Scumbag Bragg Implements the Plan to Mislead the Jury about the Charges

Bragg Implements the Plan to Mislead the Jury about the Charges


This Lawless Bastard Belongs In Prison.

Bragg is 'trying to hoodwink the jury into believing that he charged former president Donald Trump with conspiracy — i.e., an agreement to commit a crime, in this instance a “scheme” with David Pecker and Michael Cohen to suppress politically damaging information. In reality,
(a) the grand jury did not charge Trump with conspiracy, and
(b) it is not a crime to suppress politically damaging information,
so it could not be a conspiracy to do so.'

His entire case is a lie, built on lies, and now he opens with a lie to the Jury.

'Assistant DA Matthew Colangelo — formerly a top official in the' Bribed Joe 'Justice Department — proclaimed to the jury, “This case is about a criminal conspiracy and coverup.”'

He's a liar.

'The crime of conspiracy is not charged in the case. Charged, instead, are 34 counts of falsifying business records. That offense is normally a misdemeanor, but Bragg enhanced it into a felony — 34 felonies — by claiming that, in making false bookkeeping entries, Trump fraudulently intended to cover up another crime. Nowhere in the indictment does the grand jury allege that this crime was a conspiracy.'

'One of the more outrageous constitutional violations that has occurred in this case is that Bragg has attempted to alter the grand jury’s indictment with his own “statement of facts” — a document he drafted and published in conjunction with the unsealing of the indictment, as if it were part of the indictment.'

That is a violation of the 5th Amendment, and of course these lying bastards do not care, the Corrupt Judge with the tweezed eyebrows is fixing the case for the corrupt prosecutors.

The 5th Amendment:

“No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury.” ​

'The grand jury indicted Trump for falsifying business records, not criminal conspiracy. Bragg’s statement of facts, so called, is not part of the indictment; yet he has used it to modify the indictment as if Trump were charged with criminal conspiracy. That’s not permissible; the charges must be stated with specificity in the indictment.'

Bragg doesn't use the term “conspiracy.” He uses “scheme.” But 'suppressing politically damaging information is not a crime, and therefore it cannot be the objective of a conspiracy.'

The non-disclosure agreement was a legal contract, not a crime.

Bragg and this other slimeball are trying 'to convict Trump of conspiracy without having charged Trump with conspiracy. He has injected into the case federal campaign-finance law — law he has no jurisdiction to enforce — in order to obscure this constitutionally offensive gambit.'

Clearly Judge Tweezed Eyebrows is going to let him get away with this, soon we'll learn if the Jury lets him get away with it. And if the Jury does, as soon as it gets to an unfixed court, on appeal, it will be overturned.

In the meantime this portion of the Left will try to cheat their way through another election. They thought the indictments would fix the election, but instead, Trump took the lead after the indictments. If this is not viewed as a legitimate application of State Authority, it will not help the cheaters, and it could very well hurt them.

Please discuss.

https://archive.ph/WBXwA#selection-865.0-865.288

 

Good post, Zorro, it exposes who the real threats to democracy are.

 

These people don't want Democracy, they want an Oligarchy that pretends to be a "Democracy".

David Pecker Will Be Scumbag Bragg’s First Witness.



Scumbag Bragg is an election denier. Apparently that's only a crime if you deny Bribed Joe's stolen election.

Scumbag Bragg and 'his assistant prosecutors are trying to hoodwink the jury into believing that they have formally accused Trump of stealing the 2016 election — as if that were an actionable criminal charge. That is why, after opening statements, they will reportedly call as their first witness, David Pecker — the former CEO of American Media Inc., which used to own the National Enquirer.'

'In point of fact, Bragg does not have an actionable criminal charge related to Trump’s supposed theft of the 2016 election. He needs to make it look like he does, though. Otherwise, the jury might wonder why, if Trump stole an election in 2016, the actual charges in the case — which are trivial business-records violations, not grand conspiracies — all took place in 2017, months after the 2016 election took place.'

He's hoping for a fixed jury that will convict Trump no matter the crimes charged or the lack of evidence to support conviction. He's banking on a biased jury, even though the Constitution requires that Trump be provided a fair trial before an unbiased jury. But Scumbag Bragg doesn't care about that, neither does corrupt Judge Tweezed Eyebrows.

'Withholding information is only a crime when there is a legal obligation to divulge the information. Politicians, of course, are not legally required to divulge extramarital affairs in political campaigns.'

Read the whole thing.

https://archive.ph/crxSX#selection-859.102-859.307

 

Yea.... conspiracy...as there is no recording in the court room to hide what a sham this proceeding is.... there are folks who do sit through these boring court session and write down all that was said...
https://twitter.com/innercitypress

 

This is a classic prosecutorial tactic (used by unscrupulous prosecutors).

Charge the defendant with crimes, even though the evidence does not clearly show the defendant committed those crimes, but get the jury to vote guilty anyway by convincing the jury that something else the defendant did was wrong. The jury will vote guilty to punish the defendant, even if the real reason they are voting guilty has to do with something the defendant did that is not clearly a crime.

You CAN be sent to prison for something that is not crime. This is just ONE of the ways that could happen.

Prosecutors try to paint the defendant to look bad anyway they can, hoping it will help sway the jury to vote guilty, even if the jury would not otherwise vote guilty based only on the evidence about the actual alleged crime.

 

@Zorro

Yep... turning falsifying business records charges ...... now......... ""This is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover up. We are confident you will have no reasonable doubt""

https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-con...ts-bragg-trump-gag-order-februayr-26-2024.pdf

 

Trump bum kissers have a lurid fantasy life.

The perp is allowed defense counsel to challenge the prosecution in court, rendering the pom pom flailing from the peanut gallery gratuitous, purely for entertainment value, if any.

 

Do you have anything constructive to add to our adult conversation?

 

I think you are overestimating the maturity of the average adults on the other side of the political aisle.

 

@Zorro

"Politicians, of course, are not legally required to divulge extramarital affairs in political campaigns.'"
and there was once a slush fund setup for Congress critters for any extramarital affairs coverups to be paid for... and we the tax payers paid for it... Ain't America great..
Funny how that works, it’s like one rule for them, and another for everyone else.

https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/st...ss-sexual-harassment-settlements-200-million/

 

Stop whining because your Cry Baby Idol is not above the law and mimic adult behavior.

Pissing and moaning because Trump is being disciplined for throwing tantrums is pathetic.

 

So your answer is an obvious "NO" to the question ""Do you have anything constructive to add to our adult conversation?""

 

I suggest that you

1) Respect certified democratic elections, the express will of the People, and the public servants who make it work.

2) Respect law enforcement defending democracy against goon attacks.

3) Respect our justice system, the public servants who administer it, and their families.

4) Respect trial by jury under which one's peers assess evidence and sworn testimony, and attempts to refute it.

​

If you believe that it is patriotic and/or mature to do otherwise, to rage against America's institutions, try not to embarrass the nation.

 

I don't understand, doesn't the former President have a defense attorney that can point this out to the judge and the jury?

 

Yes. And even if they get a conviction, it will be overturned on appeal for these reasons.
Bragg knows this.
The Judge knows this.
Bragg's assistant that is arguing the case knows this.
This is an exercise in election interference, and every informed person knows it.

 

Then the investigations into President Biden must also be election interference.

 

That does not follow. One has nothing to do with the other. Each case must be considered on its own merits or lack of merits.

 

Conspiracy language refers to this law: § 17-152. Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more
persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to
a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by
one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. NYS Open Legislation | NYSenate.gov

This is the most easily proven crime to elevate falsifying business records to a felony. Since falsifying business records is also a crime, and it was done in service to elect Trump, it makes it a pretty clear case.

Prosecution must prove that Trump willingly caused these business records to be falsified, and that this was done for the purpose of helping his election chances. Also of note, the 17-152 misdemeanor does not have to be separately charged, but it or something like it does need to be proven to make this a felony. I am not sure if SCOTUS has ever weighed in on how New York law works here in terms of the 5th amendment argument, but it has definitely been applied to non-famous individuals in the past.

Frankly, I think it would take a real partisan Trumper on the jury to not convict with what is known. Ideally, we have a relatively nonpartisan jury, but people do sometimes lie to get on a jury. This is to Trump's advantage, even in that jurisdiction, because it only takes one to get him off, but it takes all of them to convict.

 

There were no unlawful means. Therein lies the fly in the ointment.

If that's Bragg's case, then there is no case.

 

So you admit that Scumbag Bragg is an election denier pretending that Trump stole the election from Crooked Hillary. We've been assured by much of the Left for nearly 4 years that "Election Denial" was a threat to the very Republic, yet here we are, Weird! It's like some folks discard yesterday's deeply held conviction like they are dirty socks.

And Scumbag Bragg hasn't charged Trump with violating § 17-152

The Election was in 2016, each of these paperwork entries that are being charged occurred in 2017, according to Scumbag Bragg's only charging document. So how did actions in 2017 'steal' a NYC election in 2016?

Scumbag Bragg isn't a Federal Prosecutor,
Scumbag Bragg isn't even a State Prosecutor.
Scumbag Bragg is a County Prosecutor.

Crooked Hillary took the election 80-20 in County where Scumbag Bragg has jurisdiction.

 

Your fantasizing about the outcome of the trial to pleasure yourself does not support the perp's constant sniveling and lashing out hysterically. If he adopted your presumptions in this and his other persecutions, he would be eager to expedite all the trials, not desperate to postpone them and rave hysterically about public servants.

BACKGROUND:

• September 2016: Trump discusses a $150,000 hush money payment to a bimbo with consiglieri Michael Cohen (who secretly recorded the conversation.) He needs desperately to hide his moral depravity from the public until after the election.
• October 7, 2016: An "Access Hollywood" tape is released exposing the sexual aggressor bragging and using vulgar language to describe his boorish sexual approach to women.
• October 27, 2016: Cohen pays a porn queen $130,000 via a shell company in exchange for her keeping secret Trump screwing her behind the back of a trophy wife.
• February, 2017: To secretly reimburse Cohen, Trump hatched a plot with his lawyer who sent a series of false invoices requesting payment for bogus legal services he performed, and receive monthly checks for $35,000 for a total of $420,000 to cover the payment, his taxes and a bonus, prosecutors alleged.
• January 2018: The Wall Street Journal broke the news about the hush money payment Cohen made to Trump's porn queen.

THE LEGAL ISSUE?

Whether skanky Trump or anyone committed crimes in arranging the payoffs, or in the way they accounted for them internally at the Trump Organization.

A jury of Trump's peers is hearing the evidence and the sworn testimony as well as attempts to refute them, and will deliberate and issue a verdict.​

 

It's irrelevant whether these actions made the difference in election outcome. Intent to help his election is what matters.

Yes I know, and I explained it. If you actually have an interest in understanding the case, justsecurity is the best source. A Complete Guide to the Manhattan Trump Election Interference Prosecution (justsecurity.org)

The Manhattan DA’s Charges and Trump’s Defenses: A Detailed Preview (justsecurity.org)

I think they key detail is that the whole scheme, including paying Cohen back, was planned before voting. The point of doing the payments in 2017 was to hide that it was related to the election.

 

Falsifying business records is the unlawful means.

 

How Strong Is Bragg’s Case?



'Bragg has a weak case because the charges are not merely complex. Bragg is trying to convict Trump of a charge he hasn’t actually brought and that he cannot prove because the allegation is neither true nor a crime.'

Gee, that's a problem. Bragg is trying to convict Trump of a crime he hasn't even charged him with, which Bragg cannot prove, because the charge is false and the act isn't even a crime.

Per the 5th Amendment, Trump may only be legitimately charged with crimes brought by the GRAND JURY.

'In the purported “statement of facts” written by Bragg — but, vitally, not charged by the grand jury in the Trump indictment, as the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution requires — the district attorney alleges that Trump stole the 2016 election by conspiring to suppress politically damaging information about extramarital affairs. In truth — and notwithstanding that Alvin Bragg is a 2016 election denier, which Democrats tell us is a terrible thing, at least as concerns the 2020 election — Trump won the 2016 election fair and square. The grand jury’s indictment, moreover, does not charge Trump with the crime of conspiracy; it alleges that Trump falsified business records with fraudulent intent.'

Trump's not charged with Conspiracy by the Grand Jury. Notice how some of the posters here are confused on this point. This confusion is deliberate on the part of Bragg and being facilitated by the corrupt Judge. Their plan is to similarly confuse the Jury.

And why did Bragg not charge him with conspiracy? 'There is no statutory crime of “suppressing politically damaging information.”'

'Since suppressing politically damaging information is not a crime, an agreement to do it cannot be a crime — even if that agreement is hyperbolized by Bragg and his prosecutors as a “scheme” or a “conspiracy.”'

'it is not a crime to plan to pay money and other consideration to people who possess information that could be politically damaging — or at least claim to possess it — in order to secure their silence. What Bragg wants the jury to see as a lawless “catch and kill” device is well established in the law as a non-disclosure agreement. In an NDA, for the payment of money and other consideration, a person or entity in possession of potentially damaging information is paid by the person or entity whom it could damage.'

Read the whole thing: https://archive.ph/L39TZ#selection-891.220-895.185

 

Please, submit your amicus brief to SCOTUS or the Appeal Courts, thanks.