Perhaps what you're missing is that New York has its own version of "fraud" that differs from most jurisdictions. The Broad Scope of “Intent to Defraud” in the New York Crime of Falsifying Business Records (justsecurity.org) " On this standard, the law does not require prosecutors to show “pecuniary or potential pecuniary loss” to the government or otherwise. Id. Indeed, New York Jurisprudence (Second Edition 2023) in a section titled, “Indictment or information charging falsification of business records,” states: “In an indictment for first degree falsification of business records, the grand jury presentation is not required to establish commercial or property loss.” Applying this broad concept of “intent to defraud” in false business records cases, New York state courts have found such intent in a wide range of cases including when a defendant: made covert contributions to a political campaign, covered up an alleged rape, misled the relatives of a patient about the individual’s treatment, operated a motor vehicle without a license, obtained credit cards through false documents but with no proof of intention to miss payments, frustrated the regulatory authorities of the New York City Transit Authority, and much more. " It refers to this law: Legislation | NY State Senate (nysenate.gov) This is one of the potential "second crimes" to be proven concurrently for felony falsifying business records. It does not need to be charged separately. Incorrect for New York law, see the first article in this post. Again, still haven't looked into the nuts and bolts of the tax crime in question, but based upon the law I cited above the case seems pretty safe until it reaches SCOTUS (who will try to find a way to justify helping republicans) based upon New York Law.
I think you have it backwards for your first paragraph. Damages would be required for a civil case, not a criminal one. If you want to understand it, I again refer you to this article: The Broad Scope of “Intent to Defraud” in the New York Crime of Falsifying Business Records (justsecurity.org)
Excellent post. I was going to tell him that, too, but had to take part in a Teams meeting. Not as good as Zoom.
I've been holding for seven years now for these imminent indictments. When are YOU going to let go of them?
You really want to "get him" huh? You realize that sitting Presidents can't be indicted federally, right? So, for over half of that time, the DOJ couldn't charge that totally innocent man with crimes. And he's tried his damnedest to delay and stall all other prosecutions of totally exonerated Donald when he wasn't President. So, the mere passage of time demonstrates his complete innocence! Good call!
Trump hasn't been a sitting President for over two years. Seven years of dropped investigations and no indictment and in desperation this totally bogus one. How about the mere no conviction? You seem to have forgotten the innocent until proven guilty thingy.
Not to mention the fact that Biden can't pardon Trump for state charges. Should Biden pardon Trump? No. But the bigger problem for the OP is that HE ****ING CAN'T.
IF BIDEN still had two or three functional synaptic pathways...... yes he would pardon Trump...... and then give Trump all that he knows about Bill Gates........ and all that he knows about Obama....... and all that he knows about Hillary...... and all that he knows about P. M. Justin........ and all that he knows about Epstein........ and all that he knows about Kamala....... and all that he knows about George Soros...... etc., etc, etc., etc, ......
