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

[para bellum]

His intent was to influence voters. That's on the underlying charge. Falsifying records was an intent to conceal that underlying crime. That was intent to defraud the state.

Bragg is charging Trump with a crime he didn't commit, and elevating it to a felony by claiming he broke another law that doesn't apply to federal elections...

Trump absolutely committed that crime by listing an illegal campaign contribution as "legal services."

That is mumbo-jumbo. The falsification charge requires an intent to defraud. What State agency was frustrated in their duty to enforce the law?

If Trump was the one that paid the NDA, then it wasn't a contribution to his campaign.

The conspiracy to promote an election by unlawful means only applies to State elections. If unlawful means are used to influence a Federal election, it is the Federal Gov't's jurisdiction to adjudicate.

 

[Faun]

No, the enhancement is a conspiracy to promote an election using unlawful means, and Trump was never convicted for Cohen's violation.

And the conspiracy law is not applicable to a federal election.

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

 

[Faun]

So what? That was Cohen's crime, not Trump's.

Guilt by association is not how it works in this country.

The conspiracy law does not apply to federal elections. The federal preemption is absolute. The only laws a State can pass with respect to a federal election are the "times, places, and manner" of the election.

Which Trump conspired with Cohen to commit.

 

[para bellum]

Nope. It's not about Trump breaking campaign finance laws. He's not charged with that. That's not the subject of thd underlying charge.

Lol. You guys keep bouncing around on the underlying crime. You are saying the unlawful means were campaign finance violations, which Trump was never charged with...

 

[para bellum]

Which Trump conspired with Cohen to commit.

Nope. That was never the intent of "capture and kill". Cohen and Pecker always had the expectation that Trump would pay for those NDA's. That is even documented in Cohen's plea deal.

The repayment schedule was agreed upon between Weisselberg and Cohen, and the recording as "legal expenses" was done without any consultation with Trump. Trump was POTUS, and not running the Trump organization at that time. His role was to sign the checks.

 

[Faun]

That is mumbo-jumbo. The falsification charge requires an intent to defraud. What State agency was frustrated in their duty to enforce the law?

If Trump was the one that paid the NDA, then it wasn't a contribution to his campaign.

The conspiracy to promote an election by unlawful means only applies to State elections. If unlawful means are used to influence a Federal election, it is the Federal Gov't's jurisdiction to adjudicate.

His intent was to conceal the payments to porn stars. Which he did for political gain.

And you're right that it was legal for Trump to pay them. But he didn't. Pecker and Cohen paid them. That made it illegal. Then Trump tried concealing that by reporting it as a "legal service" when it was actually a campaign contribution.

 

[Dante]

Lol. You guys keep bouncing around on the underlying crime. You are saying the unlawful means were campaign finance violations, which Trump was never charged with...

Nope. You keep ignoring things. As usual.

 

[Faun]

Lol. You guys keep bouncing around on the underlying crime. You are saying the unlawful means were campaign finance violations, which Trump was never charged with...

Holy fuck.

How many times need I tell you Trump was not charged with that. That is not the underlying charge. For the 20,000th time, Cohen broke the law. Trump was involved with that. That's the conspiracy element of the law. Cohen breaking the law was the "unlawful means" element of the law.

 

[Faun]

Nope. That was never the intent of "capture and kill". Cohen and Pecker always had the expectation that Trump would pay for those NDA's. That is even documented in Cohen's plea deal.

The repayment schedule was agreed upon between Weisselberg and Cohen, and the recording as "legal expenses" was done without any consultation with Trump. Trump was POTUS, and not running the Trump organization at that time. His role was to sign the checks.

Reimbursement doesn't convert it into a non-crime. You should already know that as evidenced by Cohen being charged, convicted & incarcerated over it, among other crimes.

 

[Rigby5]

The people, voters.

Wrong.
The people or voters do NOT have a right to invade Trumps personal life and know about what Stormy was claiming.
That is known as "kiss and tell", which is highly unethical, and when money is involved, illegal for Stormy, not illegal for Trump.

 

[para bellum]

Holy fuck.

How many times need I tell you Trump was not charged with that. That is not the underlying charge. For the 20,000th time, Cohen broke the law. Trump was involved with that. That's the conspiracy element of the law. Cohen breaking the law was the "unlawful means" element of the law.

So you are back to guilt by association.

This is tiresome.

 

[Dante]

Wrong.
The people or voters do NOT have a right to invade Trumps personal life and know about what Stormy was claiming.
That is known as "kiss and tell", which is highly unethical, and when money is involved, illegal for Stormy, not illegal for Trump.

No one is claiming -- a right to invade Trumps personal life and know about what Stormy was claiming -- that. You people keep lying through omission, lying because of the pressures of being in a cult, and conflating things in order to build up straw men.

 

[Dante]

So you are back to guilt by association.

This is tiresome.

Works fine for you people when discussing others.

 

[Rigby5]

Stop asking stupid qurstions. It has been explained. So if you don't want to believe what was explained, that is your problem.

Sorry, but no it has not been "explained".
The law is clear, that paying hush money is legal, but demanding it is not.
Same with the loan application. The applicant is not liable for a valuation, but the bank is required by law to hire an independent appraiser.
Same with classified docs. Presidents are not only exempt specifically, but also are authorized to give permanent copies to anyone they want, including themselves.
Same with fake electors, which can not exist. Electors act in a public session of the state legislature, so can't be fake or act contrary to the election results everyone already knows.

 

[para bellum]

Reimbursement doesn't convert it into a non-crime. You should already know that as evidenced by Cohen being charged, convicted & incarcerated over it, among other crimes.

"Intent to do something illegal" means a "culpable mental state". If the intent was always to reimburse, there is no culpable mental state to support a criminal conspiracy to aid Cohen in campaign finance violations.

 

[otto105]

The New York law Trump is on trial for violating:

View attachment 943987

https://nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/175/175.10.pdf

View attachment 943988

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/21/21-1158/236829/20220902124059970_3835_001.pdf

Well? Who did Trump specifically intend to deceive and deprive when he allegedly called money he paid his lawyer "legal fees?" Who was the "another?"

The law in NY.

 

[Faun]

So you are back to guilt by association.

This is tiresome.

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

 

[Rigby5]

No one is claiming -- a right to invade Trumps personal life and know about what Stormy was claiming -- that. You people keep lying through omission, lying because of the pressures of being in a cult, and conflating things in order to build up straw men.

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.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

That is mumbo-jumbo. The falsification charge requires an intent to defraud. What State agency was frustrated in their duty to enforce the law?

If Trump was the one that paid the NDA, then it wasn't a contribution to his campaign.

The conspiracy to promote an election by unlawful means only applies to State elections. If unlawful means are used to influence a Federal election, it is the Federal Gov't's jurisdiction to adjudicate.

It applies to campaign finance laws everywhere, Sam.

 

[para bellum]

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

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.