We should just presume that the American legal system no longer exists as conceived, and is merely a tool to target enemies of those in power.
FTA——Bragg’s argument for Trump’s guilt is that Trump caused records pertaining to the “hush money” payment, e.g., invoices, checks, ledgers, etc., which were falsely marked “legal payment,” to be maintained in the Trump Organization’s (“TO”) business records, thus he made false entries in the TO’s business records.
Trump’s defense argues that the records at issue were not “business records” of the TO because: 1) Trump’s payments to Cohen were made from personal or trust accounts and, hence, involved private records; and 2) the records were, unlike accounting books, not held to reflect the TO’s “condition or activity” and, accordingly, did not constitute “business records” under the statute.
Judge Juan Merchan, the presiding judge, has sided with Bragg. According to Merchan, the fact that Trump’s checking records were “personal . . . and not the books and records of a business entity is of no legal consequence.” Merchan reasoned that “[Trump] and the Trump Organization are intertwined to such a degree that it is of no legal relevance” that Trump made payments from personal funds. Merchan suggested that Trump’s personal and trust records “became” TO records once they were scanned into the corporate records system.
Whether Cohen’s invoices and Trump’s checking documents “became” TO records, in my judgment, is of little significance as to whether Trump violated Art. 175.10. There is a much clearer answer as to why Trump is innocent of the charges against him. Let me explain.
The Words of the Statute
Let’s return to the statutory language: “A person is guilty of falsifying business records . . . when . . . he . . . [m]akes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise.” I have emphasized two words in the statute— “entry” and “the”—because Trump’s team has yet to raise the exculpatory impact of these words. The word “entry” is a noun that means, per the Oxford Dictionary, “an item written or printed in a diary, list, ledger or reference book.”
In accounting parlance, an “entry” is “the record of any transaction found in a bookkeeper’s journal.” The statute at issue, notably, penalizes a false “entry” made “in” a “business record,” which is defined as “any writing or article [or computerized data] . . . kept . . . for the purpose of evidencing or reflecting [a business’s] condition or activity.” In short, as used in Art. 175.10, the term “entry” literally means a written or typed-in item added to paper or computer records. An obvious example of “making” a “false entry” is where an accountant inputs phony deductions in a corporation’s QuickBooks account.
snip
False entry? What a joke.
I once accidentally posted a food invoice to electricity. First four account numbers were similar and I typo’d.
Corrected it by that months closing.
Guess I should be on trial.
That the quack “judge” in this case just made a pronouncement there was “...no legal distinction between Trump’s personal account(s) and his business...” Illustrates just how corrupt he is. He cites no evidence to support his pronouncement. I have been involved in debt collection for many years and often had to attach assets not held in the name of the creditor. These were assets fraudulently transferred from the creditor to another person, usually a relative or close associate. The legal theory is called nominee/alter-ego. Before I could attach those assets I had to submit EVIDENCE the assets transfered were not an arms-length transaction, or were transferred for less than adequate consideration. There is a legal distinction between one’s personal activities and one’s business activities. No quack judge—democrat or not—can simply waive a magic wand to make the distinction go away. If there was no difference between personal and business why do we allow the existence of corporations, LLC’s, or partnerships?
Unfortunately, this solid argument will fly over the head of the jury.
As i read it, Trump used the TO to scan his persona trust checks paid to Cohen. Anyone who knows what happens in corps. They scan everything and looks like trump was using the TO to scan his Trust stuff. Good practice as maybe later could reclass to a TO account or not. In this case it looks like the checks were not entered into the TO’s books just scanned into the system. Clearly dumb lawyers who never ran a business would know what constitutes a GL entry to the books as opposed to scanning docs. Companies scan everything, just to have a record of comms from clients, members, bills, unidentified cash receipts,
How is it election fraud when Trump was already in the White House when he paid Cohen?