Is Braggs stretching it with a felony?

[Lesh]

So you and Bragg are claiming that Trump paying Cohen in June of 2017 was an effort to influence the 2016 election? Just how stupid must one BE these days to be a Democrat?

The DEAL and illegal contribution was made prior to the election.

The payoff was later

Dumbfuck

 

[WorldWatcher]

Babbit provided no armed lethal threat and many other law enforcement were within feet and did not fire

#1 The standard is clear and present danger, not that the must brandish a firearm. Being at the head of a riotious mob attempting to breaking into the House Chamber after numerous acts of violence's had already been reported over the law enforcement radio net and the rioters breaking through the barricade with melee weapons represents a clear and present danger.

#2 You know the Boston Bomber's didn't brandish a firearm right? But people died when their backpacks exploded.

WW

 

[Faun]

Babbit provided no armed lethal threat and many other law enforcement were within feet and did not fire

No other cop had a clear shot. And that mob was a lethal threat.

 

[Faun]

Oh sorry baby doll man that I missed the T on thought. That’s a major victory for you
Now instead of weeping for things to be explained to your satisfaction, develop a refutation and share that.

LOL

It's my problem you posted incomprehensible English? Or was it supposed to be my job to figure out what you were trying to write?

Regardless, it still makes no sense.

Faun: What did Trump intend to do later on?

weather53: Some type of thought police thing​

Was Trump intending to pretend he was a cop?

 

[Flopper]

So you and Bragg are claiming that Trump paying Cohen in June of 2017 was an effort to influence the 2016 election? Just how stupid must one BE these days to be a Democrat?

What is being claimed is that the twelve $35,000 a month checks written to Cohen by Trump beginning in Feb. 2017 were payments for 2016 hushmoney payments and legal fees by Cohen on Trump's behalf. The evidence so far are Trump's check stubs and Cohen's invoices with details of the charges. Trump is not so stupid as to write Cohen a check for $420,000 just before the election. Apparently Trump didn't think that payments of $35,000 a month for legal fees of the Trump Organization would be question after the election. He was wrong.

 

[Flopper]

Cohen committed a crime. Trump aided & abetted him.

Yes, Trump could have written checks to payoff Daniels and McDougal and it would have been perfectly legal provided he reported the payments as campaign contributions and expenses. Remember the purpose of hushmoney is to hide information that could be damaging. Having to report these campaign contributions and expenses would create a trail right to Daniels, the Enquire, and McDougal. So he turned to his personal lawyer to handle the payments and NDAs in a way that would leave no trail to him.

Thus Cohen created a long trail of opening a bank account in a phony name owned by a shell corporation. The purpose being to receive money that Cohen would raise to issue hushmoney checks along with the NDAs. Trump then paid Cohen back after the election in checks disguised as legal fees which Trump recorded as such so it could be deducted from taxes and would likely not be questioned. It was a solid plan until the Feds started looking into Cohen.

 

[WEATHER53]

LOL

It's my problem you posted incomprehensible English? Or was it supposed to be my job to figure out what you were trying to write?

Regardless, it still makes no sense.

Faun: What did Trump intend to do later on?​

​

weather53: Some type of thought police thing​

Was Trump intending to pretend he was a cop?

Poor little apple dumpling “man” still needs things explained to “him”

 

[Faun]

Poor little apple dumpling “man” still needs things explained to “him”

Anyone needs incomprehensible English explained.

 

[Delldude]

He's being charged on a business law violation under Section 175.10 of the New York State Penal code conserning the Felony Falsification of Business Records.

Which has to show the falsification was to hide another crime, which would be hiding campaign contributions.....which Bragg will have to prove.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Which has to show the falsification was to hide another crime, which would be hiding campaign contributions.....which Bragg will have to prove.

Cohen and Packer have already been found guilty of their crimes one went to prison and the other paid $187,000 in fines. Bragg will not have to prove those two committed their crimes, only that Trump falsified his business records to aid and or conceal the crimes committed by others.

Is this really that hard a concept to understand?

WW

 

[Delldude]

Bragg will not have to prove those two committed their crimes, only that Trump falsified his business records to aid and or conceal the crimes committed by others.

Bragg will have to prove that Donald J Trump, Himself, not two others, committed the crime of falsification of business records to conceal what Bragg believes is a federal election law violation, which he has to prove Trump did.

Is this really that hard a concept to understand?

Maybe try it on for size.

 

[kyzr]

What he can't do is aid & abet a crime. Even if it's with his own money.

WTF is "aid & abet"? DUH.
David Pecker (AMI) committed the exact same crime, paid a fine, all done.
If Cohen made an illegal contribution, that has ZERO to do with Trump, moron.
The FEC did not prosecute Trump, so who knows campaign finance laws better than the FEC? ANS: no one.

 

[WEATHER53]

Bragg will have to prove that Donald J Trump, Himself, not two others, committed the crime of falsification of business records to conceal what Bragg believes is a federal election law violation, which he has to prove Trump did.

Maybe try it on for size.

But….but…but…Trump might have know or maybe…maybe…would gain knowledge later on so that possible gain had to be preempted.

 

[WEATHER53]

Bragg stretched it by starting

 

[Nostra]

It's not possible to understand, no less refute, incomprehensible English.

"Some type of though police thing"​

You couldn’t figure out what he was posting?

Not surprising from a dumbass who had to admit he has ZERO reading comprehension skills.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Which has to show the falsification was to hide another crime, which would be hiding campaign contributions.....which Bragg will have to prove.

Yes Bragg will have to prove the falsification of business records under Section 175.10 of the NYS Penal Code to hide another crime.

From the Statement of Facts it will be very easy to link Trumps (alleged) action to aid in and or concealing the crimes that Cohen and Pecker were found quilty of (Cohen through criminal prosecution, Pecker through FEC fines).

Bragg does not have to prove that Trump committed campaign finance violations because Trump hasn't been charged with those. Those fall under federal jurisdiction and are outside his authority. He only has to show the link to Cohen's and Peckers crimes. Nothing in Section 175.10 says that the crimes that were attempting to aid and or conceal have to be ones performed by the defendant.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Bragg will have to prove that Donald J Trump, Himself, not two others, committed the crime of falsification of business records to conceal what Bragg believes is a federal election law violation, which he has to prove Trump did.

Nothing in Section 175.10 requires the falsification of records and is enhanced to a felony when done to aid in and or conceal another crime. Nothing in the statutes say the defendant has to be the one that committed the other crime, it can be committed by someone else with the defendant aiding in and or conceal the other crime.

WW

 

[Faun]

If Cohen made an illegal contribution, that has ZERO to do with Trump, moron.

LOL

Zero?? He paid off a porn star to hide Trump's purported affair with her. Trump has everything to do with that.

 

[kyzr]

LOL
Zero?? He paid off a porn star to hide Trump's purported affair with her. Trump has everything to do with that.

LOL!! So why didn't the FEC indict Trump? Dumbass.

 

[Faun]

LOL!! So why didn't the FEC indict Trump? Dumbass.

It's been explained to you repeatedly. That you still don't understand is on you.