Posted on 06/07/2024 9:45:04 AM PDT by bitt
Yale Law Professor Jed Rubenfeld, a prominent legal scholar known for his work in constitutional law, privacy rights, and the First Amendment, has provided a legal roadmap for Donald Trump’s attorneys to potentially overturn the former president’s ‘guilty’ verdict before the crucial 2024 election.
In a recent video, Rubenfeld begins by explaining the complexities of the case.
“Nobody wants it to be the rule in America that if you’re a former president or if you’re running for President, you become a target for criminal prosecution,” said Rubenfeld.
Trump was found guilty of allegedly falsifying business records to conceal a second crime. The crux of the prosecution’s argument was that Trump’s reimbursements to his lawyer, Michael Cohen, a convicted perjurer, for hush money paid to Stormy Daniels were falsely recorded as legal expenses. The prosecution argued that these payments were campaign expenses meant to influence the 2016 election.
For the record, Jed Rudenfeld represented Robert Kennedy’s Children Health Defense, The Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft, and several other independent voices in an antitrust lawsuit against members of the Trusted News Initiative back in 2023.
Rubenfeld points out that while paying hush money is not illegal, falsifying business records is. The complication arises from the necessity of proving a second crime that Trump was allegedly trying to conceal.
The prosecution suggested multiple theories, including New York tax violations and federal campaign finance violations, but did not definitively commit to any single one during the indictment.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u23t__ysVjU
Straight Down the Middle — The Trump Verdict —Ep. 1 23 MIN
the person who reported the steele dossier payments as legal expenses for the clinton campaign
is now the head of the sec
gary gensler
Where was is proven that it was not a legal expense, nor another category of expense within the Trump Org. accounting system?
Trump reported a legal expense as a “legal expense.”
Off with his head!
An academic proposes a method to finesse away an autracity…
To: kiryandil
I believe Trump has had a fair trial. Should I be charged with crimes, I hope I would be treated as well as Trump.
148 posted on 5/29/2024, 11:06:08 PM by joesbucks
https://freerepublic.com/focus/news/4240700/posts?page=148#148
We've discovered Joe Scarborough's Free Republic screen name.
Rubenfeld, Dershowitz, Turley, Levin - it seems everyone has an opinion on how to challenge and overturn the guilty verdict, except Trump’s lawyers. Where are they? Are they at the golf course? On vacation?
He was Amazing! Love President Trump. He is an extraordinary person!
All of it is years past the Statue Of Limitations, anyhow. Why is Trump excluded from that protection as any RAT would be?
“We’ve discovered Joe Scarborough’s Free Republic screen name.”
Could be you’re right. He even retained the “joe”.
BTW, has joesbucks been zotted here yet? There was a movement.
“is not illegal, falsifying business records is.”
Apparently, they used provisions in the Sarbanes Oxley Act to trump up this charge. If they were trying to conceal the payment, they could have picked a dozen other better choices than legal expenses.
Anyone who has been audited knows there is a high level of scrutiny placed on all costs categorized as legal expenses in the general ledger. It’s the last place you’d put a charge if you really wanted to try to hide it.
“Where was is proven that it was not a legal expense, nor another category of expense within the Trump Org. accounting system?”
Invoices and ledger entries.
I’m a little disappointed with Trump’s legal team in New York, but possibly Trump wanted a guilty verdict.
So far it’s improved his polling and raked in 400 million dollars.
No, but he’s working on it, as is his usual way.
This is where the whole "novel legal theory" comes in. You're correct that the charge of falsifying business records is a misdemeanor. However, if done to cover up a previous crime, it becomes a felony with a longer statute of limitations. That's exactly what the prosecutors did here. They alleged Trump falsified the records to hide another crime, but never specified the other crime.
“They alleged Trump falsified the records to hide another crime, but never specified the other crime”
According to NY law, they don’t have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the other crime happened. Using Cohen’s, Pecker’s and some other testimony, they were able to convince the jury the other crime likely happened
“I’m a little disappointed with Trump’s legal team in New York, but possibly Trump wanted a guilty verdict.”
Trump has an exceptional legal team who has done all that could be done. The problem is the pissant judge from Columbia and his grifting sleazebag daughter.
Merchan put his thumb on the scale throughout the process and has acted as though he were part of the prosecution team.
When that is the case, who you have for an attorney does not matter. That said, where you will see the quality of Trump’s counsel will be during the appeals process.
“Where are they? Are they at the golf course? On vacation?”
I think they are opting to hold their cards, and close to the vest, until the sentencing date.
Trump’s superpower is exposing these government scumbags. Just sit back and let him work his magic. He was re-elected last week, they just don’t know it yet.
By the way, Trump has raised $400,000,000.00 in the past 7 days.
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.