Trump Was Fined $9,000 For Speaking

That’s because the first three were Democrats who were found guilty of something. Manediz is still voting the Senate with his fancy car and gold bars still in his possession.

 

And you STILL can't tell us what crime was concealed...lol

 

Yep I have offered him many opportunities to show this "underlying crime".... posted the actual indictment link.... and he can't seem to do it.... just dances all around and never did.... it does not claim the "conspiracy" crime either some have claimed was the second misdemeanor, that also has run the statute of limitations out...

 

17-152... that terse enough?

 

The underlying crime needs to be proven in court. It does not need to be part of this indictment. According to New York law and precedent. That is, it has previously been done this way without the Trump factor. This is not so outrageous, the prosecution does not need to lay out the entirety of their case in the indictment.

I knew over a year ago it was 17-152 though. Justsecurity, a bunch of new york law and policy experts, laid it out.

 

Trump's already been found liable of sexual assault (called rape in most states), fraud, and defamation. He has almost 90 felonies and will likely be found guilty on at least one of them. I'll be the first to say politicians like Melendez are guilty and he hasn't even had trial yet. It's a shame Republicans can't shake their personal ideological stranglehold.

 

Tax crimes and campaign contribution crimes. Chiefly the later. It ain't rocket surgery.

 

Where does it say tax crimes? When has anyone even said anything about tax crimes? Why isn't Trump charged with a tax crime?

 

When did Trump try to prevent an election in the state of New York?

 

You don't have to be charged for the underlying crime. And Cohen was already charged for the campaign crime that Trump's scheme went toward

 

That makes no sense. You know that. Right?

 

Promoting a campaign by unlawful means. His campaign for president of the United States. Yes, the law DOES apply to federal elections held in the state.

 

Merchan's running a Court so rigged that even the Kangaroos are impressed.

 

Criminal defendants are not put under gag orders all of the time... on rare occasions... and not because the judges daughter and company is making millions off of daddy's courtroom...

 

Sanctioning the perp's projectile verbal diarrhea suggests that no one is above the law, but the court has been incredibly patient with his tantrums.

If he were confident that his defense attorneys could refute the evidence and sworn testimony, he would not be incessantly sniveling and lashing out hysterically.

​

 

Wrong, it must be in black and white and in the indictment…. There is no hide and seek allowed…

 

Well, tell that to New York even before they indicted Trump. It's not at all the first time the law has been used in this way. Since Trump has friends on the supreme court, unlike these prior cases, maybe they'll help him out.

 

You don’t know what you’re talking about… you can’t hide the charges.

 

The charge is falsifying business records as a felony due to intent to commit another crime with it. Here are a couple of cases which did this without relying upon separately charging or convicting a separate crime:

survey-new-york-felony-falsification-of-business-records-just-security.pdf (justsecurity.org)

The People of the State of New York v. John Cassisi, David Adelhardt, Arthur Fazio... The only indicted/convicted crime was falsifying business records in the first degree. "Construction Executives Admit To Taking and Facilitating around $500,000 in Bribes Former Citigroup Inc executive and onetime child star John Cassisi was sentenced to up to at least two years in prison in December 2015 after pleading guilty to taking at least $500,000 in bribes from contracting companies seeking business with the bank. Page 20 of 24 “The bribes were sometimes delivered as cash-stuffed envelopes to the Citigroup executive. Other times, contractors seeking business sent checks to a fake company that the executive ran from his house. One electrical company bought him a lavish hunting trip in Alaska. Another contractor built a patio and barbecue at the executive’s home.” Others who pleaded guilty in connection with the scheme included Arthur Fazio, a former senior vice president at Citi, and David Adelhardt, the president of Adelhardt Construction Corp. Adelhardt pleaded guilty to falsifying purchase orders to hide his firm’s work at Cassisi’s home, as well as payments for hunting trips. On October 6, 2015, both Fazio and Cassisi pleaded guilty to falsifying business records. Fazio pleaded guilty to creating fake invoices to help Cassisi hide the work being done at his home, and Cassisi pleaded guilty to accepting bribes and laundering money in connection with his work overseeing construction for Citigroup. See also: Adelhardt Constr. Corp. v. Citicorp N. Am., Inc., Index No.: 655186/2018, (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2019)"

Another one: The People of the State of New York v. Structure Tone, Inc. "A New York interiors business pleads guilty to falsifying purchase orders with the intent to defraud clients."

Here's an example where he got felony falsifying business records for a second crime that he was acquitted for - held up on appeal.

People v. Holley, 2021 N.Y. Slip Op. 5416 | Casetext Search + Citator

 

What other crime did Trump commit? You lefty’s keep NOT showing it in the indictment… here it is… please copy and paste the second crime.

https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000187-4d9a-dc00-a3d7-4d9f97b40000

 

I'm telling you, it wasn't in the indictment in the first two of the precedent cases I showed you. Therefore, Trump is NOT getting special treatment in a bad way. In the 3rd, it was part of the indictment, but the felony falsifying business records was upheld despite being acquitted of the second charge. Basically, felony falsifying business records is a stand-alone charge which incorporates evidence that the fraud was used with the intent to commit another crime. The other crimes have been detailed now, but did not need to be directly cited in the indictment.

 

The Steady Slide Towards Tyranny: How Freedom Dies From A To Z

'It’s time to rein in our runaway government, reclaim our freedoms, and restore justice in America...'

The Vile Corrupt Totalitarians hate Trump and are doing everything they can to prevent his election.

 

You ain’t telling me squat…. The charges have to be in the indictment.

 

Next Act in the Farce: Holding Trump in Contempt.



'the gag order is over-the-top. It is an arrogant expression of a judge convinced that nothing — not even free expression and robust political speech in a presidential election — takes precedence over the farcical ongoing trial. It is, moreover, the perpetuation of a partisan narrative that Trump’s bracing posts and insults, which don’t actually threaten anyone (otherwise Bragg would charge him), are dog-whistles summoning MAGA-world to execute the next Capitol riot — which is to be expected given that Merchan is an activist Democrat whose daughter is a Democratic political operative making lots of money working for Trump’s bitterest political rivals.'

Merchan is a crook, participating in the attempted fixing of the election by obtaining a felony conviction on Trumped up charges.

'If Merchan were truly interested in the administration of justice, he could have postponed the trial until after the November election, at which point concerns about protecting witnesses and minimizing publicity that might influence the jury pool would clearly take precedence over Trump’s right to campaign and the public’s interest in uninhibited political speech. Instead, what the judge, Bragg, and other Democrats are interested in is getting Trump convicted during the campaign so Biden can call him a “convicted felon.” Ergo, we have a trial and we have a gag order, which prohibits Trump from speaking about Bragg’s witnesses even as they speak endlessly about him, and stifles Trump while his political rivals are allowed to say whatever they want about the prosecution.'

They are working to fix the election. Fairness and Justice are not part of their consideration.

'given the free-election interests at stake, Trump should be limited only by the strictures on free speech that limit everyone: If he incites lawlessness, willfully intimidates witnesses, or corruptly obstructs justice, he can and should be charged with a crime; if he defames someone, he can be sued — as E. Jean Carroll proved, that can be an expensive proposition; and if he says idiotic and/or patently false things, prosecutors can use them against him at his various trials. '

If this judge was that fair-minded the trial would have already been tossed.

'the New York case is rigged against him. Since it may be a year or three before he gets any convictions reversed on appeal, he has to fight the case as politics — as part of the campaign. So naturally, the ink was not dry on the contempt order before Trump was back at it, publicly bashing the judge and the process. For Trump, Merchan might end up being more of a rhetorical punching-bag than Bragg, Michael Cohen, et al. Trump calculates that if people become convinced that the judge was in the tank for Bragg, they won’t hold the “convicted felon” him. The trial may even end up being a political net-positive if voters are convinced that it says less about Trump than about the Democrats’ abuse of law-enforcement processes as political weapons.'

https://archive.ph/lsgYi#selection-863.0-873.628

Well, it's difficult for a reasonable person to come to any other conclusion.

 

Jonathan Turley points out that 'the gag order is not tailored narrowly enough and that the reposting issue is more complicated than Merchan’s reasoning implies.'

'if Merchan sentences him to a few days’ imprisonment, that would be a political catastrophe for Democrats.'

I don't think that Merchan possesses enough of his reason to accurately make that calculation. That is, this robed clown is dumb enough to sentence Trump to jail.

'this is performance art not the administration of justice.'

Trump should simply give 'Merchan $5K or $10K every Monday for the rest of the trial and then say whatever he insists on saying, subject to the potential sanctions that are real: prosecution, defamation, and use of his comments and social-media posts as evidence against him.' And if Merchan's dumb enough to jail him, Bragg’s case will bring even more well-deserved 'discredit on the justice system.'

https://archive.ph/lsgYi#selection-903.0-903.511