The Manhattan DA’s Charges and Trump’s Defenses: A Detailed Preview

What's that reason?

 

When I was raising my children I had a rule that I only told them twice regarding some matter I expected them to tend to. After the second time being ignored they were given a time out. Might work here. Fortunately we don't have to raise them here.

 

Bragg can't prosecute Federal campaign finance violations. It's out of his jurisdiction.

 

My point was actually that the bolded is NOT about that, but rather another state law about elections (not campaign finance). The state law becomes 1st degree based upon it being used to commit another crime. I don't think it specifies it must be a state crime. But I'd agree, that's a bit more dubious than what I bolded.

 

Bragg has to have charges he can prosecute. He can have a "back up plan".

 

I think he believes all three second crimes he mentioned (but only one of which I have been emphasizing as reasonable) can be proven by his evidence, but the good thing about having three is he only needs one of them to work to satisfy that part of the law for the 1st degree conviction. So he has backup plans, fails safes, or whatever you prefer, for that part of his case, at least.

 

What second crimes does he have evidence of?

 

When they were made is irrelevant to my post you quoted and are responding to.

And now you are confirming my point.

 

This is a superb overview of this case for that perverbial 'deep dive' . I like this kind of thing and I really could not dive deep enough though. I will say, I really don't like the DA's odds on this being a fruitful endeavor. This is a 76 year old very wealthy well connected incredibly famous and controversial defendant. Just imagine the voir dire process! How is this office supposed to find a jury of 12 members willing to put aside their personal views of Donald Trump? Then we start with this legal minefield through which his legal team has to crawl to get a conviction of a felony and then the legal team has to crawl back through that same minefield on appeal.

I just see this prosecution as a very very long series of dice throws with the hope of never seeing snake eyes pop up.

 

That's bunk because there is no other crime.

 

he was found guilty the first time, appealed, won the appeal on a technicality in which the case had to be retried, and then was acquitted, all in state court. But it was the same type of scheme that Trump is using.

 

Please....please....read the Summary of Facts attached to the Indictment. All your questions are well answered there. Time to face facts, Blueguy.

 

The trial is supposed to start in December. Trump is guilty of these charges. There will never be a verdict due to appeals regarding the jury in the unlikely verdict that a jury found him guilty. This is Trump's tactic - divide the country even further. No jury member will feel safe

One supporter even stated that he would still vote for Trump even if he murdered someone in cold blood. Apparently "saving the country" is more important than the life of one innocent.

 

Is it the same type of scheme? There is nothing illegal about a supporter giving personal money to someone else. It only becomes illegal if there is a tax issue (tax fraud)

 

Please please tell me what is this other crime for which Trump has been charged let alone convicted? Time to state the facts, Bush.

 

I don't think he needs to be charged/convicted of other said crime. Hell, I'm pretty sure all he has to do us pursue said crime, whether or not the crime is even completed. We'll see. If this is really a strong argument, then the case will be dismissed very quickly.

 

He's going to prove a FEDERAL CRIME??? He can charge and convict someone for a FEDERAL CRIME??

 

He's not going to charge any federal crimes

 

If he was not convicted of some other crime, not even charged by the agencies with jurisdiction to do so, then how can this be ramped up to a felony on that other crime? If the other crime happened in France could Bragg charge him and declare he committed a crime or participated in a crime? Bragg has as much jurisdiction in France as he does for federal elections.

 

If Trump is not going to be charged with it how can he defend himself? Is Bragg just going to declare Trump guilty of a federal crime and therefore this minor reporting charge becomes a felony? Did I miss some previous charge let alone conviction of this federal crime?

 

Bragg is state, not federal. He's charging state crime, not federal.

 

Then how can he prosecute for this other crime for which Trump has not been charged or convicted. How can he claim a federal crime occurred when Trump was not charged with violating one? Did the FEC say Trump committed a campaign violation? No. Did the DOJ? No. Does Bragg get to find him guilty on his own and therefore ramp up his minor bookkeeping misdemeanor to a felony?

 

Not directly. It seems like one of the prongs of his 3-pronged approach uses a federal crime to serve as the "2nd crime" to elevate falsifying records to a felony. I am not sure if that could work or not. That's why I have been explaining one of the other two prongs that is stronger (New York election law, a state law). The New York tax law as the "2nd crime" is the one I have not explored much. I have heard there are few arguments that would work against the last one, though. I just haven't looked into it much.

 

I think it is a somewhat different scheme because it involved more people than Senator Edwards did. But the details have not been provided. We will know in about 45 days or so when the prosecution has to turn over its evidence to the defense then the defense goes through the evidence and will file multiple motions to get that evidence tossed. It is a standard tactic the defense uses along with the "dismissing the case" motion. And all of that will be in December when Trump has to appear again.

 

Read the Summary of Facts attached to the Indictment. It is all set out there.