trump repeatedly called for the arrest of his political "enemies". he even got his crowds chanting "lock her up, lock her up". in that respect this is just the chickens coming home to roost. i do agree that this will only make trump stronger, but if he committed crimes he should be held accountable...but like i said earlier, of all the crap he did this is one of the more benign...inciting an insurrection and pressuring the georgia secretary of state to "find" 11k votes is far more serious. he should spend the rest of his life in prison for january 6th.
Trump wants to appear in handcuffs if he’s charged in NYC: report https://nypost.com/2023/03/22/trump-wants-to-appear-in-handcuffs-if-hes-charged-in-nyc/ excerpt: Former President Donald Trump has reportedly said he wants to be hauled into court in handcuffs if he’s slapped with unprecedented charges in the “hush money” case involving p*rn star Stormy Daniels. Trump, 76, told advisers of his plan, saying that if he has to go through the ordeal of getting arrested and arraigned, he’d prefer making it a “spectacle,” the Guardian said Wednesday, citing unidentified sources close to him. more at the link
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2023/03/but-for-falsifying-business-records-to.html "But for falsifying business records to be a felony, not a misdemeanor, Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors must show that Mr. Trump’s 'intent to defraud' included an intent to commit or conceal a second crime." by noreply@blogger.com (Ann Althouse) "That crime could be a violation of election law, under the theory that the payout served as a donation to Mr. Trump’s campaign, because it silenced Ms. Daniels and shut down a potential sex scandal in the final stretch of the campaign. Although the district attorney’s office need not obtain a conviction on the election law violation, or even include it in the indictment, that second crime might be the aspect of the legal theory that is most vulnerable to attack.... "n 2018, when [Michael D.] Cohen pleaded guilty to federal charges involving the hush money. Because he pleaded guilty, the issue was never tested in the courts, but some campaign finance experts and conservative legal scholars have argued that the case was bogus. 'Michael Cohen Pled Guilty to Something That Is Not a Crime,' was the headline in a National Review article at the time.... "... Mr. Trump’s lawyers could argue that federal law has no place in state court. And if he uses a New York election law violation, the defense could claim that a violation of state law does not apply to a federal election — in this case, the 2016 presidential campaign.... ... Federal campaign finance law explicitly states that it overrides — pre-empts, in legal terminology — state election law when it comes to campaign donation limits.... But there are exceptions to federal pre-emption contained in regulations from the Federal Election Commission.... "[Also], the felony falsifying business records charge expires after five years.... And there are a few additional advantages for the district attorney: His case will play out in state court, with a state judge... and a jury in deep blue Manhattan." From "The Legal Intricacies That Could Make or Break the Case Against Trump/To try to convict the former president of a felony, prosecutors might attempt to connect state election law to a federal election" (NYT). "Legal Intricacies," indeed! These are obvious and terrible problems with the prosecution. It's not subtle! Alvin Bragg, please don't inflict this on us. And it's so repulsive for the NYT to end this article by bucking up readers with the hope that the state judge will be biased. ADDED: A perfectly concise comment over at the NYT: "Novel legal theory in a political prosecution destroys trust in rule of law." Posted by Ann Althouse at 4:09 PM
As all of us should know there is no national Presidential election. Each state carry out there election is if the argument is they federal law overrides state law so in the Stormy Daniels case there wouldn’t be two state crimes the election in question would still be the NY state election for presidential electors.
Not doubting our ability (though maybe our willingness) to regulate campaigning. But I was responding to your response about the cycle of revenge prosecutions and the fertile ground to find more campaign finance violations to prosecute over. Was just pointing out that regulatory frameworks depend on the ability to assess punishments for violations and the more constraint you put on parties, the more opportunity you'll have to find violations. From a regulatory perspective its fine -- you catch a bad actor and you give him a spanking and he thinks twice before doing it again. For a cycle of revenge prosecutions, though, it means a motivated prosecutor will interpret many things as a circumvention of the cap just to mount a frivolous charge. All that said, I'm still not worried about it. I'm totally happy with the idea of presidential candidates defending their actions in court. And if the charges are frivolous, juries won't be receptive and DAs will be shamed. Even now, Bragg is taking a lot of heat and he hasn't even indicted yet -- but if he wins in court, the recriminations won't matter.
My guess is we'll likely also see obstruction type of charges also related to the offense so it'll be interesting to see the entire indictment "package" so to speak. Something obviously changed from when Bragg took over, and when he picked the case back up. If you read the tea-leaves one would assume there's something new that makes the case much less risky for the prosecutor. Since the case got picked back up as the Trump org case was finally getting documentary evidence after the courts had to force Trump's bankers to give them over to the state, one would assume there's possibly some new evidence that strengthens their case. All of the legal theories are speculative until we see the actual indictment. YULE SEE!!
The irony of watching Michael Avenatti (currently serving time in prison) speak of an indictment of Trump in a thread about Stormy Daniels WHEN HE WAS HER ONE TIME ATTORNEY ON THIS MATTER is bizzaro world.
Seems like millimeters would be the way to go “I’m packing 89mm, babe. Put in the work and you might get a full 90.”
