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

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

*yawn*

Lone fraud is actually a serious felony that the courts take very seriously. In fact , assets that were acquired via loan fraud can be confiscated, even if the loans are paid in full.

You are so full of shit!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You are so full of shit!

Well that was a special little outburst.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Cohen's plea deal notwithstanding, if Trump benefited personally in ANY WAY from the NDA, it by law COULD NOT be a legitimate campaign expense. Choen committed no crime, well except lying under oath to help the DOJ try to get Trump. There was no crime to cover up.

.

Cohen made the campaign contribution. Trump having any other possible excuse us irrelevant because he wasn’t charged. Trump having an excuse does not matter in regards to Cohen’s crime.

And yes. Cohen committed, was charged with, and was convicted of a federal campaign illegality.

WW

 

[Flopper]

What tax fraud?

Trump entered the hush money payments he made through Cohin as a legal expenses which would be a business expense and a tax deduction. However, hush money payments are not legal expenses and thus it is a fraud. It may or may not meet the New York State thresholds of being a crime

 

[Flopper]

Cohen's plea deal notwithstanding, if Trump benefited personally in ANY WAY from the NDA, it by law COULD NOT be a legitimate campaign expense. Choen committed no crime, well except lying under oath to help the DOJ try to get Trump. There was no crime to cover up.

.

Not the way the FEC looks at it. If anyone spends money intended to enhance the candidates chance of election, that money would be a campaign contribution and is subject to FEC laws. It would only be campaign expense if the money was spent by the campaign.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Cohen made the campaign contribution. Trump having any other possible excuse us irrelevant because he wasn’t charged. Trump having an excuse does not matter in regards to Cohen’s crime.

And yes. Cohen committed, was charged with, and was convicted of a federal campaign illegality.

WW

He was not "convicted by anyone. He pleaded guilty to a charge that was NOT illegal.

Why do you not get that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Trump entered the hush money payments he made through Cohin as a legal expenses which would be a business expense and a tax deduction. However, hush money payments are not legal expenses and thus it is a fraud. It may or may not meet the New York State thresholds of being a crime

Trump entered the hush money payments he made through Cohin as a legal expenses which would be a business expense and a tax deduction. However, hush money payments are not legal expenses and thus it is a fraud.

From what I've seen, most NDA payments are deductible.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Not the way the FEC looks at it. If anyone spends money intended to enhance the candidates chance of election, that money would be a campaign contribution and is subject to FEC laws. It would only be campaign expense if the money was spent by the campaign.

Not the way the FEC looks at it. If anyone spends money intended to enhance the candidates chance of election, that money would be a campaign contribution and is subject to FEC laws.

That's obviously not true.

Look here for "proper" uses of campaign funds.

Proper Use of Campaign Funds and Resources

Below is a condensed version of this topic. For complete guidance please refer to the House Ethics Manual, Chapter 4 on campaign activity.

ethics.house.gov

 

[WorldWatcher]

No the plea deal is a matter of record, it will be easy to prove he lied for a lesser sentence, there was no trial.

.

And how will the defense prove this?

They will have 3 options:

• File a motion for suppression of any evidence,
• Put a witness on the stand and then lead that witness in testimony, or
• Put Trump on the stand and he makes the claim under oath.

If the defense attempts the first option, the Prosecution will be able to file a rebuttal motion and and exhibits which were the evidence in the Cohen case, the Judge will make the call outside the presence of the Jury. If options 2 or 3 the prosecution will then be able to call rebuttal witnesses and evidence to impeach the testimony of the other witness or Trump. However this time it would be in front of the jury.

However the prosecution probably already has this line of impeachment already to go if needed including testimony by David Pecker (AMI Media), David Weisseiberg (Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer), texts, emails, contemporaneous notes, phone records, travel documents, home loan documents (used by Cohen to make the payments), corporate records of the shell company, invoices, business ledgers, corporate tax returns, and possibly audio recordings. We know that as Trumps "fixer", Cohen would record phone conversations, this is not in question as one was already released to the public invovling Karen McDougal. There are likely more since Cohen operated on the shady side and wanted "CYA" if ever needed.

Please continue to believe that the case hinges on Cohen's testimony.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

He was not "convicted by anyone. He pleaded guilty to a charge that was NOT illegal.

Why do you not get that?

#1 Because he was convicted in a court of law for the charges made against him. There are three ways to be found quilty in a court of law:

• By a judges ruling (if the defendant waives a jury trial),
• By a jury
• By pleading guilty to the charges.

Pleading guilty is a conviction on the charges.
.
.
.
#2 Yes, his payments were illegal under campaign finance law. He was NOT charged with paying for the NDA, that isn't illegal. What was illegal was the way the money was paid.
.
.
.
Why do you not get that?

WW

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

#1 Because he was convicted in a court of law for the charges made against him. There are three ways to be found quilty in a court of law:

• By a judges ruling (if the defendant waives a jury trial),
• By a jury
• By pleading guilty to the charges.

Pleading guilty is a conviction on the charges.
.
.
.
#2 Yes, his payments were illegal under campaign finance law. He was NOT charged with paying for the NDA, that isn't illegal. What was illegal was the way the money was paid.
.
.
.
Why do you not get that?

WW

If Cohen pleads guilty to tax evasion, does that mean he did something that was against the law if he never actually did it?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

#1 Because he was convicted in a court of law for the charges made against him. There are three ways to be found quilty in a court of law:

• By a judges ruling (if the defendant waives a jury trial),
• By a jury
• By pleading guilty to the charges.

Pleading guilty is a conviction on the charges.
.
.
.
#2 Yes, his payments were illegal under campaign finance law. He was NOT charged with paying for the NDA, that isn't illegal. What was illegal was the way the money was paid.
.
.
.
Why do you not get that?

WW

Because you are factually wrong as numerous posters and media interviews of lawyers proves.

 

[Faun]

If Cohen pleads guilty to tax evasion, does that mean he did something that was against the law if he never actually did it?

He pleaded guilty because he was. The FEC determined it was an excessive campaign contribution. That's a crime. Cohen did that.

 

[The Duke]

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.

"We got him now!" #6793224567890912145593950

Meanwhile, violent crime is spiking in The City.

"The number of major crimes reported in February 2022 – 9,138 – represents a 19.7% from 2020 and a nearly 47% increase from 2019, city data shows."

New York City crime wave continues into 2022 as city rolls out safety plan | CNN

Major crimes in New York City spiked nearly 60% in February compared to the same month in 2021 -- a large majority occurring in a small swath of the metropolis -- as Mayor Eric Adams rolled out his plan to combat gun violence and crime in the city.

www.cnn.com

 

[Faun]

Because you are factually wrong as numerous posters and media interviews of lawyers proves.

A guilty results in a conviction...

The Basics of a Plea Bargain

Plea bargains, also called negotiated pleas or just "deals," are the way most criminal cases end up.

www.nolo.com

A guilty or no-contest plea entered as a judge-approved plea bargain results in a criminal conviction; the defendant's guilt is established just as it would be after a trial. The conviction will show up on the defendant's criminal record (rap sheet).​

 

[WorldWatcher]

Because you are factually wrong as numerous posters and media interviews of lawyers proves.

I don't base my positions on what other people tell me to think.

I actually read the court documents.

Is Trump guilty? I don't know, that will be determined at a later date.

But yes, given the information in the public sphere and what has been presented in court documents the following is factually true.
.
.
.
.
Donald J. Trump, former President of the United States has been indicted under Section 175.10 of the New York State Penal Code, Falsification of Business Records in the First Degree (Felon) [Indictment], and from the Statement of Facts filed with the court it appears that the felony enhancement is strongly linked to attempting to aid in and conceal the illegal federal campaign finance violation that his former lawyer was charged with and was convicted of (and yes a guilty pleas is a conviction).
.
.


What part of that, based on court documents is "factually wrong".

WW

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

I don't base my positions on what other people tell me to think.

I actually read the court documents.

Is Trump guilty? I don't know, that will be determined at a later date.

But yes, given the information in the public sphere and what has been presented in court documents the following is factually true.
.
.
.
.
Donald J. Trump, former President of the United States has been indicted under Section 175.10 of the New York State Penal Code, Falsification of Business Records in the First Degree (Felon) [Indictment], and from the Statement of Facts filed with the court it appears that the felony enhancement is strongly linked to attempting to aid in and conceal the illegal federal campaign finance violation that his former lawyer was charged with and was convicted of (and yes a guilty pleas is a conviction).
.
.


What part of that, based on court documents is "factually wrong".

WW

The highlighted statement is factually wrong as Trump was cleared by the FCC and the DOJ declined to prosecute. Suck on that a while!

Cohen pleaded guilty to a charge that was NOT a crime in any way shape or form. Had he fought it, he would have been found not guilty on that charge.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The highlighted statement is factually wrong as Trump was cleared by the FCC and the DOJ declined to prosecute. Suck on that a while!

Cohen pleaded guilty to a charge that was NOT a crime in any way shape or form. Had he fought it, he would have been found not guilty on that charge.

Trump not being charged by the FEC does not clear Cohen of HIS conviction. So that statement is correct.

Cohen pleaded guilty to a charge that was NOT a crime in any way shape or form.

Sure he was. He paid a porn star just days before an election to aid the campaign of his boss. Classic "in kind" campaign contribution. He was charged and convicted.

WW

 

[Faun]

The highlighted statement is factually wrong as Trump was cleared by the FCC and the DOJ declined to prosecute. Suck on that a while!

Cohen pleaded guilty to a charge that was NOT a crime in any way shape or form. Had he fought it, he would have been found not guilty on that charge.

What the fuck is wrong with you??

Making excessive campaign contributions, for which Cohen was convicted, absolutely is a crime.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Trump not being charged by the FEC does not clear Cohen of HIS conviction. So that statement is correct.




Sure he was. He paid a porn star just days before an election to aid the campaign of his boss. Classic "in kind" campaign contribution. He was charged and convicted.

WW

That is YOUR error, he paid off the porn star at Trump's instruction. Trump repaid him with personal funds.