One thing coming out of the "Hush money trial"

You've asked for secondary crimes several times and they have been identified/provided.

 

It is in the indictment, federal election interference (NY is part of the Union in case foreigners don't get it), the second crime. If your talking points had any merit, but to fool the Trump supporters in to believing that Vlad's buoy is being victimized, the Russian puppet's team would be in front of an appeals court crowing like every Vlad puppet.
My hat is mine, not part of the Soviet propaganda machine. Vodka?

 

Nonsense, trump's appeal in the Jan 6th case is in front of SCOTUS, case has not started, reaching.......around? This is America, not Russia....rule of law you know.

 

That's about presidential immunity. There is no such thing available for Braggs horse crap.

 

The first sentence must be gas lighting drug induced or just pure nonsense, Trump's team simply don't have grounds for appeal to a higher court genius. Bragg has to prove his case to the jury, no need for Vlad to be afraid of an American jury in America or maybe he should be?

 

Only you must know what the second crime is… no one else knows.

 

Yes, but, on the bright side, there is nothing to stop the judge from throwing Br'er Rabbit into jail for contempt.

https://quatr.us/history/brer-rabbit-briar-patch-american-literature.htm

 

Asked and answered.

 

You seem to be confused. No question is being asked… statement of facts are being presented.

 

No victim, no loss, no fraud. Pure nonsense. Just politics.

 

Or simply reduced to gas lighting "statements" since the case proceeds LEGALLY and a jury will render a verdict soon. Time for you to go back to Earth II with that "comment".

 

A check went to a lawyer and was booked as legal services. Nothing fraudulent nor is Trump charged with fraud. He is charged with paying money to help his campaign. No doubt he paid the money. No way to prove it was to help his campaign. Most likely it was to hide his tryst from his family. The best they can do is find him guilty and hope the appellate court doesn't rule on the appeal before the election.

 

Sounds like another case recently.

 

The check to the lawyer was a reimbursement for a campaign contribution.

 

As you've been told a million times, the federal government says you're wrong and this was a federal election. Both the FEC and the DOJ have investigated this and disagree with your false premise. Even Alvin Bragg's prosecution has run away from this theory. This is just the continued spreading of disinformation and conspiracy theories.

 

Since some people are spreading disinformation and conspiracy theories such as paying an attorney isn't a "legal expense," I'll help everyone out. It's sad that I have to keep correcting the same people repeatedly.

Trump was charged with making false business records with the intent to commit another crime. There are three theories that Bragg has floated in the pre-trial process and have been approved for trial.

1. Federal campaign finance violations. This was the one he leaned on the heaviest during pre-trial, and he was ridiculed into oblivion for merely suggesting it. As I've just informed someone spreading disinformation for the millionth time, the DOJ and FEC looked into this and determined the payments were not a campaign violation worthy of a civil sanction, let alone a criminal indictment. As the prosecution's witness testified, Trump's team was paid to kill stories just like this one for decades to protect his family and professional life from embarrassment.

2. Tax fraud. The payments were fully recorded, and Cohen was treated as a vendor. Trump actually reimbursed Cohen double the cost of the NDA on top of his time so that he could overpay taxes and report it as income. The tax violation would be on Cohen's part if he did or did not pay taxes on the payments he received from Trump.

3. NY campaign law. The campaign law in question is not about failing to disclose payments. It's about conspiring to win an election through unlawful means. The "unlawful means" Bragg's team has put forward is the primary charge of falsifying business records. It's circular logic saying Trump conspired to win his election. It also doesn't account for the glaring problem that every single business record in question was made AFTER the election was over. If the false business records were to "win the election," the need to falsify the records went away after Trump won. Thus, it makes no sense to say that Trump put a false record in his business ledger to win an election he had already won.

Their plan seems to be to throw all three of these at the wall to varying degrees and see if the judge will allow each jury member to decide on each option rather than a unanimous verdict on the secondary offense. Additionally, the prosecution still has not told anybody what the records should have been if Trump had acted lawfully. Thus far in the trial, every single prosecution witness has testified that they either have no knowledge whatsoever about the false records or if they did have the knowledge, they said they made the personal choice to classify them as "legal expenses" without Trump ever being involved. The only witness who seems to be willing to say otherwise is perhaps Michael Cohen, but he's a serial disbarred convicted perjurer without any credibility who is willing to testify that his client should go to jail for taking his legal advice. And the invoices that Trump was charged with were drafted by Cohen and submitted directly to his bookkeeper who did not consult with Trump before labeling them as "legal expenses" in the ledger. That's how invoices work, the vendor drafts and submits them, not the CEO of the buyer.

 

Nonsense the dems have been talking about it incessantly since Obama. It even has a blog

 

And substantial percentages of American worry about contrails and an alien invasion and a host other things about which they are almost certainly wrong.

 

Never seen it from anyone but tRumpublicans.

 

Then you haven't been paying attention I believe both Lee and Patricio used to frequently cite the blog when Trump was president.

 

Daniels said in sworn testimony that it had nothing to do with an NDA but rather for other services rendered given her back ground I don't even want to think what that might be.

 

I'm very selective about what I read, I do my own research and post my own thoughts.

 

Your blunderbuss misfired. It is only Trump haters that actually believe Bragg has a case. Thus far you don't even have evidence that there was an NDA signed by Trump

 

I think it meant, keeping her mouth shut. Looks like tRaitor tRump fell short of getting his money's worth. LoL!

TRaitor tRump could **** up an anvil with a rubber hammer; he has the Shitus touch, everything he touches turns to ****.

 

Too bad your research capabilities are so poor...