The (many) indictments of Donald Trump

#16,526
#16,526
BigOrangeMojo said:
It's a misdemeanor for the falsifying records. There is no second crime, IMO, to raise it to a felony....

The actual falsifying of docs is pretty much a slam dunk. It's the 2nd crime
Click to expand...

But what exactly was falsified? In my mind as I think about it, it’s almost akin to arguing capital vs maintenance expenses. There is a wide grey area.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NEO, davethevol and Gandalf
#16,527
#16,527
BigOrangeMojo said:
They arent based on lies. You are a partisan hack who had no sense of reality.

His own CFO stated in his depo that they falsified records. There is 100% a crime here.

The issue, which you clearly do not understand, is whether this obvious falsification was done to cover up another crime. If no other crime was covered up, Trump walks because it's just a misdemeanor out of statute.

I don't think there was a 2nd crime was but to say there was absolutely no crime done at all goes against all evidence and the words of Trump's own finance team...
Click to expand...
How did they falsify records?
 
#16,528
#16,528
hog88 said:
But what exactly was falsified? In my mind as I think about it, it’s almost akin to arguing capital vs maintenance expenses. There is a wide grey area.
Click to expand...

In theory, they created a false paper trail. If that paper trail had been requested by a state or federal tax auditor, you would have given them something with no economic reality.

It might not have changed the end result but you would have given them something fake. Again, the absolute definition of misdemeanor.

If Trump had actually broke a tax law and intended to give this as documentation to cover it up, that's where the felony would have shown up.

I know they reached out to investigate tax angle but they must not have liked the answer they got...
 
#16,529
#16,529
BigOrangeMojo said:
Trump's own CFO has testified in his depo to falsifying. That's a misdemeanor unless the court can prove Trump intended to use the falsified records to cover up another crime.

The State can no longer charge him with a misdemeanor due to statute expiration. It's felony or bust.
Click to expand...
How were the records falsified? It was obvious falsification according to you, so it should be really easy to explain what he did.
 
#16,530
#16,530
hog88 said:
But what exactly was falsified? In my mind as I think about it, it’s almost akin to arguing capital vs maintenance expenses. There is a wide grey area.
Click to expand...
If he called payments made to his attorney legal expenses, that's not falsification of anything. That's a correct classification of those expenses. My guess is that the liberal power base in New York threatened the CFO's CPA license if he didn't testify against Trump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol
#16,531
#16,531
Vol423 said:
How were the records falsified? It was obvious falsification according to you, so it should be really easy to explain what he did.
Click to expand...

Instead of paying Cohen back the 130K for settlement that he funneled through a newly created LLC, they created a Fake monthly retainer arrangement (without an actual contract) to pay Cohen...
 
#16,532
#16,532
BigOrangeMojo said:
In theory, they created a false paper trail. If that paper trail had been requested by a state or federal tax auditor, you would have given them something with no economic reality.

It might not have changed the end result but you would have given them something fake. Again, the absolute definition of misdemeanor.

If Trump had actually broke a tax law and intended to give this as documentation to cover it up, that's where the felony would have shown up.

I know they reached out to investigate tax angle but they must not have liked the answer they got...
Click to expand...
It used to be obvious falsification of records...now it's "in theory". You're a joke.
 
#16,533
#16,533
Vol423 said:
If he called payments made to his attorney legal expenses, that's not falsification of anything. That's a correct classification of those expenses. My guess is that liberal power base in New York threatened the CFO's CPA license if he didn't testify against Trump.
Click to expand...
That CFO is in jail and is testifying
 
#16,534
#16,534
Vol423 said:
It used to be obvious falsification of records...now it's "in theory". You're a joke.
Click to expand...
You are a partisan hack. I was explaining the tax angle hog had brought up earlier but your head is buried too deep in Trump's crotch to catch on...
 
#16,535
#16,535
Vol423 said:
How were the records falsified? It was obvious falsification according to you, so it should be really easy to explain what he did.
Click to expand...

It’s a false business record if you falsely classify an expense. I agree with Mojo that the DA had a case, weak and petty case but he had a misdemeanor case against Trump for classifying the payoff as a legal expense. Probably not even a misdemeanor or a case any DA outside of NY would even look at.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whodeycin85, davethevol and 85SugarVol
#16,536
#16,536
BigOrangeMojo said:
I don't think Bragg should have brought this case but to say Trump did nothing wrong is disingenuous as well...
Click to expand...
Trump clearly ran afoul of the law. That’s demonstrably true.

But something else can also simultaneously be true - this juiced felony case would never, ever have been brought against anybody else.

And the stink of it is only amplified with the knowledge that Bragg doesn’t charge anybody, with anything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: davethevol, BigOrangeMojo and hog88
#16,540
#16,540
Vol423 said:
If he called payments made to his attorney legal expenses, that's not falsification of anything. That's a correct classification of those expenses. My guess is that the liberal power base in New York threatened the CFO's CPA license if he didn't testify against Trump.
Click to expand...

If you knowingly create a false business record that does not reflect reality (which this arrangement was) that is a misdemeanor. It's a slap on the wrist and a fine.

The reason why this is important is a state or IRS auditor could review the deductibility of Trump's legal expense, especially since Trump is audited annually. You give them a document that represents something that does not reflect reality and that impacts their ability to do their job....
 
#16,541
#16,541
85SugarVol said:
Trump clearly ran afoul of the law. That’s demonstrably true.

But something else can also simultaneously be true - this juiced felony case would never, ever have been brought against anybody else.

And the stink of it is only amplified with the knowledge that Bragg doesn’t charge anybody, with anything.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree here. You can do something wrong and you can still be overcharged....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 85SugarVol
#16,543
#16,543
hog88 said:
But what exactly was falsified? In my mind as I think about it, it’s almost akin to arguing capital vs maintenance expenses. There is a wide grey area.
Click to expand...

Thats just it. Its not unreasonable to think that it would be a justifiable legal expense. Companies pay for NDAs all the time, especially when there is a a severance event. If Trump really didnt sleep with her (which admittedly seems far fetched) then he would have all the more reason to simply consider it effectively paying a legal bill to keep slander away from him.

The truth is, there could not have been much to Stormy's story. $130k is not much at all for someone like Trump. So it had to be either not completely credible or he didnt really care that much if it came out. Its called greenmail. Companies pay out all the time because its just cheaper to pay a smaller sum to get people to go away. For sure she had some nexus to show that it was plausible or there would be no money but again, they clearly couldnt have been too concerned with it or it would have absolutely been north of $500k and with deep teeth if she violated it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#16,544
#16,544
Gandalf said:
Thats just it. Its not unreasonable to think that it would be a justifiable legal expense. Companies pay for NDAs all the time, especially when there is a a severance event. If Trump really didnt sleep with her (which admittedly seems far fetched) then he would have all the more reason to simply consider it effectively paying a legal bill to keep slander away from him.

The truth is, there could not have been much to Stormy's story. $130k is not much at all for someone like Trump. So it had to be either not completely credible or he didnt really care that much if it came out. Its called greenmail. Companies pay out all the time because its just cheaper to pay a smaller sum to get people to go away. For sure she had some nexus to show that it was plausible or there would be no money but again, they clearly couldnt have been too concerned with it or it would have absolutely been north of $500k and with deep teeth if she violated it.
Click to expand...
That's an amazing redistribution of the facts. Impressed.
 
#16,545
#16,545
  • Like
Reactions: jmacvols1, hog88, davethevol and 1 other person
#16,546
#16,546
  • Like
Reactions: Gandalf and Carl Pickens
#16,548
#16,548
Sandman 423 said:
The problem with the gag order is that you have extortionists and a felon allowed to comment about Trump which the jurors can hear without him being able to respond. Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...

It's not about jurors hearing things. Fake news.

It's about Trump loons scaring the bejeesus out of witnesses and court personnel.

Please stop with the obvious and dumb straw man arguments.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigOrangeMojo
#16,550
#16,550
the entire case is a corrupt left wing sham....


thehill.com

Alvin Bragg’s entire case against Trump hinges on a disbarred serial perjurer

Before the bailiff administers the oath to Michael Cohen, Judge Juan Merchan might have to warn the spectators in the courtroom not to laugh.
thehill.com thehill.com

Jonathan Turley

"A disbarred, serial perjurer walks into a courtroom and asks to take an oath . . . No, seriously, this is not a joke. Michael Cohen will soon appear in a Manhattan courtroom in what is sure to be one of the most bizarre moments in legal history.

Cohen nearly comprises the prosecution’s entire case against former President Donald Trump under a criminal theory that still has many of us baffled. It is not clear what crime Trump was supposedly trying to conceal by making “hush-money” payments to former porn actress Stormy Daniels.


What is clear is that none of the witnesses called in recent weeks has had any direct involvement with Trump on the payments.

The witnesses had a lot to say about Cohen, and most of it was not good. They described an unprofessional, self-proclaimed “fix-it man” who created a shell corporation to buy out Daniels with his own money. The money was later paid back by Trump after the election, with other legal expenses.

So Cohen will now make the pitch to the jury that they should put his former client in jail for following his own legal advice.

This would be difficult even for a competent and ethical lawyer. For Cohen, it is utter insanity. But Bragg is betting on a New York jury looking no further than the identity of the defendant to convict. "
 
  • Like
Reactions: LibertyVol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top