If Drumpf only paid all this out of his personal, post-tax money, we wouldn't be having this discussion. So Drumpf's cardinal sin #1 is being cheap, which is hardly a surprise. Sin #2 is cheating on taxes.
The problem here is that "prosecutorial discretion" exists and whether to bring an indictment or not is subject to the personal bias and ideologies of an individual prosecutor. Then you add the problem that we have countless laws at the state and federal level, so many a proper accounting cannot be done, and a motivated prosecutor can find something to charge someone with if they really want to. "Show me the man I'll show you the crime" Here we have a Democratic prosecutor, in a heavily Democratic county, bringing what most experts agree is a pretty weak case against a former Republican President. It's not some "justice is blind bullshit" -nobody is buying that.
[QUOTE="HTM, post: 14575686, member: 55841]-nobody is buying that.[/QUOTE] but many here are fapping to it. Spoiler I pray they don't soil themselves[/spoiler
They just released the charges. What “expert” has commented on them today? Or are you just referring to gas bags on tv?
These exact crimes are regularly prosecuted in this jurisdiction. It is not extraordinary that these particular crimes led to an indictment.
Word on the street is they're renting out their foreheads as billboard space to fund their representation.
Thanks, I'll try. I'm not a lawyer - I just teach the Constitution and nerd out on Con Law from all the legal minds across the political spectrum: Amar, Shaw, Strauss, Vladeck, French, etc. Again, I haven't read the whole thing, but I've been familiar with the facts for a while. Every charge presented by the DA hinges on the Cohen conviction to turn a misdemeanor into 30+ felonies. The statute of limitations for a NY misdemeanor for falsifying business records is two years (I think). It's probably too late to charge Trump with that, otherwise that case would be strong. There is an exception, originally intended for those who flea a state for fear of prosecution, which pauses the clock. But it's dicey here because Trump didn't flea, but moved to DC then Florida. So maybe the misdemeanor is still chargeable - it's a long shot. What the DA is arguing that..well, I'll just copy and paste NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/nyregion/trump-hush-money-charges.html Every felony count hinges on the Cohen crime. Now going in favor of the DA is the fact that Cohen pled guilty to breaking campaign finance laws. The problem is Cohen is an idiot and had terrible lawyers, because he didn't commit a crime. The NY charges hinge on breaking the Federal Election Campaign Act. If this all leads to a conviction, the FECA would probably get overturned or limited the way Bob McDonnell's conviction for breaking federal bribery laws got overturned/limited by a 8-0 SCOTUS decision. FECA is meant to prevent politicians from taking campaign funds and spending them on themselves. Think Duncan Hunter, a good looking former Marine (I think) turned Congressmen from San Diego. He's a poor man's Gerard Butler, and poor is literal and relative as he was making decent money in Congress but wanted to hang with the upper class. He basically spent campaign contributions on his homes, his kids' private schools and everything. Eventually, his wife turned on him when she found out he also spent campaign funds in Vegas on his side chick. Funny connection to Trump - Duncan was one of the first Trumpers. He pled guilty, got sentenced, and then Trump pardoned him, lol. Ok, so what did Cohen do and admit to doing? All the facts are out. Again, no need to dispute them. He pled guilty to several crimes, but the one that needs to stick here is violating FECA. Here's a decent summary of the pleadings at the time: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/07/coh...ails-efforts-to-help-trump-2016-campaign.html Cohen said in his statement that the money was to influence the election and to not cause personal embarassment. So, obstacle one is to prove that it's all the former and not the latter, because if it's the latter, it's not a crime. That's a big obstacle, because even if it's partially the latter, it's probably not a crime. Here's obstacle two: even if it's the former, it's a misreading of the law, not a crime, and ultimately would get overturned by SCOTUS based on every SCOTUS-related decision to campaign finance laws it has ever made, conservative or liberal judge (some hyperbole here). Spending money for the "purposes of influencing an election" is a broad interpretation of a cut out of the law that if read expansively can turn almost anything any candidate has ever done or spent on and not reported, a violation of FECA. Here is the statute: https://www.fec.gov/regulations/100-111/2022-annual-100 The logic of this law is to prevent misuse of campaign funds, like Duncan Hunter did. You're allowed to use your own money to cover up your own affairs, indiscretions, unfavorable civil situations, etc. In fact, you're supposed to use your own money. If you use campaign funds, then it is illegal. That's the purpose of the law. Even if the primary use of funds is for the campaign, but there is a secondary personal use, then it's still illegal use of campaign funds. That is why according to FEC regulations, you HAVE to use independent expenditures to do all that. That is similar to why John Edwards was unsuccessfully prosecuted. Per SCOTUS, for it to be a crime, the connection has to be using funds for expressly stated messages - a broad general connection does not make it a campaign expenditure, and therefore not a violation of FECA. In conclusion, Trump didn't commit a felony here. Again, he probably did in Georgia with the phone calls, but this case is legal-stretching at best.
Don't know and don't care whether the case is strong. Its on Bragg. If he wins, the decision to indict is vindicated. If he loses, he is an idiot for trying.
No its not. Suggested reading: https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/4/1/23664751/trump-indictment-alvin-bragg-stormy-daniels
No its not. Suggested reading: https://www.vox.com/politics/2023/4/1/23664751/trump-indictment-alvin-bragg-stormy-daniels
If a Republican District Attorney, in a heavily Republican county ever brings charges against a prominent Democrat on "novel legal theories" - I'm sure you won't have any problem with that. Wouldn't want to be "soft on crime"
You are the ultimate right wing boomer. There's not a shred of evidence against JOE over anything. I've already torn apart the other boomer bs talking point. You people are clueless Boomer
Yes. They are. Bragg made that clear and explained that in this jurisdiction it is routine to prosecute these felonies. The article you listed doesn't acknowledge any of these routine cases. Here are just some of the other prosecutions of these same crimes are listed in this article from 2022 and prior. Suggested reading: https://www.justsecurity.org/85605/...prosecutions-for-falsifying-business-records/ Follow us on TwitterFollow us on FacebookFollow us on LinkedinOpen the search toolOpen the main navigation Survey of Past New York Felony Prosecutions for Falsifying Business Records by Siven Watt, Norman L. Eisen and Ryan Goodman March 21, 2023 Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Click to print (Opens in new window) A core crime that the Manhattan District Attorney will likely include in an indictment of former President Donald Trump is “falsifying business records in the first degree,” a felony under New York State law (N.Y. Penal Code § 175.10). Prosecutors and indeed all of us are compelled by the rule of law to consider how such a charge compares to past prosecutions. Are like cases being treated alike? Here it appears they are. Prosecution of falsifying business records in the first degree is commonplace and has been used by New York district attorneys’ offices to hold to account a breadth of criminal behavior from the more petty and simple to the more serious and highly organized. We reach this conclusion after surveying the past decade and a half of criminal cases across all the New York district attorneys’ offices. The Table below provides full details of many examples of cases we identified in the survey. A sample of representative precedents includes: The People of the State of New York v. Josue Aguilar Dubon, AKA Saady Dubon, AKA Alejandro Ortiz (October 2022) — Bronx business owner indicted for failing to report over $1 million in income, avoiding paying $60,000 in taxes. The People of the State of New York v. Scott Kirtland (February 2022) — Insurance broker indicted for allegedly creating/filing fraudulent certificates of liability insurance to further scheme to defraud. The People of the State of New York v. James Garner (November 2021) — Mental health therapy aide indicted for allegedly defrauding over $35,000 in workers’ compensation benefits. The People of the State of New York v. Jose Palmer (November 2016) — Pleaded guilty to petit larceny for unemployment benefits fraud of over $3,000, having initially been indicted for grand larceny and falsifying business records in the first degree. The People of the State of New York v. Jason Holley (November 2016) — Convicted by jury of falsifying business records in the first degree but acquitted of the predicate crime, insurance fraud. The People of the State of New York v. Christina Murray (May 2015) & People v. Terrel Murray (May 2014) — Married couple convicted of house fire insurance claim, attempting to recover the cash value of various items of property that were ostensibly lost in the fire. The People of the State of New York v. Barbara A. Freeland (June 2013) — Convicted for falsely claiming on a food stamps application that a young adult lived with her. The People of the State of New York v. Maria F. Ramirez (August 2010) — Convicted for returning unpurchased items to a store in exchange for store credit, thus causing a false entry in a business record of an enterprise, and using the store credit to purchase additional items one day.
The indictment wouldn’t happen if Donald Trump wasn’t a pathological lying criminal Jim. It's only a witch hunt when a Republican is the criminal being investigated or charged of a crime. We have Jim, who kept mute on athletes being molested, and Matt Gaetz the accused sexual trafficking pedophile weighing in on the law. It's typical that these guys would defend a traitor and coup planner, rapist, and conman like Trump. The party of shame.
Well, he ran on charging Trump for his election, right? But shouldn't the bigger point be that if he truly is stretching the law, then that just opens up a can of worms? Also, the conviction would get overturned. Also important is confusing the public and undermining a real case, with real strength, and real harm in Georgia.
