Who Did Trump Intend to Defraud when he Allegedly Falsified Business Records?

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Yes. Trump's "involvement" was limited to approving the NDA, and signing the checks. Neither of which are crimes.

There was never an expectation that it would come out of Cohen's own pocket. That was Cohen's own fucked-up idea.

Cohen pled to the charge to avoid a 30+ year prison sentence.

The testimony and documents chase support the Prosecution and damns the Donald.

 

[Rigby5]

The law in NY.

That law clearly does not apply and was not violated.
Fraud is when you harm someone by taking their money through misrepresentation.
Trump did not take anyone's money, but instead was forced by extortion to give his own money to someone who did not earn or deserve it.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Since Trump has the right to keep his personal life secret, then he can label the payments anyway he wants.
And obviously, hush money is a valid tax write off for ANY celebrity.

Business documents?

Have you been paying attention? Who did the prosecution call on -- people who worked at Trump Tower. Why? Business records.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Yes. Trump's "involvement" was limited to approving the NDA, and signing the checks. Neither of which are crimes.

There was never an expectation that it would come out of Cohen's own pocket. That was Cohen's own fucked-up idea.

Cohen pled to the charge to avoid a 30+ year prison sentence.

Nope.

Pay attention to court filings, testimony...

 

[para bellum]

It applies to campaign finance laws everywhere, Sam.

NY Election Law 17-152 is not not applicable to federal elections, because it is a State election law and preempted by 52 USC 30143.

 

[para bellum]

The testimony and documents chase support the Prosecution and damns the Donald.

 

[Rigby5]

By "association," you mean involved with the illegal payment.

Payments are never illegal.
It is always demanding payments that are illegal.

The only time payments are associated with a crime is when they are to induce someone else to violate the law, like when you pay a hit man to murder someone.
There was no crime paid for by Trump.
He was just legally paying for his privacy.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Yeah you are confused yet again.

 

[Rigby5]

Yes. Trump's "involvement" was limited to approving the NDA, and signing the checks. Neither of which are crimes.

There was never an expectation that it would come out of Cohen's own pocket. That was Cohen's own fucked-up idea.

Cohen pled to the charge to avoid a 30+ year prison sentence.

Cohen appears to be a moron, since he actually committed no crime either.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

NY Election Law 17-152 is not not applicable to federal elections, because it is a State election law and preempted by 52 USC 30143.

Show us in state law that it is not a crime. You can't, because it is.

 

[Rigby5]

The testimony and documents chase support the Prosecution and damns the Donald.

Like what?
Paying hush money is NOT at all covered by the statutes the prosecutor claims.

 

[Rigby5]

Show us in state law that it is not a crime. You can't, because it is.

Easily done.
The statute the prosecution is using is over "fraud".
Fraud is when you deceive someone to take money from them you do not deserve or have earned.
But Trump PAID money and did not "take" money, so there is no possible "fraud".

 

[Rigby5]

The unlawful means was conspiring to make an illegal campaign contribution.

Wrong.
Whether or not the hush money was useful to the campaign or not, it is legal because Donald's own money that reimbursed Cohen.
It is also a valid tax write off.

The idea you can charge the victim of blackmail, is totally and completely absurd.

 

[Rigby5]

It applies to campaign finance laws everywhere, Sam.

Wrong.
State laws only apply to state elections since they have no jurisdiction over federal elections that are regulated by federal laws, superseding state laws.

But the state laws clearly do not at all prevent any candidate from paying hush money and keeping it secret.

 

[para bellum]

Of course the enhancement based on committing federal crimes applies. If someone told you different (and yes I saw your previous post), then don't believe them. If what you posted was true, the defense would have filed the monition pre-trial and we wouldn't be here today.

Simple question.

Could Trump, Cohen, and Pecker have been charged with violating New York Election Law 17-152?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Simple question.

Could Trump, Cohen, and Pecker have been charged with violating New York Election Law 17-152?

Immaterial, overruled, and sit down. It does not apply now.

 

[para bellum]

Immaterial, overruled, and sit down. It does not apply now.

LMAO. You know the answer is no.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

LMAO. You know the answer is no.

The answer is that it does not matter. Prosecution made the choice, and it is going to pay off for them at jury decision and on appeal.

 

[Rigby5]

Business documents?

Have you been paying attention? Who did the prosecution call on -- people who worked at Trump Tower. Why? Business records.

Obviously paying hush money is only a "business record" because he is a celebrity who needs to keep up his public image.
So this has nothing to do with Trump Tower, and it was wrong to call anyone who worked there.

Clearly the goal of the election campaign was to gain the half million salary, so then publicity toward that goal is a perfectly legal business expanse.
You do not have to itemize the exact native of any expenditure, as long as it is put in the correct column. And it was. The hush money is an obviously appropriate expenditure for this political business venture.

 

[Rigby5]

The answer is that it does not matter. Prosecution made the choice, and it is going to pay off for them at jury decision and on appeal.

Prosecution is violating the law by illegally trying to defame Trump and infringe on the election rights of the entire country.
Prosecution has to know there is no legal authority that could make hush money illegal in any way, (except to demand it).