NY - Former President Donald Trump charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023

[Smelly Squirrel]

And let's not forget John Edwards, who even used donor funds to hide his affair. He was charged but found not guilty of campaign finance charge.

No, it was a hung jury on all but one count. And it was a different set of facts. It is always more difficult to convict on "white crime" charges than violent crime charges, because they need to prove not only that the act was committed but that they knew it was illegal.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

DA Bragg will not be condemned by the majority of MSM no matter what happens. JMO.

Yes, Ranch, I already understand you have made up your mind about any and all outcomes of this case already, correct?

 

[MyBelle]

Yes belle. Really. I am pretty sure the Trump organization was not in the business of preparing tax returns. Weren't they in the property management or real estate business? I'm referring to outside CPA firms that audit and prepare taxes for companies.

Tax returns require signatures of both the business AND the preparer if a third party is used. If the IRS detects fraud, the DOJ goes after them.

Tax Preparer, Husband Sentenced for Defrauding IRS Out of $3.3 Million

The owners of a Duncanville tax preparation business were sentenced to a combined five nd a half years in federal prison for defrauding the IRS out of more than $3.3 million.

www.justice.gov

 

[RANCH]

No, it was a hung jury on all but one count. And it was a different set of facts. It is always more difficult to convict on "white crime" charges than violent crime charges, because they need to prove not only that the act was committed but that they knew it was illegal.

The disgraced Democrat giving Donald Trump hope

John Edwards' defence claimed he had paid to hide his affair to save his family pain rather than for political advantage

www.telegraph.co.uk

Mr Edwards, a lawyer and two-time presidential candidate, was indicted by a grand jury in 2011 on six felony charges of violating multiple federal campaign contribution laws to cover up an extramarital affair – but was ultimately acquitted.

His legal team have been publicly drawing parallels to the Edwards case, which resulted in a high-profile loss for the Justice Department.

“He made this with personal funds to prevent something from coming out, false, that is embarrassing to himself, his family, his young son,” Joe Tacopina, Mr Trump’s lawyer, said earlier this month on ABC. “If the spending would exist irrespective of the campaign, it’s not a campaign law violation. End of story.”

 

[RANCH]

Yes, Ranch, I already understand you have made up your mind about any and all outcomes of this case already, correct?

I have my opinions which I have posted here on WS.

 

[MyBelle]

There is nothing illegal about hush money anyhow even if true. Bill Clinton paid Paula Jones to drop her case.

That's not true no matter how many times Trump says it. Paula Jones sued Clinton and they reached an out of court settlement.

Bill Clinton settled the Paula Jones case. He wasn't fined.

<p><b>"[Clinton] was impeached and lost his license to practice law and paid an $850,000 fine to one of the women. Paula Jones who is also here tonight.' - Donald Trump</b></p>

www.politico.com

 

[RANCH]

That's not true no matter how many times Trump says it. Paula Jones sued Clinton and they reached an out of court settlement.

Bill Clinton settled the Paula Jones case. He wasn't fined.

<p><b>"[Clinton] was impeached and lost his license to practice law and paid an $850,000 fine to one of the women. Paula Jones who is also here tonight.' - Donald Trump</b></p>

www.politico.com

From your link.

While it was on appeal, Bill Clinton paid $850,000 to settle the suit without admitting liability.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Mr Edwards, a lawyer and two-time presidential candidate, was indicted by a grand jury in 2011 on six felony charges of violating multiple federal campaign contribution laws to cover up an extramarital affair – but was ultimately acquitted.

His legal team have been publicly drawing parallels to the Edwards case, which resulted in a high-profile loss for the Justice Department.

“He made this with personal funds to prevent something from coming out, false, that is embarrassing to himself, his family, his young son,” Joe Tacopina, Mr Trump’s lawyer, said earlier this month on ABC. “If the spending would exist irrespective of the campaign, it’s not a campaign law violation. End of story.”

His lawyer defends him? Shocking.

But what did this same lawyer say before Trump was his client?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/23/politics/kfile-joe-tacopina-stormy-daniels-campaign-finance-2018/index.html

Former President Donald Trump’s defense attorney repeatedly speculated as a legal pundit that Trump’s alleged affair with Stormy Daniels likely happened and that the $130,000 payment made to Daniels days before the 2016 election could be seen as an in-kind campaign contribution, contradicting his recent legal and public defense of Trump.

Joe Tacopina, a defense attorney representing Trump in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office investigation of Trump, made the comments in 2018 as a prominent legal commentator – years before he would ultimately represent the former president in the case that may indict Trump.

 

[RANCH]

His lawyer defends him? Shocking.

But what did this same lawyer say before Trump was his client?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/23/politics/kfile-joe-tacopina-stormy-daniels-campaign-finance-2018/index.html

Former President Donald Trump’s defense attorney repeatedly speculated as a legal pundit that Trump’s alleged affair with Stormy Daniels likely happened and that the $130,000 payment made to Daniels days before the 2016 election could be seen as an in-kind campaign contribution, contradicting his recent legal and public defense of Trump.

Joe Tacopina, a defense attorney representing Trump in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office investigation of Trump, made the comments in 2018 as a prominent legal commentator – years before he would ultimately represent the former president in the case that may indict Trump.

He probably changed his mind after the FEC drop it's case. Perfectly reasonable for anyone to come to the same conclusion.

F.E.C. Drops Case Reviewing Trump Hush-Money Payments to Women (Published 2021)

The case had examined whether Donald Trump violated election law with a $130,000 payment shortly before the 2016 election to a pornographic-film actress by his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.

www.nytimes.com

 

[MyBelle]

From your link.

Correct. An out-of-court settlement isn't "hush money" as Trump tried to claim.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

He probably changed his mind after the FEC drop it's case. Perfectly reasonable for anyone to come to the same conclusion.

F.E.C. Drops Case Reviewing Trump Hush-Money Payments to Women (Published 2021)

The case had examined whether Donald Trump violated election law with a $130,000 payment shortly before the 2016 election to a pornographic-film actress by his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.

www.nytimes.com

He shouldn't have because that decision was a 50-50 result from an evenly divided Republican and Democrat commission. It tells us very little about the merits.

 

[RANCH]

He shouldn't have because that decision was a 50-50 result from an evenly divided Republican and Democrat commission. It tells us very little about the merits.

So you're saying it was totally political? Sounds familiar. JMO.

 

[Teche]

Trump indictment: A simple guide to what it means​

What is Trump accused of?​

"Stormy Daniels says she had an affair with Mr Trump in 2006, which he has always denied.

In 2016 she tried to sell her account of what happened to the media. Mr Trump's lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid her $130,000 (£105,000) to keep quiet. That kind of payment is called hush money.

That is not illegal but what has got Mr Trump into trouble is how Mr Cohen's reimbursement was recorded in his accounts. He is accused of falsifying his business records by saying the payment was for legal fees.

As it happened just before Americans were due to vote, it may also violate laws about payments that help an election campaign.

There will now be a trial where Mr Trump will make his case.

He has denied any wrongdoing and says the charges are politically motivated."

Trump indictment: A simple guide to what it means

Former US President Donald Trump is charged with 34 felony counts. Here is what the case is about.

www.bbc.co.uk

Wait, Ms. Daniels’ isn't an attorney (jk).

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

So you're saying it was totally political? Sounds familiar. JMO.

No, didn't say that. It could have been political for some commissioners and not for others.

 

[MyBelle]

I don't think he will be "exonerated," but at the most, he will face fines for campaign finance violations even though those related charges are past the statute of limitations.

Candidates often violate campaign finance rules, but the vast majority of the time, they are fined by the Federal Elections Commission. When the FEC looked at these violations (after Cohen pleaded), they publicly stated they would not be fining Trump. You can download and read that letter here.

If the FEC opted not to pursue the violations, I don't think Bragg has a good chance of obtaining any felony conviction, and I'd be willing to bet the FEC will be called to testify as to why they didn't pursue the matter.

The only thing (JMOO) that might change the outcome would be the inclusion of charges we know nothing about so far.

The FEC didn't have access to Trump's tax returns and the accompanying documentation. The Supreme Court ordered the release in December 2022.

Opinion | Trump has officially run out of moves on his tax returns. Here's why that matters.

While Trump’s long legal wrangling delayed the production of documents to House Democrats, it has also created two more perils for the former president.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[MyBelle]

Yep. Bill Clinton just wanted the whole thing to go away. So he paid to settle. JMO.

And lost his law license for lying about it.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

Jim Jordan slams the left for targeting any opposition: 'Most scary thing of all'

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, discusses the indictment and prosecution of former President Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

www.foxnews.com

MARIA BARTIROMO: … When are you expecting to speak with Alvin Bragg if he does not come to testify in front of the Judiciary Committee, will you subpoena him?

REP. JIM JORDAN: … Everything's on the table, Maria. We're going to talk with the other chairmen and look at the response. We just got his [D.A. Alvin Bragg] letter back. We're reviewing that. But we think that this is here's I think maybe the most important thing. We think this is bigger. This involves all of us. I don't think it's an accident that the same week we learned that the IRS knocked on Matt Taibbi's door while he's testifying in Congress. That same week is when we learned a district attorney, a left-wing district attorney, a Soros-backed district attorney is going to go after the former President of the United States.
… I mean, that is a scary thing, that they paid a foreigner. Think about this. They paid a foreigner to put together a fake dossier to spy on President Trump's campaign. The FTC sends letters to Twitter demanding who are the journalists you're talking to. And then, of course, when Matt Taibbi is testifying, the IRS is knocking on his door and now an indictment of a former president, the guy who happens to be leading in every single poll.

 

[Telltale]

So you're saying it was totally political? Sounds familiar. JMO.

I am curious to know what you think of the merits of this case and Trump's role in it?

I am guessing you believe this to be politically motivated, which there is a fair argument for, but with what we know at the moment what's your opinion on his culpability and criminality under the law?

 

[MyBelle]

Jim Jordan slams the left for targeting any opposition: 'Most scary thing of all'

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, discusses the indictment and prosecution of former President Trump by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

www.foxnews.com

MARIA BARTIROMO: … When are you expecting to speak with Alvin Bragg if he does not come to testify in front of the Judiciary Committee, will you subpoena him?

REP. JIM JORDAN: … Everything's on the table, Maria. We're going to talk with the other chairmen and look at the response. We just got his [D.A. Alvin Bragg] letter back. We're reviewing that. But we think that this is here's I think maybe the most important thing. We think this is bigger. This involves all of us. I don't think it's an accident that the same week we learned that the IRS knocked on Matt Taibbi's door while he's testifying in Congress. That same week is when we learned a district attorney, a left-wing district attorney, a Soros-backed district attorney is going to go after the former President of the United States.
… I mean, that is a scary thing, that they paid a foreigner. Think about this. They paid a foreigner to put together a fake dossier to spy on President Trump's campaign. The FTC sends letters to Twitter demanding who are the journalists you're talking to. And then, of course, when Matt Taibbi is testifying, the IRS is knocking on his door and now an indictment of a former president, the guy who happens to be leading in every single poll.

The D.A. sent a scathing letter to Jordan:

“Like any other defendant, Mr. Trump is entitled to challenge these charges in court and avail himself of all processes and protections that New York State’s robust criminal procedure affords,” read the letter. “What neither Mr. Trump nor Congress may do is interfere with the ordinary course of proceedings in New York State.”

Prosecutor hits back against House GOP on Trump indictment - Roll Call

New York prosecutors hit back Friday against “unfounded allegations” from the House GOP that a Donald Trump probe is politically motivated.

rollcall.com

 

[JerseyGirl]

Trump's N.Y. Case May Include Hush Money Payment to Karen McDougal, Michael Cohen's Lawyer Says

Michael Cohen gave the District Attorney Alvin Bragg documents related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, his lawyer says.

www.rollingstone.com

“Michael Cohen submitted a lot of documentation, not only to this group of prosecutors, but to the earlier group. And there are other documents from other people and other testimony from other people, some of it direct, involving conversations with Mr. Trump, concerning the Karen McDougal crime,” Cohen’s lawyer Lanny Davis said Sunday when questioned in an interview about whether Cohen had documents to back up his claims and testimony.

“Remember, there are two crimes here. And so the answer is substantial documentation,” Davis added.

Bash later asked for clarification: “So you’re saying that your client, Michael Cohen, also gave documentation, evidence that will show that there was hush money paid in maybe in an illegal way to Karen McDougal?”

“The answer is yes,” Davis replied. “But so did others involved in that transaction, including, as we know publicly, the head of The National Enquirer, Mr. [David] Pecker, was involved in that transaction that Michael Cohen was forced to plead guilty to, even though he didn’t pay the money. National Enquirer paid the money in an arrangement with Mr. Trump.”

The Federal Election Commission in 2021 found that Pecker and the Enquirer‘s parent company, American Media Inc., unlawfully assisted Trump in 2016 by making the $150,000 payment to McDougal to kill the story of her alleged 2006 affair with Trump. As part of a non-prosecution agreement, Pecker admitted he made the payment to help Trump’s presidential campaign. Pecker also testified before the grand jury in the New York Trump case last week.

Lawyers for Donald Trump, Michael Cohen square off in fight for credibility in criminal case

Donald Trump's indictment lawyer Joe Tacopina and Michael Cohen's lawyer Lanny Davis argued about each side's crediblity in the pending criminal case.

www.usatoday.com

Trump’s lawyer, Joe Tacopina, told CNN’s “State of the Union” that Michael Cohen is a convicted liar who "is constitutionally incapable of telling the same story the same way twice." Tacopina said there is no documentation of Trump falsifying business records, the central charges anticipated in the indictment, which remains under seal.

“I know there is no such evidence,” Tacopina said. “Michael Cohen is a pathological, convicted liar.”