• Run Down Poverty Ridden, Gun Infested Red State Shithole Cities Are Uni

    From tRUMP@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 29 14:55:47 2023
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.society.liberalism, alt.atheism
    XPost: alt.politics.democrats.d, talk.politics.guns

    Why should any American city matter to rightist trailer trash whose
    shithole cities are overrun with gun crime and poverty when Trump's going
    to end his days behind bars and leave in a body bag!


    Feeble old scatterbrain Trump (Inmate Number P01135809) will have spare
    change from his prison laundry duties to get by. He'll be sucking black
    dick too. At his age, he'll probably die in prison.

    Trump's Total Charges Could Result In More Than 700 Years In Prison.

    Former President Donald Trump has been indicted on 91 federal and state
    charges in total after being indicted for the fourth time Monday in Fulton County, Georgia, facing a range of felony charges that all carry potential prison sentences that add up to a potential maximum sentence of 717.5
    years in prison,


    Manhattan - 136 Years Maximum: Trump was charged with 34 counts of
    falsifying business records in the first degree in his first indictment in Manhattan, stemming from "hush money" payments made during his 2016
    campaign, which as a class "E" felony under New York law carries a maximum four-year prison sentence for each count if convicted.

    Trump could face over 100 years in prison if he were convicted of every
    charge in that case.


    Classified Documents - 450 Years Maximum: Trump faces 40 federal charges
    after being indicted for bringing White House documents back to Mar-A-Lago
    with him and allegedly trying to obstruct the Justice Department's investigation into them, including 32 counts of willful retention of
    national security documents, six counts related to obstruction and two
    counts for scheme to conceal and making false statements.

    That could result in 450 years maximum imprisonment, based on the willful retention charges each carrying up to 10 years in prison, the obstruction charges carrying potential 20-year penalties and the false statement
    charges carrying potentially five years each.


    Federal Election Investigation - 55 Years Maximum: Trump was charged with
    four felony counts as part of the Justice Department's investigation into
    his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, including conspiracy to defraud
    the U.S., obstruction, conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding and conspiracy against rights, a 19th century law that criminalizes when two
    or more people "conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate" any Americans "in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege"
    they're afforded under the Constitution or federal law.

    Those charges could result in more than 50 years in prison if Trump were convicted of all counts, based on maximum sentences of five years for conspiracy to defraud, 20 years for each obstruction charge and 10 years
    for conspiracy against rights.


    Fulton County - 76.5 Years Maximum: Trump was indicted on 13 state charges
    in Fulton County for trying to overturn Georgia's 2020 election-part of 41 total counts brought against 19 defendants-including charges for
    racketeering (known as RICO charges), solicitation of violation of oath by
    a public officer, conspiracy to commit impersonating a public officer, conspiracy to commit forgery in the first degree, false statements and writings, conspiracy to commit false statements and writings, filing false documents and conspiracy to commit filing false documents.

    Trump could spend more than 70 years in prison if he were convicted on all counts, based on maximum sentences of 20 years for racketeering, three
    years for solicitation (three counts), 2.5 years for conspiracy to
    impersonate a public officer, 7.5 years for forgery conspiracy (two
    counts), five years for false statements (two counts), 2.5 years for
    conspiracy to commit false statements (two counts), 10 years for filing
    false documents and five years for conspiracy to file false documents.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From AI Sux@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 29 22:19:40 2023
    XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, comp.ai.philosophy, misc.legal
    XPost: talk.politics.guns

    On 29 Dec 2023, tRUMP <elonx@protonmail.com> posted some news:ummmlj$s3g1$7@dont-email.me:

    Why should any American trust AI to do anything that they can't do
    better themselves? Oh wait, Cohen is a Jew not an American.

    Michael D. Cohen, the onetime fixer for former President Donald J. Trump,
    said in court papers unsealed on Friday that he had mistakenly given his
    lawyer bogus legal citations generated by the artificial intelligence
    program Google Bard.

    The fictitious citations were used by Mr. Cohen’s lawyer in a motion
    submitted to a federal judge, Jesse M. Furman. Mr. Cohen, who pleaded
    guilty in 2018 to campaign finance violations and served time in prison,
    had asked the judge for an early end to the court’s supervision of his
    case now that he is out of prison and has complied with the conditions of
    his release.

    In a sworn declaration made public on Friday, Mr. Cohen explained that he
    had not kept up with “emerging trends (and related risks) in legal
    technology and did not realize that Google Bard was a generative text
    service that, like ChatGPT, could show citations and descriptions that
    looked real but actually were not.”

    He also said he did not realize that the lawyer filing the motion on his behalf, David M. Schwartz, “would drop the cases into his submission
    wholesale without even confirming that they existed.”

    The episode — the second this year in which lawyers in Manhattan federal
    court have cited bogus decisions created by artificial intelligence —
    could have implications for a Manhattan criminal case against Mr. Trump in which Mr. Cohen is expected to be the star witness. The former president’s lawyers have long attacked Mr. Cohen as a serial fabulist; now, they say
    they have a brand-new example.

    Mr. Schwartz, in his own declaration, acknowledged using the three
    citations in question and said he had not independently reviewed the cases because Mr. Cohen indicated that another lawyer, E. Danya Perry, was
    providing suggestions for the motion.

    “I sincerely apologize to the court for not checking these cases
    personally before submitting them to the court,” Mr. Schwartz wrote.

    Barry Kamins, a lawyer for Mr. Schwartz, declined to comment on Friday.

    Ms. Perry has said she began representing Mr. Cohen only after Mr.
    Schwartz filed the motion. She wrote to Judge Furman on Dec. 8 that after reading the already-filed document, she could not verify the case law
    being cited. In a statement at the time, she said that “consistent with my ethical obligation of candor to the court, I advised Judge Furman of this issue.”

    She said in a letter made public on Friday that Mr. Cohen, a former lawyer
    who has been disbarred, “did not know that the cases he identified were
    not real and, unlike his attorney, had no obligation to confirm as much.”

    Editors’ Picks

    The Fine Art of the Paperback Makeover

    The Secret Sorrow of Hotel Rooms

    I Offered to Give My Home to My Son. Why Does He Expect Me to Leave It?
    “It must be emphasized that Mr. Cohen did not engage in any misconduct,”
    Ms. Perry wrote. She said Friday that Mr. Cohen had no comment, and that
    he had consented to the unsealing of the court papers after the judge
    raised the question of whether they contained information protected by the attorney-client privilege.

    The imbroglio began when Judge Furman said in an order on Dec. 12 that he
    could not find any of the three decisions. He ordered Mr. Schwartz to
    provide copies or “a thorough explanation of how the motion came to cite
    cases that do not exist and what role, if any, Mr. Cohen played.”

    The matter could have significant implications given Mr. Cohen’s pivotal
    role in a case brought by the Manhattan district attorney that is
    scheduled for trial on March 25.

    The district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, charged Mr. Trump with
    orchestrating a hush money scheme that centered on a payment Mr. Cohen
    made during the 2016 election to a pornographic film star, Stormy Daniels.
    Mr. Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony charges.

    Seeking to rebut Mr. Trump’s lawyers’ claims that Mr. Cohen is
    untrustworthy, his defenders have said that Mr. Cohen lied on Mr. Trump’s behalf but has told the truth since splitting with the former president in
    2018 and pleading guilty to the federal charges.

    Mr. Trump’s lawyers immediately seized on the Google Bard revelation on
    Friday. Susan R. Necheles, a lawyer representing Mr. Trump in the coming Manhattan trial, said it was “typical Michael Cohen.”

    “The D.A.’s office should not be basing a case on him,” Ms. Necheles said. “He’s an admitted perjurer and has pled guilty to multiple felonies and
    this is just an additional indication of his lack of character and ongoing criminality.”

    Ms. Perry, the lawyer now representing Mr. Cohen on the motion, rejected
    that assertion.

    “?These filings — and the fact that he was willing to unseal them — show
    that Mr. Cohen did absolutely nothing wrong,” she said. “He relied on his lawyer, as he had every right to do. Unfortunately, his lawyer appears to
    have made an honest mistake in not verifying the citations in the brief he drafted and filed.”

    A spokeswoman for Mr. Bragg declined to comment Friday.

    Prosecutors may argue that Mr. Cohen’s actions were not intended to
    defraud the court, but rather, by his own admission, a woeful
    misunderstanding of new technology.

    The nonexistent cases cited in Mr. Schwartz’s motion — United States v. Figueroa-Flores, United States v. Ortiz and United States v. Amato — came
    with corresponding summaries and notations that they had been affirmed by
    the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It has become clear that
    they were hallucinations created by the chatbot, taking bits and pieces of actual cases and combining them with robotic imagination.

    Judge Furman noted in his Dec. 12 order that the Figueroa-Flores citation
    in fact referred to a page from a decision that “has nothing to do with supervised release.”

    The Amato case named in the motion, the judge said, actually concerned a decision of the Board of Veterans’ Appeals, an administrative tribunal.

    And the citation to the Ortiz case, Judge Furman wrote, appeared “to
    correspond to nothing at all.”

    William K. Rashbaum contributed reporting.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/29/nyregion/michael-cohen-ai-fake-
    cases.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)