Are these nutbags alleging that Trump “stole” the 2016 election via skewed articles in the National Enquirer? I’m not following the logic.
Are these nutbags alleging that Trump “stole” the 2016 election via skewed articles in the National Enquirer? I’m not following the logic.
There is no logic. Make no mistake, this Bragg circus is brought to you lock, stock, and barrel by Felonius Milhaus von Pantsuit.
This is her hail Mary to dirty up Trump and give her some talking points for the willing presstitutes. She’s a sore loser.
I just posted this in another thread:
So, if business records were falsified, it boils down to non-payment of taxes he owed to the state.I'm trying to understand your hypothesis.
How is it that Trump owes taxes?
What Bragg is essentially doing is trying to declare negative campaign ads against a candidate's opponent as unlawfully influencing an election. Conversely, Bragg is also saying that suppressing negative stories by buying them and silencing them is also unlawfully influencing an election because it prevents the negative news from getting out and the opponent from running negative ads against the candidate. Bragg is saying that Trump, Cohen, and Pecker conspired to hush Stephanie Clifford and Karen McDougal. with payments that were campaign expenses.
- If Trump hired Cohen for legal services and paid a retainer to Cohen that he refreshed periodically, then isn't it Cohen who has to document the payments from Trump as income? Isn't it Cohen who has to pay income tax on the earnings from performing legal services for Trump? What is Trump's tax that is owed? If it's a sales tax on the consumption of legal services, isn't it on Cohen's law firm to collect the taxes and pass it on to the state?
I just did a quick search and New York does require lawyers to charge a sales tax on legal services.
- If Stephanie Clifford was paid $130,000 by Cohen for an NDA, isn't it Clifford who has to pay income taxes on the money? What is Trump's tax obligation for paying money to someone else?
- We don't know that Trump's business records were falsified; that's Bragg's allegation. Bragg needs Trump's business records to be falsified in order to call it a fraudulent activity in furtherance of another crime.
Without the other crime, Trump's business records are ordinary book-keeping entries. Even with another crime, they are still ordinary book-keeping entries. If Bragg thinks the book-keeping should have recorded the payments as campaign expenses, then he should have been pursuing a campaign finance violation charge, but he's not.
Bragg can't bring campaign finance violation charges because:
- Federal campaign finance violations are the sole jurisdiction of the Department of Justice or the Federal Elections Commission.
- New York State campaign finance violations are the sole jurisdiction of the New York State Public Campaign Finance Board.
That leaves Bragg with fraudulent records in furtherance of another crime. Bragg's problem is that he can't define that other crime beyond a reasonable doubt (he may get away with defining the crime within a New Yorker's doubt).
Bragg is also saying that Trump and Pecker used the National Enquirer to pay informants for information to plant negative stories about Hillary Clinton to harm her candidacy. Before Trump was elected, that used to be called "opposition research."
Hillary Clinton funneled cash payments through Marc Elias at the Perkins Coie law firm to pay former British agent Christopher Steele for the "Steele Dossier" and then planted that story in the American media. Nobody charged Clinton with falsifying records at Perkins Coie in furtherance of another crime, or conspiring with Perkins Coie and Buzzfeed.
Hope this helps.
-PJ