Posted on 04/04/2023 1:32:24 PM PDT by FarCenter
The statement of facts is more informative than the indictment.
If Trump had simply written Daniels a check for $130K from his personal funds there would be no case.
But that's not how the payment was made.
Congress tapped a $17 million dollar taxpayer funded hush fund to pay off and silence people accusing members of sexual and other misbehaviors.
Did they write personal checks?
Did they claim the funds on their tax returns?
Why is this hidden from taxpayers….because it might influence their reelection?
Does that make it a campaign donation or expense?
Inquiring minds
Technofog: There’s a curious omission in the Donald Trump indictment and statement of facts -
The specific federal law Trump violated.
>>Where did you get that load of crap?
That is quoted from the Statement of Facts.
Exactly - using our tax dollars to make rape cases disappear - but it can’t be traced back to their personal or PAC funds. Bunch of slimy hypocrites.
It’s on Daily UK mail, they posted the legal papers.
I sure hope Trump’s lawyers bring that up. They had to sign NDA’s to get the settlement money.
There’s two documents: the indictment and the statement of facts. It was from the other document.
“The specific federal law Trump violated.”
Not a federal case. State law 175.10 stated in first paragraph and in each count.
The indictment is weak for two reasons:
1) The prosecutors have to prove not just that the business records were falsified, but that Trump falsified the records with “the intent to defraud.” That term basically means that you intend to rip a third party or the government off. Ironically, the entire theory of the indictment is that Trump’s intent was to help his campaign. That is not “intent to defraud.”
2) Additionally, the prosecution must prove that Trump intended to violate another statute. It is highly questionable whether a federal crime can be that statute. Even if it is, it is highly questionable whether Trump’s actions, even if true, amount to a federal campaign finance violation.
https://twitter.com/techno_fog/status/1643347714971783170?s=61&t=BspBEkX2hzhEXXxbQreKxg
Techno_Fog is one of the most respected lawyers on Twitter. Bragg is linking the charges to federal election law without citing the law.
Another voice: Former Assistant U.S. Attorney @AndrewCMcCarthy: “If the judge does his job right here, the case should be dismissed...I would dismiss it on its face because it fails to state a crime. Here, it fails to state a crime 34 times!”
Bragg is relying on a novel legal theory that the supposed violation of a federal campaign finance law is sufficient to raise NY 175.10 from a misdemeanor whose statute of limitations has expired to a felony where he can argue that the statute of limitations has not expired.
Bragg's case also requires one to believe that payments to Cohen far in excess of the amount Cohen paid to Daniels are somehow payments for that purpose. According to Bragg Trump's organization paid Cohen $450,000 over 12 months and accounted for it as a legal expense base on it being a monthly retainer for Cohen.
Strangely, Bragg claims that recording the payments as what they were is a "false" business record since some of the money was actually used by Cohen to repay the loan he took out personally to settle with Daniels.
By Bragg's logic if you pay your lawyer and characterize the checks as legal payments, but the lawyer takes the money and buys a new boat you are violating New York law because you made "false" business records.
This is one of the most ridiculous cases I have seen.
We are seeing another example of Trump Derangement Syndrome being played out by liberal Democrats.
Trump also had an affair with Marla Maples when he was married to Ivana. Repeated infidelity is not a conservative value.
PTrump had already resigned/divested during this timeframe
“Bragg is linking the charges to federal election law without citing the law.”
That is another issue. The indictment only applies to falsification of business records and NY Penal 175.10.
“By Bragg’s logic if you pay your lawyer and characterize the checks as legal payments,”
Per the statement of facts invoices and payments were per a retainer agreement but no such agreement existed.
“Repeated infidelity is not a conservative value.”
Trump was never a conservative.
So did you enjoy those Jimmy Carter years?
“Strangely, Bragg claims that recording the payments as what they were is a “false” business record since some of the money was actually used by Cohen to repay the loan he took out personally to settle with Daniels.”
No. He is claiming that Trump falsified records by documenting payments for a retainer when no retainer existed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.