Attorney says Trump team should NOT ask jury to bring charges down to misdemeanor

[AntonToo]

I also know that the entire indictment should have been dismissed upon inspection. It fails to actually state any actually legally cognizable “crime.”

Dummy, since when is it not a crime to falsify bussiness records in NY?

 

[para bellum]

There is no lack of evidence. All Trump has is an attempt to smear a man that committed crimes and went to jail in his service, as if he wasn’t the source of it all.

Sure, there is sufficient of evidence that Pecker and Cohen worked to suppress the stories, that Trump knew about it, and expected to pay for the NDA's. He was reluctant, and initially said that he didn't want to pay- he said the stories would come out anyway.

That much is in evidence from Pecker's testimony and corroborated by emails between Pecker or Dylan Howard, and Cohen. All the communications were between Cohen and AMI, or Cohen and Davidson. Trump was not party to any of those conversations.

Pecker received assurances from Cohen that Trump would pay for McDougal's NDA, and the recording of Trump by Cohen refers to the payment to AMI. There were also some unpublished stories about Trump that Cohen was trying to get in that transaction, which Pecker ultimately backed out of. That is the recording where Cohen said he was working out the financing, and Trump said pay in cash, and Cohen said "no, no, no, I got this."

That is the only recorded conversation with Trump.

The repayments to Cohen were worked out between Cohen and Weisselberg, who told the controller how to record the invoices. The controller sent several emails to Cohen asking for the invoices so he could enter the bills into the accounting software.

No one has offered any documentary evidence or testimony that Trump was involved in any of that. The first two checks came from the trust and were signed by Weisselmann and Don Jr, the other nine were signed by Trump and came from his personal checking account.

That is the record in this case as presented by the prosecution.

Cohen smeared himself by admitting to a false campaign finance violation, and blaming Trump to get a lower sentence on his tax evasion and bank fraud charges with the DOJ. So that's on him.

NDA's are not illegal, no campaign money was used, and paying a lawyer and recording it as "legal expenses" is perfectly valid. There was nothing to "cover up" by January 2017- the Wall Street Journal had already published the story about McDougal and Daniels on November 4.

You would know all this is if you looked at the transcripts and the evidence in the case...

 

[para bellum]

What witness?

Bradley Smith, a former FEC commissioner was going to testify about the complexities and practices of campaign finance laws. Merchan would not let him testify- he wants to be the only one to tell the jury about the law.

Scalia once said it was so complicated that even he couldn't understand it- Merchan definitely does not have the expertise in that area of law to give a proper jury instruction.

 

[para bellum]

Dummy, since when is it not a crime to falsify bussiness records in NY?

Every CEO in New York will be surprised to learn that their personal checking accounts are "business records" in Merchan's court...

 

[john doe 101]

The lack of evidence is in Trump's favor. The partisanship of the judge and the jury is not. What your side has to hope for is a miscarriage of justice. What my side has to hope for is a fair and impartial judgement.

And of course if he's found guilty it's because of a bunch of commies on the jury and the judge is one as well, right you ******* dumb piece of shit?

 

[AntonToo]

Every CEO in New York will be surprised to learn that their personal checking accounts are "business records" in Merchan's court...

Wrong, wrong again.

The first two checks were from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account, and signed by Donald Trump Jr. and Trump Organization finance chief Allen Weisselberg.

Guess you'll have to go fish for some other excuse now.

 

[AntonToo]

Bradley Smith, a former FEC commissioner was going to testify about the complexities and practices of campaign finance laws.

In other words a witness that has zero clue or comment about Trump falsifying bussiness records.

Right?

 

[AntonToo]

And of course if he's found guilty it's because of a bunch of commies on the jury and the judge is one as well, right you ******* dumb piece of shit?

Yea good luck with that.

Everyone and their not-retarded mother knows Trump falsified those records. They were clearly NDA pay off, not Cohen's retainer.

 

[para bellum]

Wrong, wrong again.

The first two checks were from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust Account, and signed by Donald Trump Jr. and Trump Organization finance chief Allen Weisselberg.

Guess you'll have to go fish for some other excuse now.

Hey numbnuts, read my post #142.

I will help you:

"No one has offered any documentary evidence or testimony that Trump was involved in any of that. The first two checks came from the trust and were signed by Weisselmann and Don Jr, the other nine were signed by Trump and came from his personal checking account."

Spectacular failure fool!

 

[AntonToo]

Hey numbnuts, read my post #142.

I will help you:

"No one has offered any documentary evidence or testimony that Trump was involved in any of that. The first two checks came from the trust and were signed by Weisselmann and Don Jr, the other nine were signed by Trump and came from his personal checking account."

Spectacular failure fool!

So you are saying Trump didn't know that he is paying Cohen when he was paying him from his personal account?

Have you been dropped on your head recently?

What work was Cohen doing for him? Trump has absolutely no invoices or record to show any other work being done. Was he just paying him out of the kindness of his heart?

There is no alternate explanation here aside from payments for NDA.

 

[para bellum]

In other words a witness that has zero clue or comment about Trump falsifying bussiness records.

Right?

No more than Stormy Daniels...

He wasn't going to testify about New York laws, fool.

 

[para bellum]

So you are saying Trump didn't know that he is paying Cohen when he was paying him from his personal account?

Of course he knew he was paying Cohen.

Do you know that it is not illegal to pay a lawyer for his services?

 

[AntonToo]

Of course he knew he was paying Cohen.

Do you know that it is not illegal to pay a lawyer for his services?

Dummy THERE ARE NO RECORDS OF ANY SERVICES, there is only NDA payoff.

 

[para bellum]

Dummy THERE ARE NO RECORDS OF ANY SERVICES, there is only NDA payoff.

Who cares? NDA's are not illegal. My attorney has paid fees on my behalf, and I reimbursed him. I recorded the transactions as "legal expenses". There is nothing false about that. It is bog-standard bookkeeping notation.

There is no law requiring a written retainer, and it's not uncommon to not have one when an attorney and client have a long standing relationship.

There were services rendered in 2016, and I am pretty sure Trump would NOT have agreed to overpay Cohen by $270K for something that was not even illegal...

 

[BackAgain]

What witness?

see? You don’t know what you’re talking about.

Look it up.

The defense sought to call an expert witness concerning the federal campaign laws (to rebut any prosecution theory that any of Trump’s actions had **** all to do with some fantasy “other” crime) and mutant Merchannwouldnt approve it.

 

[BackAgain]

Dummy THERE ARE NO RECORDS OF ANY SERVICES, there is only NDA payoff.

So, asshole Antoinette’s theory here is that Cohen’s sole legal service was to deal with the NDA and its payment?

Obviously, Asshole Antoinette doesn’t know anything about the trial or Cohen’s testimony (and his complaint about not getting his traditional yearly bonus from Trump).

 

[BackAgain]

Dummy, since when is it not a crime to falsify bussiness records in NY?

Retarded cockbite Antoinette, the charged crime is the alleged falsification of business records. There was no falsification (which would have been only a misdemeanor but which was time barred anyway). That would need to have been done to commit or conceal some other crime to jack it up to a felony. Not only did the persecution not specify which “other” crime they were claiming it was done to commit or conceal, but there is no evidence of any”other” crime, either.

 

[krichton]

NY v Trump: Michael Cohen admits to stealing tens of thousands from former president's business

Michael Cohen, a lawyer who previously worked for former President Trump, admitted Monday in the NY v. Trump case that he stole thousands from The Trump Organization.

www.foxnews.com

I wish I understood a few more details about this case, but I am piecing together that it's a matter of falsifying business records--or not. What Daniels' testimony had to do with is anyone's guess...

Oh wait... Guessing not needed. . it was only there to make Trump look bad.

Then there is the issue of the statute of limitations, which I understand has passed.. so why would Trump cop to lesser charges?

At Point 1.57 the attorney says there is no proof of falsifying records.

Trump and his defense team has made it a point that nothing happened between him and Daniels, so the prosecution is simply pushing back

 

[konradv]

Sure, there is sufficient of evidence that Pecker and Cohen worked to suppress the stories, that Trump knew about it, and expected to pay for the NDA's. He was reluctant, and initially said that he didn't want to pay- he said the stories would come out anyway.

That much is in evidence from Pecker's testimony and corroborated by emails between Pecker or Dylan Howard, and Cohen. All the communications were between Cohen and AMI, or Cohen and Davidson. Trump was not party to any of those conversations.

Pecker received assurances from Cohen that Trump would pay for McDougal's NDA, and the recording of Trump by Cohen refers to the payment to AMI. There were also some unpublished stories about Trump that Cohen was trying to get in that transaction, which Pecker ultimately backed out of. That is the recording where Cohen said he was working out the financing, and Trump said pay in cash, and Cohen said "no, no, no, I got this."

That is the only recorded conversation with Trump.

The repayments to Cohen were worked out between Cohen and Weisselberg, who told the controller how to record the invoices. The controller sent several emails to Cohen asking for the invoices so he could enter the bills into the accounting software.

No one has offered any documentary evidence or testimony that Trump was involved in any of that. The first two checks came from the trust and were signed by Weisselmann and Don Jr, the other nine were signed by Trump and came from his personal checking account.

That is the record in this case as presented by the prosecution.

Cohen smeared himself by admitting to a false campaign finance violation, and blaming Trump to get a lower sentence on his tax evasion and bank fraud charges with the DOJ. So that's on him.

NDA's are not illegal, no campaign money was used, and paying a lawyer and recording it as "legal expenses" is perfectly valid. There was nothing to "cover up" by January 2017- the Wall Street Journal had already published the story about McDougal and Daniels on November 4.

You would know all this is if you looked at the transcripts and the evidence in the case...

All of which is election interference and the reason he’s in court.