The Frankish Reich

And they both had illegitimate children! (allegedly)

Revealed in court today to have been a total photoshopped fake story, put in the National Enquirer with the encouragement of Trump. Yes, ladies and gentlemen (and various non-binary sorts), this is your presidential nominee. For the third time.

I don’t think there is. But there is a legal requirement to not knowingly file false financial statements. If Trump has written out a personal Donald John Trump check I suppose we wouldn’t be here. But he was afraid that such a payment would come to light and ruin his electoral chances so he buried it through a falsified legal expense, using Cohen as a conduit. Look, you can argue all you like about whether it was wise or prudent or political or whatever to bring this case. I don’t think it was a good idea to bring it for various reasons. But the case is pretty compelling on the facts (yep, this is what Trump and Cohen actually did, and there is evidence that they did it at least in large part to avoid a story coming out that could damage his campaign), and reasonably well thought out with respect to the legal theory.

Yes, that is exactly what the Stare of New York is suggesting. Indeed, charging. The payment was laundered through Michael Cohen as a legal fee when it was nothing of the sort.

You need to get out more. The key point of today’s testimony: Packer (I know I’m spelling it wrong to avoid the auto censor) said Cohen discussed with him what Packer could do to help “with the election.” In short, there’s the evidence that suppressing stories was for the purpose of furthering Trump’s campaign. To spin this as favorable testimony for Trump is just ridiculous. MSM 1, Alt-Nut coverage 0.

Watch this and tell me that Josh is not the second coming of Roman Gabriel. What a talent.

To me, Allen’s closest comp is still Roman Gabriel. He was past his prime by the time I started watching football, but I’ve seen the old video. Rocket arm, huge guy, excellent foot speed, just the whole package. I hope Allen gets the championship that evaded Gabriel ….

There is a new day rising.

I doubt anyone scripted that thing about how his uncle was eaten by cannibals.

NC Bills Fan, was this you? https://heavy.com/news/max-azzarello-5-fast-facts-you-need-to-know/ The manifesto makes accusations against Peter Thiel and mentions former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush as well as Trump. “That Bill Clinton was secretly on (former CIA Director) George H.W. Bush’s side, and that the Democrat vs. Republican division has been entirely manufactured ever since: Clinton is with Bush; Gore is with Bush; Trump is with Hillary, and so on,” it reads, claiming, “As it turns out, we have a secret kleptocracy: Both parties are run by financial criminals whose only goals are to divide, deceive, and bleed us dry.” The New York Post reported that left “a rambling, incoherent 2,648-word manifesto. Bears the hallmarks. Rambling. Incoherent. Angry. RIP, buddy.

It is before the Supreme Court of New York State, which despite its name is the trial level court of general jurisidiction. County courts are lower level, handling the stuff you talk about. Because it is INCONCEIVABLE that your God Who Walks The Earth could doze off during an incredibly boring court proceeding.

Ask the guy who started the "Uniparty" thread. Unless he's currently a crispy critter, that is.

Well, there really was no such thing as people here illegally at the time, since the USA was birthed in a time of open borders. So there is that ...

Good point. This is what economists would call the moral hazard problem. If the fees are capped at a low amount, we'd all love to think that someone carrying significant credit card debt would save that $25 difference and all consumers would be better off. But as you point out, that's not necessarily what happens. And a larger point: I don't like throwing these credit card fees in with Biden's general attack on "junk fees." I'm in favor of that because it ought to relate to those annoying/unjustifiable fees on things we can't opt out of - the classic $30 "resort fee" that I'm charged every night (and can't opt out of) that allows me to do ordinary things like make local telephone calls (who does that on a hotel phone anymore?) and access the hotel swimming pool. The idea is that if I can't opt out, you've got to wrap that fee into the disclosed nightly rate. That makes sense as a consumer/advertising fairness issue. Things like paying a credit card bill late are not the same thing.

I could agree with that. It would seem to be a fair result in those individual cases. There are various reasons the government brings prosecutions, and only one of them is punishment for a crime. Sometimes it's to deter other people from trying the same thing again, and I have to say that the deterrent effect should be clear.