Can anyone give a Lucid Explanation of Bragg's alleged "another crime?"

[Billiejeens]

Clearly you are living in a MAGAT fantasy land where truth is fungible and lies are your favorite breakfast food.

I haven't had breakfast this morning yet - make your best factual point on how 17-152 should work here.

 

[Dadoalex]

I haven't had breakfast this morning yet - make your best factual point on how 17-152 should work here.

You've had plenty of lies for breakfast.
You're puking the overflow here.

 

[Billiejeens]

You've had plenty of lies for breakfast.
You're puking the overflow here.

So, you can't.

It's okay, real world no one can.

In your echo chamber, everyone simply agrees with The Narrative = boring.

 

[BULLDOG]

It's not

You are free to believe that isn't illegal, but it is the charge of record in this case.

 

[Dante]

You never heard the saying “a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich, if that’s what you wanted.”?

Yes I have. And it does not negate the fact that the jury decides, not the prosecutor and any mysterious force behind them.

Fact: Grand Juries often decide NOT to indict.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

That's because you're too dumb to check out what the actual law says.

§ 17-152. Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more​

persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to​

a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by​

one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.​

NYS Open Legislation | NYSenate.gov

www.nysenate.gov

​

Oh a misdemeanor.

 

[Dante]

Oh, so the charges only get revealed as the trial goes along? How un-American is that!

Maybe you need to become American, or learn about America before you flap your lips -- strike the keys on your keyboard.

"Mr. Trump’s lawyers argued that the New York statute requires that the predicate (underlying) crime must also be a New York crime, not a crime in another jurisdiction." They have no argued what you are arguing. Why? Because they know Bragg was correct when he said the indictment doesn’t specify the potential underlying crimes because the law doesn’t require it.

NEW YORK (AP) — The cover-up is worse than the crime, the expression goes. And in the hush money case against Donald Trump, prosecutors say the cover-up made the crime worse.

Analysis: Trump hush money case raises thorny legal issues

The coverup is worse than the crime, the expression goes. And in the hush money case against former President Donald Trump, prosecutors say the coverup made the crime worse.

apnews.com

 

[Dante]

Even a leftoid who works for MSNBC knows the time of day.

And here we are, a jury sworn in, day two of testimony, and no one knew what the actual charges are. Isn't that supposed to be in the indictment? What a disturbing farce.

The indictment lists the charges. D'Oh!

 

[Dante]

Oh a misdemeanor.

Fact: certain misdemeanors can be elevated to felonies.

Now, let the class come to order:

“There are an awful lot of dots here which it takes a bit of imagination to connect,” said Richard Klein, a Touro Law Center criminal law professor. Bragg said the indictment doesn’t specify the potential underlying crimes because the law doesn’t require it. But given the likelihood of Trump’s lawyers challenging it, “you’d think they’d want to be on much firmer ground than some of this stuff,” said Klein, a former New York City public defender.

Hasen said it’s not clear whether candidates for federal office can be prosecuted in cases involving state election laws. The defense may also argue the case can’t be brought in state court if it involves a federal election law.

Prosecutors, however, also alluded to another accusation involving tax law: that Trump’s scheme included a plan to mischaracterize the payments to Cohen as income to New York tax authorities.

“They did talk about tax crimes, and I think that could be potentially more compelling for the jury,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, said on ABC News. “It’s a safer bet than the campaign finance crimes.”

Bragg is “going to bring in witnesses, he’s going to show a lot of documentary evidence to attempt to demonstrate that all these payments were in furtherance of the presidential campaign,” said Jerry H. Goldfeder, a veteran election lawyer in New York and the director of Fordham Law School’s Voting Rights and Democracy Project.

“It remains to be seen if he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt,” Goldfeder said. But, he added, “Do not underestimate District Attorney Alvin Bragg and do not overestimate Mr. Trump.”

Analysis: Trump hush money case raises thorny legal issues

The coverup is worse than the crime, the expression goes. And in the hush money case against former President Donald Trump, prosecutors say the coverup made the crime worse.

apnews.com

 

[EvilCat Breath]

The only interference Bragg can possibly allude to is the federal election. That makes it federal jurisdiction, not state. Federal prosecutors already rejected these charges.

Bragg is relying on a heavily biased judge in a kangaroo court to just go along.

There really isn't any other argument. The fix is in, unless the Supreme Court can unravel the lies.

 

[Dadoalex]

So, you can't.

It's okay, real world no one can.

In your echo chamber, everyone simply agrees with The Narrative = boring.

You're right.
No one but you can understand your fantasies.
But you and that 13 legged elephant have fun.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Fact: certain misdemeanors can be elevated to felonies.

Now, let the class come to order:

“There are an awful lot of dots here which it takes a bit of imagination to connect,” said Richard Klein, a Touro Law Center criminal law professor.

The dots are supposed to be connected by facts, not by a prosecutor’s overactive imagination.

Bragg said the indictment doesn’t specify the potential underlying crimes because the law doesn’t require it. But given the likelihood of Trump’s lawyers challenging it, “you’d think they’d want to be on much firmer ground than some of this stuff,” said Klein, a former New York City public defender.

Hasen said it’s not clear whether candidates for federal office can be prosecuted in cases involving state election laws. The defense may also argue the case can’t be brought in state court if it involves a federal election law.

Prosecutors, however, also alluded to another accusation involving tax law: that Trump’s scheme included a plan to mischaracterize the payments to Cohen as income to New York tax authorities.

“They did talk about tax crimes, and I think that could be potentially more compelling for the jury,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, said on ABC News. “It’s a safer bet than the campaign finance crimes.”

Bragg is “going to bring in witnesses, he’s going to show a lot of documentary evidence to attempt to demonstrate that all these payments were in furtherance of the presidential campaign,” said Jerry H. Goldfeder, a veteran election lawyer in New York and the director of Fordham Law School’s Voting Rights and Democracy Project.

“It remains to be seen if he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt,” Goldfeder said. But, he added, “Do not underestimate District Attorney Alvin Bragg and do not overestimate Mr. Trump.”

Analysis: Trump hush money case raises thorny legal issues

The coverup is worse than the crime, the expression goes. And in the hush money case against former President Donald Trump, prosecutors say the coverup made the crime worse.

apnews.com

In other words, the are doing several things that have not been done before or which are very unusual. Because they are frustrated that they have failed to “get Trump.”

 

[Dante]

The dots are supposed to be connected by facts, not by a prosecutor’s overactive imagination.

Taking one line out of context? Okay. Add another flop to your resume.

Fact: certain misdemeanors can be elevated to felonies.

Now, let the class come to order:

“There are an awful lot of dots here which it takes a bit of imagination to connect,” said Richard Klein, a Touro Law Center criminal law professor. Bragg said the indictment doesn’t specify the potential underlying crimes because the law doesn’t require it. But given the likelihood of Trump’s lawyers challenging it, “you’d think they’d want to be on much firmer ground than some of this stuff,” said Klein, a former New York City public defender.

Hasen said it’s not clear whether candidates for federal office can be prosecuted in cases involving state election laws. The defense may also argue the case can’t be brought in state court if it involves a federal election law.

Prosecutors, however, also alluded to another accusation involving tax law: that Trump’s scheme included a plan to mischaracterize the payments to Cohen as income to New York tax authorities.

“They did talk about tax crimes, and I think that could be potentially more compelling for the jury,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, said on ABC News. “It’s a safer bet than the campaign finance crimes.”

Bragg is “going to bring in witnesses, he’s going to show a lot of documentary evidence to attempt to demonstrate that all these payments were in furtherance of the presidential campaign,” said Jerry H. Goldfeder, a veteran election lawyer in New York and the director of Fordham Law School’s Voting Rights and Democracy Project.

“It remains to be seen if he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt,” Goldfeder said. But, he added, “Do not underestimate District Attorney Alvin Bragg and do not overestimate Mr. Trump.”

 

[Billiejeens]

You're right.
No one but you can understand your fantasies.
But you and that 13 legged elephant have fun.

It's a simple question that you can't answer -
I get it.

 

[Dadoalex]

It's a simple question that you can't answer -
I get it.

you didn't ask a question slurpy.
you said something about a 13 legged elephant.

 

[Billiejeens]

you didn't ask a question slurpy.
you said something about a 13 legged elephant.

I did

I didn't.

 

[Dadoalex]

I did

I didn't.

See?

I haven't had breakfast this morning yet - make your best factual point on how 17-152 should work here.

No question ya moron.

Hint for dumbasses....

Questions end with "?"

 

[Seymour Flops]

Taking one line out of context? Okay. Add another flop to your resume.

It was the first sentence of your quote and in no way out of context.

 

[Dante]

It was the first sentence of your quote and in no way out of context.

The context is the meaning of the whole. I guess you're unclear on what "context" means.

Out of context: If words are used out of context, only a small separate part of what was originally said or written is reported, with the result that their meaning is not clear or is not understood.

Fact: certain misdemeanors can be elevated to felonies.

Now, let the class come to order:

“There are an awful lot of dots here which it takes a bit of imagination to connect,” said Richard Klein, a Touro Law Center criminal law professor. Bragg said the indictment doesn’t specify the potential underlying crimes because the law doesn’t require it. But given the likelihood of Trump’s lawyers challenging it, “you’d think they’d want to be on much firmer ground than some of this stuff,” said Klein, a former New York City public defender.

Hasen said it’s not clear whether candidates for federal office can be prosecuted in cases involving state election laws. The defense may also argue the case can’t be brought in state court if it involves a federal election law.

Prosecutors, however, also alluded to another accusation involving tax law: that Trump’s scheme included a plan to mischaracterize the payments to Cohen as income to New York tax authorities.

“They did talk about tax crimes, and I think that could be potentially more compelling for the jury,” Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, said on ABC News. “It’s a safer bet than the campaign finance crimes.”

Bragg is “going to bring in witnesses, he’s going to show a lot of documentary evidence to attempt to demonstrate that all these payments were in furtherance of the presidential campaign,” said Jerry H. Goldfeder, a veteran election lawyer in New York and the director of Fordham Law School’s Voting Rights and Democracy Project.

“It remains to be seen if he can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt,” Goldfeder said. But, he added, “Do not underestimate District Attorney Alvin Bragg and do not overestimate Mr. Trump.”

You relied with this: "The dots are supposed to be connected by facts, not by a prosecutor’s overactive imagination."

 

[AZrailwhale]

Rubber stamp? So they decide.

Can't you read or are you just willfully ignoring my facts. The grand jury can only decide within the facts and evidence the prosecutor chooses to present to them.