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

[BackAgain]

We still don’t Know the actual “Case” Against Trump, but from what we can glean from the facially insufficient indictment, It Is a laughably lame one.​

I just tweaked the erroneous thread headline to fix it.

I wonder if Rumpole can tell us what the underlying crime was? Can’t tell from Bragg’s indictment. Can we tell from his statement on the day of the arraignment? Not really. Will Bragg settle on a theory of the case by the time he has to file a bill of particulars? I doubt it. He seems to like to waffle in the nitty gritty. Maybe he will be compelled to when the defense moves for a true bill of particulars. (It’s time to pin that fat phony down.)

 

[Chillicothe]

Besides, we all know that if this were anyone other than Trump, there would be no indictment here. This is petty BS

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

Yeah, that is sad.
But we must note it is reminiscent of Al Capone. After all, if Al hadn't killed several men with a ball bat......there likely would not have been an indictment for petty tax fraud.

But alas.....karma is a thing.
Karma always lurks.
Like ketchup stains on a wall.

 

[toobfreak]

But we must note it is reminiscent of Al Capone.

Really, Moron? A great ex-president whom it took the combined forces of the federal government and State of New York EIGHT FUCKING YEARS together to find a teeny-weeny bookkeeping error discrepancy reminds you of an infamous mobster/racketeer serial killer?

Can we all say: Wow?! You've got potato peelings for brains. Seriously--- you've got more shit in there than a septic system. I'm only disappointed you didn't bring up Hitler.

But alas.....karma is a thing. Karma always lurks.

Biden's last famous words.

 

[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.

/——/ Well La Dee da. Let’s see the Trump haters latch on to this and scream for an indictment.

House Oversight Committee subpoenas banks, Biden family associates in probe of finances

The House Oversight Committee has issued subpoenas to banks asking for financial records regarding Biden associates, according to sources.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Flopper]

Who says that Danial's claims were ever damaging to Trump? I heard about it while he was running and he still won.


Then blame Cohen. He was the attorney running things and advising people. The CEO of a big corporation doesn't do his own books, his accountants and legal department handle that. Besides, we all know that if this were anyone other than Trump, there would be no indictment here. This is petty BS. NYC just spent 200 million dollars trying to prosecute a crime about $130,000 dollars.

The hush money was paid to Daniels in 2015 before the election to keep her mouth shut which was of course illegal. Apparently it worked because the public did not learn about the affair until after the election in 2018. It was not just $130,000 Trump paid hush money. He paid off a playboy model $150,000, I guess she did more for Trump than Daniels and a doorman, $30,000. How many more he paid off we will probably never be know.

However the amount of payments are irrelevant. Paying hush money to help win an election is illegal and has been for a long time.

My question is why should the city of New York turn a blind eye to Trump's payoffs when they have been prosecuting people for election payoffs for years? People you never heard of went to jail for doing a lot less than Trump. Even if Trump is convicted, he won't spend a day in jail. In fact, he will probably be able to turn his crime and prosecution into a badge of courage that will help get elected.

 

[Rumpole]

7 year Democrat crusade / addiction / fetish

2024 Election Interference

incompetent rebuttal; no argument presented. dismissed.

 

[Flopper]

Rich people have been buying off people for centuries. Still not illegal.

If you are running for office it is.

 

[Rumpole]

/——/ Well La Dee da. Let’s see the Trump haters latch on to this and scream for an indictment.

House Oversight Committee subpoenas banks, Biden family associates in probe of finances

The House Oversight Committee has issued subpoenas to banks asking for financial records regarding Biden associates, according to sources.

www.foxnews.com

I see, so the anglers are angling, well, unfortunately for them, there will be no fish in that expedition.

 

[Chillicothe]

Wow?! You've got potato peelings for brains. Seriously--- you've got more shit in there than a septic system. I'm only disappointed you didn't bring up Hitler.

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

My avatar regrets, poster 2bfreak, if his postings discombobulate and disorient your avatar.
It is not the intention to make you sad or frazzled or upset.

But, it is Friday. So at least be relieved at that.

Good luck.

 

[Rumpole]

If Bragg loses this case, particularly if he loses badly, his name is going to mud in legal circles and his chances of re-election would not be good.

He'll be bruised, but he'll manage. Most, in legal circles, are acutely aware of the challenge he faces. Prosecutors who win all the time are not actually has highly regarded as prosecutors who lose of few. Because they know that if that is what is happening, the prosecutor is merely taking easy cases. They know that taking the tough cases means you are going to lose a few. So, the opposite will happen, Bragg wil be respected for having the courage to prosecute Trump. But, of course, opinions will vary if they are partisan opinions.

What would happen to Trump if he loses.

No one doubts he will capitalize on it and improve his chances in the primary.

Would he go jail, Nope. Would he be barred from running for president, Nope. Would it keep him from being nominated? Probably not. In fact it might even help his nomination. Trump supporters are convince that there is no substance to the charges and it is spurred on by a democratic conspiracy and being prosecute by the devil himself.

This is not a reason not to prosecute, so it's a meaningless point. Bragg isn't considering the politics. If he did, he wouldn't prosecute, and if he did that, he'd be doing America a grave disservice.

I think Trump is far more concerned about getting nominated and winning the election. If he does not get elected he will not be able to stop the Jan6 or Classed Documents investigation and probably the trials which would likely follow. These crimes could well send him to jail for rest his life.

Trump wants to win for only two reasons
1. Vindication
2. Revenge.

Both are the wrong reasons for running. In fact, his reason for running from the very beginning was the wrong reason.

That fact explains why he is such a disaster.

Cheers, Rumpole

 

[Flopper]

It looks like the books were cooked, and there's no getting around that. The part that I don't understand -- and I'm seeing the same question from many -- is how the original payoffs specifically broke campaign finance law, making them felonies. Admittedly, I definitely don't know the law.

So I'm guessing that Bragg either has a plan to make that connection, or it will look like he's stretching to make it. So I'll just have to wait, I guess.

Assuming the underlying crime is the Daniels payoff, he has to convince a jury that his motive was to benefit his election campaign an not to maintain his spotless image. If he can do that, all 34 counts become felonies.

 

[Lesh]

Rich people have been buying off people for centuries. Still not illegal.

If it’s done to help an election campaign it has to declared as such and the limit can not be breached. $130K is WELL over that limit and it was NOT REPORTED as a campaign contribution

 

[Cellblock2429]

I see, so the anglers are angling, well, unfortunately for them, there will be no fish in that expedition.

/——/ Oh, go grab some guns from drug dealers and show us how great you are.

 

[Flopper]

Who says that Danial's claims were ever damaging to Trump? I heard about it while he was running and he still won.


Then blame Cohen. He was the attorney running things and advising people. The CEO of a big corporation doesn't do his own books, his accountants and legal department handle that. Besides, we all know that if this were anyone other than Trump, there would be no indictment here. This is petty BS. NYC just spent 200 million dollars trying to prosecute a crime about $130,000 dollars.

It is not about the actually relationship between Trump and Daniels but rather Trump's intent in paying were off. Was it to preserve his spotless image in the community or to enhance his election possibility? The Jury will have decide on that and that will determine whether the charges are felonies.

 

[Cellblock2429]

It is not about the actually relationship between Trump and Daniels but rather Trump's intent in paying were off. Was it to preserve his spotless image in the community or to enhance his election possibility? Jury will have decide on that.

/——/ Meanwhile Bill Clinton and other democRATs who paid off hookers get a free pass.

 

[toobfreak]

The hush money was paid to Daniels in 2015 before the election to keep her mouth shut which was of course illegal.

Well, it didn't keep her mouth shut because I knew about it and NDAs are not illegal and shouldn't be in this case either otherwise it just opens the door for someone to produce some bimbo every time a politician runs for office creating a scandal and ruining a marriage. For one thing, we only have Daniel's claims that there was ever even any affair in the first place.

Apparently it worked because the public did not learn about the affair until after the election

Like I said, it was common knowledge before the election.

He paid off a playboy model $150,000, I guess she did more for Trump than Daniels and a doorman, $30,000. How many more he paid off we will probably never be know.

See? There you go already prejudiced by the allegations sans any real facts and yet you blame Trump for trying to put these matters to rest. There is nothing illegal about NDAs.

Paying hush money to help win an election is illegal

But that is pure supposition on YOUR part. Trump's NDAs came at the time they did because that is when the hosebags tried to extort Trump of the money. Wouldn't surprise me if they were put up to it by the democrats.

My question is why should the city of New York turn a blind eye to Trump's payoffs when they have been prosecuting people for election payoffs for years?

Your question ought to be that they've had two years to try to prosecute Trump on this nonsense, so why dd they wait until now, timing the case so as to DIRECTLY CROSS the '24 election? My question is if you are so consumed with concern for Trump's alleged trying to influence the '16 election, why aren't you more concerned that the government is using this now only because of the coming '24 election and only because the other 15 cases they've tried to throw at Trump these past eight years have all failed? We all know that if this were ANYONE ELSE, Bragg wouldn't be concerned at all. Hell, he's not even concerned about rape and murder in his own city. So quit trying to blow smoke up my ass.

People you never heard of went to jail for doing a lot less than Trump.

People I HAVE heard of never even got questioned for doing a million times MORE than Trump. So all that leaves is POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY and trying to rig the next election again by trying to influence public opinion in their favor. Funny how it is ILLEGAL when Trump supposedly did it but PERFECTLY FINE when the State tries to do it!!!

Even if Trump is convicted, he won't spend a day in jail. In fact, he will probably be able to turn his crime and prosecution into a badge of courage that will help get elected.

I've been telling people that for days. It's less about the conviction and more about just trying to steal the next election to keep Biden working for them and Trump out of Washington irregardless of how much the People want him as president.

That is what we call a banana republic.

 

[toobfreak]

The Jury will have decide on that and that will determine whether the charges are felonies.

We both know the judge is prejudiced and in Manhattan, the jury will be 12 angry anti-Trump democrats who will convict Trump even with no evidence.

It is all going to appeals and a retrial, probably in upstate NY.

 

[Flopper]

We still don’t Know the actual “Case” Against Trump, but from what we can glean from the facially insufficient indictment, It Is a laughably lame one.​

I just tweaked the erroneous thread headline to fix it.

I wonder if Rumpole can tell us what the underlying crime was? Can’t tell from Bragg’s indictment. Can we tell from his statement on the day of the arraignment? Not really. Will Bragg settle on a theory of the case by the time he has to file a bill of particulars? I doubt it. He seems to like to waffle in the nitty gritty. Maybe he will be compelled to when the defense moves for a true bill of particulars. (It’s time to pin that fat phony down.)

You are not suppose to be able to figure it out. Indictments only include the bare minimum needed to go to trial. It seems like the underlying crime is a violation of election law, i.e. Trump paying hush money to Daniels. However, that could be a red herring.

 

[OKTexas]

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.

So where's the grand jury for the hildabitch? She was actually fined by the FEC for doing the same thing. Her campaign books were kept at her HQ in NYC. She wrote off her expenses for the Russia hoax as legal expenses and used campaign money to pay for it.

.

 

[toobfreak]

My avatar regrets, poster 2bfreak,

Moron, it is pronounced TUBE FREAK. As in thermionic audions. What an ass.

But, it is Friday.

It's Good Friday.