Is Braggs stretching it with a felony?

[Lesh]

A conspiracy is made up events. Nothing I listed was untrue commie.

You connect dots the way bug eyed Carrie Mathison did

 

[WorldWatcher]

Linking to a false charge on the indictment doesn’t explain away the pretzel twisting. The biased DA, who ran on the promise to “get Trump,” is tying it to a campaign violation, which is a federal crime, and to which Cohen already testified Trump knew nothing about.

Trump isn't charged with a federal crime. Trump is charged with a state crime.

Cohen's didn't "testify" (IIRC) his attorney wrote a letter - not testimony. Very early in the investigation. That was rescinded once the evidence against him was laid out and he decided to take the plea deal instead of facing a jury. As part of the plea deal he had to turn over all evidence in his possession which included texts, emails, invoices, contemporaneous notes, and even reports of audio recordings of Trump being in on the scheme. All part of what the Grand Jury reviewed in deciding to issue the indictment.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

I didn't say he was. I brought up the FEC to show they couldn't find anything related to any campaign finance violations. The only way the check could have came from a business account is if Cohen had access and legal rights to use that account on behalf of Trump. Again, that would make Cohen the culprit and not Trump.

Not sure where you are getting your information. Trump isn't being charged on anything to do with the FEC.

In the business world a vendor (in this case Cohen) issues an invoice to the business. The business then cuts a check to the vendor to pay for expenses. Cohen didn't have or need to have access to Trump's business accounts. He invoiced the claims, they went to the Business, they were approved by the Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer (David Weisselberg [sp?]), and Trump signed the checks.

WW

 

[blackhawk]

This case is about politics always has been I don't believe any DA Democrat or Republican including Bragg would have gone foreward with this case if the defendent was anyone but Trump.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The DA is trying to show the misdemeanor (expired) of falsifying business records is a felony because it is tied to campaign violations (a federal crime which was not prosecuted against him due to no evidence of it).

In the Felony law (Section 175.10) the requirement is aiding and concealing another crime. It no where says (A) Trump has to be the one that committed the crime, and (B) that it only applies to aiding and concealing state crimes. Felony charges have not "expired" assuming you are referring to the Statute of Limitations. The base is 5-years with a possible additional 5-years for any period where Trump was out of state.

Cohen violated the Federal campaign finance violations, that is a done deal and that case is closed. The charges under New York State law are that Trump aided in concealing the crimes that Cohen committed in a manner which generated falsification of business records.

If Trump and his team had simply come to an agreement on the NDA, paid the money directly out of Trumps personal account - there would be no violation of New York State law. However by laundering the money through shell companies and phony invoices as "legal expenses" (legal expenses being tax deductible for a business while payments to porn starts for an NDA are not).

WW

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not sure where you are getting your information. Trump isn't being charged on anything to do with the FEC.

In the business world a vendor (in this case Cohen) issues an invoice to the business. The business then cuts a check to the vendor to pay for expenses. Cohen didn't have or need to have access to Trump's business accounts. He invoiced the claims, they went to the Business, they were approved by the Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer (David Weisselberg [sp?]), and Trump signed the checks.

WW

Why do you keep putting words in my post? One more time: I said that I brought up the FEC to demonstrate their investigations show that there was no wrong doing by Trump.

According to the testimony by Cohen's lawyer, Cohen paid Trump out of his own money. So no, it didn't originally come from any business fund, it came out of his own pocket according to him.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Why do you keep putting words in my post? One more time: I said that I brought up the FEC to demonstrate their investigations show that there was no wrong doing by Trump.

#1 Because you seem to be attempting to tie the New York business law violations to the FEC. They have nothing to do with each other. The FEC cannot say that Trump didn't violate New York State law.

#2 Secondly the FEC investigations didn't say there was no wrong doing by Trump. Actually the opposite the Office of the General Counsel recommended that there was wrong doing and that charges be filed. The FEC has 6 commissioners and it requires a majority to take action on the Counsel's recommendation. For political reasons the vote to take action was 2 for and 2 against. In neither case is 2 a majority of the 6 commissioners. (The other two wouldn't vote either way.) So no, that FEC Commissioners didn't find there was no wrong doing. They failed to act either way and eventually just closed the case. Which is different.

FEC drops investigation into Trump hush money payments

The Federal Elections Commission (FEC) has closed its investigation into whether former President Trump illegally made hush money payments to women prior to the 2016 election. The FEC vot…

thehill.com

https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7313/7313_19.pdf

According to the testimony by Cohen's lawyer, Cohen paid Trump out of his own money. So no, it didn't originally come from any business fund, it came out of his own pocket according to him.

That wasn't "testimony" it was a letter. Testimony is under oath, the letter was not.

Secondly it was early in the investigation when Cohen was denying the allegations. However that changed later once the government show him the evidence and he decided to take a plea deal under the condition of full cooperation for telling the truth. Not only did HIS testimony change (under oath now in court) he was also required to provide any other evidence on the matter including texts, emails, file, invoices, corporate documents, phone records, travel records, contemporaneous notes, and he even had audio recordings of Trump to corroborate.

Of course the money initially paid to Daniels came out of his pocket, that is the whole point. The arrangements were made by the Trump team, later reimbursed (with extra) by the Trump Organization (business) and in laundering the money that was repaid to Cohen they violated Section 175.10 of the New York Penal Code, Falsification of Business Records in the First Degree by submitting and paying invalid invoices as "legal fees". Legal fees are a tax deductible expense for a business, paying a porn star hush money is not.

If Trump had the NDA drawn up, cut a personal check and been done with it, he wouldn't be in legal jeopardy. The problem comes from having Cohen front the money, use of shell companies, make fraudulent invoices, and inaccurately enter the invoice payment in the Trump Organization ledgers.

WW

 

[Clipper]

1. Bubba took advantage of a young intern, which would have gotten any manager in the US fired instantly, and lost his law license for perjury a real crime that he deserved to get impeached for.
2. Prove Trump lied. Stormy's story keep changing. Trump paid the doorman too for a bogus claim as it turns out.

Who said it was bogus? Are you saying that a doorman got the best of Trump the "stable genius"?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

#1 Because you seem to be attempting to tie the New York business law violations to the FEC. They have nothing to do with each other. The FEC cannot say that Trump didn't violate New York State law.

#2 Secondly the FEC investigations didn't say there was no wrong doing by Trump. Actually the opposite the Office of the General Counsel recommended that there was wrong doing and that charges be filed. The FEC has 6 commissioners and it requires a majority to take action on the Counsel's recommendation. For political reasons the vote to take action was 2 for and 2 against. In neither case is 2 a majority of the 6 commissioners. (The other two wouldn't vote either way.) So no, that FEC Commissioners didn't find there was no wrong doing. They failed to act either way and eventually just closed the case. Which is different.

FEC drops investigation into Trump hush money payments

The Federal Elections Commission (FEC) has closed its investigation into whether former President Trump illegally made hush money payments to women prior to the 2016 election. The FEC vot…

thehill.com

https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7313/7313_19.pdf

That wasn't "testimony" it was a letter. Testimony is under oath, the letter was not.

Secondly it was early in the investigation when Cohen was denying the allegations. However that changed later once the government show him the evidence and he decided to take a plea deal under the condition of full cooperation for telling the truth. Not only did HIS testimony change (under oath now in court) he was also required to provide any other evidence on the matter including texts, emails, file, invoices, corporate documents, phone records, travel records, contemporaneous notes, and he even had audio recordings of Trump to corroborate.

Of course the money initially paid to Daniels came out of his pocket, that is the whole point. The arrangements were made by the Trump team, later reimbursed (with extra) by the Trump Organization (business) and in laundering the money that was repaid to Cohen they violated Section 175.10 of the New York Penal Code, Falsification of Business Records in the First Degree by submitting and paying invalid invoices as "legal fees". Legal fees are a tax deductible expense for a business, paying a porn star hush money is not.

If Trump had the NDA drawn up, cut a personal check and been done with it, he wouldn't be in legal jeopardy. The problem comes from having Cohen front the money, use of shell companies, make fraudulent invoices, and inaccurately enter the invoice payment in the Trump Organization ledgers.

WW

Robert Costello, the former legal advisor to ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen, appeared before the grand jury in the Manhattan District Attorney’s investigation into former President Trump Monday, and testified that Cohen is a "serial liar."

Costello testified before the grand jury for more than two hours Monday, as Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg considers bringing charges against former President Trump.

Trump-Manhattan DA case: Bob Costello testifies to grand jury, says Michael Cohen is a 'serial liar'

Robert Costello, the former legal advisor to ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen, appeared before the grand jury in the Manhattan District Attorney’s investigation into former President Trump Monday, and testified that Cohen is a “serial liar.”

www.foxnews.com

 

[WorldWatcher]

Robert Costello, the former legal advisor to ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen, appeared before the grand jury in the Manhattan District Attorney’s investigation into former President Trump Monday, and testified that Cohen is a "serial liar."

Costello testified before the grand jury for more than two hours Monday, as Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg considers bringing charges against former President Trump.

Trump-Manhattan DA case: Bob Costello testifies to grand jury, says Michael Cohen is a 'serial liar'

Robert Costello, the former legal advisor to ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen, appeared before the grand jury in the Manhattan District Attorney’s investigation into former President Trump Monday, and testified that Cohen is a “serial liar.”

www.foxnews.com

So?

Costello attempted to disparage Cohen.

Now let’s hear about Allen Pecker, David Weisseilberg, the other in persons called as witnesses, texts, emails, corporate shell documents, invoices, cashed checks, contemporaneous notes made by the various individuals, and audio recordings of Trump phone calls.

WW

 

[Lisa558]

So?

Costello attempted to disparage Cohen.

Now let’s hear about Allen Pecker, David Weisseilberg, the other in persons called as witnesses, texts, emails, corporate shell documents, invoices, cashed checks, contemporaneous notes made by the various individuals, and audio recordings of Trump phone calls.

WW

Maybe he should just destroy all the evidence, like Hillary did with her emails.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So?

Costello attempted to disparage Cohen.

Now let’s hear about Allen Pecker, David Weisseilberg, the other in persons called as witnesses, texts, emails, corporate shell documents, invoices, cashed checks, contemporaneous notes made by the various individuals, and audio recordings of Trump phone calls.

WW

It's doubtful we will hear anything given the case should be thrown out of court on day one. Fat Alvin is on record stating he will use his power to get Trump which is a personal vendetta.

 

[Lisa558]

It's doubtful we will hear anything given the case should be thrown out of court on day one. Fat Alvin is on record stating he will use his power to get Trump which is a personal vendetta.

Fat Alvin should be disbarred based on that statement alone. A DA is not supposed to target an individual, and then figure out a crime he can charge him with.

 

[WorldWatcher]

It's doubtful we will hear anything given the case should be thrown out of court on day one. Fat Alvin is on record stating he will use his power to get Trump which is a personal vendetta.

Not likely Ray.

We (the public) will be hearing a lot more detail.

The defense will be receiving all the evidence presented to the Grand Jury, any additional evidence not used for the Grand Jury, and any exculpatory evidence the DA has.

The defense will then be making a Motion to Dismiss and the DA will then have a rebuttal motion. Each likely to bring more evidence into the public sphere. Same for Motions to Supress Evidence filed by the defense.

Since these are public filings we will be hearing more.

It’s the type of motions, if I understand correctly are due to be heard by the Judge in December.

WW

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Not likely Ray.

We (the public) will be hearing a lot more detail.

The defense will be receiving all the evidence presented to the Grand Jury, any additional evidence not used for the Grand Jury, and any exculpatory evidence the DA has.

The defense will then be making a Motion to Dismiss and the DA will then have a rebuttal motion. Each likely to bring more evidence into the public sphere. Same for Motions to Supress Evidence filed by the defense.

Since these are public filings we will be hearing more.

It’s the type of motions, if I understand correctly are due to be heard by the Judge in December.

WW

We won't hear anything if this ends up in front of a non-commie judge. The idea that a DA would be allowed to use the court system for a personal vendetta is actually unheard of. Once it gets thrown out Fat Alvin can appeal all he wants. By the time it hits the Supreme Court, Trump will be President again and there is nothing he will be able to do about it since the goal here is to stop Trump from running.

 

[Faun]

And if there was anything illegal, why didn't the FEC find it? According to Cohen's former attorney he paid her without Trump's knowledge. If Trump did anything, all he did was reimburse him which is not criminal on his part.

The FEC was split 2-2 over going after Trump for campaign finance violations. They didn't go after Trump because doing so required a majority vote. So you repeating that the FEC found nothing wrong is just you lying again.

But more salient to this case is that the FEC not going after Trump for campaign finance violations is utterly meaningless since a court already adjudicated that decision when it found Michael Cohen guilty of campaign finance violations in regards to the same hush money Trump was involved with.

And despite Trump lying his ass off, denying any and all knowledge of it -- turns out, Trump was recorded plotting the hush money...

 

[WorldWatcher]

We won't hear anything if this ends up in front of a non-commie judge. The idea that a DA would be allowed to use the court system for a personal vendetta is actually unheard of. Once it gets thrown out Fat Alvin can appeal all he wants. By the time it hits the Supreme Court, Trump will be President again and there is nothing he will be able to do about it since the goal here is to stop Trump from running.

OK Ray, at this point you aren't talking about the case. Feel free to continue to rant if that floats your boat.

Have a nice day.

WW

 

[Faun]

OK Ray, at this point you aren't talking about the case. Feel free to continue to rant if that floats your boat.

Have a nice day.

WW

Aside from FEC being Federal, I've already shown Ray From Cleveland is lying when he falsely claims the FEC found nothing wrong. It actually came down to 2 Democrats wanting to pursue the case, versus 2 Republicans who didn't. Two others on that commission recused themselves. The tie meant the FEC would not pursue the case. And the 2 Republicans who voted to not pursue, did not say it was because they found no wrong-doing -- they said it was because the DoJ had already prosecuted Michael Cohen.

If truth and reality were on Ray From Cleveland's side, he wouldn't have to keep lying like he does.

 

[Lisa558]

We won't hear anything if this ends up in front of a non-commie judge. The idea that a DA would be allowed to use the court system for a personal vendetta is actually unheard of. Once it gets thrown out Fat Alvin can appeal all he wants. By the time it hits the Supreme Court, Trump will be President again and there is nothing he will be able to do about it since the goal here is to stop Trump from running.

I think the DA and those he’s conspiring with know all that. There’s no case here. What they are counting on is that enough gullible, stupid, uninformed people will be manipulated into thinking that Trump did something….shudder…..awful… and that, combined with the resources and time it will take from the campaign, will be enough to install another Democrat as president in 2024.

In the meantime, the DA is working to get actual violent, violent criminals back onto the subway platforms and streets of NY.

 

[Pappadave1]

Why?

Trump did what he was accused of.
The only question is, is it a crime (yes) and should he be punished for it. (Normally, I'd say, no, but given what Trump has done to this country, absolutely.)

What he did was at worst MISDEMEANOR that at most deserved a small fine and I've seen no proof that it was even a misdemeanor on TRUMP'S part. You all seem to forget that Trump's 2016 campaign was largely SELF-FINANCED. He spent somewhat more than 100 million while Hillary spent $1 BILLION and still lost. Any money he paid to Cohen was likely largely his OWN money and not subject to FEC "rules" that govern political DONATIONS.