Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 04/04/2023 4:53:52 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last
To: E. Pluribus Unum

Indicted.... but no law was broken. It’s straight out of Beria’s Soviet Union.


2 posted on 04/04/2023 4:56:12 PM PDT by Rummyfan (In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized of man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

He “concealed criminal conduct.”

So why didn’t they indict him for that criminal conduct?


5 posted on 04/04/2023 4:58:24 PM PDT by ProtectOurFreedom (I don’t like to think before I say something...I want to be just as surprised as everyone els)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

If the indictment does not state which laws were broken, is it a legal instrument under New York law or not?


6 posted on 04/04/2023 5:01:15 PM PDT by Widget Jr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Apparently campaigning, i.e. influencing an election is illegal - if you are a Republican.


9 posted on 04/04/2023 5:04:30 PM PDT by ALPAPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

does da bragg think stormy daniels is a chinese agent?


11 posted on 04/04/2023 5:04:55 PM PDT by joshua c (to disrupt the system, we must disrupt our lives, cut the cable tv)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

1) He ran for office.
2) He won.
3) He claims to be innocent of wrong-doing.

That’s three felonies right there.


12 posted on 04/04/2023 5:07:39 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy (“You want it one way, but it's the other way”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

They indicted him and didn’t identify the specific crime he violated as a felony.

We are all Stalinists now.


13 posted on 04/04/2023 5:07:50 PM PDT by R0CK3T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Interesting point.

Another thing I wondered... remember the whole “grab them by the *****” audio? That should have doomed his chances in 2015. But it didn’t. I doubt anyone would have been shocked to find out a billionaire playboy who was on the cover of major magazines and in the society pages of New York for decades had any number of alleged sexual affairs. The premise that he “bought the silence to win the election” is faulty given that the audio released was likely to be much more damaging than paying off some woman who claimed to have gone to bed with the man.

Of course, they had to wrap this nonsense in 32 ridiculous felony charges but the fact they open the indictment with a story about a payoff his lawyer made to some alleged sexual partner tells the tale. They are of course trying to say “see, the man didn’t account for this properly, he didn’t reimburse the lawyer but booked it as legal fees” or something like that. It’s almost too absurd to be real. 32 felony charges for getting rid of a nuisance that was probably more disturbing to his family than to the general public.


14 posted on 04/04/2023 5:13:18 PM PDT by monkeyshine (live and let live is dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Does a grand jury indictment have to be unanimous?

No – but there must be at least 12 votes toward an indictment in the New York court system. A quorum of 16 grand jurors must be present for evidence and deliberation, and at least 12 grand jurors who have heard the essential evidence must vote.


15 posted on 04/04/2023 5:13:48 PM PDT by smokingfrog ( sleep with one eye open (<o> --- )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Doesn’t the indictment have to cite the particular law violated? No citation? No law broken.


17 posted on 04/04/2023 5:28:40 PM PDT by arthurus (covfefe /_|_\)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Law? They don’t care about no stinkin’ law. They only care about POWER!


20 posted on 04/04/2023 5:36:05 PM PDT by libertylover (Our biggest problem, by far, is that almost all of big media is AGENDA-DRIVEN, not-truth driven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

......I think that the number of democrats in the whole United States, with an IQ above room temperature, are equal to the number of fingers on one hand; AND, these 5 dimwits KNOW that THE BEST their marxist socialist party was EVER going to get out of this entire “indictment” would be a perp walk video, which they didn’t get or Trump in handcuffs which they didn’t get either.

Now, it’s just a matter of how long before a REAL judge looks at this laughable indictment document and throws it out.


22 posted on 04/04/2023 5:41:41 PM PDT by Cen-Tejas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

23 posted on 04/04/2023 5:44:35 PM PDT by grey_whiskers ( The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
According to public announcement and signed affidavit, Clifford said that she did not sleep with Donald Trump.

She threatened to defame, slander and libel PDJT and say that she had an affair with him, unless she was paid money.

Isn't this extortion?

26 posted on 04/04/2023 5:48:33 PM PDT by Eagles6 (Welcome to the Matrix . Orwell's "1984" was a warning, not an instruction manual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

How does one influence a 2016 election by scheming from August 2015 until December 2017? The 2016 election is supposed to be long over by December 2017.


28 posted on 04/04/2023 5:53:52 PM PDT by FoxInSocks ("Hope is not a course of action." — M. O'Neal, USMC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

SECTION 175.05
Falsifying business records in the second degree
Penal (PEN) CHAPTER 40, PART 3, TITLE K, ARTICLE 175
§ 175.05 Falsifying business records in the second degree.

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree when, with intent to defraud, he:

1. Makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise; or

2. Alters, erases, obliterates, deletes, removes or destroys a true entry in the business records of an enterprise; or

3. Omits to make a true entry in the business records of an enterprise in violation of a duty to do so which he knows to be imposed upon him by law or by the nature of his position; or

4. Prevents the making of a true entry or causes the omission thereof in the business records of an enterprise.

Falsifying business records in the second degree is a class A
misdemeanor.

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.05

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony.

https://codes.findlaw.com/ny/penal-law/pen-sect-175-10

The term “intent to defraud” is important.

Defraud means according to my Random House Dictionary “to deprive of a right or property by fraud”. The “de” of “defraud” matters.


30 posted on 04/04/2023 5:57:54 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

statement of (alleged) facts:

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-SOF.pdf


31 posted on 04/04/2023 5:59:35 PM PDT by Brian Griffin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Even so...that’s a federal law NOT state law. And the federal authorities didn’t even fine him for it.


36 posted on 04/04/2023 6:14:06 PM PDT by for-q-clinton (Cancel Culture IS fascism...Let's start calling it that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Incorrect. The indictment cites NY Penal Law § 170.10. Total BS.


37 posted on 04/04/2023 6:17:19 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Oh my gosh — I did not mean “Total BS” to you. I was referring to the article.


39 posted on 04/04/2023 6:20:39 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-24 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson