'He wrote all of it down?': Prosecutors claim to have handwritten notes of Trump hush money scheme

[kyzr]

Well, he didn't exactly just pay for it out of his own pocket. Cohen paid the NDA and he had to launder the money through fake invoices for legal fees.

The purpose of which was to hide the entire thing from the public.

It's a campaign expense because he wouldn't have been paying for the NDAs if it hadn't been for his election campaign.

1. The money came from Trump, not the campaign or a gift from someone else.
2. Stupid Cohen did try to launder the money, but he didn't have to. The NDAs are perfectly LEGAL.
3. NDAs are perfectly legal for whatever reason. Trump can do NDAs with his own money for any reasons he wants.
4. Trump paid the doorman $30,000 for a bullshit NDA, he paid Karen McD $150,000 for an NDA, and he paid Stormy $130,000 for an NDA, all perfectly LEGAL. No campaign funds were used, you can't prove they were campaign related because other NDAs were made BEFORE the campaign.

 

[marvin martian]

A shout out to Big Al for keeping copious records of the hush money payment. The prosecution's case is made a little easier. It kinda makes a mockery of Trump's denial he didn't schtoink Stormy. Sorry Melania, you married an unfaithful pig of a man.

So, how's it going?

Can we see those notes now?

LOL

 

[Rawley]

So, how's it going?

Can we see those notes now?

LOL

LOL. He was mistaken - they have handwritten notes to the "conspiracy," not the "scheme." But you can't see those either.

 

[Rawley]

Well, he didn't exactly just pay for it out of his own pocket. Cohen paid the NDA and he had to launder the money through fake invoices for legal fees.

Here we go with the "fake" again. Why were his invoices to Trump "fake?"

 

[Flopper]

She said they didn't hook up not just him, she said it. She basically admitted she was extorting him and instead of bringing her to trial DEMS ALWAYS go after the victim of the false charges rather than the criminal with a motive.
This trial is called "Obstruction", intended to intimidate Trump and the right from prosecuting the Biden crime family.

It is not extortion. Extortion requires force or threat of violence. The crime is blackmail, not extortion. However, whether she committed extortion or blackmail does not nullify Trump's crime of violating statue 175-10, Conspiracy to Promote and Prevent Election. It is simply a red herring.

 

[Flopper]

schlonging Hillary still isn’t a “crime”

Apparently you have never considered what would be required to steel an election

 

[Rawley]

It is not extortion. Extortion requires force or threat of violence. The crime is blackmail, not extortion. However, whether she committed extortion or blackmail does not nullify Trump's crime of violating statue 175-10, Conspiracy to Promote and Prevent Election. It is simply a red herring.

How about Hillary paying Steele to make up dirt on Trump? How is that not a violation of 175-10?

 

[Lesh]

One more time.

Trump recorded the hush money payments as legal fees. They were not.

They were illegal campaign contributions

That in itself is a misdemeanor. Trying to hide that is a misdemeanor.

The first becomes a felony because it falsifies records to hide the second.

That is how the laws are written.

If the prosecution proves those points to a jury… Trump is guilty of a felony

That’s it whether you like it or not

 

[Marener]

1. The money came from Trump, not the campaign or a gift from someone else.
2. Stupid Cohen did try to launder the money, but he didn't have to. The NDAs are perfectly LEGAL.
3. NDAs are perfectly legal for whatever reason. Trump can do NDAs with his own money for any reasons he wants.
4. Trump paid the doorman $30,000 for a bullshit NDA, he paid Karen McD $150,000 for an NDA, and he paid Stormy $130,000 for an NDA, all perfectly LEGAL. No campaign funds were used, you can't prove they were campaign related because other NDAs were made BEFORE the campaign.

Cohen and Trump laundered the money together.

The NDA is legal, but it was a campaign expense. Trump didn't pay Karen McDougal or the doorman anything. David Pecker did for the express purposes of protecting Trump's campaign.

The NDAs were all made DURING the campaign. Not before. Check your dates.

 

[Flopper]

Here we go with the "fake" again. Why were his invoices to Trump "fake?"

The invoices from Cohen were fake because they listed hush money payoffs as legal expenses. Trump made a deal where Cohen would pay the hushmoney and bill Trump after the election as legal expenses. Hushmoney payments are not legal expenses. Trump knew this yet he had these expenses recorded in his check register and his General Ledger as Legal Expenses which was falsifying business records.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

State election laws cover both federal and state elections. Federal Election laws are on top of state election laws.

At the heart of this case is convicting a jury that falsifying business records was done to cover up other illegal activity.

It will be very clear to the jury that Trump's business records were false entries. Trump made the entries in his check register and there is evidence he ordered GL entries of the the hush money payments to be made as legal expenses. The prosecutor will have no problem convicting a jury that Trump is guilty of these misdemeanors.

If entries were made in connection with or to coverup of other crimes, the charges become felonies. So far here are two other crimes connected to the falsification of business records.
The hush money payments and the catch and kill scheme are violations of state statue 175-10, Conspiracy to Promote and Prevent Election. Also the hush money payments must be reported as campaign expenses which they were not. It is likely that there will be other crimes revealed as part of the coverup. The problem for the prosecution is convincing the jury that all these misdemeanors add up to felony convictions. Yes, it is the law but will the jury be willing to convict an ex-president and candidate for the presidency of felonies that will likely end his chance of re-election and possibly send him to jail. I think a Trump conviction of felonies is a long shot. Although this is the weakest of the 4 cases against Trump it is becoming more likely that it will be the only trial in which Trump will be brought to the bar of justice.

Apparently a conservative Supreme Count and a republican judge have decide to delay till after the election the federal trials which would likely go against Trump. If Trump wins the election he will stop the trials. Power and money has a way of lifting the blindfold off the eyes of justice.

The hush money payments and the catch and kill scheme are violations of state statue 175-10, Conspiracy to Promote and Prevent Election.

Everything every candidate does is to promote their election.
Biden is handing out hundreds of billions in taxpayer funded loan forgiveness to promote his election.
String him up!!!

 

[WorldWatcher]

So why did Trump pay for NDAs out of pocket?
Hint: Its not a campaign expense, and Trump can spend his own money any way he wants, its called "free speech" and is perfectly legal.

This may be a part that you may not know.

FPOTUS#45 didn't pay for the NDA out of his pocket. He routed the expenses to the Trump Organization which is a business entity that handeled transaction both for the Trump Oranization and The Trump Revocable Trust. Which puts the payments through a business entity, not from his own pocket.

If he had transferred money to his personal account, got a certified check from his personal account, and paid for the NDA that way - there would be no violation of business law to charge.

FPOTUS#45 the individual and Trump Organization are two different things in terms of legal structure.

WW

 

[Lesh]

The hush money payments and the catch and kill scheme are violations of state statue 175-10, Conspiracy to Promote and Prevent Election.

Everything every candidate does is to promote their election.
Biden is handing out hundreds of billions in taxpayer funded loan forgiveness to promote his election.
String him up!!!

Bullshit. He’s fulfilling a campaign promise from four years ago

 

[Rawley]

The invoices from Cohen were fake because they listed hush money payoffs as legal expenses.

Really? Do you have a link to these "fake" invoices?

Trump made a deal where Cohen would pay the hushmoney and bill Trump after the election as legal expenses. Hushmoney payments are not legal expenses. Trump knew this yet he had these expenses recorded in his check register and his General Ledger as Legal Expenses which was falsifying business records.

He wrote checks to his lawyer and recorded them as checks to his lawyer.

Do you typically list the disbursements when you write your lawyer a check?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Bullshit. He’s fulfilling a campaign promise from four years ago

To promote his election.

 

[Lesh]

Really? Do you have a link to these "fake" invoices?

He wrote checks to his lawyer and recorded them as checks to his lawyer.

Do you typically list the disbursements when you write your lawyer a check?

Checks to his lawyer… as legal expenses.

They were not that

 

[Lesh]

To promote his election.

So are all campaign promises then

 

[WorldWatcher]

Really? Do you have a link to these "fake" invoices?

He wrote checks to his lawyer and recorded them as checks to his lawyer.

Do you typically list the disbursements when you write your lawyer a check?

#1 It wasn't "He" it was checks issued by the Trump Organization which is a business entity.

As a business? Yes.

Because there is a difference between paying Attorney Fee's which have to be reported as income on a 1099 and reimbursement for expenses which are not considered income.

WW

 

[Rawley]

Checks to his lawyer… as legal expenses.

They were not that

When you write checks to your lawyer do you typically list the disbursements separately on your checkbook?

 

[Lesh]

When you write checks to your lawyer do you typically list the disbursements separately on your checkbook?

As far as businesses are concerned… legal fees and campaign contributions have to be recorded differently