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

LOL... Don't you think if there was tax fraud, someone would already know about it? Since Trump's taxes were illegally released.

 

Err, that is what this case is partly about

 

Tax fraud is a very specific concept under the code that deals with numbers, tax liability, and intent. The Joint Committee on Taxation already released a report on Trump's tax returns stating some $300 million of questionable deductions were claimed. Further investigation should ensue on those deductions, but there is the normal statute of limitations and then there is a fraudulent statute of limitations. Fraud statute is unlimited. Furthermore, those were business returns, not PAC, Form 990 returns. The expense also depends on where it is located. A Political Action Committee falls under 527 rules and has FEC filing requirements. If it is exempt, there may also be a 990 tax return as well. Buit given the lack of resources the IRS has, I seriously doubt they can audit those returns at all.

 

o

one million for a post in an extremely left city, you wonder what is going on

 

Bragg can't prosecute a Federal tax crime.

 

the public perception sure supports my assertions
https://nypost.com/2022/06/07/7-in-10-new-yorkers-concerned-about-being-violent-crime-vic-poll/

In fact, a whopping 70% of New Yorkers said they feel less safe now than before the COVID-19 pandemic started, compared to just 3% who said they feel safer.

The sobering results come as the latest NYPD data from last week showed gun violence had dropped by nearly a third in May compared to the same time last year — but shootings were still nearly double pre-pandemic levels.

https://www.city-journal.org/new-yorkers-dont-need-data-to-feel-angry-about-crime

To review the sobering details: robbery is up 32 percent over last year, and felony assault is up 14 percent. Rape is up 10 percent, and grand larceny 38 percent. Crime in the transit system has risen 41 percent since last year, and the subway system has seen nine murders since January; the typical year used to have one or two, at most. Scoffers on social media like to point to how much worse things used to be in New York—they mean a generation ago—but index crime is a solid 20 percent above where it was in 2010, at the beginning of Michael Bloomberg’s third term.

 

I gave a like for that for humor, but then wondered....was the pun intended?

 

This case, like every other case against Trump, is about finding WTF ever that they can charge him with. It's a political witch hunt. No more, no less.

 

One only needs to research Soros' philanthropy to figure out why he would support Bragg. And if Bragg continues to have Soros' support it would clearly indicate that he is pleased with the actions of Bragg. If Bragg didn't want to lose his support he wouldn't do anything that would piss him off.

 

Never said he was doing that. I simply answered your comment about tax fraud in Trump's tax returns. When it comes to state tax returns, they start with the federal and go on from there. But the part in which Trump is facing is state crimes, including, but not limited to, falsified business records. As part of the falsified business records for the state, substance over form doctrine can be applied in proving their case, among other things, plus any illegal deductions. States do copy federal definitions almost word for word when it comes to illegal deductions as described in the code. But the state will use what is codified in their code as the concurance, but the general concept is where you get it from in federal law.

 

Plenty of billionaires do philanthropy. Like the Rothschilds, Soros is part of nearly every conspiracy by the John Birch Society and other conspirators out there. It is quite literally a bunch of hogwash.

 

Apparently on the verge.... ehhh? BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Who Is Directing the Annoying Trump/Bragg Soap Opera? “Trump is so good at this that, at some point in the last few days, it almost seemed as if control of the situation shifted from Bragg to him. It was Trump, not Bragg’s office, who told the public that he would be arrested on Tuesday of this week. When that didn’t happen, it made Bragg look weak.”



Trump is demanding that he be publically arrested and perp-walked by Bragg and his shrieking minions. He is looking for maximum effect and tune in to illustrate the sheer desperation of these clowns that are so desperately trying to make their mark by witch hunting Trump.

Trump's flair for the dramatic is unmatched by anyone in the political field today.

'Trump has always known how to maximize almost any kind of publicity for his benefit.'

'The fact that the grand jury wasn’t seated on Wednesday really made it seem as if Bragg was faltering. There’s nothing definitive set for the grand jury for the rest of the week:

In massive walk back and groveling, not only did the grand jury fail to indict, but the Wednesday meeting of the grand jury was CANCELLED.

Trump was clearly on to something. The Wednesday session of the grand jury has been canceled, according to a report from Business Insider. 'It is doubtful the grand jury will convene at all this week.'

Given Bragg's tremendous perversity, I expect at some point to get up off the floor and go through with indicting Trump, which will backfire on 'Bragg even more than it would have if he’d done it on Tuesday.'

 

Because perception is never a factual basis, is it? In the 1990s, local news began to show more and more crime stories on the local news from homicides to assaults to whatever. It has always been there. In the past, it was reported by the local newspaper, usually the metro section, in the police blotter, which was normally the second or third page in the metro section of all the police activity that day. And when crime did go down, the actual crime still go down, and perception still persisted. It is like going into the ocean thinking that there will always be a shark attack if you go into the ocean. It may occur, but the chance are far less likely than you imagine.

Feeling less safe is not the same as being less safe, is it?

 

There you have it. A prime example from a Trump supporter that Trump should be above the law at any and all costs.

 

but of course-I actually heard that years ago, it was an alleged conversation with another clinton conquest after listening to Monica's testimony (Jennifer Flowers) and they asked her if her sex with Clinton was like Lewinsky's and she said (allegedly) close but not cigar BTW Mike Chernuchin-former Manhattan ADA and a writer, director etc of Law and Order had a line where Detective Brisco (IIRC) was explaining that a "john" they collared was "getting a Lewinsky" in a phone booth. Monica's father sewed but the court dismissed the case saying the term "Lewinsky" for oral sex was sort of like "Xerox" for photocopying or "Kleenex" for tissues

 

What “documentable” proof is there that he is.

 

And there you have it. A prime example of a Trump hater who thinks Trump is below the law and the rule of law should be thrown to the wind, just to convict him.

 

Nothing wrong about philanthropy. Did I suggest there was? There's nothing wrong with having an ideology either. My point wasn't about it being right or wrong, but rather a measurement of why a billionaire would support a certain politician. They don't support those that disagree with their ideology. A close look at Bragg's policies and actions would suggest why Soros would support him.

 

So why comment about George Soros then?

 

Look

 

Not a Trump hater considering I am waiting for what the grand jury decides. Or are the members of the grand jury part of your conspiracy theory too along with all other prosecutors?

remember, even the GOP said upon face value that the evidence listed by the DA that a crime may have been committed, if you don't mention Trump's name. To me, a charge is valid no matter who is the allegation alleged against.

 

what drives voting? gun banners have been howling for bans on semi auto rifles even though those are used in less murders in a decade than gangbangers with handguns kill in a few months in big Democrat run cities and over the last 30 years the violent crime rate has gone way down,

 

NO! There Weren't...
It has been explained Umpteen Times that the Release of Trump's Taxes was LEGAL...
So, Why would anybody persist in posting The Same BS (over and over)?
___________
A Detailed Explanation (of the precise legal issues) can be found here:
The Easy Question: Can House Democrats Make Trump’s Tax Returns Public?
The law is clear that the House Ways and Means Committee can now make Trump’s tax returns public if a majority of the committee members vote to do so.

The relevant statute, Section 6103(f) of the Internal Revenue Code, instructs the IRS to release otherwise-confidential tax returns or return information to three congressional tax committees—the Senate Finance Committee, the House Ways and Means Committee, and the Joint Committee on Taxation—upon written request from the chair of any of those panels. The statute also instructs the IRS to release returns or return information to other congressional committees under a narrower set of circumstances.
The key language regarding the receiving committee’s confidentiality obligations lies in Section 6103(f)(4). That paragraph says that any return or return information obtained by the Senate Finance Committee, House Ways and Means Committee, or Joint Committee on Taxation “may be submitted by the committee to the Senate or the House of Representatives, or to both.” It goes on to say that any return or return information obtained by another committee “may be submitted by the committee to the Senate or the House of Representatives, or to both, except that any return or return information which can be associated with, or otherwise identify, directly or indirectly, a particular taxpayer, shall be furnished to the Senate or the House of Representatives only when sitting in closed executive session unless such taxpayer otherwise consents in writing to such disclosure” (emphasis added).
Some textualist judges and justices are fond of the Latin phrase “expressio unius est exclusio alterius”: the expression of one thing is the exclusion of the other. But one doesn’t need to be a textualist—or a classicist—to recognize the importance of the contrast between the two submission provisions. Absent the taxpayer’s consent, other committees can submit returns to the full Senate or House “only when sitting in closed executive session.” The Senate Finance Committee, House Ways and Means Committee, and Joint Committee on Taxation can submit returns to the full Senate or House without condition.
Judge Trevor McFadden of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia reached the same conclusion in his December 2021 decision rejecting Trump’s bid to block the IRS from releasing his returns. “It might not be right or wise to publish the returns,” McFadden wrote, but the House Ways and Means Committee has the “right to do so.” And if the House Ways and Means Committee exercises that right with respect to Trump’s returns, its action wouldn’t be unprecedented: In 2014, the House Ways and Means Committee published return information regarding 51 taxpayers as part of its investigation into allegations that the IRS had discriminated against conservative nonprofit organizations seeking tax exempt status.
In the definitive scholarly treatment of Section 6103(f), longtime University of Virginia law professor George Yin, who served as chief of staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation from 2003 to 2005, concludes that the choice to allow the three tax committees to publish private tax information was a “conscious decision” by Congress. Prior to 1976, Yin explains, the president—along with the three congressional tax committees—had statutory authority to make return information public. A 1976 amendment eliminated the president’s authority to publicize return information but preserved the power of the three tax committees. “Congress no doubt felt compelled in 1976 to preserve some outlet for Congressional disclosures to the public,” Yin writes, and it “was natural to give this authority to the tax committees.”
On top of all this, the Speech and Debate Clause immunizes lawmakers from liability for statements they make in committee and on the House or Senate floor. So even if it weren’t for Section 6103(f)(4), a Ways and Means Committee member could—without legal consequence—read Trump’s tax returns aloud, line by line, with the C-SPAN cameras rolling. But House Democrats don’t need to rely on constitutional super-immunity here: The relevant statutory provisions clearly empower the Ways and Means Committee to enter Trump’s tax returns into the public domain.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/house-democrats-can-release-trumps-tax-returns-should-they

 

But still posting it is a waste of time, is it?

 

It’s interesting that the “Soros deflection” seems to be the right wing’s go to, to obfuscate tRaitor tRump’s potential coming indictment. And here you are with both feet in that pool.