Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We'll see. Only takes one New York small business owner on that jury to tank the whole prosecution. People hide shit as business expenses that aren't really 7 days a week be it their cell phone, their spouse's cell phone, xmas presents and such bought with company plastic, donations disguised as advertising expenses, etc etc etc. The fundamental problem they may face in this case is that the person who created the invoices weren't the Donald. They were the former lawyer who is a convicted felon who probably designed the whole scheme to begin with.
Who told you 10% was for the Bid Guy? Oh thats right, a junkie who wouldn't mind pocketing that 10%.And 10% for the Big Guy means Joe also got paid you'd have to be a naive fool to think otherwise
Oh wait
We'll see. Only takes one New York small business owner on that jury to tank the whole prosecution. People hide shit as business expenses that aren't really 7 days a week be it their cell phone, their spouse's cell phone, xmas presents and such bought with company plastic, donations disguised as advertising expenses, etc etc etc. The fundamental problem they may face in this case is that the person who created the invoices weren't the Donald. They were the former lawyer who is a convicted felon who probably designed the whole scheme to begin with.
Not all attempts to influence an election are criminal.
the DA NY office prosecuted over 100 similar such cases last year (I'm told).
The case against Crooked Hillary was ironclad but then the Worthless Negro administration let her off the hook for the ridiculous excuse of "no intent" because she was the Democrat President nominee,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.
Why did you sign that as if you wrote it? It's an op ed hit pieceAh, 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.
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.
No. What it is… is a campaign contribution. Try to keep upthe intention of the payoff was to influence the election.
Anything that is intended to "influence" the election is illegal?
I have been watching conservative news most of the time since Trump was charged. They go on and on about an NDA not being illegal, which is true. But not what he is charged with. They go on and on about it it was not Trump there would be no charges. Talk about Brag and his family's politics. Statute of limitations, but I have not heard a single news outlet say Trump did not commit the acts charged with, the only defense I have heard is he should not be charged for some reason. Of course posters on conservative forums are flipiping out about how Trump has never sinned.No. What it is… is a campaign contribution. Try to keep up
The simple answer is no. Not all attempts to influence an election are criminal.
Speaking at a podium, is an attempt to influence the election, but that is not deception.
Deception is required, I would think. And on that score, (not a lawyer) but my guess is that it would depend on severity and a scheme or conspiracy.
While Santos fits the above description, he was just lying, which might be criminal, I don't know, but unlike Trump, it wasn't part of a scheme, a conspiracy where cash is changing hands, and other complicating factors.
All 'oppo research' is for influencing elections. Influencing elections, per se, isn't criminal.
No. What it is… is a campaign contribution. Try to keep up
I have been watching conservative news most of the time since Trump was charged. They go on and on about an NDA not being illegal, which is true. But not what he is charged with.
You calling Hunter Biden a junkie? Bout time you say something correctWho told you 10% was for the Bid Guy? Oh thats right, a junkie who wouldn't mind pocketing that 10%.
And what deal did he say that about? Oh thats right, a deal that never panned out, so how much is 10% of ZERO?
Fox is far more guilty of that but no court has ruled that such is a campaign contribution...yetLike a nice story on CNN is a campaign contribution.
Ah, "Old Yeller," I am truly saddened you haven't been laid in 20 years, and this is why you feel it necessary to sling mud to compensate for your erectile dysfunction. But, as an old sage once said, 'he who slings mud loses ground'. Well, before you disappear into a mud infested abyss, why don't you dazzle us with your brilliance? I'm sure we're all curious about your profound wisdom about the Trump case, which, once you step down from that lofty perch you occupy (or white horse, whichever the case may be), you might want to bestow upon us mere mortals the pearls you have, no doubt, been hoarding and are now willing to share with us?LMAO! This Rumproated clown is another board Lawyer who pretends to know it all with inside informatiom. Another hack like Care4all surfaces. Get lost fatmam.
Speaking at a podium, is an attempt to influence the election, but that is not deception.
How is an NDA deception?
Conceal information to influence an electionI see you've raised an interesting point here about the NDA. However, let's make sure we keep our focus on the bigger picture. While an NDA itself may not be inherently deceptive, the problem arises when it's used as part of a larger scheme to conceal information that could potentially impact an election, as alleged in the case against Trump.
In the context of the original article, the NDA is just one piece of the puzzle. The more pressing issue is the alleged falsification of business records to cover up the hush-money payments made to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal. The primary concern is whether these actions were an attempt to illegally influence the 2016 election by preventing potentially damaging information from coming to light.
So, while the NDA itself may not be deceptive, the manner in which it was allegedly used as part of a broader cover-up is where the deception lies. It's crucial that we examine the entire context to understand the gravity of the situation and not get sidetracked by isolated details.
Conceal information to influence an election
Yet social media covering for Biden removing the laptop story means nothing to ya huh. Idiot
You have a lot of garbage in your head.You calling Hunter Biden a junkie? Bout time you say something correct
