Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The jury will decide.
Blah, blah, blah.quote --
crimes
A recent conversation with Jeffrey Cohen, a friend, Boston College law professor and former prosecutor, made me think that the case could turn out to be more legitimate than I had originally thought. The reason has to do with those allegedly falsified business records: Most of them were entered in early 2017, generally before Mr. Trump filed his Federal Election Commission report that summer. Mr. Trump may have foreseen an investigation into his campaign, leading to its financial records. Mr. Trump may have falsely recorded these internal records before the F.E.C. filing as consciously part of the same fraud: to create a consistent paper trail and to hide intent to violate federal election laws, or defraud the F.E.C.
In short: It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up.
Blah, blah, blah.
How is a non crime a crime?
BINGO!When they need to stop President Trump.
They are told to? By whom?Oh, I'm certain that a NYC jury will find President Trump guilty of anything that they are told to.
It is not for a jury to decide, it is not a finding of fact. It is a finding of the law.
It doesn't survive an appeal.
Even the NY Times realizes that.
I've gone on record saying it was enough for me to see Mr. Trump brought before justice. Any specific outcome matters less to me. There are general and nuanced arguments out there from many scholars, and armchair legal experts. On social media and places like usmb, I see the average person regurgitating key phrases (fed into their minds by ideological and political mouthpieces), like underlying crimes, predicate crimes, intent to defraud, election interference, all while ignoring any coherent arguments of legal and judicial interpretations of particular state or federal statutes.
This is a pretty damn good piece:
About a year ago, when Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, indicted former President Donald Trump, I was critical of the case and called it an embarrassment. I thought an array of legal problems would and should lead to long delays in federal courts.
After listening to Monday’s opening statement by prosecutors, I still think the Manhattan D.A. has made a historic mistake. Their vague allegation about “a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election” has me more concerned than ever about their unprecedented use of state law and their persistent avoidance of specifying an election crime or a valid theory of fraud.
Opinion | I Thought the Bragg Case Against Trump Was a Legal Embarrassment. Now I Think It’s a Historic Mistake.
It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up. But it’s still a highly flawed case.www.nytimes.com
The author of this opinion piece, JED HANDELSMAN SHUGERMAN, is highly regarded by fellows in his field of expertise. He is a co-author on an amicus brief in CREW v Trump. Shugerman is no ideological warrior, or political hack.
CREW v. Trump - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
And as a public service (sans a paywall):
A recent conversation with Jeffrey Cohen, a friend, Boston College law professor and former prosecutor, made me think that the case could turn out to be more legitimate than I had originally thought. The reason has to do with those allegedly falsified business records: Most of them were entered in early 2017, generally before Mr. Trump filed his Federal Election Commission report that summer. Mr. Trump may have foreseen an investigation into his campaign, leading to its financial records. Mr. Trump may have falsely recorded these internal records before the F.E.C. filing as consciously part of the same fraud: to create a consistent paper trail and to hide intent to violate federal election laws, or defraud the F.E.C.
In short: It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up.
Opinion | I Thought the Bragg Case Against Trump Was a Legal Embarrassment. Now I Think It’s a Historic Mistake.
It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up. But it’s still a highly flawed case.web.archive.org
They are told to? By whom?
CoAngelo worked as a prosecutor in New York with Alvin Bragg before the DOJ hired him temporarily, and then he returned back to his home to work for New York State again....silly one!Actually silly one Bragg is a county DA.... and Matthew Colangelo was the top prosecutor at the DOJ... Biden's DOJ... how many times do I need to tell you... turn off CNN and watch FOX for just two weeks... for your own good....
Colangelo gave the opening statement... bet you didn't know that either...
Alvin Leonard Bragg Jr. (born October 21, 1973) is an American politician and lawyer who serves as the New York County District Attorney, covering Manhattan.
They are told to? By whom?
But, but, but they have Giuliani-type alternate truths, alternate facts...CoAngelo worked as a prosecutor in New York with Alvin Bragg before the DOJ hired him temporarily, and then he returned back to his home to work for New York State again....silly one!
he doesn't work for the temp DOJ job anymore and does not work for Biden, he returned home to New York.
the DOJ has no say in any state prosecution, ever!
The only Trump cases the DOJ controls are the two federal indictments, the election subversion case, and the classified documents case, which Trump has succeeded in delaying both of those federal indictment cases.
Not true but even if it were so what?... he worked for Garland as a senior DOJ prosecutor.... he worked on the Tish James case and now he is with Bragg who had to have his arm twisted by Garland to even bring the case...CoAngelo worked as a prosecutor in New York with Alvin Bragg before the DOJ hired him temporarily, and then he returned back to his home to work for New York State again....silly one!
The kind with former leaders who are criminals?Mr. Trump don't speak and stay at your seat and be here everyday... oh you say you are running for president to damn bad....
What kind of country acts like this with their former leaders?.... this is a sickness.... TDS is real and this judge has it bad...
He should be disbarred....
Picked by VOTERS you mean.Both Bragg and James were handpicked by the Democrats for the sole purpose of legally taking down Trump. Stalin would be proud of the Democrats.
If they are then a quick dismissal will come.Crimes that are past the statute of limitations?... hush money case???? man everyone can see what this is and who is running this BS and its Biden... he should be in a courtroom not Trump....
And when Justice prevails and it will one day we may see that happen....
Obama hasn't been in office for 7 years.I wouldn’t call it Braggs case, he decided against filing charges. It’s more Obama/Bidens case after they send Coangelo to file it
They're in the indictment.Feel free to post up an actual law that was broken
Poor the dainty. Narcissistic to a fault. But also delusional.Dante Derangement Syndrome.
Members like westwall, backagain and many others will enter threads deflecting, derailing, hijacking -- all in order to attack the legendary Dante. The contexts and arguments being made in any thread become irrelevant when they see this Dante. It's been amusing, but I long ago figured a herd immunity would settle in.
But twas not to be.
carry on
next
~~~~~~I've gone on record saying it was enough for me to see Mr. Trump brought before justice. Any specific outcome matters less to me. There are general and nuanced arguments out there from many scholars, and armchair legal experts. On social media and places like usmb, I see the average person regurgitating key phrases (fed into their minds by ideological and political mouthpieces), like underlying crimes, predicate crimes, intent to defraud, election interference, all while ignoring any coherent arguments of legal and judicial interpretations of particular state or federal statutes.
This is a pretty damn good piece:
About a year ago, when Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, indicted former President Donald Trump, I was critical of the case and called it an embarrassment. I thought an array of legal problems would and should lead to long delays in federal courts.
After listening to Monday’s opening statement by prosecutors, I still think the Manhattan D.A. has made a historic mistake. Their vague allegation about “a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election” has me more concerned than ever about their unprecedented use of state law and their persistent avoidance of specifying an election crime or a valid theory of fraud.
Opinion | I Thought the Bragg Case Against Trump Was a Legal Embarrassment. Now I Think It’s a Historic Mistake.
It’s not the crime; it’s the cover-up. But it’s still a highly flawed case.
The author of this opinion piece, JED HANDELSMAN SHUGERMAN, is highly regarded by fellows in his field of expertise. He is a co-author on an amicus brief in CREW v Trump. Shugerman is no ideological warrior, or political hack.
CREW v. Trump - Wikipedia
