You know, this does bring to mind an interesting observation. And this is what you may have been eluding to, but, the book keeping error was a misdemeanor that had run its statute of limitations, however, Bragg is reviving that by saying if it was done in furtherance of another crime, this reinstated the statute of limitations.
Now, Bragg never specified the underlying crime in the indictment, only in the supporting documents. However, even if he had, I’m not sure it would have validated his case because the underlying crime he’s using (allleged campaign finance violations), is not a crime for which Trump has been charged, or convicted.
In essence, Bragg case is assuming a further felony that trump hasn’t been convicted of, and he’s trying to use his case to assert that crime.
I’m not sure that’s how it works. First, Trump would have to be charged and found guilty of committing the crime if campaign finance violations, Bragg could then use that felony as his underlying crime for his book keeping misdemeanor case.
Is this not right ?