We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong

[krichton]

Everyone with a thinking rational brain knows trump is guilty. Only his band of cultists think otherwise. The only question is will he actually do time. I say no. He pays a small fine and moves on. When you’re a former president you will get certain favors a normal person wouldn’t.

 

[RhodyPatriot]

He might have a case but the Money Transactions occurred AFTER the 2016 Election, according to the FEC.

Ah, but what you don't realize is not only that Fat Alvin is about to be victorious in his epic quest for justice to takedown Orange Man - but in the process he will achieve the glorious feat of being the first man to show verified proof of the ability to time travel.

And he's not even a scientist.

Incredible.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ah, yes, so it appears that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, has been receiving quite a bit of flak for pursuing a case against none other than Donald Trump. However, I must say that upon closer inspection, the charges brought against Mr. Trump are anything but weak. In fact, the charge of creating false financial records is not novel and has been used time and time again in New York to prosecute individuals who create fake documentation to cover up campaign finance violations - precisely the accusation leveled against Mr. Trump, or rather, defendant Trump.

It's worth noting that the Manhattan D.A.'s office is hardly your run-of-the-mill local cog in the judicial system. Rather, it is unique, with jurisdiction over the financial capital of the world, which means the office regularly deals with complex white-collar crimes, including those involving high-profile individuals. Indeed, the office recently secured a conviction of the Trump Organization and a guilty plea from one of its top executives, Allen Weisselberg, on charges related to a tax fraud scheme.

Moreover, the books and records counts laid out in the charging papers against Mr. Trump are the bread and butter of the D.A.'s office. He is the 30th defendant to be indicted on false records charges by Mr. Bragg since he took office just over a year ago, with the D.A. bringing 151 counts under the statute so far. Indeed, the Trump Organization conviction and the Weisselberg plea included business falsification felonies.

The 34 felony books and records counts in the Trump indictment turn on the misstatement of the hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels arranged by Michael Cohen in the waning days of the 2016 election and the repayment of that amount by Mr. Trump to Mr. Cohen, ostensibly as legal expenses. There are 11 counts for false invoices, 11 for false checks and check stubs and 12 for false general ledger entries. This allegedly violated the false records statute when various entries were made in business documents describing those repayments as legal fees.

While Mr. Trump's case may be unique in its particulars, his behavior is not. Individuals have often attempted to skirt the disclosure and dollar limit requirements of campaign finance regulations and falsified records to hide it. Contrary to Mr. Trump's protestations, New York prosecutors regularly charge felony violations of the books and records statute and win convictions when the crimes covered up were campaign finance violations, resulting in false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity.

All in all, my fellow members of this illustrious snakepit and a few ladies and gentlemen, it seems that Mr. Bragg is hardly navigating uncharted waters. His actions are supported by previous prosecutions in New York and elsewhere, which have demonstrated that state authorities can enforce state law in cases relating to federal candidates. It remains to be seen what will come of this case, but one thing is certain - Mr. Trump cannot persuasively argue that he is being singled out for some unprecedented theory of prosecution. He is being treated like any other New Yorker would be with similar evidence against him.

And let the war begin, the war of words, that is.

Cheers,
Rumpole.

Opinion | We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong (Published 2023)

There’s nothing novel or weak about Alvin Bragg’s case.

www.nytimes.com

For weeks, Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, has come under heavy fire for pursuing a case against Donald Trump. Potential charges were described as being developed under a novel legal theory. And criticism has come not only from Mr. Trump and his allies, as expected, but also from many who are usually no friends of the former president but who feared it would be a weak case.

With the release of the indictment and accompanying statement of facts, we can now say that there’s nothing novel or weak about this case. The charge of creating false financial records is constantly brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York D.A.s. In particular, the creation of phony documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump stands accused of.

Did you see poor Trumpy Bear's big frowny-face? That was the face of a man who has just learned they have all the receipts.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

He might have a case but the Money Transactions occurred AFTER the 2016 Election, according to the FEC.

The next reasons were that the paperwork violation took place after 2016 which means it could not have been done to help with the 2016 election and that it isn’t obvious the payments were meant to influence the election.

He still wouldn’t have a case.. because he doesn’t have evidence that Trump allocated which money to which expense.

He’s making that up, assuming it, and charging someone with what he’s assuming. It’s a Create Your Own Adventure book.

No matter what side of the aisle you’re on, there’s no way to say this guy isn’t abusing his office.. I’m a DeSantis guy, but I know what’s going on here. Bragg is on record when running for his position saying he’d go after Trump (odd thing for a judge to pledge) and it wouldn’t surprise me if he sought to be praised by and gain brownie points with leftists, Democrats, media, etc. An Anthony Fauci light.

Just hope a leftist judge doesn’t ever try to arrest you for an evidence-less theory that they created while in the shower.. wondering how they can get you because they don’t like you.

 

[Rumpole]

I thought Rumphole was the name of Buttgigs wife.

Congratulations, Jbrownson0831, I don't offer this to just anyone. You've earned it, you swell little critter, you!
Oh, you didn't get the memo? I chose "Rumpole" for the sole purpose of sorting certain individuals lacking
intellectual maturity from those that do. You see, those that don't will find it irresistible to make fun of my name.
I am most assiduously honored that you took the bait. I now know in which category you belong.
Humbly Tendered,
Rumpole

 

[Batcat]

Let's see now, ah yes, the NYPost, a news source about half way between a legit news source and a tabloid, printed in Tabloid format, all to the horror of it's founder, Alexander Hamilton (no doubt), and, last time I checked, has managed to garner the impressive total of one Pulitzer, that I can recollect, and compare that to NYTimes' 132 Pulitzers, noting that NYTimes is one of the US Journals of record (there are only four, the WSJ, [which earned that status before Murdoch took it over], the LA Times, The NYTimes and the Washington Post.

As to the NYPost, at times they do a good job, but so often they don't. Their reportage must be scrutinized, every inch.

Rindsberg is something of a turncoat amongst the former journals he used to work for. While Rindsberg's work has been published in various notable outlets, he has also been criticized for some of his opinions and claims, particularly in his book about The New York Times. Critics argue that his work is biased against the newspaper and presents a one-sided view. As with any author or commentator, it is essential to approach their work with a critical mindset and consider multiple sources for a balanced understanding of the subject matter.

Does this mean NYTimes is the paragon of perfection? Of course not, and as Noam Chomsky, one of the premier liberal intellectuals, has often criticized the NYTimes, but he tells us how to get good information from it, as you would from any publication that reports the news. That being said, Chomsky will not even read the NYPost, or at least, in his famous book, "Manufacturing Consent', which is highly critical of the MSM, I don't recall him ever mentioning the Post.

IN short, I am taking your rebuttal with a grain of salt, as one man's opinion, and leave it to rest on that particular shelf.

Well you can just go on expecting the New York DA will win and Trump will end up behind bars.

Don’t get upset if it doesn’t happen.

The dubious legal theory at the heart of the Trump indictment, explained

No one knows if Donald Trump can be prosecuted for the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.

www.vox.com

How strong is Alvin Bragg's case against Trump?

Is this a slam dunk, or an uphill battle?

news.yahoo.com

 

[excalibur]

Ah, yes, so it appears that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, has been receiving quite a bit of flak for pursuing a case against none other than Donald Trump. However, I must say that upon closer inspection, the charges brought against Mr. Trump are anything but weak. In fact, the charge of creating false financial records is not novel and has been used time and time again in New York to prosecute individuals who create fake documentation to cover up campaign finance violations - precisely the accusation leveled against Mr. Trump, or rather, defendant Trump.

It's worth noting that the Manhattan D.A.'s office is hardly your run-of-the-mill local cog in the judicial system. Rather, it is unique, with jurisdiction over the financial capital of the world, which means the office regularly deals with complex white-collar crimes, including those involving high-profile individuals. Indeed, the office recently secured a conviction of the Trump Organization and a guilty plea from one of its top executives, Allen Weisselberg, on charges related to a tax fraud scheme.

Moreover, the books and records counts laid out in the charging papers against Mr. Trump are the bread and butter of the D.A.'s office. He is the 30th defendant to be indicted on false records charges by Mr. Bragg since he took office just over a year ago, with the D.A. bringing 151 counts under the statute so far. Indeed, the Trump Organization conviction and the Weisselberg plea included business falsification felonies.

The 34 felony books and records counts in the Trump indictment turn on the misstatement of the hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels arranged by Michael Cohen in the waning days of the 2016 election and the repayment of that amount by Mr. Trump to Mr. Cohen, ostensibly as legal expenses. There are 11 counts for false invoices, 11 for false checks and check stubs and 12 for false general ledger entries. This allegedly violated the false records statute when various entries were made in business documents describing those repayments as legal fees.

While Mr. Trump's case may be unique in its particulars, his behavior is not. Individuals have often attempted to skirt the disclosure and dollar limit requirements of campaign finance regulations and falsified records to hide it. Contrary to Mr. Trump's protestations, New York prosecutors regularly charge felony violations of the books and records statute and win convictions when the crimes covered up were campaign finance violations, resulting in false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity.

All in all, my fellow members of this illustrious snakepit and a few ladies and gentlemen, it seems that Mr. Bragg is hardly navigating uncharted waters. His actions are supported by previous prosecutions in New York and elsewhere, which have demonstrated that state authorities can enforce state law in cases relating to federal candidates. It remains to be seen what will come of this case, but one thing is certain - Mr. Trump cannot persuasively argue that he is being singled out for some unprecedented theory of prosecution. He is being treated like any other New Yorker would be with similar evidence against him.

And let the war begin, the war of words, that is.

Cheers,
Rumpole.

Opinion | We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong (Published 2023)

There’s nothing novel or weak about Alvin Bragg’s case.

www.nytimes.com

For weeks, Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, has come under heavy fire for pursuing a case against Donald Trump. Potential charges were described as being developed under a novel legal theory. And criticism has come not only from Mr. Trump and his allies, as expected, but also from many who are usually no friends of the former president but who feared it would be a weak case.

With the release of the indictment and accompanying statement of facts, we can now say that there’s nothing novel or weak about this case. The charge of creating false financial records is constantly brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York D.A.s. In particular, the creation of phony documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump stands accused of.

Still, state data show that it’s rare that individuals are charged only with the alleged crimes facing the former president — first-degree falsifying business records with the “intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”

Records show there have been roughly eight times in the past few years when the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office prosecuted the felony charge of falsifying business records as the top or only charge.​

Charges that Trump faces rarely pursued as top offense in New York

Felony charges of falsifying business records usually end with a plea to a minor infraction and rarely result in jail time

www.timesunion.com

 

[Rumpole]

Everyone with a thinking rational brain knows trump is guilty. Only his band of cultists think otherwise. The only question is will he actually do time. I say no. He pays a small fine and moves on. When you’re a former president you will get certain favors a normal person wouldn’t.

How about this, if he is found guilty, Congress shall appropriate the funds to build a private wing and cell at Rikers (or the appropriate venue, other than his comfy home), just for the President and non other, nothing fancy, as austere as it would be for anyone else, but with quarters for the Secret Service, and a nice little cell for Trump, to spend his days contemplating his navel, and perhaps he will, some day, realize his transgressions and ask God for forgiveness, which of course, once upon a time, he claimed he never committed any sins, ever, so, I shall not have any false expectations in this regard.

 

[ActionJackson]

What's the "original" crime referenced in the indictment?

I think the main "crime" they're attempting to pin on him is beyond the statute of limitations so their witch hunt will be tossed out in appellate court.

 

[Rumpole]

​

Still, state data show that it’s rare that individuals are charged only with the alleged crimes facing the former president — first-degree falsifying business records with the “intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”​

​

Records show there have been roughly eight times in the past few years when the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office prosecuted the felony charge of falsifying business records as the top or only charge.​

Charges that Trump faces rarely pursued as top offense in New York

Felony charges of falsifying business records usually end with a plea to a minor infraction and rarely result in jail time

www.timesunion.com

So? You think that when they are going to indict the former President of the United States, the DA is not going to go the extra mile insofar as evidence, far more than they would for your run of the mill white collar criminal?

I sincerely doubt it, the states are sky high, can't be higher for this target.

Bragg must feel he has the goods to convict. He knows the flak, the world attention, the criticism, and the threats, he is about to receive, but decided to do it, anyway. He doesn't get a bonus, or any added financial benefit for pursuing Trump, and is vanity worth such a price? Only to a fool and Bragg does not strike me as one.

Bragg must know what will happen if he loses, it will embolden Trump in a fashion characteristic of the antagonist in the film, 'the Mask', the substantially enhanced monster the bad guy became once he obtained that mask.

Bragg knows what every person of sound mind and judgment knows about the human character, that Trump is a demagogue and give power to a demagogue and he will always destroy their country, eventually. HIstory is replete with the devastation they leave in their wake once they are finally deposed, convicted, gotten rid of, etc.

Sorry, your implication just doesn't wash.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[excalibur]

So? You think that when they are going to indict the former President of the United States, the DA is not going to go the extra mile insofar as evidence, far more than they would for your run of the mill white collar criminal?

I sincerely doubt it, the states are sky high, can't be higher for this target.

Bragg must feel he has the goods to convict. He knows the flak, the world attention, the criticism, and the threats, he is about to receive, but decided to do it, anyway. He doesn't get a bonus, or any added financial benefit for pursuing Trump, and is vanity worth such a price? Only to a fool and Bragg does not strike me as one.

Bragg must know what will happen if he loses, it will embolden Trump in a fashion characteristic of the antagonist in the film, 'the Mask', the substantially enhanced monster the bad guy became once he obtained that mask.

Bragg knows what every person of sound mind and judgment knows about the human character, that Trump is a demagogue and give power to a demagogue and he will always destroy their country, eventually. HIstory is replete with the devastation they leave in their wake once they are finally deposed, convicted, gotten rid of, etc.

Sorry, your implication just doesn't wash.

Cheers,
Rumpole

Sorry, but you are clueless. And not worth any more of my time.

 

[Rumpole]

I think the main "crime" they're attempting to pin on him is beyond the statute of limitations so their witch hunt will be tossed out in appellate court.

No, because the crimes they are pinning on him are subject to NY's tolling law, which stops the statute of limitation's clock when the defendant leaves the state, and only resumes once he returns. Now, for that to be the case, it will have to be ruled on, as their are circumstances which might disallow the application of the tolling law. Naturally, I suspect defense counsel will file motions in this regard, and we must wait for the court's ruling. If the court rules in the state's favor, and their reasoning, insofar as applying the facts of the case and the applicable law are sound, I doubt the appellate court will reverse the lower court's ruling. That is my lay opinion.

Cheers,
Rumpole

 

[Rumpole]

Sorry, but you are clueless. And not worth any more of my time.

You have presented no evidence for that claim. no path of logic to refute my rebuttal.

But, go as you wish, it makes no difference to me.

Sincerely,
Rumpole.

 

[Aldo Raine]

Cohen served jail time for a felony conviction....IDIOT

Wow, I mean just wow!

 

[ActionJackson]

No, because the crimes they are pinning on him are subject to NY's tolling law, which stops the statute of limitation's clock when the defendant leaves the state, and only resumes once he returns. Now, for that to be the case, it will have to be ruled on, as their are circumstances which might disallow the application of the tolling law. Naturally, I suspect defense counsel will file motions in this regard, and we must wait for the court's ruling. If the court rules in the state's favor, and their reasoning, insofar as applying the facts of the case and the applicable law are sound, I doubt the appellate court will reverse the lower court's ruling. That is my lay opinion.

Cheers,
Rumpole

I can't say for sure, but I believe he still has a residence at the Trump Tower (and perhaps other areas of the State of New York).

 

[Oldestyle]

Ah, yes, so it appears that the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, has been receiving quite a bit of flak for pursuing a case against none other than Donald Trump. However, I must say that upon closer inspection, the charges brought against Mr. Trump are anything but weak. In fact, the charge of creating false financial records is not novel and has been used time and time again in New York to prosecute individuals who create fake documentation to cover up campaign finance violations - precisely the accusation leveled against Mr. Trump, or rather, defendant Trump.

It's worth noting that the Manhattan D.A.'s office is hardly your run-of-the-mill local cog in the judicial system. Rather, it is unique, with jurisdiction over the financial capital of the world, which means the office regularly deals with complex white-collar crimes, including those involving high-profile individuals. Indeed, the office recently secured a conviction of the Trump Organization and a guilty plea from one of its top executives, Allen Weisselberg, on charges related to a tax fraud scheme.

Moreover, the books and records counts laid out in the charging papers against Mr. Trump are the bread and butter of the D.A.'s office. He is the 30th defendant to be indicted on false records charges by Mr. Bragg since he took office just over a year ago, with the D.A. bringing 151 counts under the statute so far. Indeed, the Trump Organization conviction and the Weisselberg plea included business falsification felonies.

The 34 felony books and records counts in the Trump indictment turn on the misstatement of the hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels arranged by Michael Cohen in the waning days of the 2016 election and the repayment of that amount by Mr. Trump to Mr. Cohen, ostensibly as legal expenses. There are 11 counts for false invoices, 11 for false checks and check stubs and 12 for false general ledger entries. This allegedly violated the false records statute when various entries were made in business documents describing those repayments as legal fees.

While Mr. Trump's case may be unique in its particulars, his behavior is not. Individuals have often attempted to skirt the disclosure and dollar limit requirements of campaign finance regulations and falsified records to hide it. Contrary to Mr. Trump's protestations, New York prosecutors regularly charge felony violations of the books and records statute and win convictions when the crimes covered up were campaign finance violations, resulting in false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity.

All in all, my fellow members of this illustrious snakepit and a few ladies and gentlemen, it seems that Mr. Bragg is hardly navigating uncharted waters. His actions are supported by previous prosecutions in New York and elsewhere, which have demonstrated that state authorities can enforce state law in cases relating to federal candidates. It remains to be seen what will come of this case, but one thing is certain - Mr. Trump cannot persuasively argue that he is being singled out for some unprecedented theory of prosecution. He is being treated like any other New Yorker would be with similar evidence against him.

And let the war begin, the war of words, that is.

Cheers,
Rumpole.

Opinion | We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong (Published 2023)

There’s nothing novel or weak about Alvin Bragg’s case.

www.nytimes.com

For weeks, Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, has come under heavy fire for pursuing a case against Donald Trump. Potential charges were described as being developed under a novel legal theory. And criticism has come not only from Mr. Trump and his allies, as expected, but also from many who are usually no friends of the former president but who feared it would be a weak case.

With the release of the indictment and accompanying statement of facts, we can now say that there’s nothing novel or weak about this case. The charge of creating false financial records is constantly brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York D.A.s. In particular, the creation of phony documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump stands accused of.

How are a number of misdemeanors that have gone way past the statute of limitations, that Bragg has somehow connected to a mystery felony that Bragg won't name, a "strong" case, Rumpole? With all due respect...this case is a joke!

 

[Oldestyle]

So? You think that when they are going to indict the former President of the United States, the DA is not going to go the extra mile insofar as evidence, far more than they would for your run of the mill white collar criminal?

I sincerely doubt it, the states are sky high, can't be higher for this target.

Bragg must feel he has the goods to convict. He knows the flak, the world attention, the criticism, and the threats, he is about to receive, but decided to do it, anyway. He doesn't get a bonus, or any added financial benefit for pursuing Trump, and is vanity worth such a price? Only to a fool and Bragg does not strike me as one.

Bragg must know what will happen if he loses, it will embolden Trump in a fashion characteristic of the antagonist in the film, 'the Mask', the substantially enhanced monster the bad guy became once he obtained that mask.

Bragg knows what every person of sound mind and judgment knows about the human character, that Trump is a demagogue and give power to a demagogue and he will always destroy their country, eventually. HIstory is replete with the devastation they leave in their wake once they are finally deposed, convicted, gotten rid of, etc.

Sorry, your implication just doesn't wash.

Cheers,
Rumpole

Bragg is playing to his base. Arresting Trump is the one thing that just might keep liberal New Yorkers from firing his ass for incompetence.

 

[blackhawk]

I have not seen any objective legal expert claim this is a strong case and an opinion piece in the New York Times hardly qualifies as objective.

 

[Rumpole]

Well you can just go on expecting the New York DA will win and Trump will end up behind bars.

Don’t get upset if it doesn’t happen.

The dubious legal theory at the heart of the Trump indictment, explained

No one knows if Donald Trump can be prosecuted for the hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.

www.vox.com

How strong is Alvin Bragg's case against Trump?

Is this a slam dunk, or an uphill battle?

news.yahoo.com

That the misdemeanors can be enhanced to a felony if the underling crime is a federal crime is a novel, untested theory. I couldn't find anything in NY law that says one can, or cannot. It just states that the method to enhance, that the underlying crime that the misdemeanors are concealing must be a felony. That's a broad statement, and without qualification, it suggests that it is, indeed, possible especially given that it doesn't even require that the underling crime actually charged in the indictment, that does appear to give the prosecutor a lot of leeway. But, I"m not a legal expert.

However, that isn't the only theory he is operating other, there are other crimes, and I suspect Bragg is confident he can find one that will enhance the misdemeanors to the first degree, there is the tax angle, as well. You have to understand that Bragg has been working on this for some time, and clearly he played out the scenarios to staff, advisors, etc., before filing the charges. The defense will no doubt file motions in this regard, and we shall learn the courts opinion. I think it will be very interesting.

Thank you for bringing up this very significant point.

Cheers,
Rumpole.

 

[Rumpole]

Why did you sign that as if you wrote it? It's an op ed hit piece

I always put quotations in italics