Trump indicted over hush money payments in Stormy Daniels probe

I didn't realize you were arguing that Trump just accidentally faked his business records. Interesting tactic.

 

I'm arguing that in order for the statute to apply to Trump, Bragg must also prove the fraud element. That was my initial comment that started this circus and people went all crazy saying untrue stuff in an attempt to dispute it. Simply proving the report is false isn't enough. Businesses file incorrect reports all the time.

 

If the records are false on purpose, that's fraudulent. If you are arguing he got them wrong on accident, have fun with that. It's kind of cute in a way.

 

Fraud has elements as well that could complicate things depending on the interpretation. "Falsifying" assumes intent as well. There's a reason they include the fraud element.

 

Best of luck.

 

You can admit you were wrong whenever you're ready. We all know already.

 

Welp, I wasn't wrong. Falsifying business records is, indeed, a crime. But, hey, maybe you'll get luck and your favorite Dear Leader will skate on this one but just get destroyed by his theft of government records instead.

 

Touche my arze! I can carry a gun with an intent to rob a bank, but ultimately decide not to rob the bank.

 

This isn't the NY case, and could be yet ANOTHER thread for Jack Smith to pull on in his federal case(s)

SNIP
Special Prosecutor Jack Smith’s investigation into Trump’s role on Jan. 6 has launched a probe into allegations the former president and his allies defrauded donors by touting false claims of election fraud. According to a report from The Washington Post, Smith’s office has issued a series of wide-ranging subpoenas to Trump advisers and former campaign staff requesting materials on the matter.

Sources tell the Post that the investigation is honing in on $200 million dollars generated by Trump and various PAC’s during the period between Nov. 3, 2020 and Jan. 20, 2021. Prosecutors are seeking to identify if campaign staff and fundraising operatives misrepresented claims of election fraud in order to drive donations toward Trump.
ENDSNIP

https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/jan-6-investigators-think-trump-234212517.html

LMAO, I'll file this in the "No ****" file. Reuters told us the "Official Election Defense Fund” was BS less than 2 weeks after the electon

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...nse-instead-go-to-president-rnc-idUSKBN27R309

Hope Jack isn't taking his eye off the ball here....

 

I thought this thread was about the Stormy charges

 

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

 

It is, but we don't have a recent, inclusive Jack Smith/Federal investigations thread.... If I started one everytime there's news out of his investigations, I'd be as bad as some random poster who starts a thread everytime Trump orders dinner...

Besides, the Trump indictment in NY is now sort of in resting phase for several months...

Sorry...

 

In NY it is a misdemeanor. Isn't that the relevant point? So why are you saying it isn't?

 

I’m not surprised this is your response Lol. You don’t even know who determined this.

 

I believe @CornPop ‘s point is that 175.05 requires an additional element of intent. Falsifying business records with intent to defraud.

I also understand him to be arguing that without demonstrating that element of intent to defraud, you can’t even move on to the more serious felony set out in 175.10.

 

There's an element of the statute that requires the intent to commit fraud. Fraud has five elements, one of which is damage to a victim. Fraud is not a victimless crime. Bragg still needs to prove the intent to defraud someone. So far all he has presented is evidence of falsified records. Trump does no time unless he can also show intent to commit fraud. This is a potential problem for Bragg which is likely why he is ranting about campaign finance violations and Trump's desire to influence the election. Additionally, Bragg needs to prove that Trump knew classifying an (NDA) attorney fees as a legal expense was a crime. That's hard to prove, since it's true.

 

Mate, I have just about given up trying to assist you. I think best that you just allow Braggs the opportunity to prosecute his case, and if he fails...you get the last laugh. Just don't bet the homestead on it in advance.

 

I think you are mixing up criminal fraud with “intent to defraud”, which is much wider. Have a read.
https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/glossary/intent-to-defraud

S 175.10 gives a more serious example of intent to defraud - intent to conceal a crime. So that is inherently an attempt to defraud.

Trump and Cohen clearly tried to create records so that anyone looking at the books would be misled into believing that Cohen was being paid legal fees for performing legal services. That isn’t what was happening. He was being reimbursed for a payment that he made on trump’s behalf. Those records would also be used to mislead the tax authorities. Resulting in higher taxes, but misleading the authorities nonetheless.

That intention to mislead is an intention to defraud.

The only question is whether that was done in order to conceal a separate crime.

I understand the point you are trying to make, but it’s extremely weak.

 

I stopped reading after the first paragraph because your building your entire post on the false premise that they investigated anything. They did not and it clearly states that in the judgement.

They LITERALLY tell you they didnt investigate Trump because they used Cohens conviction to claim everything was already adjudicated.

C’mon your smarter than that…..

 

You cannot be that obtuse.

Cohen paid her at Trumps behest, thats not really up for debate. Cohen literally mortgaged his house to pay her, and Trump said he would pay him back.

Please explain why Cohen paid Stormy Daniels out of his own money. What/why did Cohen pay Stormy Daniels from his own bank account?

 

Falsifying business records concealing a felony would prove intent and enhance the misdemeanor to a felony..

What will prove the underlying felony is the abundance of evidence and there is an abundance sufficient to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

It took long enough.

'ORDERED: Trump’s attorney must turn over communications regarding Stormy Daniels'

'Joe Tacopina, an attorney for Donald Trump, has been ordered to submit documents so that a judge can determine whether he has a conflict of interest in handling the former president’s 34 felony charges for falsifying business records. The case hinges on payments made to Stormy Daniels, and therein, too, may lie the conflict

Daniels contacted Tacopina’s law firm, Tacopina, Seigel & DeOreo, seeking representation in 2018 and shared some information about her situation regarding Trump, their brief affair, and the hush money payments made to her by his then-attorney, Michael Cohen.

Now the question is whether the information she shared at the time should prevent Tacopina from a role representing Trump in this case, and what information he may have discussed with others, including his client.

Daniels has turned over documentation of her communications with the law firm, and Tacopina has downplayed this, saying that he never spoke to her and that she ultimately did not hire his firm to represent her."

cont:
https://washingtonpress.com/2023/05...over-communications-regarding-stormy-daniels/






https://washingtonpress.com/2023/05...over-communications-regarding-stormy-daniels/

 

Now THIS is interesting.... we've all thought this should be a federal case, and now Mango wants it moved there...

I wonder why?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-lawyer-york-hush-money-153401311.html

It would still be a NY jury pool and I ASSUME it would still be the original state charges, for which he cannot eventually be pardoned.

I don't see the advantage to the defense here

 

More on this odd request

https://www.yahoo.com/news/nyc-judge-signals-ll-sign-181100321.html

SNIP
Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, told Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan he planned to file the request later Thursday. By law, a defendant has 31 days from being arraigned on criminal charges to make such a request.

If it is rejected, Merchan told the prosecution and Trump’s lawyers to plan for a trial date in February or March, instructing them to clear their schedules and not plan any vacations, new cases or other trials.

That also goes for Trump, who’s running to become the 2024 Republican presidential nominee. He can’t agree to any appearances, speaking arrangements or other events that would interfere with his availability for the trial, Merchan said.
ENDSNIP

Well, that might put a crimp in ye olde campaign efforts... Although I suppose he can agree to any appearances, as long as they are cancelled when required.....