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

[Flopper]

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.

That is nonsense. The last thing the DA or the judge wants is a mistrial or to have the verdict overturned. Yes, there will certainly be appeals if Trump is found guilty. However, nothing is going to happen to Trump if he is convicted. I guess the worst thing would be having to meet with his probation officer monthly. That would probably be waived too because he's Donald Trump. That fucker has a gold spoon stuck up his ass. I guess that's why Trumpster love him. He can thumb his nose at our laws and nothing ever comes of it.

 

[Rust_Cohle]

That is nonsense. The last thing the DA or judge wants is a mistrial or to have the verdict overturned. Yes, there will certainly be appeals if Trump is found guilty. However, nothing is going to happen to Trump if he is convicted. I guess the worst thing would be having to meet with his probation officer month. That would probably be waived too because he's Donald Trump. That fucker has gold spoon stuck up ass. I guess that's why Trumpster love him. He can thumb his nose and our laws and regulations and nothing ever comes of it.

And what do you think happens to the DC elite when they fuck up? When's the last time one of them was held accountable for anything?

 

[para bellum]

Many people have been charged with these crimes in New York.

So you have nothing to complain about, I guess.

I'm not complaining. Falsifying records to hide a crime isn't unusual, so it wouldn't surprise me if the statute has been used before.

But the statute clearly says it's only a crime if there is intent to defraud. The indictment only mentions the payment to Daniels, and charges the crime (3 times) for each invoice from Cohen.

Did he defraud Daniels? She hasn't said so. He isn't charged with fraud, and he isn't charged with violating PEN175.05, which a defendant is required to have violated to be charged under PEN175.10, plus there is still a requirement that there is some other fraud or crime being concealed!

The DA is calling it fraud because it is about "altering the outcome the election", or some such inference?

The NDA was entered into, and the payment was made to protect the reputation of Trump, right? (setting aside the obvious contradiction for the sake of argument)

I'm just curious, where is the fraud? If a Politician is guilty of fraud for paying money to protect his reputation, I don't really mind. But we're going to have to charge them all...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But the statute clearly says it's only a crime if there is intent to defraud.

Right, not accounting errors.. actual intent to defraud. When the statute uses the word "defraud", it isn't referring to the secondary crimes. It is referring to filing false business records with intent to defraud. Which, by itself, is the misdemeanor version. This is the felony version:

"A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof."

The entity being defrauded here is the State of New York, not Stormy Daniels or anyone else.

 

[Flopper]

That’s not quite true. But prosecutors do have to turn over a “bill of particulars” to flesh out the indictments. The defense is entitled to a fair trial. So the defense needs to get the facts and so forth ahead of time. Pretty strict time limits in NY these days.

What is not quite True? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just wondering what is not quite true.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Not based on what I've seen. It appears you are living in a different universe than the one I live in.

Indeed, we probably do.

Imagine you are a prosecutor, state or federal, and you have facts which would conceivably allow you to indict the former President Of the United States, and not just any former president, a very rich former president whose base historically has threatened persons acting in ways not favorable to Trump.

That's a telling statement about your lack of objectivity.
1. Is it wrong for Trump to be "very rich"? Why? Many people in Washington are "very rich", and have done it by seemingly very dirty means.
2. You're smearing Trump's "base" as threatening? I'm a Trump voter in 2016 and 2020.. am I "threatening"? Sounds quite hyperbolic and CNN-esque to me. Meanwhile, it's interesting to see you point out the Trump base as threatening while ignoring the BLM pro-Biden riots across America in 2020 that caused 30-40 deaths, billions in damage, and thousands of police in critical condition or severe hospital events.

You will be engaging in what is known as a 'maiden voyage prosecution', which is one that has never been done, i.e., the indictment of a former President.

You will be thrown onto the world stage, you will be making history in the grandest of terms,

These quotes give me even more reason to think Bragg is doing this for his own namesake and notoriety.

and your every move, comment, anything and everything will be subject to world scrutiny, reporters will follow you everywhere, as Trump loving protesters will never cease harassing you, threatening your life and that of your loved ones, during the entire proceeding.

Why are you victimizing Bragg here? Do you think Conservative people who stand up don't get their lives threatened? Brett Kavanaugh was nearly assassinated in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and the MSM didn't much cover it, nor did they victimize the harassed, slandered SCOTUS judge.

Just because you get some heat doesn't mean you deserve any more credit to your actions/ideology than what it was beforehand. You should stick to logic, and stop the emotional appeals. They get you nowhere.

Trump will make sly comments which will be tacit approval of such acts, such as 'bad things will happen if I am indicted' (while never condoning or being specific as to what those things are). If you believe Bragg would bring such a case to fore based on vanity, you really have misjudged the man.

Apparently you know him deeply, speaking about him passionately. I find this odd.

 

[para bellum]

The entity being defrauded here is the State of New York, not Stormy Daniels or anyone else.

Okay, what was the fraud suffered by the State?

 

[Lesh]

Indeed, we probably do.

That's a telling statement about your lack of objectivity.
1. Is it wrong for Trump to be "very rich"? Why? Many people in Washington are "very rich", and have done it by seemingly very dirty means.
2. You're smearing Trump's "base" as threatening? I'm a Trump voter in 2016 and 2020.. am I "threatening"? Sounds quite hyperbolic and CNN-esque to me. Meanwhile, it's interesting to see you point out the Trump base as threatening while ignoring the BLM pro-Biden riots across America in 2020 that caused 30-40 deaths, billions in damage, and thousands of police in critical condition or severe hospital events.



These quotes give me even more reason to think Bragg is doing this for his own namesake and notoriety.

Why are you victimizing Bragg here? Do you think Conservative people who stand up don't get their lives threatened? Brett Kavanaugh was nearly assassinated in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, and the MSM didn't much cover it, nor did they victimize the harassed, slandered SCOTUS judge.

Just because you get some heat doesn't mean you deserve any more credit to your actions/ideology than what it was beforehand. You should stick to logic, and stop the emotional appeals. They get you nowhere.

Apparently you know him deeply, speaking about him passionately. I find this odd.

Victimizing Bragg?

Regardless of anything else… he and his family are getting death threats from MAGArats.

Whether or not that has occurred to some one else somewhere else matters not at all

 

[themirrorthief]

End him up in the WH.

to bad trump didnt kill someone....he would be freed immediately and given a pile of extra food stamps so he provide beer for his family

 

[Lesh]

Okay, what was the fraud suffered by the State?

When you file false financial records you are committing a fraudulent act

Ya fucking retard

 

[Lastamender]

When you file false financial records you are committing a fraudulent act

Ya fucking retard

Anything like fake votes?

 

[Lesh]

Anything like fake votes?

Which only happened in your mind

 

[Thinker101]

 

[para bellum]

When you file false financial records you are committing a fraudulent act

Ya fucking retard

Not necessarily ya fucking retard. There has to be intent to defraud for the false business record to be illegal. Innocent bookkeeping errors are not fraud.

The fraud must be for the purpose of hiding another, separate crime for it to be first degree fraud. The misapplication of the payments as legal expenses might be a violation of PEN175.05, falsification second degree, but there needs to be another crime being concealed for those payments to be a first degree offense.

That prerequisite crime, allegedly being concealed by the fraud, is what is in question.

You guys seem to be claiming that the NDA was illegal because it "interfered with the election", which is laughable on it's face.

Did Trump win New York because the voters of New York were unaware of his affair with Stormy Daniels?

What crime was Trump concealing, by classifying the payments as legal expenses?

 

[Lesh]

Not necessarily ya fucking retard. There has to be intent to defraud for the false business record to be illegal. Innocent bookkeeping errors are not fraud.

The fraud must be for the purpose of hiding another, separate crime for it to be first degree fraud. The misapplication of the payments as legal expenses might be a violation of PEN175.05, falsification second degree, but there needs to be another crime being concealed for those payments to be a first degree offense.

That prerequisite crime, allegedly being concealed by the fraud, is what is in question.

You guys seem to be claiming that the NDA was illegal because it "interfered with the election", which is laughable on it's face.

Did Trump win New York because the voters of New York were unaware of his affair with Stormy Daniels?

What crime was Trump concealing, by classifying the payments as legal expenses?

You seem to understand and then go off the rails.

The crime that this was in support of is not in question.

 

[Lastamender]

Which only happened in your mind

If that were true we would not still be talking about it, fool.

 

[Lesh]

If that were true we would not still be talking about it, fool.

Only idiots like you are “still talking about it”

 

[BackAgain]

What is not quite True? I'm not trying to be argumentative, just wondering what is not quite true.

Read the balance of my reply.

 

[para bellum]

You seem to understand and then go off the rails.

The crime that this was in support of is not in question.

Of course it is in question, it is a required element of the crime being charged. Without it, the DA can only charge falsification in the second degree.

The charging document only mentions the money paid to Stormy Daniels, but NDA's are not illegal.

They go on about "interfering with the election", which leads back to the DA's inference that the purpose of the NDA was election interference.

If that is the reasoning for charging the offense in the first degree, then any money spent by any politician to protect his reputation must be illegal as well.

 

[Lastamender]

Only idiots like you are “still talking about it”

You mean still talking to idiots about it. You are the idiot here.