with? Just know the requirements, know the punishment and give the least amount of information you possibly can until compelled.
Of course, larger, richer groups are more able to take that strategy, but that’s a systemic problem.
But it doesn’t matter for the purposes of the crimes in question if it was an “innocent” mistake or purposeful omission.
I think it’s pretty disingenuous for the democrat message to be an attack on trump for simply having been convicted because democrats are at the same time trying to catch lefty and otherwise third party voters who see that criminal justice system as having serious fundamental flaws.
I think getting bogged down in the details of trumps convictions isn’t helpful to the democrats either because explaining them to people makes trump relatable. Nothing he actually did with money was a crime. It was not filing paperwork that was the crime.
The whole thing becomes more akin to having to pay a ticket for a taillight you got fixed because you didn’t bring the receipts to court.
“Your honor, the taillight in question is new, intact and installed on my car”
“Your car isn’t in my courtroom”
“It’s in the parking lot 80 feet to the west of your courtroom. I have a picture of it right here.”
“I will only admit a receipt”
Tbh the conviction rhetoric only appeals to reactionary right wing voters who want to punish people with records or makes him incredibly relatable to normal people.
If anything it seems like a hedge to move towards the right.
I have no idea what you are talking about. Trump was convicted of knowingly paying off Stormy Daniels with campaign funds. He was fully aware of it. There was no mistake.
Yeah I didn’t say that I think it’s a mistake, I said I think it’s not a good idea for the democrats to use the convictions as a lane of attack.
I even said that trump probably systemically doesn’t file paperwork he’s supposed to and that it’s common for people to do that.
Again, not filing paperwork is not the problem here. He paid a porn star hush money with campaign funds. He was fully aware of it. There was no mistake. There was no oversight. Nothing was overlooked. Nothing happened that he didn't know about it. This was a very simple case.
That’s not illegal.
The crime is not reporting it.
It’s reported on a filing. Sometimes electronic but paperwork in spirit.
If the “problem” in your words is the crime, then the problem is paperwork.
The crimes are falsifying business records, not paying hush money.
The hush money was paid by trumps attorney who was then reimbursed with campaign funds. The crime is not paying hush money, the crime is covering it up.
As I said before, I don’t think it’s a very good idea to try to beat trump over the head with the convictions. At best you appeal to reactionary voters who have regressive ideas about crime and justice and at worst you have to reply to questions like “it’s legal to pay hush money out of campaign funds?”
I'm sorry... paying hush money with campaign funds isn't illegal? Are you fucking joking?
Not in the slightest.
My understandings is that the convictions were for not keeping records of what he did, not reporting what he did with the money and trying to cover up what he did with the money, not for what he did with the money.
Falsifying business records are the 34 different counts he was found guilty on.
See all the blue here: https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-1848/trump-hush-money-trial-34-counts
Where do you think the money from those checks came from? It wasn't his personal bank account.
I guess I don’t take your meaning…
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c288wpj1glyo
I must be missing something. It sounds from all the articles you posted that the crime was covering up payments.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but each of the 34 counts refers to a payment made in an attempt to conceal the hush money as legal expenses. If paying hush money were illegal I bet there would be many fewer out of court settlements…