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

[Rumpole]

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.

You should look up the author's resume she's a qualified person

 

[blackhawk]

You should look up the author's resume she's a qualified person

Can't as the Times wants me create an account to read the story no thanks I get enough junk e-mails as it is with out adding the Times to the list. She might or might not be qualified it does not change the fact that the majority of opinions I have seen about the case rather they are coming from the right, left or in between feel it's a weak case.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Can't as the Times wants me create an account to read the story no thanks I get enough junk e-mails as it is with out adding the Times to the list. She might or might not be qualified it does not change the fact that the majority of opinions I have seen about the case rather they are coming from the right, left or in between feel it's a weak case.

And people from the left and right are saying it isn't a weak case.

Trumps face sure didn't make it look like a weak case. He found out that they have all the receipts. And all the testimony of those who participated.

 

[saveliberty]

Alvin Bragg’s case against Donald Trump is running into a wall of skepticism — including from left-leaning legal experts, liberal pundits and some of Trump’s Republican detractors who have otherwise been eager to see him held accountable.

The post-arraignment hangover was fueled by burning questions about the prosecution’s legal theories that Bragg has, for now, left largely unanswered. The concerns were exacerbated by the noticeable absence of support — and in some cases pointed skepticism about the case — from many of Trump’s critics in the legal community and Congress.

“It is said that if you go after the king, you should not miss,” wrote Richard Hasen, a campaign finance law expert at UCLA. “In this vein, it is very easy to see this case tossed for legal insufficiency or tied up in the courts well past the 2024 election before it might ever go to trial.

Even Ian Millhiser, the liberal legal commentator for Vox, called the legal theory on which Bragg’s case is built “dubious.

Bragg’s case against Trump hits a wall of skepticism — even from Trump’s critics

A day after the historic arraignment, questions nagged Bragg’s case.

www.politico.com

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And the authors of the OP article are a former assistant DA and a fellow at Brookings.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

That story is reported in the press, from a number of stories, so your contention isn't correct. Your source, in my view, is not a credible source. Moreover that thread is now blocked. One wonders why.

The cia controlled media Langley shill,you have shit on your face in embarrassment,mine is far more proof of Obama and Biden’s criminal activities than your pathetic desperate Hail Mary.

 

[lennypartiv]

Your side said there was plenty of evidence against Trump when he was impeached. How did that go?

 

[Oddball]

You should look up the author's resume she's a qualified person

Kevorkian was a qualified doctor.

 

[Batcat]

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.

Bragg also lets a lot of violent criminals off without prosecution and puts people in jail who exercise self defense when attacked. He has a unique way of approaching his job.

Manhattan DA to stop seeking prison sentences in slew of criminal cases

In his first memo to staff on Monday, Alvin Bragg said his office “will not seek a carceral sentence” except for in homicide and a handful of other cases

nypost.com

Remember the bodega worker who defended himself against an attacker and was incarcerated for a short period of time. Guess who the DA was?

Murder charge against NYC bodega worker Jose Alba is DA Bragg’s latest controversy

The murder charge that Manhattan DA Bragg filed against bodega worker Jose Alba is the latest outrage to result from the progressive agenda the top prosecutor unveiled since taking office, current …

nypost.com

 

[lennypartiv]

He's no slouch.
IMO, others plus family will be going down with Trump.

Trump is innocent. But we did see how corrupt the court system is after the 2020 election.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

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).

Quite so. Since Trump maintains a residence in NY and NY is his primary place of business, no statute would be tolled.

 

[Mac1958]

Trump is innocent.

You don't know this. You wouldn't be able to tell me about the evidence that they have. The indictment is just a generalized document.

None of us can say, one way or the other.

This is what ideology does to people. It robs people of any honest intellectual curiosity, any critical thinking skills, they may have had.

 

[toobfreak]

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.

You should look up the author's resume she's a qualified person

That still doesn't obviate the fact that the NYT are the most biased, non-credible source out there who has FIRED reporters just for being moderate conservatives and I've yet to hear from one of a dozen legal scholars who is anything but APPALLED at the vacuous nature of this case unprecedented, tortured, skirting the very bounds of jurisprudence to the point of comedy, and its strongest attribute honestly is that if it goes forward, it will be tried by a prejudiced judge who ought to recuse himself but we know he won't in the seat of the highest anti-Trump propaganda in the country where they will try him with 12 hostile, anti-Trump democrats in essentially a drumhead trial preordained to find him guilty (but of what no one still cannot say), all timed to try to affect the '24 election against Trump stealing another election, then the case will be contested on appeal and moved outside of Manhattan where Trump will get a fairer trial and win acquittal to still run for re-election.

 

[Hector12]

I hope they get him this time. It has been frustrating to watch that creep get away with his outrageous behavior.

 

[SweetSue92]

Well here we are a mere three days past the infamous indictment and what do we have? The Leftist media seems to be largely ignoring it now--"nothing to see here!"--because clearly, Alvin Bragg exposed his whole, substantial backside.

Way to go, liberals. "Another win for the good guys"

 

[Chillicothe]

Bragg: “OMG Trump stole the 2016 election because I’m assuming, with no evidence, how he allocated his money!!” That’s it. If this is the new norm...."

'with no evidence' poster Friscus alleges.
OK, but......but how does Friscus know there is 'no evidence'?
If you would, poster Friscus, show the forum how you know, or offer us credible informed sourcing.
Thanx.

----------------------------------------------------

Bragg is on record when running for his position saying he’d go after Trump (odd thing for a judge to pledge)

I could suppose it would be if......if he was a judge.
But he ain't.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Just hope a leftist judge doesn’t ever try to arrest you for an evidence-less theory

Ummm, good poster Friscus you seemingly have some peculiar understandings of American jurisprudence, IMHO.
I mean by that, "judges" don't arrest people. Trust me.
----------------------------------------------------------

Since Trump maintains a residence in NY and NY is his primary place of business, no statute would be tolled.

Is he a 'resident' of Florida for income tax purposes?
Where is his 'residence-of-record'?
Or, perhaps this is more on-point: Where is he registered to vote?
That locale would be residence-of-record.

---------------------------------------------------

 

[Lesh]

Well here we are a mere three days past the infamous indictment and what do we have? The Leftist media seems to be largely ignoring it now--"nothing to see here!"--because clearly, Alvin Bragg exposed his whole, substantial backside.

Way to go, liberals. "Another win for the good guys"

You seem inordinately interested in “exposed backsides”

Trying to tell us something about your sex life?

 

[Cellblock2429]

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.

/-----/

 

[SweetSue92]

You seem inordinately interested in “exposed backsides”

Trying to tell us something about your sex life?

Hitting close to home, am I? That you have to devolve to remarks like this?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

'with no evidence' poster Friscus alleges.
OK, but......but how does Friscus know there is 'no evidence'?

You need “evidence” of no evidence?

Bragg would need it in writing that Trump has, on the books, his payments to Stormy Daniels as a campaign expense. From all reports he doesn’t have that, he’s just connecting those dots so he can achieve his political end game.

Can you show any reports that Trump has his payments as a campaign expense? If not, there’s no genuine case here per the law.

However, we’re seeing that laws can’t guard against real time abuses of power.