We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Trump had his lawyer pay it at his request in order to hide the payment. Then after the election he paid Cohen back not out of his personal account but out of a business account in payments that began In Feb 2016 and ending in Dec 2016 which were record as legal expenses of the business. I believe the total of these payments will add up to $130,000, the hush money payment.

I think Bragg would have no probably proving Trump guilty of fixing the books but proving him guilty of the crime he is concealing might be more difficult because his lawyers would argue that the concealed crime was not a crime because he did not intend to influence the election. Trump was paying off Stormy to protect the wile and kids and protect his sterling character.

Everyone drink!

 

[BackAgain]

Trump had his lawyer pay it at his request in order to hide the payment.

So you claim. Oh, and so does the former lawyer who got disbarred for conviction of multiple felonies, including — perjury.

Then after the election he paid Cohen back not out of his personal account but out of a business account

The business account was his own trust fund. That means it came out of his own wealth.

in payments that began In Feb 2016 and ending in Dec 2016 which were record as legal expenses of the business.

His former lawyer did sunlit an invoice or two.

I believe the total of these payments will add up to $130,000, the hush money payment.

The payment was for the NDA. You know. Legal.

I think Bragg would have no probably proving Trump guilty of fixing the books

I think you’re wrong. He probably can prove that the books were less than perfect. But that’s not unusual.

but proving him guilty of the crime he is concealing might be more difficult because his lawyers would argue that the concealed crime was not a crime because he did not intend to influence the election.

It is more problematic than that. The payment was legal. So the “crime” of cooking the books couldn’t be for the additional Purpose of hiding a crime. There was no underlying crime.

Trump was paying off Stormy to protect the wile and kids and protect his sterling character.

Or, maybe just to protect himself (even if as a candidate it’s still not illegal). He can contribute all he wants to his own campaign. No financial limits.

 

[BackAgain]

I said I got your point and asked if you had any other. You said no. Not sure what you are thinking anyone didn't get. Please masturbate on your own time.

You’re the one who missed the point. But then, it’s you. So completely expected.

 

[Flopper]

You're driving then

No way. I'm sitting at the computer sipping a Manhattan. One more and I might change sides. The statue of limitation argument should be interesting. If Trump wins there, we've been wasting our time because there won't be a be trial.

 

[Lisa558]

Trump had his lawyer pay it at his request in order to hide the payment. Then after the election he paid Cohen back not out of his personal account but out of a business account in payments that began In Feb 2016 and ending in Dec 2016 which were record as legal expenses of the business. I believe the total of these payments will add up to $130,000, the hush money payment.

I think Bragg would have no problem proving Trump guilty of fixing the books but proving him guilty of the crime he is concealing might be more difficult because his lawyers would argue that the concealed crime was not a crime because he did not intend to influence the election. Trump was paying off Stormy to protect the wife and kids and to protect his sterling character.

….especially since the FEC already ruled the underlying crime is not a crime, and Bragg does NOT get a chance to try to prove it is. It’s out of his jurisdiction.

Besides, a $130,000 payment to a Ho pales in comparison to the Russia Hoax that Hillary paid to have created, and the fact that we have a president so indebted to our enemy that he allowed it to fly a spy balloon across the entire U.S.

I get ya‘all have been convinced into thinking Trump was horrible, but c’mon…..priorities!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

No way. I'm sitting at the computer sipping a Manhattan. One more and I might change sides. The statue of limitation argument should be interesting. If Trump wins there, we've been wasting our time because there won't be a be trial.

Right, but how could he win it? He moved out of New York permanently on inauguration day. It seems that law was made exactly because of people who flee the State to live somewhere else.

 

[Lesh]

….especially since the FEC already ruled the underlying crime is not a crime,

Ahhhh...that would be...what's that word

Ohh yea...a lie

Lisa does that a lot

 

[Flopper]

So you claim. Oh, and so does the former lawyer who got disbarred for conviction of multiple felonies, including — perjury.


The business account was his own trust fund. That means it came out of his own wealth.


His former lawyer did sunlit an invoice or two.

The payment was for the NDA. You know. Legal.

I think you’re wrong. He probably can prove that the books were less than perfect. But that’s not unusual.

It is more problematic than that. The payment was legal. So the “crime” of cooking the books couldn’t be for the additional Purpose of hiding a crime. There was no underlying crime.

Or, maybe just to protect himself (even if as a candidate it’s still not illegal). He can contribute all he wants to his own campaign. No financial limits.

The business account was his own trust fund. That means it came out of his own wealth.
The point is Cohen paid Stormy at Trump’s request. Cohen funneled the money through a shell corporation to make it difficult to tie the payment back to Trump. Trump, after the election beginning Feb 2016, started paying Cohen back in monthly payments ending in Dec 2016, disguising the payment as legal fees and being recorded in books of the business as such. Whether it is a trust fund or not the payment is recorded in the books of the as a business expense, i.e a legal fees which it is not.

The payment was for the NDA. You know. Legal.
So what. The NDA only proves that it was hush money. Are you trying say Trump paid Cohen $130,000 to create and NDA. My lawyer would do for $100. Frankly, I can't see how the NDA has any bearing on the issue except to prove the payment was hush money.

Or, maybe just to protect himself (even if as a candidate it’s still not illegal). He can contribute all he wants to his own campaign. No financial limits.
In October 2016 just a month before the election the Access Hollywood tape was made public. And Stormy Daniels had been threatening Trump with a tell all. His campaign was in full protect mode. The last thing they needed was Stormy confirming that Trump is every bit the reprobate in the Access Hollywood tape. So Trump ordered Cohen to payoff Daniels in October and get an NDA. Trump agrees to pay him back after the election. So Cohen arranges payment to come from a shell corporation. And Trump pays Cohen back disguised as monthly legal payments and records them as legal fees of the business. I think when Bragg presents this to the jury, it's going to be very hard for Trump lawyers to convince the jury that the Stormy payment was just intended to protect Trump's good name and not influence the election outcome.

 

[Flopper]

….especially since the FEC already ruled the underlying crime is not a crime, and Bragg does NOT get a chance to try to prove it is. It’s out of his jurisdiction.

Besides, a $130,000 payment to a Ho pales in comparison to the Russia Hoax that Hillary paid to have created, and the fact that we have a president so indebted to our enemy that he allowed it to fly a spy balloon across the entire U.S.

I get ya‘all have been convinced into thinking Trump was horrible, but c’mon…..priorities!

Sorry, Trump illegal behavior cannot be ignored because of whatever Hillary did.

Actually the FEC didn't do anything. After the committee received a report from a subcommittee investing Trump that indicated that Trump could be charged with violations, the committee voted. 2 democrats on the committee voted to pursue the issue and 2 republicans vote not to do so. The tie breaker was a republican but he did not attend the meeting. So the FEC did nothing.

 

[Flopper]

Right, but how could he win it? He moved out of New York permanently on inauguration day. It seems that law was made exactly because of people who flee the State to live somewhere else.

You're right. The problem is the legal exceptions is a bit confusing. However in 1999, New York's highest court, The New York Court of Appeals, clarified that the reason behind the exception to the statute of limitations is the difficulty to apprehend a criminal offender who is outside of the state. On this interpretation, the word "continuous" doesn't mean a single uninterrupted period of time but a tally of all the days put together. This might be why Bragg is pursuing this case.

Has the Statute of Limitations Run Out on the Stormy Daniels Payment?

What seemed like any other New Yorker moving down to Florida might end up being the most consequential decision of former President Donald Trump's life.

www.newsweek.com

After two drinks, that's it for me. I'm posting what I have and that's all folks.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Trump had his lawyer pay it at his request in order to hide the payment. Then after the election he paid Cohen back not out of his personal account but out of a business account in payments that began In Feb 2016 and ending in Dec 2016 which were record as legal expenses of the business. I believe the total of these payments will add up to $130,000, the hush money payment.

I think Bragg would have no problem proving Trump guilty of fixing the books but proving him guilty of the crime he is concealing might be more difficult because his lawyers would argue that the concealed crime was not a crime because he did not intend to influence the election. Trump was paying off Stormy to protect the wife and kids and to protect his sterling character.

I think you meant 2017.

WW

 

[BackAgain]

Update:

There is still no credible case against Trump.

 

[BackAgain]

The business account was his own trust fund. That means it came out of his own wealth.
The point is Cohen paid Stormy at Trump’s request.

So what. Even if that’s true, so what?

Cohen funneled the money through a shell corporation to make it difficult to tie the payment back to Trump.

I don’t care how Cohen paid for an MDA.

Trump, after the election beginning Feb 2016, started paying Cohen back in monthly payments ending in Dec 2016,

One should repay one’s debts.

disguising the payment as legal fees

If Cohen sent his client a statement for legal services, Trump was allowed to pay it.

and being recorded in books of the business as such.

Hire a lawyer. Pay him. Record it on the books of your trust as a payment for legal services. Perfectly ok.

Whether it is a trust fund or not the payment is recorded in the books of the as a business expense, i.e a legal fees which it is not.

Of course it was.

The payment was for the NDA. You know. Legal.
So what. The NDA only proves that it was hush money.

Perfectly legal. That’s what NDA’s are for.

Are you trying say Trump paid Cohen $130,000 to create and NDA.

No. Im saying that if Cohen paid for the NDA and gave Trump an invoice, it’s perfectly ok to repay it.

My lawyer would do for $100. Frankly, I can't see how the NDA has any bearing on the issue except to prove the payment was hush money.

Irrelevant. Paying it is legal.

Or, maybe just to protect himself (even if as a candidate it’s still not illegal). He can contribute all he wants to his own campaign. No financial limits.
In October 2016 just a month before the election the Access Hollywood tape was made public. And Stormy Daniels had been threatening Trump with a tell all. His campaign was in full protect mode.

Let’s assume all of that is true.

The last thing they needed was Stormy confirming that Trump is every bit the reprobate in the Access Hollywood tape.

She wouldn’t have been confirming anything. She would only be making claims.

So Trump ordered Cohen to payoff Daniels in October and get an NDA.

The NDA is for getting the party paid to shut the fuck up. Still totally legal.

Trump agrees to pay him back after the election.

Trump repaid a debt for legal services. Of those services included paying for an NDA, it doesn’t matter.

So Cohen arranges payment to come from a shell corporation.

Again. I don’t care how Cohen paid the Ho.

And Trump pays Cohen back disguised as monthly legal payments

Or, he simply paid and/or repaid Cohen.

and records them as legal fees of the business.

That’s what you do when you get a bill from the lawyer. It’s not a disguise. It’s payment of money owed.

I think when Bragg presents this to the jury, it's going to be very hard for Trump lawyers to convince the jury that the Stormy payment was just intended to protect Trump's good name and not influence the election outcome.

It wouldn’t matter even if his purpose included an effort to contribute to his own campaign. He’s allowed to do that. No spending limit.

Several of libs have gotten way too verbose. Trying to bury your nonsense in a wall o’ words won’t work.

 

[OKTexas]

The United States Constitution – The U.S. Constitution Online – USConstitution.net - U.S. Constitution.net

The United States Constitution Vote 🗳️ Show Results 📊 (watch ad for results) View Next Poll ➡️ Today’s special event: March 16, 1751, is President James Madison‘s birthday. 50:50 groups call $0 $100 $200 Submit Final Answer The Constitution is presented in several ways on this site. This page...

usconstitution.net

https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf

Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

The People of New York vs. Donald J. Trump
"THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, by this indictment, accuses the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows: The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization."

Correct, the 6th Amendment requires that he be informed of the crimes that defendant committed. The 6th Amendment does not require crimes be listed that others committed. The indictment clearly shows that the defendant was charged under Section 175.10 of the New York State Penal Code and the charge is based on the intent to aid and conceal the commission of another crime. If that crime had been committed by the defendant, it would have to be included. However since it was committed by someone else, it is not required. Only the charges against the defendant would be required. However the Statement of Facts, unsealed in court at the same time does allude to who committed the crime used for the enhancement. That was Cohen.

Now I'm sure the FDOTUS team will raise the issue as part of their Motion to Dismiss. The Prosecution will get to file a rebuttal motion. Then we will see the argument for and against in court and not filtered through talking heads on TV.

WW

Could it get more vague than this?

and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof

.

 

[SeaMajor7]

The underlying crime is noted in the Statement of Facts, Cohen's conviction.

WW

Oh my, that Cohen guy is in trouble....

 

[OKTexas]

No, hints of a crime are not covered by the 6th amendment.

Reading is fundamental:

Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well that was a bunch of irrelevant information.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Reading is fundamental:

Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

.

He was informed of the nature and cause of the action.

The indictment clearly spells out that Trump was indicted under Section 175.10 of the New York State Penal Code, Falsification of Business Records in the First Degree (a felony).

The underlying associated crime was indicated in the Statement of Facts filed and unsealed by the court at the same time as the charging indictment document.

The prosecution will be turning over all evidence to support that charge (including incriminating and exculpatory) to the Defense who can then make motions.

The prosecution is not required to layout their entire legal strategy at the indictment/arraignment stage, they only have to provide the evidence after indictment (EDIT: Not including presenting evidence to the Grand Jury to obtain the indictment.)

WW

 

[Flopper]

Reading is fundamental:

Amendment 6 - Right to Speedy Trial, Confrontation of Witnesses
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

In regard to the other criminal activity, it clearly set out in
STATEMENT OF FACTS IND-71543-23
Other information will of course be release in discovery. Bragg is certainly aware of the defendant's 6th amendment protections

 

[skye]

Cohen is a thug and Stormy is a hooker..... this is laughable and there is NO case at all.