Scumbag Bragg Implements the Plan to Mislead the Jury about the Charges

*snicker*.

Yes, Alvin Bragg is a big meany for enforcing the law and Trump falsifying his records to hide campaign finance violations, inter alia, did nothing wrong.

Do everyone a favor and cite a credible and knowledgeable source for this pretend analysis.

Do you guys really think that he didn’t falsify his records? That he wasn’t trying to hide the payoffs? That he didn’t think his payoffs were a violation of the law?

 

So the crime he was trying to cover up was a conspiracy to corruptly influence the election? He hopes the jury will buy that he used corrupt means to influence the election. But what was the corrupt means? I've read somewhere that he exceeded the limits of how much he could contribute, but there is no limit to how much he can spend from personal funds on his own campaign. Since Cohen used his own money up front, maybe Cohen could be charged with that. But it's my understanding that he did that on his own, not?

I've also read there is a recording somewhere between the 2 in which Trump expressed the need to do it all above board. Not sure if that is true or not. But if it is, that would surely hurt their case.

 

It's not a crime to not disclose an affair.

'Contra Bragg, there is no legal obligation to disclose extramarital affairs. There is no law that says candidates for public office — particularly Republican candidates loathed by Democrats — must publicly expose every skeleton in their closets.'

The Federal Elections Commission and the Department of Justice, who actually have jurisdiction, investigated all this, and not only didn't they bring criminal charges, they didn't even level civil fines.

'Not surprisingly, then, payments to silence people in that context are not campaign expenditures under federal law. That’s because they are not obligations directly related to advocacy for the election of one candidate or the defeat of another. Unlike, say, polling or political advertising, such payments are private obligations independent of a political campaign. That doesn’t change even if the fact that a candidate is running for office gives him more incentive to pay for an NDA — i.e., the political motive to pay for an NDA does not transmogrify it into a campaign expenditure. (If it did, that would mean candidates could use campaign donations to silence porn stars with whom they’ve had flings, which would itself be scandalous.) That is why the Federal Election Commission and the Department of Justice — the federal agencies with exclusive jurisdiction to enforce federal campaign laws in elections for federal office — did not even seek to fine Trump civilly, much less prosecute him criminally.'

'Bragg does not have a strong case. He has a mountain of evidence that Trump engaged in conduct that was legal.'

https://archive.ph/L39TZ#selection-921.0-921.109

 

These guys think waaay too much of their understanding of the law. I hope Trump makes these ridiculous arguments on appeal.

They’ve got the facts wrong too.

 

The national review is either being lazy and partisan or intentionally misleading you.

Here's some explanation from the new york law experts at justsecurity:

"41. What are the other crimes that DANY has to prove Trump intended to commit, aid, or conceal?
As part of establishing the second element of each falsifying records charge, DANY must prove that Trump intended to commit, aid, or conceal another crime—in this case, either a violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act, New York Election Law § 17-152, or New York tax law. Importantly, DANY does not have to prove that Trump actually violated any of the three predicate crimes, but rather that by falsifying (or causing the falsification of) business records he had the intent to commit, aid, or conceal the commission of such crime(s). Further, the jury need not find that Trump had that intent as to all three predicate crimes—a conviction is proper if jurors are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt as to an intent to commit at least one predicate crime per count." emphasis mine.

A Complete Guide to the Manhattan Trump Election Interference Prosecution (justsecurity.org)

 

It's not a crime to conceal an affair.
It's not a crime to pay for a Non-Disclosure agreement.

He's not charged with conspiracy. He may only be tried for charges brought by the Grand Jury and the Grand Jury has not charged him with Conspiracy. You claim that you "explained that", but you did no such thing.

• You have not shown that the 5th amendment allows Trump to be charged with a felony that was not brought by the Grand Jury, because you cannot.
• You have not shown that the Grand Jury charged Trump with conspiracy, because they have not.

The reason that Bragg has not charged criminal conspiracy, is because it is not a crime to conceal and affair and it's not a crime to pay for a Non Disclosure Agreement.

Again, it's not a crime to not disclose an affair.
It's not a crime to have an NDA.

That's why there are no criminal charges for the NDA or for concealing the affair, because those are not crimes.

 

The opening statement was obvious on this point, and it was clearly an attempt to mislead the jury that a crime had been committed that clearly wasn't. I was taken aback by this when I learned of it in real-time. If there was a conspiracy they would have used it to end the statute of limitations on the ledger violation. This is the previous Associate Attorney General left his cushy job for? To make this argument? Pathetic.

 

At this point I can confidently say that Bragg's elevator doesn't quite go to the top.

 

That's not a crime Trump is being accused of and was not provided to the defense during pretrial motions. The crime they're accusing him of is a campaign crime. This was just a flat-out lie. He needs to say it because they can't prove Trump was involved in this in any way. Cohen invoiced Trump $35K each month for a retainer fee, and then Trump's bookkeeper paid it and logged it in the ledger. So he needs to claim Trump was part of a grand conspiracy of election interference or some other nonsense because they don't have a smoking gun. But they can't actually charge him with conspiracy because then they'd have to provide evidence and prove it while giving Trump's team the opportunity to rebut it. He also can't charge the conspiracy charge because then he'd have to provide evidence that the bookkeeper was in on it, which there's no evidence of that being the case. In fact, she plans to testify.

There's a reason they aren't charging Trump with these other crimes, and it's because they know they have no evidence of them.

 

What Federal Election Law did he violate?
What New York Election Law did he violate?
What New York Tax Law did he violate?

You don't know, because the Grand Jury did not charge him with any of those crimes.

I realize that you are a bitter Trump hater. But you do recognise that he is a human being.

There is no way in hell that even you believe that it's just to try Trump for a crime without even telling him what the crime is he's charged with.

How is one supposed to prepare a defense if the Court and the Prosecutor hasn't even disclosed what the crime is that he is being charged with?

 

True. Had he not falsified business records, his scheme would be more likely to have been discovered and he would still have paid a political price, but at least it wouldn't have been criminal.

The key is you're not understanding New York Law. Falsifying business records is elevated to a felony if intent to use it to commit another crime is shown. THAT crime DOES NOT need to be separately charged and convicted, rather the intent to commit the crime must be proven as a part of elevating falsifying business records to a felony. This is routinely done in New York. It is not just Trump.

Hypothetical example. If a man hired a hitman to kill his wife. And he falsified business records to hide the fact that it was used to pay the hitman. But then he called off the hitman at the last minute, so no murder actually occurred, he could be convicted of felony falsifying business records because he did it with the intent of using it to commit another crime. The conspiracy to commit murder WOULD NOT need to be separately charged and convicted for him to receive a felony conviction on falsifying business records.

It is a crime to try to influence an election using "unlawful means." Falsifying business records is unlawful means. Falsifying business records was part of the conspiracy he planned with Pecker and Cohen to bury harmful stories before his election. It is rather ironic that had he just listed the things as personal expenses rather than legal retainer, he could have gotten away with it all (more likely at least), but it is justice that there is something to hold him accountable for what he did to fraudulently improve his election chances.

 

Trump didn't falsify records. Trump doesn't do his own accounting. Michael Cohen submitted an invoice and the invoice was paid and logged by his bookkeeper. If anyone is guilty of fraud it would be the felon, Cohen. He was the one who submitted "false" invoices and he's the one who made the "campaign contributions" in excess of the limits. But they can't charge Cohen because they need him to testify against Trump. Just like they can't charge Stormy with extortion because they need her to testify as well and they need their credibility, whatever is left of it.

 

The Grand Jury didn't accuse him a campaign crime, because Trump didn't commit a campaign crime.

The FEC, which actually has jurisdiction, thoroughly investigated this, and not only brought no charges, they didn't even level a civil fine.

Bragg hasn't said what the FEC violation is, because he doesn't have one.

 

And yet which side had a bunch of sustained objections during their opening statement? lol

 

Oh it's broader than that. You can be convicted of this by CAUSING records to be false. For example, one person had a scheme of pulling items off the shelf and pretending to return them to steal in-store credit. This was falsifying business records under new york law, because they were causing the store's business records to be incorrect.

In this case, I understand there is evidence Trump directed all of this to happen. It does help that Cohen records meetings with Trump.

 

And the crooked judge is letting them get away with it. They're going to fly by the seat of their pants and see how things are going before they ambush the defense with an allegation.

 

There's no evidence Cohen ever talked to Trump about the note he provided on the invoice. Cohen is responsible for his behavior, not Trump. Cohen is a corrupt attorney. Additionally, Cohen was Trump's attorney and even if Trump was involved, which there's no evidence that has come out, he was acting under the advice of his counsel (Cohen). Cohen billed him for a retainer, can you prove Trump knew how he was billed and that Trump knew it was a "crime?" That's going to be required. The problem is that it's not a crime even if you can prove Trump knew about it.

 

Justice is being and will be served. The prosecution will have to make their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Not sure why they are so many Trump "faithful" tipping over while claiming over reach but Con Don has a great legal team and he only needs one juror to not be convinced.

Personally, I think he's as guilty as sin itself but I am not in the jury nor am I in the courtroom, thank God!

Bragg would not have brought this case if he did not think he could win it.

Let the system play out, Trump has good representation and is innocent until proven guilty.

The Charges:
"Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Falsifying business records is a felony in New York when there is an “intent to defraud” that includes an intent to “commit another crime or to aid or conceal” another crime."

 

That's not hard to explain considering who the judge is. He also got testy about the Trump lawyer taking too much time after giving the prosecution as much time as they needed. He's obviously very conflicted,

 

He didn't make the entries until 2017 after the election was over. And Bragg's not a Federal Prosecutor or even a State Prosecutor, he only has jurisdiction over a NY County, and Hillary took that County by 60 points.

The only NY crime he is charge with is not labeling the entry in his ledger as "payment in the hopes that a porn star will keep her mouth shut" and instead labeling it "legal expense". At most that's misdemeanor, with a long expired Statute of Limitations.

And WHAT is that other crime?

I've asked you this repeatedly and you keep refusing to answer. You know why? Because you do not know. No one knows. It's a constitutional violation to try a person for a crime, without ever telling him what the crimes is. There is no way that you do not understand that.

The enty labeling Trump is charged with is a misdemeanor, with a long expired Statute of Limitations, not a felony.

It's not a crime to buy harmful stories before the election. That's why you cannot provide the statute for this "crime", because it's not a crime. That's why the DOJ and the FEC never charged Trump for these actions, because they are not crimes.

 

Who are you trying to convince, us or yourself? If you repeat it 100 times it will magically become true.

 

It must be tough to see justice at work. Slow the troll, it's the American way, you know, rule of law which protects rights and freedoms of everyone.

 

Again, the prosecution must show that Trump directed the payments by Cohen before the election with the plan to reimburse after the election.

It would be a misdemeanor if it were for personal reasons and not part of a conspiracy to influence the election. The SoL would likely not be expired since he was not physically present in New York for more than 2 years since the alleged crime. This didn't come up though, since as a felony they had 5 years, and made it in time due to an extension to all statute of limitations given by the governor due to covid disruptions.

The most straightforward one has been 17-152. Promoting an election by unlawful means. Again, falsifying business records as a felony does not require the alleged intended crime is separately or previously charged and convicted. Rather, proving the intent to violate one or more known laws becomes a part of the falsifying business records case.

I have been answering, you're not understanding. I've actually read the just security articles, so maybe that's why I understand it and you don't. They're not explaining it in tiny posts like this.

It is a felony in this case because it was used with the intention to commit another crime.

That's not the crime being alleged. I haven't discussed everything alleged, but I have discussed the most easily understood connection between falsifying business records and unlawfully promoting an election, and it seems obvious to me currently.

Again, if the prosecution can show it was a reimbursement that was planned prior to the election, it's still being done to influence the election. If I ask somebody to contribute to an election campaign and tell them I'll reimburse them after the election, my actions are still being done to promote the election even though I am actually giving money after the election.

 

They can't disclose the 'crime' because they don't have one. The minute they name a statute, the facts can be promptly applied to it, which will make it clear that they do not have the felony enhancement, which means that all they have is a long expired misdemeanor, and the case is over due to the Statute of Limitations, the case can't even go to the Jury.

The thing to realize is that this is a gigantic political farce that will not withstand appeal, and both Bragg, his corrupt assistant that is arguing it, and the Judge knows it.

The point is to get a felony conviction, which they may get, so that the coordinated DNC messaging apparatus of Fake News and Talking Heads all constantly referring to Trump as a convicted felon.

They may get it.

So far, all this lawfare has helped Trump's polling because it's been viewed as unjust. Well see how the electorate responds, but that's the play. Everyone involved knows that this isn't about Justice or truth, it's about Election Fixing.

 

The crooked judge is complicit in this election interference. He's not going to let this end without a jury verdict.