Bragg has still not specified the underlying crime that resurrected dead misdemeanors.

[Lisa558]

That’s absurd. The trial consisted of weeks of testimony and evidence.

Weeks of testimony from a prostitute and a convicted perjurer, who provided no credible evidence.

So hearsay? I think you’re missing the details.

That’s not hearsay to report what someone said to you.

Absurd again. An embezzler doesn’t take out a loan to pay off his bosses affairs. Those are diametrically opposed. One is Cohen taking Trump’s money, the other is Cohen spending his own money to protect him.

You have to be pretty delusional to believe that.

You have to be pretty delusional to believe this is anything other than a political witch-hunt.

 

[Lisa558]

Again, we have a lot of evidence that you have large gaps in your knowledge about this case. An uninformed opinion is not a particularly useful opinion.

yes, true….thats why I give your opinion no credence.

 

[Marener]

yes, true….thats why I give your opinion no credence.

That’s weird. I’m the one that’s been repeatedly educating you on the facts of the case which you have been ignorant of.

That and correcting the misinformation you’ve been given.

 

[Marener]

Weeks of testimony from a prostitute and a convicted perjurer, who provided no credible evidence.

Hope Hicks is not a prostitute. Your lack of knowledge as to who testified is glaring. There were 22 witnesses and physical evidence including Weisselberg’s handwritten notes about grossing up Cohen’s payment.

That’s not hearsay to report what someone said to you

It’s an out of court statement intended to prove the fact. Costello was not ever Cohen’s attorney. He was someone who was trying to get Cohen to toe the line for Trump.

You have to be pretty delusional to believe this is anything other than a political witch-hunt.

Is Hope Hicks delusional?

 

[Billiejeens]

Thanks for proving my point.

The fact is that you have retarded points.

 

[Billiejeens]

That’s weird. I’m the one that’s been repeatedly educating you on the facts of the case which you have been ignorant of.

That and correcting the misinformation you’ve been given.

Fucking retarded.

 

[Billiejeens]

In the jury instructions the judge doesn't even know what the underlying crime is.

He literally told them to pick something.

 

[Billiejeens]

Weeks of testimony from a prostitute and a convicted perjurer, who provided no credible evidence.


That’s not hearsay to report what someone said to you.

You have to be pretty delusional to believe this is anything other than a political witch-hunt.

Every actual legal mind stated how shocked that they were when the prosecution rested.

 

[para bellum]

They’re not prosecuting the object crime. All they have to prove is that Trump intended to commit another crime.

They still have to prove it was a crime, or the enhancement does not exist. Take out "by unlawful means" and it's just campaigning...

§ 17-152. Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

The prosecution never made the case for defrauding anyone. The records were created after the election was over, so who was the target of the fraud?

Unanswered...

 

[Marener]

They still have to prove it was a crime, or the enhancement does not exist.

Actually they don’t. There is precedent on this. The object crime does not have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The stipulates they only had to intend to commit another crime.

 

[para bellum]

Actually they don’t. There is precedent on this. The object crime does not have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The stipulates they only had to intend to commit another crime.

I did not say it had to be committed- but whatever conspiracy is alleged still HAS TO BE A CRIME!

Otherwise there is NO ENHANCEMENT!

 

[Marener]

I did not say it had to be committed- but whatever conduct is alleged still HAS TO BE A CRIME!

Otherwise there is NO ENHANCEMENT!

So they don’t have to commit the crime but the conduct has to be criminal?

You contradicted yourself in the same sentence

If they falsified with the intent to commit another crime, it’s a felony. The falsification is the conduct which is a crime.

 

[Billiejeens]

I did not say it had to be committed- but whatever conspiracy is alleged still HAS TO BE A CRIME!

Otherwise there is NO ENHANCEMENT!

As you probably know, even the judge can't say what the crime was.
He told the jury to pick something and that they didn't all have to pick the same thing.

Like the J6 hearings, the whole case is an infomercial - nothing more

 

[para bellum]

So they don’t have to commit the crime but the conduct has to be criminal?

You contradicted yourself in the same sentence

If they falsified with the intent to commit another crime, it’s a felony. The falsification is the conduct which is a crime.

The falsification is the charged offense. It is only a felony if there is an underlying crime. Falsification alone is a misdemeanor and time-barred.

"A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree
when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof."

There are two "intents" that have to be shown. Intent to defraud, and intent to conceal.

And the conduct that constitutes the "object crime" has to be ILLEGAL or there is no object crime, and the felony does not exist...

 

[Marener]

It is only a felony if there is an underlying crime

False. It’s a felony if there is an intent to commit an underlying crime.

Im sorry to keep saying this but it’s absolutely critical to understand and you keep making this error.

 

[Billiejeens]

False. It’s a felony if there is an intent to commit an underlying crime.

Im sorry to keep saying this but it’s absolutely critical to understand and you keep making this error.

There was no intent proven.
So there's that.

 

[para bellum]

False. It’s a felony if there is an intent to commit an underlying crime.

Im sorry to keep saying this but it’s absolutely critical to understand and you keep making this error.

The conduct that describes the "underlying crime" has to ACTUALLY DESCRIBE A CRIME.

You claim to understand this but you don't seem to really grasp it at all.

NDA's are not crimes, and the payments to Cohen were not illegal. NO target of the alleged fraud has been identified.

 

[Marener]

The conduct that describes the "underlying crime" has to ACTUALLY DESCRIBE A CRIME.

You claim to understand this but you don't seem to really grasp it at all.

NDA's are not crimes, and the payments to Cohen were not illegal. NO target of the alleged fraud has been identified.

Cohen filed false taxes as a result of the money laundering to him.

Cohen also committed campaign finance fraud by making a campaign donation in the form of the NDA payment.

The state laws forbid corrupt electioneering, which they argue was the purpose of hiding the payment.

These are the object crimes and they are all very much actual crimes.

But Bragg doesn’t have to prove any of this conduct actually occurred. All he has to do is prove that the purpose of falsifying the business records was to facilitate their intent to commit these crimes.

I dont know why they’d to to the trouble of trying to cover up an NDA otherwise.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Asked and answered.

View attachment 953595

And I told you that you were wrong. Do you know what specific crime means according to the law

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Those possibilities were specified. Sorry that's not good enough for you, but that's the law.

No not according to the misdemeanor Trump is being charged with.