Oh hell...they have proof Trump paid Stormy $850,000

[NavigatorII]

? How is a for profit corp writing a check for one of its executives to a lawyer a diversion of campaign funds?

This assclown DA can't answer you.

 

[EvilWayz]

? How is a for profit corp writing a check for one of its executives to a lawyer a diversion of campaign funds?

Did you miss the word alleged?

The problem is Cohen testified that he sent funds to both women and was charged with and pled guilty to campaign fund violation.

So Bragg seems to think he can charge Trump for that because he was Trumps lawyer. When the Feds wouldn't touch it.

I would be very surprised if he has jurisdiction.

 

[NavigatorII]

Did you miss the word alleged?

The problem is Cohen testified that he sent funds to both women and was charged with and pled guilty to campaign fund violation.

So Bragg seems to think he can charge Trump for that because he was Trumps lawyer. When the Feds wouldn't touch it.

I would be very surprised if he has jurisdiction.

What is weird is that that stupid SOB DA hasn't really publicized the EXACT charges the knucklehead has before the grand jury. The House committee is demanding that they see it and he appear before them. This is all political Kabuki theater to smear Trump. My guess is they don't have diddly of a real legal case. Otherwise Mueller and Garland would have already had their fingers in it.

 

[EvilWayz]

What is weird is that that stupid SOB DA hasn't really publicized the EXACT charges the knucklehead has before the grand jury. The House committee is demanding that they see it and he appear before them. This is all political Kabuki theater to smear Trump. My guess is they don't have diddly of a real legal case. Otherwise Mueller and Garland would have already had their fingers in it.

I'm willing to wait for what the grand jury returns but I suspect this is a delicious nothing burger.

 

[DCandtheUTBand]

Did you miss the word alleged?

The problem is Cohen testified that he sent funds to both women and was charged with and pled guilty to campaign fund violation.

So Bragg seems to think he can charge Trump for that because he was Trumps lawyer. When the Feds wouldn't touch it.

I would be very surprised if he has jurisdiction.

no I saw it but just dont understand it ...as for Cohen the tv legal eagles said it was a non crime and thought he should not have plead guilty...probably part of deal for reduced sentence. I think they let the cab medallion charges drop which I think would have had a hefty sentence.

I think the reason the original investigation was dropped,if I remember, was that if the payoff was an action that could/would happen normally outside of a campaign then the action could not be said to be because of the campaign.

High profile men are constantly settling with accusers to keep their name out of the paper. So a common practice would not cross the threshold.

That is if I remember correctly.

 

[NavigatorII]

no I saw it but just dont understand it ...as for Cohen the tv legal eagles said it was a non crime and thought he should not have plead guilty...probably part of deal for reduced sentence. I think they let the cab medallion charges drop which I think would have had a hefty sentence.

I think the reason the original investigation was dropped,if I remember, was that if the payoff was an action that could/would happen normally outside of a campaign then the action could not be said to be because of the campaign.

High profile men are constantly settling with accusers to keep their name out of the paper. So a common practice would not cross the threshold.

That is if I remember correctly.

Sounds like they set the stage to make it look worse than it was. Like you say, a faux plea deal to get real crimes dropped. I suppose you can plea guilty to making a sandwich if they allow you to?

 

[EvilWayz]

no I saw it but just dont understand it ...as for Cohen the tv legal eagles said it was a non crime and thought he should not have plead guilty...probably part of deal for reduced sentence. I think they let the cab medallion charges drop which I think would have had a hefty sentence.

I think the reason the original investigation was dropped,if I remember, was that if the payoff was an action that could/would happen normally outside of a campaign then the action could not be said to be because of the campaign.

High profile men are constantly settling with accusers to keep their name out of the paper. So a common practice would not cross the threshold.

That is if I remember correctly.

If Cohen routed funds to a non campaign purpose, I e a lump sum to an agent or lawyer it doesn't matter why. It's not that hard to write off a gala dinner or a cruise if you annotate the reason and the expense. They monitor campaign funds to keep them from being used as bribes, or hush money.


I'm pretty sure Cohen named Trump because he was in deep shit.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

Sounds like they set the stage to make it look worse than it was. Like you say, a faux plea deal to get real crimes dropped. I suppose you can plea guilty to making a sandwich if they allow you to?

They don't have a case. This is about pissing off Trump and fundraising.

The ONLY way they could POSSIBLY make this work would be if:

1 - Trump had been a shitty President. And if he had skirted the law the entire time, so many people believed he could have done something like this.

2 - Hiden was a model president. With no stench of corruption, his family was lily white, Camelot 2.0.


Instead, Trump was an amazing President that most of America misses, while Hiden and his entire family is a crime scene. So they ignore all the obvious crimes the Hiden Crime Family has committed, then literally invent one to get Trump on.

They know it won't work. Just like everything they try to push. Its for fundraising.

Eventually, they are gonna go too far and push Americans into a reaction that they aren't ready for. Hope this isn't that time.

 

[RayGravesGhost]

They don't have a case. This is about pissing off Trump and fundraising.

The ONLY way they could POSSIBLY make this work would be if:

1 - Trump had been a shitty President. And if he had skirted the law the entire time, so many people believed he could have done something like this.

Box checked

2 - Hiden was a model president. With no stench of corruption, his family was lily white, Camelot 2.0.

Boxed checked.
Even though its actually an irrelevant point since trump is responsible for his actions ...not Biden

Instead, Trump was an amazing President that most of America misses, while Hiden and his entire family is a crime scene. So they ignore all the obvious crimes the Hiden Crime Family has committed, then literally invent one to get Trump on.

trump "created" the crime in question...and then successfully prosecuted his former lawyer on his creation

trump has no one to blame for this but himself

They know it won't work. Just like everything they try to push. Its for fundraising.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-using-his-looming-indictment-fundraise-truth-social-2023-3

Trump is using the news of his looming indictment to fundraise on Truth Social, asking supporters to help 'take back our Country'​

Katie Balevic
Mar 18, 2023, 1:31 PM

Eventually, they are gonna go too far and push Americans into a reaction that they aren't ready for. Hope this isn't that time.

You sound skeered... 😂

 

[Capt Ron 1]

They don't have a case. This is about pissing off Trump and fundraising.

The ONLY way they could POSSIBLY make this work would be if:

1 - Trump had been a shitty President. And if he had skirted the law the entire time, so many people believed he could have done something like this.

2 - Hiden was a model president. With no stench of corruption, his family was lily white, Camelot 2.0.


Instead, Trump was an amazing President that most of America misses, while Hiden and his entire family is a crime scene. So they ignore all the obvious crimes the Hiden Crime Family has committed, then literally invent one to get Trump on.

They know it won't work. Just like everything they try to push. Its for fundraising.

Eventually, they are gonna go too far and push Americans into a reaction that they aren't ready for. Hope this isn't that time.

I am already there.....

 

[BCSpell]

If Cohen routed funds to a non campaign purpose, I e a lump sum to an agent or lawyer it doesn't matter why. It's not that hard to write off a gala dinner or a cruise if you annotate the reason and the expense. They monitor campaign funds to keep them from being used as bribes, or hush money.


I'm pretty sure Cohen named Trump because he was in deep shit.

I do not believe they are saying that he used campaign funds. I thought they said he paid with personal/company $ BUT, the argument I believe the DA is trying to make is that since he was running for office, paying for someone to NOT put out there something that might hurt his campaign, the payment can be seen as an illegal campaign donation, even though the money never went to the campaign.

 

[EvilWayz]

I do not believe they are saying that he used campaign funds. I thought they said he paid with personal/company $ BUT, the argument I believe the DA is trying to make is that since he was running for office, paying for someone to NOT put out there something that might hurt his campaign, the payment can be seen as an illegal campaign donation, even though the money never went to the campaign.

Paying someone to stfu is completely legal.

Paying off people that can hurt your campaign, also legal.

Paying off people with campaign funds, illegal.

I'd like to know how an illegal donation isn't a violation of federal campaign law, but somehow is a misdemeanor in New York.

 

[GhostOfMatchesMalone]

I do not believe they are saying that he used campaign funds. I thought they said he paid with personal/company $ BUT, the argument I believe the DA is trying to make is that since he was running for office, paying for someone to NOT put out there something that might hurt his campaign, the payment can be seen as an illegal campaign donation, even though the money never went to the campaign.

Don't feel bad, they don't know what they are saying either.

 

[RayGravesGhost]

I do not believe they are saying that he used campaign funds. I thought they said he paid with personal/company $ BUT, the argument I believe the DA is trying to make is that since he was running for office, paying for someone to NOT put out there something that might hurt his campaign, the payment can be seen as an illegal campaign donation, even though the money never went to the campaign.

Its a in-kind benefit

But the trumpers here think George Santos' campaign financing is legally OK too

 

[Capt Ron 1]

Paying someone to stfu is completely legal.

Paying off people that can hurt your campaign, also legal.

Paying off people with campaign funds, illegal.

I'd like to know how an illegal donation isn't a violation of federal campaign law, but somehow is a misdemeanor in New York.

The media..including FNC is using the term "hush money" when in FACT...it is called a NDA. (non disclosure agreement) Even FNC is trying to hurt Trump. ANYONE but Trump they would be calling it a NDA.

 

[BCSpell]

Don't feel bad, they don't know what they are saying either.

And the truly funny part for her if you want to call it, sad part is the information he was paying to keep quiet was got out anyways and didn’t hurt his election as he won so I think that would ruin the argument that paying her to be quiet would be a campaign donation when the information got out anyways, and it didn’t hurt him

 

[EvilWayz]

The media..including FNC is using the term "hush money" when in FACT...it is called a NDA. (non disclosure agreement) Even FNC is trying to hurt Trump. ANYONE but Trump they would be calling it a NDA.

If someone pays you to stfu and you sign a contract to that effect, it's de facto hush money. It's legal but it's still "don't tell anyone what you saw here or we'll sue. " Hush money is generally "here's ten grand, stfu and if you don't we'll break your legs. " Not so legal.

 

[Capt Ron 1]

If someone pays you to stfu and you sign a contract to that effect, it's de facto hush money. It's legal but it's still "don't tell anyone what you saw here or we'll sue. " Hush money is generally "here's ten grand, stfu and if you don't we'll break your legs. " Not so legal.

Well when Rittenhouse was paid for his lawsuit..it was not "hush money"it was a NDA. An NDA is a contract to keep privacy. Yes, it is hush money...but everyone is trying to make it sound as bad as they can. Personally, who Trump F**** has no bearing with me.

 

[NavigatorII]

I do not believe they are saying that he used campaign funds. I thought they said he paid with personal/company $ BUT, the argument I believe the DA is trying to make is that since he was running for office, paying for someone to NOT put out there something that might hurt his campaign, the payment can be seen as an illegal campaign donation, even though the money never went to the campaign.

If Gay Ray agrees with you, you know your premise is effed as effed can get. 😂

 

[BamaFan1137]

They don't have a case. This is about pissing off Trump and fundraising.

The ONLY way they could POSSIBLY make this work would be if:

1 - Trump had been a shitty President. And if he had skirted the law the entire time, so many people believed he could have done something like this.

2 - Hiden was a model president. With no stench of corruption, his family was lily white, Camelot 2.0.


Instead, Trump was an amazing President that most of America misses, while Hiden and his entire family is a crime scene. So they ignore all the obvious crimes the Hiden Crime Family has committed, then literally invent one to get Trump on.

They know it won't work. Just like everything they try to push. Its for fundraising.

Eventually, they are gonna go too far and push Americans into a reaction that they aren't ready for. Hope this isn't that time.

Also possible that this is about conditioning the American public...normalizing the act of charging a former POTUS and your political rivals.

The left has always loved incrementalism.

 

[NavigatorII]

Also possible that this is about conditioning the American public...normalizing the act of charging a former POTUS and your political rivals.

The left has always loved incrementalism.

The same way they promote queerdom and trannyism. It started out with, just leave us be in peace. Now it's , "we want your children to participate in our evil and will take you to court to do so."

 

[RayGravesGhost]

If Gay Ray agrees with you, you know your premise is effed as effed can get. 😂

 

[RayGravesGhost]

Also possible that this is about conditioning the American public...normalizing the act of charging a former POTUS and your political rivals.

The left has always loved incrementalism.

bama gets incrementally more stupid everyday... 🤣


https://www.justsecurity.org/85605/survey-of-past-new-york-felony-prosecutions-for-falsifying-business-records/
Survey of Past New York Felony Prosecutions for Falsifying Business Records


A core crime that the Manhattan District Attorney will likely include in an indictment of former President Donald Trump is “falsifying business records in the first degree,” a felony under New York State law (N.Y. Penal Code § 175.10). Prosecutors and indeed all of us are compelled by the rule of law to consider how such a charge compares to past prosecutions. Are like cases being treated alike?

Here it appears they are. Prosecution of falsifying business records in the first degree is commonplace and has been used by New York district attorneys’ offices to hold to account a breadth of criminal behavior from the more petty and simple to the more serious and highly organized. We reach this conclusion after surveying the past decade and a half of criminal cases across all the New York district attorneys’ offices.

The Table below provides full details of many examples of cases we identified in the survey. A sample of representative precedents includes:

• The People of the State of New York v. Josue Aguilar Dubon, AKA Saady Dubon, AKA Alejandro Ortiz (October 2022) — Bronx business owner indicted for failing to report over $1 million in income, avoiding paying $60,000 in taxes.
• The People of the State of New York v. Scott Kirtland (February 2022) — Insurance broker indicted for allegedly creating/filing fraudulent certificates of liability insurance to further scheme to defraud.
• The People of the State of New York v. James Garner (November 2021) — Mental health therapy aide indicted for allegedly defrauding over $35,000 in workers’ compensation benefits.
• The People of the State of New York v. Jose Palmer (November 2016) — Pleaded guilty to petit larceny for unemployment benefits fraud of over $3,000, having initially been indicted for grand larceny and falsifying business records in the first degree.
• The People of the State of New York v. Jason Holley (November 2016) — Convicted by jury of falsifying business records in the first degree but acquitted of the predicate crime, insurance fraud.
• The People of the State of New York v. Christina Murray (May 2015) & People v. Terrel Murray (May 2014) — Married couple convicted of house fire insurance claim, attempting to recover the cash value of various items of property that were ostensibly lost in the fire.
• The People of the State of New York v. Barbara A. Freeland (June 2013) — Convicted for falsely claiming on a food stamps application that a young adult lived with her.
• The People of the State of New York v. Maria F. Ramirez (August 2010) — Convicted for returning unpurchased items to a store in exchange for store credit, thus causing a false entry in a business record of an enterprise, and using the store credit to purchase additional items one day.

Before turning to the full Table listing these and many other cases, we offer a brief description of the applicable law.

In New York, the criminal law on falsifying business records is found at Article 175 of New York’s penal code. The crime of falsifying business records can be committed in the second degree, which is a class A misdemeanor (N.Y. Penal Code § 175.05), or in the first degree, which is a class E felony (N.Y. Penal Code § 175.10).

An individual is “guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree when, with intent to defraud, he:

1. makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise; or
2. alters, erases, obliterates, deletes, removes or destroys a true entry in the business records of an enterprise; or
3. omits to make a true entry in the business records of an enterprise in violation of a duty to do so which he knows to be imposed upon him by law or by the nature of his position; or
4. prevents the making of a true entry or causes the omission thereof in the business records of an enterprise.” N.Y. Penal Code § 175.05

An individual “is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.” N.Y. Penal Code § 175.10.

For Trump to be prosecuted for felony violation of falsifying business records, the statute requires the DA to prove not only that Trump is guilty of falsifying business records (a misdemeanor), but that he did so with the intent to commit “another crime,” or aiding or concealing the commission of “another crime.”

The Table of dozens of cases is provided in the 24-page Scribd file below as well as a separate online PDF.