Stormy Fiasco
- Thread starter SamSpade
- Start date
How Alvin Bragg made (preposterous) history with Donald Trump’s case
They would have been reluctant to torture the law to stretch the statute of limitations just far enough to cover the events in question, and would have been too embarrassed by the chronological difficulty involved in arguing that events in 2017 influenced the 2016 election.
This is why federal prosecutors and Bragg’s predecessor took a pass on this case, but Bragg wasn’t going to let mere legal inadequacy stop him.
If all goes as planned for Bragg, before long he’ll be known as the Manhattan district attorney who goes easy on disturbed men who punch old ladies on subway platforms but is hell on bookkeeping offenses that don’t harm anyone, not even the tax collector.
The trial is all about Trump, but the most important piece of the puzzle is Bragg, since no one else with an ounce of judgment would have brought this case.
As we know, it involves a $130,000 payment from former Trump fixer Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels right before the 2016 election to keep her quiet about an alleged affair she had with Trump a decade earlier.
Such a hush payment may be sleazy, but there is nothing illegal about it.
The underlying offense occurred later, when Trump reimbursed Cohen in 2017 and misleadingly booked the payment not as the reimbursement of a debt but as an ongoing legal expense.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
Has anyone come up with “the crime” that presumably Trump was covering up when he wrote off Cohen’s payment as a legal expense?
I’m still flabbergasted at what is going on here. The premise is that the hush money was a campaign expense instead of a personal expense. But I’m pretty sure it would be a crime to use campaign money for what is clearly a personal matter.
So how might this have been handled? Paying someone hush money isn’t a crime. Period. For whatever reason. The way they’re working this, it’s always a crime because it’s “election interference”. Really. With everything that came out about Trump in 2016 - do they think THIS helped him win? Why not a nice haircut or a nice suit? The whole idea is ridiculous.
I can’t find “the crime” and he certainly hasn’t been found guilty of it, so Bragg will have to prove a federal crime - which he has no jurisdiction to do.
So at best it’s a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations has expired.
Pointless.
I’m still flabbergasted at what is going on here. The premise is that the hush money was a campaign expense instead of a personal expense. But I’m pretty sure it would be a crime to use campaign money for what is clearly a personal matter.
So how might this have been handled? Paying someone hush money isn’t a crime. Period. For whatever reason. The way they’re working this, it’s always a crime because it’s “election interference”. Really. With everything that came out about Trump in 2016 - do they think THIS helped him win? Why not a nice haircut or a nice suit? The whole idea is ridiculous.
I can’t find “the crime” and he certainly hasn’t been found guilty of it, so Bragg will have to prove a federal crime - which he has no jurisdiction to do.
So at best it’s a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations has expired.
Pointless.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
I am no lawyer, not true historian either, but I do know that no other President in history has ever faced trials by 3 blacks and one Jack-off Smith, om charges they thought up and changed the laws in order to prosecute him.
I am not a smart man, but I recognize a pack of ass -wipes when I see them and as Judges of the Court, and Attorney Generals.
Their actions are shameful, disgraceful and probably criminal for their whole purpose is to interfere with an election to the highest office in the land. They should all be prosecuted, and they realize it because they are all frightened Trump will be elected.
I am not a smart man, but I recognize a pack of ass -wipes when I see them and as Judges of the Court, and Attorney Generals.
Their actions are shameful, disgraceful and probably criminal for their whole purpose is to interfere with an election to the highest office in the land. They should all be prosecuted, and they realize it because they are all frightened Trump will be elected.
He just wants publicity. He can't stand the thought of not being on TV or in every headline.
Tilted
..
This is another embodiment of one of the main problems with criminal justice in this country. Legislators have passed so many laws, and they’ve made many of them so vague, that law enforcers - e.g., prosecutors or police officers - can typically find one (or ten) which applies or can be stretched to apply to essentially anyone they want to target. It’s part of what makes us no longer the nation of laws we’re supposed to be but rather a nation of men despite the safeguards which many Founders sought to put in place. State power is too easily (and often) wielded arbitrarily and for the benefit of, or at the whims of, particular state actors.
There are so many laws, so many of them are contrary to basic individual liberties, and so many of them are so vague, that we’re all criminals. It’s just a question of whether the powers that be - those we’ve handed state power to - are sufficiently motivated to go after a particular person. Why we’ve chosen this is another issue I won’t get lost in now.
More directly to your inquiry, here we’re dealing with a vague law that can be stretched to cover a lot of activities in part because there are so many other vague laws. The other crimes which you’re asking about (i.e. beyond Falsifying Business Records in the Second Degree - those which might make it Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree) are laid out in various court filings. The 3 categories which survived the initial motion to dismiss are (1) violations of federal campaign finance laws, (2) violations of New York election laws, and (3) violations of New York tax laws.
Before going into more detail on those alleged crimes, I’d note a few things responsive to your post. The prosecutor doesn’t have to prove the other crime occurred, and it doesn’t have to be a federal crime. The 1st Degree FBR crime at issue only requires an intent to commit another crime or effort to conceal another crime. And in the latter case the defendant doesn’t even need to be the one who committed the other crime which is sought to be concealed.
The alleged violations of federal campaign finance laws relate to alleged payments made by others to Ms. McDougal and Ms. Davis which would exceed individual contribution limits. The theory is that the purpose of making those payments at those times was to prevent possibly politically damaging accusations from coming out. Thus the payments were effectively campaign contributions because they didn’t come from Mr. Trump himself, they came from America Media Incorporated and Mr. Cohen. If Mr. Trump had made the payments himself they presumably would have been legal. The problem for President Trump’s defense is that Mr. Cohen has already plead guilty to this crime. If the jury believes Mr. Cohen, or otherwise wants to believe President Trump is guilty of the FBR crime, it has what it needs when it comes to another crime being concealed.
The alleged NY election law violations rely heavily on the alleged violations of federal law described above, though in theory I suppose they could be proven even without those federal violations. The alleged NY tax law violations relate to how Mr. Cohen was allegedly reimbursed for the payments he made to Ms. Daniels. Supposedly they (to include President Trump) agreed to pay Mr. Cohen an extra sum of money on top of the amount he paid Ms. Daniels so that, even when income taxes were taken out, Mr. Cohen was made whole. Such grossing up is apparently, at least as argued by the prosecution, a violation of NY tax law. I don’t know enough about New York tax law to have a strong opinion on whether this makes sense.
Anyway, if you want to know what the supposed other underlying crimes are, there they are. (And yes, of course, this is a politically motivated case brought because those bringing it see personal benefit from doing so. But the problem I referred to at the beginning is what provides enough legal substance to make an ultimate conviction plausible.)
Sam, scroll up, I have posted several articles that walk through Alvin Bragg's fantasy
WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
Stupid ass
Dem clients of daughter of NY judge in Trump hush-money trial raised $93M off the case
2 top clients of the Democratic consulting firm owned by the daughter of the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s hush money trial raised $93 million in campaign funds since the ex-president’…
nypost.com
“Authentic Campaigns, and thus the judge’s daughter, is actively making money from this sham attack against President Trump, rendering Judge Merchan conflicted out,” Trump spokesman Steven Cheung told The Post, adding that evidence of bias is even clearer now than it was in August when Merchan rejected Trump’s first recusal motion.
Does the phrase Niggger in the woodpile mean anything to you, stupid bitch.
SamSpade
Well-Known Member
My guess is, since the trial has started and this is a month old, the point is moot.Stupid ass
Dem clients of daughter of NY judge in Trump hush-money trial raised $93M off the case
2 top clients of the Democratic consulting firm owned by the daughter of the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s hush money trial raised $93 million in campaign funds since the ex-president’…
What I find interesting is that these pile on attacks are generating sympathy from voters who hadn't voted fot Trump previously.
Hijinx
Well-Known Member
The problem is that it's not a woodpile it's the Justice system of the United States, and there are 4 of them.
Alvin Bragg, Fani Willis, Letitia James, and Jack Smith who matches Senator Robert Byrd's description of such.
And of course it's a word that is offensive and like the word sonofabeitch is a profanity, but in this case like the word sonofabeitch
it is descriptive of the individuals and not of the race.
Alvin Bragg, Fani Willis, Letitia James, and Jack Smith who matches Senator Robert Byrd's description of such.
And of course it's a word that is offensive and like the word sonofabeitch is a profanity, but in this case like the word sonofabeitch
it is descriptive of the individuals and not of the race.
StmarysCity79
Well-Known Member
Stupid ass
Dem clients of daughter of NY judge in Trump hush-money trial raised $93M off the case
2 top clients of the Democratic consulting firm owned by the daughter of the judge overseeing Donald Trump’s hush money trial raised $93 million in campaign funds since the ex-president’…
“Authentic Campaigns, and thus the judge’s daughter, is actively making money from this sham attack against President Trump, rendering Judge Merchan conflicted out,” Trump spokesman Steven Cheung told The Post, adding that evidence of bias is even clearer now than it was in August when Merchan rejected Trump’s first recusal motion.
Does the phrase Niggger in the woodpile mean anything to you, stupid bitch.
Other than prove you are a racist POS?
You think the NY post has a shred of truth to it?
She doesn't even work there anymore you dummy
StmarysCity79
Well-Known Member
You think 4 seperate jurisdictions all coordinated to "get" Trump?
The SCOTUS he appointed members of is somehow against him?
Attorney Generals and Secretaries of State who voted for him are now colluding against him?
You really are a special kind of stupid.
WingsOfGold
Well-Known Member
Bruised imitation vagigi fella?
How many visits to the White House did Nate have ?
Why was the head prosecutor for Georgia RICO case meeting the Biden Admin