Yep, disgraceful.
Found BTT; discussion on the indictment & NDAs, relative weakness of the case, and braggy hiding exculpatory evidence:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4143724/posts
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4143724/posts?page=16#16
“
Trainor was on Bannon the day (I think it was Bannon). He explained the campaign finance reporting requirements very clearly. If person would pay for something normally, like a haircut, suit or automobile, and then use it as part of a campaign activity, like driving to and looking good at a campaign event, it does not have to be declared as a campaign contribution. The reasoning is that haircuts, clothes and cars are everyday expenses. NDAs fall under everyday expenses. I cannot even count the number of times I signed or had others sign NDAs when I ran my consulting business. Every employee signed an NDA on the first day on the job. It is an everyday expense.
Trump’s campaign did not make payments to Cohen. That’s clearly spelled out in the indictment. So it’s not declared as a campaign donation or expense. It cannot even be misconstrued as a campaign expense give the nature of the expense.
The entry into the general ledger more that likely is legal expenses. There may or may not be some more granularity to that, such as legal expenses on a per-project basis, but there is no law or accounting standard that requires greater granularity. Their maybe some legal expenses that are and are not tax deductible. That would be tracked in Trump’s accounting software. But there’s no tax related accounting error associated with this. Trump over paid his taxes in NY. So-called leftist legal experts have even suggested that overpaying taxes was illegal. That’s just plain stupid. These asswipes will say and do anything to get Trump.
I keep scratching my head over the hideousness of the indictment. There’s a side of me waiting for a hammer to fall, something that would actually make sense. The other side of me is just chalking this up as incoherent ramblings...”
Here’s a VERY interesting one:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/4143805/posts
VIDEO: Robert Barnes Reveals SHOCKING Reason Why Bragg’s “Get Trump” Case Was First
Rumble ^ | April 6, 2023 | DUmmie FUnnies
Posted on 4/6/2023, 3:16:03 PM by PJ-Comix
VIDEO
Many liberals are currently scratching their heads over why Alvin Bragg’s laughably WEAK indictment of President Donald Trump was the first such case. One big reason for their puzzlement is they believe such a pathetic case could undermine the other cases against Trump which they believe are much stronger. However, one of America’s top lawyers, Robert Barnes, has a theory as to why the Bragg indictment was first. Namely that it is actually the STRONGEST of the cases. In other words despite Bragg’s widely mocked case that almost all legal experts believe is a joke, it is the BEST case they got according to Barnes.
“
Baggy may be walking in Nifong’s shoes:
(Nifong hid exculpatory evidence and as a result, was booted from office, disbarred, and convicted of contempt of court)
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4143765/posts
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4143765/posts?page=18#18
“
Given that a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich I thought that with a grand jury the prosecutor could say,and present,pretty much anything he wanted and that the “exculpatory evidence” rule only applied during the trial itself...and the preparations for the trial.
Oh well,I’m not a lawyer...and I didn’t even stay at a Holiday Inn last night.”
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4143765/posts?page=20#20
“
You are correct.
He intentionally withheld exculpatory evidence from the Grand Jury in order to clinch his indictment.
That evidence must now be brought out in the open for everyone to see......................
Nifong made a similar mistake........................................”