NY - Ex-President Donald Trump, charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023, Trial 25 Mar 2024 #2

[MyBelle]

Something else to remember is the former Manhattan DA Cy Vance is claiming he was told to stand down when he was the one looking into these allegations. This was during Trump's presidency when Sessions, then Bill Barr was in charge of the DoJ. The Federal SDNY office told his office to stand down pursuing the investigation. His impression was that they were implying they were going to pursue the investigation further and push for Federal charges. However, it appears he was mistaken.

Ex-Manhattan DA finally reveals why Trump wasn’t charged earlier in hush money case







JMO & wild speculations: but to me it feels suspiciously like there was also a larger 'catch and kill' scheme going on with Barr and the DoJ regarding Trump's numerous alleged crimes.

My guess is he was brought on as Session's replacement USAG for a very good reason. To be the fixer for Trump's ongoing criminal enterprise.

If you look at his conduct as USAG, esp. regarding Ukraine phone scandal and Mueller special investigation, I think it's pretty clear what his role was under Trump. And it certainly wasn't safeguarding the rule of law or protecting truth & justice. Just google William Barr and you will see all the articles about his history of helping US Presidents & officials escape accountability (all the way back to Iran Contra).

I'm bringing this all up to help give more context to why these charges and this investigation were possibly not as aggressively pursued between 2016 - 2020 as they should have been. Why it took so long to finally be ready to go ahead with a grand jury investigation from 2022.

All MOO.

BBM. I think you have nailed it! I bet Barr is called to testify. No wonder he has been in the media trashing this indictment.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think witness David Pecker will testify about his knowledge and intent.

Yes, I agree.

"AMI and its executives Pecker and Dylan Howard reached non-prosecution agreements and testified with immunity before the federal grand jury.
It isn’t clear what arrangement Pecker has with the New York DA’s office, but under certain non-prosecution agreements the obligation can continue to other investigations."

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/11/25/politics/national-enquirer-ami-david-pecker-prosecutors/index.html

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

I believe it's 2 years for misdemeanors and 5 years for felonies. But there is an exception, which is what may be in play here:



Bolded by me.

Source: Statute of Limitations for Crimes in New York

Since DJT has been continuously living outside of NY for many years (in Washington DC and Florida), the clock is basically stopped during those periods.

It’s not like they didn’t know where he was.

 

[tara83]

It’s not like they didn’t know where he was.

People complained he shouldn't be charged when President,now it's shouldn't be charged because he's running and now just shouldn't be charged.

 

[Emma Peel]

I'm looking through the transcript of Bragg's press conference, and to my reasoning, he is pretty much spelling out what the underlying covered up/concealed crimes are - which upgrade the business fraud charges.

Read for yourself:

Manhattan DA outlines charges against Trump

I'll highlight what I think are the crimes @RANCH is asking for clarity on (snipped by me):





So we have a catch and kill scheme that violated NY election law. We have payments that exceeded the federal campaign election contribution cap (illegal contribution in kind). We have AMI committing business fraud as well as part of the same scheme.



Tax fraud.

Take your pick, any/or/all of them would qualify as a crime being covered up by the falsified records. If they can prove knowledge or intent, they've got him.

Thank you.
I'm trying to follow by drilling down to the relevant election law code NYS:

Under New York election law, conspiring to promote a candidacy by unlawful means is a felony offense: section 17-142 of the New York State Election Law
Legislation

(the DA suggests the Catch and Kill conspiracy is covered by NY Election law. Point 4 from this section seems to be - IMO - the one that applies

§ 17-142. Giving consideration for franchise. Except as allowed by
law, any person who directly or indirectly, by himself or through any
other person:

... point 1, 2, 3 and then ...

4. Makes any gift, loan, promise, offer, procurement or agreement as
aforesaid to, for or with any person to induce such person to procure or
endeavor to procure the election of any person or the vote of any voter
at any election; ... point 5, 6, and then ... for all points 1-6 - "is guilty of a felony".

To clarify - the "underlying crimes" (misdemeanor and/or felony) that elevate the falsified records to felonies ... are not detailed in the indictment. Below, just noodling what these underlying items might be. MOO



Crime 1:
NY Election law (underlying felony)

From DA at presser: "The scheme violated New York election law, which makes it a crime to conspire to promote a candidacy by unlawful means."

- quote from the DA's presser referencing the "catch and kill" scheme.

Crime 2:
NY Tax Fraud (underlying misdemeanor) - cohen checks and related tax reporting)

Crime 3:
Falsified Records @ AMI (underlying misdemeanor)

Counts from Indictment: 34 Trump Co and Cohen falsified records for purpose of hiding the above crimes.

Potential Crime, Not mentioned by DA in presser:
Conspiracy (although DA's presser implies that the catch and kill scheme is a conspiracy and a crime)


MOO

 

[branmuffin]

Bring out the violins!

Sen. Lindsey Graham Fights Back Tears On Fox News, Begs Viewers To Give Trump Money After Arrest: 'I'm Sorry I'm So Upset'

Graham also complained that neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary Clinton were prosecuted despite lying under oath and mishandling government emails, respectively.

radaronline.com

GOP Senator Lindsey Graham fought back tears while begging Fox News viewers to donate money to Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign following his arrest.

During an emotional appearance on Sean Hannity’s eponymous program Hannity on Tuesday night, the South Carolina senator begged viewers to donate money to Trump’s campaign to ensure the United States does “not become a banana republic.”

“We got one last chance here to straighten this out,” Graham said in an appearance on “Hannity,” adding, “2024 is the most important election in my lifetime. America is literally at stake as we know it.”

“Please help President Trump,” he continued. “If you can afford 5 or 10 bucks, if you can’t afford a dollar, fine. Just pray. Make sure you vote as early as you can in your state. Don’t risk anything anymore. Vote as soon as you can. Pray for this country, pray for this president, and if you got any money to give, give it.”

Graham calls for donations following Trump indictment: ‘One last chance here to straighten this out’

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday took to Fox News to call for donations to former President Trump following his arraignment on criminal charges in Manhattan. “We got one last chance here to …

thehill.com

Video:

Sen. Graham begs Fox viewers to donate to Donald Trump

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, pleaded with viewers on Fox News Wednesday to donate small increments to Donald Trump or to pray. The Morning Joe panel shares their thoughts on Graham's pleas.

www.msnbc.com

It kind of reminds me of this Iranian refugee who worked with my husband. He was fascinated and bewildered by TV evangelists. He'd shake his head at the theatrics and yell "God loves you. Send me all your money!"

 

[Emma Peel]

Is this the law that Trump allegedly violated? If so It's a misdemeanor. I thought the secondary crime has to be a felony.

Section 17-152 - Conspiracy to promote or prevent election, N.Y. Elec. Law § 17-152 | Casetext Search + Citator

Does DA Bragg have jurisdiction on Federal election crimes? What tax law was broken? JMO.

I think ...

that in 2016, everything under 17-152 (.1 thru .6) is a felony.

Here's the 2016 law:

2016 New York Laws :: ELN - Election :: Article 17 - (Election) VIOLATIONS OF THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE :: 17-142 - Giving consideration for franchise.


The underlying crimes (hidden by the falsified records that elevate falsified records to a felony from a misdemeanor) can by either misdemeanors or felonies.

 

[Stunned]

I'm very curious. Can someone tell me what church Trump is a member of? Where he attends regularly?


Laying it on thick, Trump declared: “The main thing that our country needs, again, is religion.” He insisted: “I’m fighting, very hard for people of religion, people that believe in God.” Finally, Trump implored his listeners: “I want you to pray really hard, because we have to have a victory in 2024.”

MAGA Pastors: Trump Was Indicted for Your Sins

After his felony indictment, Trump surrounded himself by faith leaders who called his prosecution "demonic"

www.rollingstone.com

The Church of Trump on the first hole at Bedminister. I’m not sure where he attends in West Palm. 2nd hole? IMO

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I'm looking through the transcript of Bragg's press conference, and to my reasoning, he is pretty much spelling out what the underlying covered up/concealed crimes are - which upgrade the business fraud charges.

Read for yourself:

Manhattan DA outlines charges against Trump

I'll highlight what I think are the crimes @RANCH is asking for clarity on (snipped by me):





So we have a catch and kill scheme that violated NY election law. We have payments that exceeded the federal campaign election contribution cap (illegal contribution in kind). We have AMI committing business fraud as well as part of the same scheme.



Tax fraud.

Take your pick, any/or/all of them would qualify as a crime being covered up by the falsified records. If they can prove knowledge or intent, they've got him.

Including multiple underlying felonies probably makes it a stronger case. The defense may be able to get some dismissed, but not all of them. And as I understand it, they don't need to prove or convict on the underlying felony, they just have to show intention to hide the crime. Although intention can be difficult to prove.

 

[CGray123]

Or stop investigating and charging him.

Clear example: all the discussion about his taxes... why doesn't he turn over his taxes? what's he hiding in his taxes? Every other presidential candidate has turned over their taxes, why hasn't he? Finally his taxes are made public and what happened - nothing. All of this only emboldens him. I said it earlier, he would have been gone a long time ago if he weren't constantly being attacked or investigated and with nothing coming of it.

It is strictly a political issue whether a candidate for president releases his returns.

Using US aid to coerce Ukraine was a political issue.

Even impeachment was a political issue.

But, the public should be made aware of these things even if there was no crime.

Now, the man whose appeal to scofflaws is that he "gets away with it" - buying off or outlasting plaintiffs, deflecting criminal consequences to his employees - is finally charged with serious crimes (that's the definition of "felony'). This is a very different situation with a very different set of rules in which his usual tactics may well work against him.

DT is precisely the kind of public scofflaw that should be prioritized for prosecution on these offenses IMO.

 

[MyBelle]

It kind of reminds me of this Iranian refugee who worked with my husband. He was fascinated and bewildered by TV evangelists. He'd shake his head at the theatrics and yell "God loves you. Send me all your money!"

Interesting point. Reminds me of the Jim and Tammy Faye Bakker scandal and how it closely resembles the Trump indictment. Bakker was convicted because of hush money paid to a hooker, cooking the books and cheating a whole lotta folks out of their money.

 

[Stunned]

And what’s Mr.Baker doing these days? Thats right! Still grifting for Jesus or selling end of time necessities! Might be a sale going on since Covid died down!

 

[Emma Peel]

The unsealed indictment against former President Donald Trump on Tuesday laid out an unexpected accusation that bolstered what many legal experts have described as an otherwise risky and novel case: Prosecutors claim he falsified business records in part for a plan to deceive state tax authorities.

But bookkeeping fraud is normally a misdemeanor. For it to rise to a felony, prosecutors must show that a defendant intended to commit, aid or conceal a second crime — raising the question of what other crime Bragg would contend is involved.

On Tuesday, Bragg suggested that prosecutors are putting forward multiple theories for the second crime, potentially giving judges and jurors alternative routes to finding that bookkeeping fraud was a felony.

As was widely predicted, he is pointing toward alleged violations of both federal and state elections laws. By doing so, he is in part plunging forward with a premise that has given pause to even some of Trump’s toughest critics.

As a matter of substance, it can be ambiguous whether paying off a mistress was a campaign expenditure or a personal one.

As a matter of legal process, to cite federal law raises the untested question of whether a state prosecutor can invoke a federal crime even though he lacks jurisdiction to charge that crime himself. Still, Article 175 does not say that the second intended crime must be a state-law offense.

To cite state law raises the question of why New York election rules would apply to a federal presidential election, which is governed by federal laws that generally supersede state laws.

A Surprise Accusation Bolsters a Risky Case Against Trump

WASHINGTON — The unsealed indictment against former President Donald Trump on Tuesday laid out an unexpected accusation that bolstered what many legal experts have described as an otherwise risky and novel case: Prosecutors claim he falsified business records in part for a plan to deceive state...

www.yahoo.com

MOO

New York State Election Law § 1-102 states: "Except as otherwise expressly provided, the provisions of this chapter shall apply to all elections held in this state, including those for presidential electors, United States senators and representatives in Congress, but not including village elections."

2022 New York Laws :: ELN - Election :: Article 1 - General Provisions :: 1-102 - Applicability of Chapter.

bbm

New York Election Law​

Sec. 1-102​

Applicability of Chapter​

Universal Citation: NY Elec L § 1-102 (2022)​

§ 1-102. Applicability of chapter. This chapter shall govern the conduct of all elections at which voters of the state of New York may cast a ballot for the purpose of electing an individual to any party position or nominating or electing an individual to any federal, state, county, city, town or village office, or deciding any ballot question submitted to all the voters of the state or the voters of any county or city, or deciding any ballot question submitted to the voters of any town or village at the time of a general election. Where a specific provision of law exists in any other law which is inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, such provision shall apply unless a provision of this chapter specifies that such provision of this chapter shall apply notwithstanding any other provision of law.

 

[RANCH]

I think ...

that in 2016, everything under 17-152 (.1 thru .6) is a felony.

Here's the 2016 law:

2016 New York Laws :: ELN - Election :: Article 17 - (Election) VIOLATIONS OF THE ELECTIVE FRANCHISE :: 17-142 - Giving consideration for franchise.


The underlying crimes (hidden by the falsified records that elevate falsified records to a felony from a misdemeanor) can by either misdemeanors or felonies.

My link says this.

Current through 2023 NY Law Chapters 1-49 and 61-119

Plus your link is for a different statute. This is why it would be nice to know the correct underlining crime. Too much confusion for no reason. JMO.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I really would like to know if the statue of limitations can be extended to over six years in this case. I have my doubts. JMO.

Well if not, then this will be a very easy case to get dismissed. But do you really think the prosecutors haven't accounted for SOL?

It's not something I'm the least concerned about. I am more concerned about where there's a felony. I would be very disappointed if this was all for just misdemeanors when they're claiming felonies. As someone with a lot of antipathy for Trump -- for his brazen criminality, for his politics, for how he conducts himself personally, for how he treats his family, for his sociopathy -- I would love him to see him prosecuted, but still only if it's done fairly. As a WS member, I am a big supporter of legitimate prosecutions, but I also am even more against frivolous ones. If Bragg does not have the goods on this case, he should be run out of town for wasting everyone's time. The whole world is watching.

But for now we'll have to wait and see, and that wait will be a long one since Trump has not asked for a speedy trial. If he did, it could all be over before the primaries even.

As it is, we will have to wait on the trickle of leaks for more information, and for the next motions which won't be till September.

Maybe he'll have multiple concurrent indictments before it's all over. If not, I've been sacrificing all those chickens to Moloch for nothing.

 

[Emma Peel]

I really would like to know if the statue of limitations can be extended to over six years in this case. I have my doubts. JMO

There's rules. There's exceptions. There's extenuating conditions. There's COVID allowance. There's arguments.

I understand that when FRAUD (falsifying records) is involved the SOL can be ignored/adjusted. IIRC the Court has the discretion to extend SOL in cases of fraud. The effective date becomes closer to the date the Fraud was discovered - or could have/should have been discovered.

So ... what date should/would the fraud discovery date be for this fraud case?
Release date of tax returns?
Or earlier?

JMO

 

[RANCH]

Well if not, then this will be a very easy case to get dismissed. But do you really think the prosecutors haven't accounted for SOL?

It's not something I'm the least concerned about. I am more concerned about where there's a felony. I would be very disappointed if this was all for just misdemeanors when they're claiming felonies. As someone with a lot of antipathy for Trump -- for his brazen criminality, for his politics, for how he conducts himself personally, for how he treats his family, for his sociopathy -- I would love him to see him prosecuted, but still only if it's done fairly. As a WS member, I am a big supporter of legitimate prosecutions, but I also am even more against frivolous ones. If Bragg does not have the goods on this case, he should be run out of town for wasting everyone's time. The whole world is watching.

But for now we'll have to wait and see, and that wait will be a long one since Trump has not asked for a speedy trial. If he did, it could all be over before the primaries even.

As it is, we will have to wait on the trickle of leaks for more information, and for the next motions which won't be till September.

Maybe he'll have multiple concurrent indictments before it's all over. If not, I've been sacrificing all those chickens to Moloch for nothing.

We may see if this extension for the SOL is unconstitutional if this case continues and is not dismissed.

It makes sense for a person who is trying to escape justice by fleeing to unknown places. I don't see how a citizen of the United States should be punished for simply moving to another state. JMO.

 

[MyBelle]

And what’s Mr.Baker doing these days? Thats right! Still grifting for Jesus or selling end of time necessities! Might be a sale going on since Covid died down!

Bakker has always been a fan of Trump's. iirc, he said impeachment of Trump would lead to civil war. I wonder how he feels about the indictment? He seems to now have a case of remaining silent.

 

[MyBelle]

Well if not, then this will be a very easy case to get dismissed. But do you really think the prosecutors haven't accounted for SOL?

It's not something I'm the least concerned about. I am more concerned about where there's a felony. I would be very disappointed if this was all for just misdemeanors when they're claiming felonies. As someone with a lot of antipathy for Trump -- for his brazen criminality, for his politics, for how he conducts himself personally, for how he treats his family, for his sociopathy -- I would love him to see him prosecuted, but still only if it's done fairly. As a WS member, I am a big supporter of legitimate prosecutions, but I also am even more against frivolous ones. If Bragg does not have the goods on this case, he should be run out of town for wasting everyone's time. The whole world is watching.

But for now we'll have to wait and see, and that wait will be a long one since Trump has not asked for a speedy trial. If he did, it could all be over before the primaries even.

As it is, we will have to wait on the trickle of leaks for more information, and for the next motions which won't be till September.

Maybe he'll have multiple concurrent indictments before it's all over. If not, I've been sacrificing all those chickens to Moloch for nothing.

BBM. Me neither.

While the defense can question the SoL in this case, I think the Prosecutor has that base well covered.

 

[MyBelle]

Well if not, then this will be a very easy case to get dismissed. But do you really think the prosecutors haven't accounted for SOL?

It's not something I'm the least concerned about. I am more concerned about where there's a felony. I would be very disappointed if this was all for just misdemeanors when they're claiming felonies. As someone with a lot of antipathy for Trump -- for his brazen criminality, for his politics, for how he conducts himself personally, for how he treats his family, for his sociopathy -- I would love him to see him prosecuted, but still only if it's done fairly. As a WS member, I am a big supporter of legitimate prosecutions, but I also am even more against frivolous ones. If Bragg does not have the goods on this case, he should be run out of town for wasting everyone's time. The whole world is watching.

But for now we'll have to wait and see, and that wait will be a long one since Trump has not asked for a speedy trial. If he did, it could all be over before the primaries even.

As it is, we will have to wait on the trickle of leaks for more information, and for the next motions which won't be till September.

Maybe he'll have multiple concurrent indictments before it's all over. If not, I've been sacrificing all those chickens to Moloch for nothing.

BBM. Me neither.

While the defense can question the SoL in this case, I think the Prosecutor has that base well covered.
I think there will be an indictment re: Jan 6 before this current case concludes.