Trump's Troubles

Hey genius I was told earlier this is a campaign finance issue. That is therefore not a NY jurisdiction issue as campaign finance deals with the federal election. Are you saying the previous poster is full of crap saying this is campaign finance? Before you go any further I recommend you learn more about this case and what the prosecution has presented to the jury what the alleged crime is. Stop relaying on your media sources and stick to the actual trial. Anything else is speculation which is clear to me to be the overriding source of misinformation. You tell me what you think the jury has been told is the crime at hand to determine guilt or innocence if it is not campaign finance violation.

 

No, the crime is falsification of business records. That is a crime in New York State. The crime is simply elevated to a felony by the alleged commission of this state crime to cover up the federal crime related to campaign finance. It really isn't that complicated.

 

My assertion is you don't have the first clue about this subject matter. Florida's law was cited due to the very strong parallels to NY in terms of pleading and charging crimes. I tried to dumb it down for you, obviously not far enough.

For 3+ years 1/5 of the felony Informations (official charging documents) filed in Hillsborough County came across MY desk for MY review and approval. You, on the other hand, obtained your legal expertise from watching Fox "News"

Bless your heart.

 

I don't have "compression" problems. The socks I buy for that problem work just fine.

But I see what is going on here now. You are regurgitating nonsense from the likes of Tom Fitton or Jonathan Turley as if it weren't right wing disinformation.

Instead of asking us to provide you with court analysis, try following Lisa Rubin on Twitter who is following the trial live each day.

 

Let’s pick up here and cut out all the other noise. I agree this is the case in a nutshell. The prosecution must prove Donald Trump committed some federal crime which you say is related to campaign finance. Pretty simple and yet so far very vague and unclear from the prosecution’s opening statements all through yesterday’s testimony. Little to nothing has directly implicated Donald Trump. Even yesterday’s math and hours of outlining of the calculated payments to Cohen the witness admitted under cross examination that Donald Trump had no involvement. Maybe not all media sources reported this so everyone may not be aware of the significance of that admission. Even CNN had to reluctantly admit this fact. Maybe today’s testimony and new witness will provide relevant information.

 

I suspect these trolls are all from a few people. I always enjoy reading this board more after I have ignored them.

 

The brave man just keeps on giving and giving ...

 

You are hanging your hat on a mafia defense. Look, John Gotti never said to kill Johnny Two Times. He just winked at his right hand man who told his right hand man to "take care of the Johnny Two Times problem." Then Gotti cut a check and signed it to the guy who killed him. See, no direct involvement from Gotti!

 

Good luck to him ever getting to put it in evidence. Cannon just gave Trump another indefinite extension to review the documents.

 

Here’s my concern based on the evidence so far. It seems that the evidence yesterday, amongst many other things, suggests that the payments were paid by “DJT”, meaning (to me) his personal accounts. Of that’s the case, how does the prosecutor connect the payments to the campaign? In other words, doesn’t this support the defense argument that the payments were arguably made to protect his family from the embarrassment, as opposed to primarily quashing the story for the campaign?

 

No, they do not. They have to prove a crime was committed and that Trump helped conceal it by falsifying business records. They don't have to prove that he did the crime. There have been people convicted of falsifying business records in the first degree and acquited of the underlying crime.

 

This is actually a necessary part of the case. If the payment came from the campaign, that would be legal. The issue is that it came from other entities (his business and some other entity, I believe) and was done for campaign purposes (which the prosecution will have to prove to get first degree). They did this to further conceal the payments, as there are less reporting rules around private businesses than campaigns. However, businesses aren't allowed to contribute this amount, either directly or in-kind, to a campaign. So if the activity is found to have been for campaign purposes, then they did something illegal. Cohen has already been found guilty of thatz with Trump listed as an unindicted co-conspirator.

 

For the lawyers, here is a derailed breakdown of what must be proven in the NY trial. Ben Wittes has also stated that they likely need to elicit testimony that Trump directed the scheme from someone other than Michael Cohen, who will have credibility issues. I think they do not have another witness, given how much time they have invested in getting into the check signing protocols

What Must Prosecutors Prove in Trump’s NY Trial?

 

Groundhogs Day!

 

Stormy was in court burying Trump today if not legally then personally:

--Spanked his butt with a newspaper
--Trump told her that Melania sleeps in a different room than him
--Trump told her she was like his daughter right before sex

 

Not creepy at all!

 

There is a 0.0% chance republicans will care.

 

Would seem that the voice recording of Trump, in evidence, of discussing the scheme with Cohen might speak to that.