Trump: UnPerson Guilty of UnCrime?

Original Content | 8/24/2018 | By Laz A. Mataz

[Lazamataz]

In the prescient novel '1984', George Orwell envisioned a society ruled by an all-powerful State that imposed its rule with both force and psychological manipulation. One such manipulation was the molding of the speech of its citizens by imposing "NewSpeak", a form of language that limited ideas and political innovation.

In this language, there was a word -- "UnPerson" -- whose definition was someone that was so hated by the State that their very existence was erased from all official history. The daily barrage of negative stories about President Donald Trump shows that the News Misleadia so despises him, that they would erase him if given the chance. To them, Trump is an UnPerson.

Yet, now, we can add a new word to the '1984' lexicon: UnCrime. The definition of an UnCrime is "something that is not a violation of the law, or in any way an actual crime, yet is prosecuted and punished as if it was."

The prosecution of Michael Cohen had him plead guilty to an UnCrime. Witness:

• Many women across the political landscape make claims of sexual indiscretions with men in power. Sometimes these claims are false, and intended only to force the powerful man to settle out of court -- or be dragged through the courts. Many of these men consider it a cost of doing business, and make the payment.
• Michael Cohen said Tuesday that the payments were intended to influence the election, making them a violation of campaign-finance laws, and that he had done so at the direction of the candidate. But that is his opinion. For this to be a campaign violation, we must know the mindset of then-candidate Trump. Did he make these payments with the guilty mindset (or mens rea, in legal jargon) of influencing the election? Or was his intention to protect his family from the scandal that would swirl around such allegations? Or was his intention to simply prevent himself from being dragged through the courts, and that this would be considered, in his mind, the cost of doing business?
• Michael Cohen has no way of knowing the President's mindset, unless he specifically stated, "Michael, you know what? I am making these payments to influence the election, and I am purposefully refusing to report these payments to the FEC, in violation of Campaign Finance regulations."
• Yet, Michael Cohen plead guilty to these unprovable charges. He plead guilty to an UnCrime.

I admit that I am rather impressed with the prosecutions machinations, given that the sole intent of this series of charges (unspoken, of course) was to try to harm President Trump. They charged Cohen with many serious and provable crimes, but offered a plea deal in which he plead guilty to an UnCrime, and stated that President Trump commanded him to commit the UnCrime. It was an interesting and convoluted tactic. Get the defendant to plea to a non-existent crime, thus giving the appearance that the action was actually criminal. Then, tie President Trump to that action. Then, impeach President Trump for a non-existent crime. Of course, it fits their Modus Operandi: The Russian collusion is also non-existent.

Lanny Davis, one of the slimier denizens of Washington DC, had this to say: "It's not about evidence. It is definitive, indisputable that Donald Trump's lawyers said in a letter to the special counsel that President Trump directed – the same word that Michael Cohen used in court yesterday under oath – directed Michael Cohen to make illegal payments. It's not a dispute. It's not about credibility. His own lawyers used the word directed.”

Mr. Davis, I have underlined and bolded the one word you interjected into your narrative that is false: "illegal". Just because your client plead guilty to a charge that is in great dispute as to the legality, and can only be a crime if the candidate Trump had one-of-three mindsets: To specifically and purposefully violate a rather hazy FEC law. You, sir, are assuming facts that are not in evidence.

Furthermore, this law is quite vague, indicating that a personal expense is reportable if it benefits the campaign. Allow me to apply Reducto Ad Absurdium, which will clarify the point:

• Candidate buys an expensive silk tie.
• Candidate appears on TV wearing that tie.
• Candidate looks good in that tie.
• THAT TIE PURCHASE BENEFITED THE CANDIDATE. IT BETTER BE DECLARED!

The same goes for eating breakfast, buying gasoline, paying car insurance...you name it.

The law is vague and open to interpretation. Perhaps it is intentionally so.

[MortMan]

Actually, if the prosecutor accepts the plea and the court imposes punishment, that is exactly the case.

[Nifster]

These silly FRers don’t know what they’re missing

[Nifster]

Tell em all of these special posts are being blocked on FB by Zuckerberg

Either that or that they are coded messages from Q

[Nifster]

Drudge has always from his very beginning used the msm papers from around the world.

This is neither new nor unique.

[Laslo Fripp]

OKAY. Please add me to your ping list, again 😈

If I receive two pings, I’ll simply un-subscribe 😀

[bagster]

Why do you blame the aggregator

Because the aggregator chooses what stories to give prominence to and what to ignore?

Kinda' like the Derp State media does?

I dunno. Just a thought.

Bagster

[Pajamajan]

BUMP

[bagster]

You are the 405th Satisfied Customer!™

Say, who is the 400th customer? I bet it's somebody really special.

The most important "un" of them all...

Marvelous little things...

Bagster

[SaveFerris]

A LOT of folks have thought he’s turned more liberal in reporting.

For over a year now.

So what I said is neither new nor unique.

[Nifster]

No. Drudge has from the very beginning posted the headline stories from the msm....the daily papers from around the world. Every now and again he would throw in a interesting or amusing bit from a smaller paper

Except for the Lewinsky affair he does not do reporting of the original sort

[Nifster]

Oooooh a lot of folks said...... Now that’s just so compelling

If you don’t like him don’t go to his site

[SaveFerris]

Listen, you don’t like what I say, tough.

You want to make excuses for Drudge, try someone else.

You go there all the time if you want.

[SaveFerris]

Yes, Drudge is pimping Dem talking points.

And has Rachel Maddow on the front page now, too.

Yeah, I noticed that today.

[bagster]

No.

No what? No, Drudge doesn't prioritize which "headline stories from the msm" he chooses to highlight and ignore or diminish? Are you saying no to that?

That's pretty unquestionable.

Drudge has from the very beginning posted the headline stories from the msm....

I kinda' get that. Thanks.

the daily papers from around the world. Every now and again he would throw in a interesting or amusing bit from a smaller paper

Again. simple, common knowledge. And again, not the point.

he does not do reporting of the original sort

I have to give you another "duh" for this pearl of irrelevant observation.

If you don’t like him don’t go to his site

I still check in on him from time to time when I want to see what the Derp State media wants us to think is important.

For the real stories, I now go to;

thelibertydaily.com

p.s. I wasn't gonna break down your flawed argument until you got pissy with that other guy. C'mon, man.

p.p.s. I do still have a soft spot for the Drudge from back in the Lewinsky days and his turning me on to FreeRepublic in 1998, so I understand your misplaced loyalty.

Bagster

[bagster]

And has Rachel Maddow on the front page now, too.

That's a felony right there.

Bagster

[SaveFerris]

LOL - no kidding - yes he does have WND - though at least some Fox would balance better. He’s got NY Times (2) and LA Times right now.

---

Longtime Trump Org CFO granted immunity...
‘Narrow in scope’...
Manhattan D.A. Eyes Criminal Charges...
‘We don’t know quarter of what’s in pocket of Mueller’...
RUDY TAKES SHOT AT PRESIDENT FOR ‘FLIPPING’ COMMENTS...
DRAMA: George Conway tweets again...
BUCHANAN: We are headed for hellish year...
DAN RATHER: STAY TUNED...
Kavanaugh argued the president can be impeached for lies, cover-ups and refusing to testify...
Dems’ midterm strategy: Stop talking about Trump...

---

[SaveFerris]

MSNBC DOMINATES WHITE HOUSE HELL WEEK

[SaveFerris]

[ I still check in on him from time to time when I want to see what the Derp State media wants us to think is important. ]

Thank you.

[bagster]

Just a small example;

(right now)

TheLibertyDaily.com headline;

Anti-American Dirtbag Attorney of Mollie Tibbetts’ Murderer Files Gag Order to Ban the Legal Term ‘Illegal Alien’ From the Court

Drudge.com headline;

MSNBC DOMINATES WHITE HOUSE HELL WEEK (with a picture of hell's lesbian).

See the diff? Did Trump really have a "hell week"?

p.s. Are you Matt Drudge?

Bagster

[SaveFerris]

[Anti-American Dirtbag Attorney of Mollie Tibbetts’ Murderer Files Gag Order to Ban the Legal Term ‘Illegal Alien’ From the Court]

Now that’s a headline.

[Hell’s lesbian]

O.K. that made me laugh.