Who is politicizing trump's trial?

[OKTexas]

Covering up Cohen's illegal campaign contribution as "legal services."

It was payment to an attorney for executing an NDA. Nothing illegal about that. Hell congress and others had staff attorneys and a taxpayer funded slush fund for that exact same function. When will they be prosecuted?

.

 

[d0gbreath]

How's that?

It kept the voters from knowing that DJ was boinking a porn star, while his wife was home with their newborn son, during the 2016 campaigns.

 

[Frankenstein]

Let's be clear, DeNiro was speaking on behalf of the Biden campaign.

Dezero is neck deep in the child sex industry you know why he is supporting Briben

 

[OKTexas]

none of this is appropriate at the court house.

It's jury tampering by the xiden campaign.

.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

And trump's red tie brigade is a sign of winning?

No, it's just a sign of stupidity and their typical cult behavior. Not the same thing. It isn't Trump who's running to defend his seat. It's Biden and his campaign would have no need to send movie stars to give speeches outside a courthouse regarding a trial that has nothing do with him if he felt he were comfortably heading into another term. You can believe whatever you want, but that's the reality of it. If you people are dismissive of what's going on out there the same way you were in 2016 I hope you're prepared to get embarrassed again.

 

[ThisIsMe]

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.


It's literally on every page.

intent to commit what crime? The indictment never says.

Also, that text is not accurate because I think the law has a part in there about intent to defraud

Also:

Generally, Rule 7(c)(1) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure requires an indictment to provide "a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged."

First, the indictment standing alone must contain the elements of the offense intended to be charged, and it must be sufficient to apprise the accused of the nature of the offense.

971. Sufficiency of Indictment—Generally

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Does it sound like the indictment contained all the essential facts of the crime charged? No, it leaves out all the supporting information to explain how Bragg came to his charge.

The indictment and information must contain sufficient detail to adequately apprise the defendant of the nature of the charges against him. The drafter must afford the defendant not only a document that contains all of the elements of the offense, whether or not such elements appear in the statute, but one that is sufficiently descriptive to permit the defendant to prepare a defense, and to invoke the double jeopardy provision of the Fifth Amendment,

Sounds like Bragg was supposed to have included all of the relevant facts IN the indictment.

Also, I just realized…even the statement of facts doesn’t ever list a crime. He tells a story about catch and kill and payments to Daniels, but at no time does he ever list the criminal statute violated. His indictment say he intended to conceal a crime, but the actual criminal statute he supposedly violated is never cited.

So, hush money payments are not illegal, catch and kill stories are not illegal, ndas are not illegal. If Bragg is alleging that trump violated campaign finance laws, he never specified what law was broke.

It’s like he’s trying to be very vague, hoping that the people won’t look further than the surface.

 

[SeaMajor7]

It kept the voters from knowing that DJ was boinking a porn star, while his wife was home with their newborn son, during the 2016 campaigns.

The payment he's being charged for was made in 2017, Rover.

 

[Rawley]

It kept the voters from knowing that DJ was boinking a porn star, while his wife was home with their newborn son, during the 2016 campaigns.

Got it. Even though it allegedly happened ten years earlier?

Is that really the standard you want for our elective process? Send a candidate to prison if he had an affair ten year prior, but didn't tell the public? How about if she had a problem with alcohol a decade ago, but didn't tell the public? Prison?

 

[BS Filter]

Just charging Trump in such a stupid case that the former DA wouldn't even bring, shows how politicized it is.

It also shows how corrupt and desperate the demonrat party is.

 

[d0gbreath]

The payment he's being charged for was made in 2017, Rover.

That when he payed the fixer back.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Robert DeNiro And two of the cops who were attacked at the insurrection spoke before a crowd of reporters in front of the courthouse where trump's trial is being held. Fox and the rest of right-wing media went apoplectic complaining that Biden was politicizing the trial. Perhaps they didn't notice that trump regularly makes political statements outside his trial every day. Trump has also had a string of VP hopefuls and family members who openly made political statements admitting they were there to emphasize trump's political standing.

MSN

Attacked. Haahhahahaa!
Please oh please keep letting DuhhhhhhNero speak for Flackalacapaca *Joe and the dems.

 

[BS Filter]

Got it. Even though it allegedly happened ten years earlier?

Is that really the standard you want for our elective process? Send a candidate to prison if he had an affair ten year prior, but didn't tell the public? How about if she had a problem with alcohol a decade ago, but didn't tell the public? Prison?

Only if it's their political opponent. The double standard and hypocrisy is glaring. They don't care. they're more desperate than a 50 year old hooker.

 

[SeaMajor7]

That when he payed the fixer back.

Yeah, in 2017.
AFTER THE ELECTION

 

[Rawley]

intent to commit what crime? The indictment never says.

Also, that text is not accurate because I think the law has a part in there about intent to defraud

Also:

971. Sufficiency of Indictment—Generally

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

www.justice.gov

Does it sound like the indictment contained all the essential facts of the crime charged? No, it leaves out all the supporting information to explain how Bragg came to his charge.



Sounds like Bragg was supposed to have included all of the relevant facts IN the indictment

Judge Merchan ruled Bragg didn't.

 

[d0gbreath]

Got it. Even though it allegedly happened ten years earlier?

Is that really the standard you want for our elective process? Send a candidate to prison if he had an affair ten year prior, but didn't tell the public? How about if she had a problem with alcohol a decade ago, but didn't tell the public? Prison?

If Nixon was still alive he'd be the first one to tell you that's it's not what you've done, but that you got caught doing the cover up.

 

[Faun]

I realize the jury does not have to convict Trump of any specific underlying crime, but doesn't it have to find one exists in order to convict?

Yes.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

Covering up Cohen's illegal campaign contribution as "legal services."

You’re behind on the leftist talking points. It’s now business records.

 

[IDIOCRACY]

There sure was. How long are you planning on beating that "peaceful protest" dead horse?

You're a fool. You need an insurrection like a baby needs a pacifier. There WAS NO INSURRECTION. Not a single soul has been charged for it.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

it was politicized the day trump gave the order to "pay her."

Nope. NDAs are legal. You should use the google machine and look up how many democrats have used them.

 

[progressive hunter]