Where's the Ham?

So Bragg lays out his hand. And we discover he was bluffing? Indeed he alleges that it was all about covering up underlying crimes. But when push comes to shove he can't name the underlying crimes. None of the stuff he named is even provably a crime unseemly undoubtedly but scarcely criminal.

 

He is making an absolute mockery of the justice system.

" Just us "

Like George Carlin said.... It's a really big club and you ain't in it!

 

Yea to "cover up other crimes"..... uhhhh. which are ?

Am I seeing that Trump set down out at his desk and wrote checks and turned around and then he enter the transactions in to the "books"?
Trump has more than likely never written a check and has never touched a ledger...

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EG7R6w7FZdY

 

What an absolute moron this prosecutor is.

Does he plan to actually detail these crimes he says he's trying to cover up or are we just supposed to believe him?

 

Counts are Falsifying Business Records—the brread and butter of white collar prosecutions. The “other” crimes are possibly falsifying business records at another organization or the reason David Pecker was before the grand jury. Promoting by false means a candidate-perpetrating a fraud. And obviously campaign finance.

I suppose they’ll argue Trump and others (Cohen, Weiselberg (sp?), Pecker, and whomever else) conspired to commit these acts to perpetrate a fraud on the public and state.

 

Trump's new nickname "President Fraud"

 

what I am waiting to see, is if Trump will say he did not have sex with that women under oath

 

in court, stay tuned

 

He only has a big mouth in front of his adoring fans and on truth Social, where his lies are cheered. In front of the judge, he'll be advised to stay silent, so to not perjure himself.

 

An even bigger dud than the Jan. 6 committee.

I didn't think that was possible.

Nice job, Alvin.

 

New York campaign finance laws don't apply to Federal candidates.

A candidate spent money to influence election?

A candidate was in cahoots with a newspaper to get favorable coverage?

OMG! Nobody ever did that!...lol

 

I thought the phrase was "Where's the Beef?" with that Wendy's commercial with Dave Thomas.

I take it you did not read the statement of facts. The statement of facts lays out what the underlying crime is. The indictment is simply a bare-bones indictment in which it states that each payment and entry is considered a crime.

 

Yes, Bragg was bluffing. But when you are a Democrat, a pair of duces beats a full house, even when the cards are on the table. Many voters learned that in high school and college.

 

Exactly, since when is falsifying business records NOT a crime? The beauty of the rule of law, Trump's defense will likely not defend against the falsification but they might try the statue of limitations angle, this case is just warming up Trump's next ten years.

 

From the old statement a DA could indict a ham sandwich.

And sorry no the underlying crimes that makes calling legal fees legal fees is never named.

In the end this isn't an indictment it's a wish list.

 

He's already handed down the indictments and the arraignments so it's time to s*** or get off the pot

 

What was falsified? And, who falsified them?

1. Paying for an NDA is not illegal.
2. To claim the NDA was a campaign expense, the prosecution must prove that it was solely a campaign benefit... which is absurd considering Trump is a public figure and businessman.
3. You have to prove that Trump was behind all this, not his accountants/lawyers.
4. The statute of limitations is expired. In order for the statute of limitations to have been paused, the law says Trump must have been continuously out of state, or his whereabouts were continuously unknown. That never happened.
5. You can't prosecute a federal crime in a state court. The jury has no way of knowing whether or not Trump engaged in a federal crime because it can't be prosecuted by Bragg, and the federal government never convicted him of it, let alone charged him. In fact, the last time a Presidential candidate paid a mistress threatening to go public for an NDA out of campaign funds (John Edwards) the federal government charged and prosecuted him for it saying it wasn't allowed to be a campaign expense. Therefore, the felony charges are unwarranted. In addition, I believe the statute of limitations on that federal statute also expired. The use of federal statutes to increase the charges in NY state court is unprecedented because everyone knew it wasn't legal to do so.
6. This is a selective prosecution that violates his constitutional rights.

The list of hurdles for Bragg is probably longer than this, but this is just what is plainly obvious as it stands currently. This prosecution is a total disaster.

 

This is a misdemeanor rap well past it's prime and no covering one misdemeanor with another and that's not in the indictment either, is still a misdemeanor. And even as felonies it's still beyond the statute of limitations.

 

580 days..... they only have to keep this in the news and muddy the waters until Nov 5, 2024.... the conversation in ANY conversation from now on will "trump got indicted, trump got indicted, trump got indicted".. whether Trump ever wins or not and included in any conversation... even if it never goes to court.... how many times on here have the left crowed "trump was impeached twice" and never including he was acquitted twice?
Our country in the last many years runs on "court of public opinion".... The Democrats own the MSN and Big Tech and will use it to their advantage. We don't need a court room when you have CNN in every airport spewing lies and misinformation.

 

The rightness or wrongness of the indictment, barring some unforeseen event, will be decided either by a jury or by a plea deal.

Until then, political palaver remains just that: a tale full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.

Meanwhile, other indictments are possible.

Regards, stay safe 'n well.

 

In bold, that's the purpose of a court case and the rule of law......no need to pop off prematurely.
1. why and was was it hidden as a business expense, that's the real point..no need to look at the rabbit.
2. for a court to decide
3. Bragg might just have that proof, no need to pop off prematurely again
5. Again, seems like Bragg believes he has a case and John E was found not guilty. Best for you (and the mango menace) to respect the rule of law and a jury. Patience is a virtue and the rule of law guarantees freedom and liberty.
6. Bullshit partisan spin, popping off must really be an ultra MAGA condition.

To sum up, he get his day in court....his right and also the right of the rule of law. Feel free to donate to his defense fund campaign kitty.

 

Felony charges carry up to 5 years each, hope for a weak prosecution case, a kind juror and, if things go south, a pardon from Ole' Joe and a NY governor.

 

Read The tenth amendment to the Constitution if the Constitution does not forbid it it falls under the domain of the states

also consider Article I section 4 Clause 1 of the Constitution:that allows states power over Federal elections for Senators and Representatives.

 

The goal is to keep Trump tied up in legal proceedings and the court for the remainder of his life. The persecution continues . . .

 

I'm referring to campaign laws. New York campaign laws don't apply to Federal elections.

Read New York's campaign laws and show us where any of them say "presidential campaign". I'll save you some time and inform you that it doesn't say that, but you're welcome to check it out yourself.