Posted on 04/11/2023 10:45:52 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Manhattan DA Bragg recently indicted and arraigned former president Trump on 34 individual felony counts. According to statements from ‘star’ grand jury witness and former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, the matter concerns his payment of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels to buy her silence concerning an alleged 2006 affair—which she cannot prove and later denied in 2018. Trump reimbursed Cohen just before the 2016 election and apparently labeled it as legal expenses in his business records rather than ‘hush money reimbursement’, leading to Bragg’s business records misdemeanor charge. No less a legal scholar than Alan Dershowitz labeled this as ‘utter nonsense’.
DA Bragg claims this is the misdemeanor of false business records under New York state law. He further claims that because this was done with intent to conceal a second crime, it becomes a felony—in fact, 34 felonies as the indictment itself shows, each under the same identical NY state law.
These indictments are fatally defective for three separate reasons, any one of which should get the indictments dismissed before trial.
1. Charging 34 separate indictments from what is essentially one event violates the very clear (in New York and most other states) criminal doctrine of multiplicity. It is a pretrial form of the trial/post trial proscription on double jeopardy provided by the 5th Amendment as extended to the states by the 14th Amendment. The multiplicity doctrine simply holds that an alleged criminal indictment concerning events that are reasonably contiguous (for example, in time or space—here, both) cannot be broken up into separate indictments each separately risking a jury guilty finding. The charged indictments are defectively multiplicitous under clear New York case law on the doctrine.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
HERE ARE THE OTHER TWO FLAWS:
2. The felonies were created via the additional allegation of ‘false records with intent to conceal another crime’. But that second alleged crime is not specified in any of the 34 felony indictments. That is a clear violation of the 6th Amendment, which requires that an accused be informed of the ‘nature and cause of the accusation’. There were mutterings in Bragg’s post arraignment press conference that the second crime could be a couple of different things.
a. A violation of election laws. Since 2016 was a Presidential election, federal rather than state law governs. This raises a murky jurisdictional question about whether DA Bragg could use a federal ‘crime’ for state law purposes. But the jurisdictional question need not be addressed because we already have the answer— there was no crime. Both the head of the Federal Elections Commission and the then acting head of DoJ say the question was actively investigated at the time, and that there was no election issue found, let alone a criminal election issue.
b. A violation of some state income tax law. By law, the president’s federal income tax filings are audited each year of the presidency, and the audit result is then filed with the National Archives. For Trump, this would have been his 2017 filing for 2016. The IRS found no problems; there was no refile. That is relevant for his New York state filing, because New York expressly adopts the federal definition of adjusted gross income (AGM) and the federal definitions of allowable itemized deductions. There is one express New York variance; the state removes the federal $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions (SALT). Since there is no federal tax problem, there can be no state tax problem.
Both (a) and (b) explain why the indictments were mute about the alleged second crime and therefore is constitutionally defective.
3. The New York felony statue of limitations is 5 years. The charged events took place about 6 and a half years before the indictments. The statute of limitations expired about a year and a half before the indictments were brought. However, DA Brag might claim one of the two express statute of limitations exceptions under New York criminal law. Neither factually applies
a. If the indicted individual was continuously outside New York jurisdiction for 5 years, the limitation can be extended. But Trump provably was not CONTINUOUSLY outside New York during the 5 years since the 2016 election. He traveled to the UN in Manhattan to address the UN in 2018, 2019, and 2020.
b. If the indicted individual’s whereabouts remain unknown during the 5 years. But Trump’s whereabouts were known at all times—primarily at the White House or at Mar a Lago.
There is a separate factor to be considered. Bragg expressly campaigned for Manhattan DA on the claim that he was the best candidate ‘to get Trump’. That is express evidence of malice aforethought, and therefore of the resulting prosecutorial misconduct that all three indictment defects evidence. He should be disbarred after the indictments are dismissed.
The left has gone all out to “win” at any costs. No decorum, no respect for norms, no politeness, and no limits.
This “indictment” is only the first with more to follow. For the last 6 years we have seen an investigation of a man, his supporters, and his business that is unparalleled in American history.
They have scrutinized everything attempting at all costs to find any crime even if they have to violate norms and ethics to make one.
I am sure the author of this article is well versed in the law and NY law.
However, Conservatives and Trump are now below the law and subject to the whims of political based investigations, such as the Russian Collusion hoax, Impeachment hoaxes, and now NY law hoaxes, without regard to the law. Perhaps a better understanding of the Democratic party could be grasped by the actions of the legal system in Germany under the Democratic Nationalist Socialists wherein Judges were told to follow the party before the law.
Almost 90 years later and the United States, with the Direction of the DNC and Democratic Socialist leaders, looks more and more like Germany after the fall of the Republic.
Bragg needs to be “Nifonged”.
This is going to trial. You can forget any suggestion of a dismissal.
The indictments are bogus, but the prosecutor is counting on having a Democrat judge, and Democrat jurors. Which he will have.
The author made a mistake here. “Trump reimbursed Cohen just before the 2016 election and apparently labeled it as legal expenses in his business records rather than ‘hush money reimbursement’”
The legal expenses were reimbursed in 2017, AFTER the election, AFTER Trump was sworn in, and AFTER Trump had resigned his positions in order to perform the full time duties of POTUS.
Yes, it’s listed right after Bribes and Extortions..................
The problem is that the judge is also a corrupt far left cretin. He should have dismissed with prejudice immediately. Instead he continued the case until December to impact the Republican primaries.
under bragg a jaywalking charge is by the step
The judge who will be in charge of the case is known for hating Trump (and illegally contributed money to defeat Trump)--I'm not counting on him being forced to recuse himself. It should be a snap to find 12 New York jurors who will find Trump guilty. Enough low-information voters will believe that he has actually committed a crime to cost him millions of votes in 2024.
bkmk
See Post #15
yes so he could not influence the 2016 election it was already over...
And the very minute it gets thrown out of court, another bogus prosecution will end up in front of a grand jury.
And apparently, nobody is going to stop it.
Seriously Mr Istvan?
Surely you know and understand that President Trump has been indicted, tried and convicted in the New York Just-us system. All that is left is as much public humiliation they can inflict before the sentencing and execution.
Nah, but you are supposed to report the gross amount of a legal settlement separately from attorney’s fees, even if you paid both of those things on one check.
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.