Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit will hear oral arguments on a threshold issue in the criminal case against President Donald Trump in New York. The case is still pending in the New York court system after his sentencing, but President Trump wants the case removed to federal court. He is relying on last year’s presidential immunity decision and arguing that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg tripped a wire by calling former White House aides as witnesses.
Last year, the Supreme Court issued a historic decision in Trump v. United States defining the scope of presidential immunity.
The Court found that there was absolute immunity for actions that fall within their “exclusive sphere of constitutional authority,” while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial, or private, actions.
The Court has often adopted tiered approaches in balancing the powers of the branches. For example, in his famous concurrence to Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), Justice Robert Jackson broke down the line of authority between Congress and the White House into three groups where the President is acting with express or implied authority from Congress; where Congress is silent (“the zone of twilight” area); and where the President is acting in defiance of Congress.
Here, the Court separated cases into actions taken in core areas of executive authority, official actions taken outside those core areas, and unofficial actions. Actions deemed personal or unofficial are not protected under this ruling.
Trump is arguing that he is protected by presidential immunity and that this matter should be heard in federal court. He is citing Bragg’s calling of former White House Communications Director Hope Hicks and former executive assistant Madeleine Westerhout as witnesses to discuss matters occurring in the White House and during Trump’s first term.
Bragg is arguing that it is too late for such removal. Trump’s prior efforts at removal have failed.
The argument will be heard before Judges Raymond J. Lohier, Susan L. Carney, and Myrna Perez.
This is a difficult case to make at this stage of the case. If Trump loses, the criminal case will continue through the state system and may eventually find its way to the Supreme Court.
I have long been a critic of the case and there are strong grounds to appeal.
For example, Judge Juan Merchan effectively guaranteed a conviction by telling jurors that they did not have to agree with specificity on what had occurred in the case to convict Trump. The only way to get beyond the passage of the statute of limitations on the dead misdemeanor for falsifying business records had been to allege that the bookkeeping violation in question occurred to conceal another crime. Bragg did not bother to state clearly what that crime was, originally alluding to four different crimes.
It was not until the end of the case that Merchan would lay out three possible crimes for the jury. All the way up to the final instructions in the case, legal analysts on CNN and other outlets expressed doubt about what the actual theory of the criminal conduct was in the case.
Despite spending little time on these secondary crimes at trial, Merchan told the jury that they could convict if they believed that invoices and other documents had been falsified to hide federal election violations, other falsification violations or a tax violation.
Those are very different theories of a criminal conspiracy. Under one theory, Trump was hiding an affair with a porn actress with the payment of hush money before the election. Under another theory, he was trying to reduce a tax burden for someone else (that part was left hazy). As a third alternative, he might have falsified the documents to hide the falsification of other documents, a perfectly spellbinding circular theory.
If those sound like they could be three different cases, then you are right. Yet Merchan told the jurors that they did not have to agree on which fact-pattern or conspiracy had occurred. They could split 4-4-4 on the secondary crime motivating the misdemeanors and just declare that some secondary crime was involved.
Many of us are eager to see the New York system move this case, as well as the equally grotesque case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The cases, however, continue to move forward at a glacial pace in the notoriously slow New York legal system.
“It was not until the end of the case that Merchan would lay out three possible crimes for the jury.” (JT)
In other words:
Here’s your target. And a smorgasbord of crimes. Pick one. Or any number. Whatever sates your desire to convict.
Beria would be jealous.
No sale. The law did not require it. All that was required for the upgrade was that he was doing it as part of a scheme to facilitate another crime. If a perp breaks into your house and sets it alight, do you have to prove that he was there to rape the occupant, when he might have been intent on burglary? Beria, my a$$.
“. . . require it.” “. . . doing it . . .”
What is (are?) the “it?”
Or is that still a mystery?
There is no mystery; it’s about the complexity of the arguments and how the law was applied through those arguments.
Supporters of Trump tend to prefer things to be simple and straightforward, viewing issues in black and white. Anything more complex than that is often dismissed as nonsense. This is why lawyers attend law school: laws, particularly across different states, can have varying meanings and definitions of “fraud.” The federal definition of “fraud” does not supersede state definitions and that is what many here are trying to argue.
OMG! George thinks that fraud is not fraud in different states! It depends on how they “interpret” the definition of fraud!
george, fraud is fraud. fraud is fraud. basic Black letter law definition, used THOUSANDS OF TIMES IN SCOTUS CASES, whether based on federal or state law.
What may differ is its USE in statutory language of its potential APPLICATION in different states.
You are really scary.
“What may differ is its USE in statutory language of its potential APPLICATION in different states.”
DUh! That’s my point. Thanks for agreeing with me.
I seems your reading comprehension problem did get a smidge in the way of your understanding. But it seems you eventually got it. Good job. there is hope for you.
“thanks for agreeing with me” a tactic georgie learned and emulates on this blog.
“can have varying meanings and definitions of “fraud.”
WTH?
Your frustration is not with me. It’s your inability to read for comprehension. I truly feel sorry for you. Your incessant need for literal meanings and an inability to read for comprehension is creating a conflict in that little brain of yours. You’re experiencing in real time a Kruger-Dunning moment. It’s hilarious.
HAHAHA georgie, did you mean “dunning-kruger” ?
remember when you tried to appear smart and told someone that he suffered from “kruger-dunning effect?” Obviously, when someone tried to correct you, your READING COMPREHENSION didn’t understand that they were making fun of your fake pretense that you were an expert and knew what you were talking about. what a phony clown.
he’s “hilarious” isn’t he?
ROLF! So what. We both know what it means. It doesn’t change the fact that you are experiencing a Dunning-Kruger/ Kruger-Dunning effect in real time. Your frustration is getting the better of you.
NO, you apparently don’t know what it means other than what you learned on google or wiki. If you truly were familiar with it, you would at least remember what it is called. clown.
“. . . viewing issues in black and white.”
You mean like you just did numerous times?
“. . . the complexity . . .”
Complexity worship is always the refuge of those who regard themselves as High Priests.
You are incorrect. First of all, SCOTUS has ruled that due process requires unanimity on the contingent crime which they never did. As per your analogy, the jury’s instructions did not require it nor did their decision of guilt declare it.
Secondly, by law, only a federal court can charge and probe evidence for a federal election campaign crime. Thus, the NY Court did not have jurisdiction to declare guilt on a FEC violation.
Third, hush money payments by the candidate would never be a campaign expense or else every person in trouble would run for office and use donations to pay legal expenses.
The case is defective on the merits and eventually won’t survive an appeal.
Mac: Well said.
Trump made a promise to GOD to follow, uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution from “domestic enemies” to the U.S. Constitution. In his first 24 hours after making this promise to GOD and promise to 350 million Americans, Trump tried to illegally amend and overturn the 14th Amendment in his first 24 hours.
What’s really curious is that Christian leaders on the right support arguably the least religious president in American history, but oppose really devout Christian’s like Jimmy Carter and Ted Olson (former George W. Bush official).
Silence from most top Christian leaders. None will reprimand Trump for his phony promise to GOD with his hand in the Christian Bible after swearing a constitutional Oath of Office!
The Washington Post has been keeping score. Trump lied more than 3000 times during just his first term!
Republicans play “Team Sports” – today’s Party of Abraham Lincoln seem to stand for nothing! Not even Christian leaders will stand up to Trump!
The Washington Post
__________________________
HAHAHAHAHA.
Jezzzzzzzzzzz what a loon.
Sometimes I don’t comment because I am literally stunned into silence by the sheer vileness of the modern left; this would be one of those matters. None of this should have ever been ‘a thing’ in a sane society. Our modern left, in toto, are a pox on humanity, and that’s all there is to it. We can only pray that our legal system works.
If it did, he’d be out of office already. https://www.scribd.com/document/874938084/CAFC-VOSAmicus
This case will be forever mired in appeals until rendered moot by mortality.
Where is the jury verdict and verdict form on the three mystery charges the judge instructed them to select (“not unanimous”) …. The jury would LITERALLY have to set down immediately on the start of deliberation and vote on the three mystery charges and produce a jury vote and jury form before ever proceeding on to the original charge which was a out of date misdemeanor unless their” not unanimous” vote determined otherwise…. two of the mystery charged were out of date misdemeanors themselves and the third was a federal election which Merchan had no jurisdiction…..
This says it all…
Let Judge John Wilson tell it how it is…
“ASSURED REVERSAL”
Now, do Aileen “Loose” Cannon.
This says it all.
https://youtu.be/kn200lvmTZc
Thanks to Professor Turley for EXCELLENT and succinct summary of the varying directions this case could go. I would love to sit in one one of his classes while his students bounce these theories around.
Lin
I wonder?
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has scheduled oral arguments Wednesday to consider whether to move the president’s criminal hush money case from state to federal court.
This is not a case; this is venue corruption.
This case must be heard in Coeur D’Alene, Idaho, in the interests of impartial justice.
It’s obvious (IMO) that this should be held in Federal Court and brought to the SCOTUS Level. It is purely a Constitutional Issue regarding the Executive Branch.
However given the current political atmosphere in New York, the”Anything Goes” approach of the State of New York vs. a Technicality (Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg tripped a wire by calling former White House aides as witnesses.) will depend on the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit weighing it as a ‘Hard founded Technicality’ or a ‘Soft founded Technicality.’
Whatever the result – it won’t be surprising (in these times).
No sale. The statute was a state statute, and even John Roberts can’t grant him absolution.
As Yale law professor Jed Rubenfeld has pointed out, Hillary committed the same pair of crimes that Trump was convicted of, but remains unprosecuted. In her case, she falsely labeled Steele Dossier payments as “Legal Services,” instead of reimbursements to Cohen’s HELOC. What’s worse, HRC did it on official expense submittals to the FEC — only the Trump Organization and Cohen would ever see Trump’s mislabelings. The FEC even fined her for her deception. And a political organization counts as a business for New York Penal Law 175.10.
The purpose of the deception, to promote HRC’s campaign at the expense of Trump’s,,is obvious. Both Hillary Clinton and Marc Elias conspired to carry out the deception. Finally, the deception violated Federal election law. So all elements of New York Election Law 17-152 have been met.
Why didn’t Hillary go to jail? Something (D)ifferent about her?
There’s a huge flaw in your comparison. Hillary was being charged under FEDERAL law. which it has a different meaning of fraud than state law. States have their own definitions of what constitutes “fraud.”
This type of lawfare against Trump enhanced his appeal to the voters and helped him get reelected. This and the physical assassination attempts. It also helped that the public saw two additional things: the Dems and media are corrupt and never tell the truth (like with Joe Biden being “sharp as a tack” and “laser focused”), and the Dem party has gone stark raving mad with tampons in boys rooms, men clobbering women in competitive sports and invading their private spaces, open borders letting in thousands of convicted rapists and murderers, enormous inflation, suppression of domestic energy production in worship to the green new scam cult, defund the police, and on and on.
“You gotta twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out what the crime was.”
“I would be happier, as someone who owns property in Manhattan, if the district attorney of New York County would take care of criminals who were making it impossible for citizens to walk in the streets and use the subway, to use his efforts to keep those people off the street, than to spend $5 million or $10 million of taxpayers’ money trying Donald Trump on this nonsense,”
— Judge “Judy” Sheindlin
“Judge Judy Sheindlin should stick to law and leave the lawfare to us. That’s our specialty and we do it better than anyone.”–District Attorney Alvin Bragg
The crime was falsifying business records. It wasn’t hard to prove. That’s a crime in NY.
It was never proved. Falsification would require there to be a true, known value in the case. There is no such value until a sale is made. The case violated multiple laws, and they were all violated by the NY prosecutors.
12 jurors believed there was enough evidence to find him guilty.
What laws were violated? State law makes falsifying business records a crime.
Falsifying business records is a MISDEMEANOR!!
Unless there are aggravating factors, which makes it a felony. Don’t like the law? Get it changed. But you can’t object to the DA enforcing the law in a clear-cut case.
“But he’s My Pwecious TwumpyBear, AND I WUVS HIM!!!”
If not for double-standards, you would have no standards at all! “Differing weights and differing measures—the LORD detests them both.” Prov. 20:10.
The statute of limitations had expired on the misdemeanor falsification of business records. The second, unspecified, crime was required to make the misdemeanor a felony with a longer statute of limitations. The 2nd crime wasn’t specified until the very end of the trial. Even then it was multiple choice. That violated Trump’s 6th Amendment right to “be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation” before the trial.
The law didn’t require it. All that was required is intent to commit a separate crime.
The Manhattan DA prosecutes this every day of the week and twice on Mondays. Why do you object?
“But he’s My Pwecious TwumpyBear, AND I WUVS HIM!!!”
If not for double-standards, you would have no standards at all! “Differing weights and differing measures—the LORD detests them both.” Prov. 20:10.
Trump got a fair trial. And a jury of his peers took only a few hours to convict. Why? Document cases are hard to defend.
So in response, then who was the injured party in this case? Who suffered a financial loss from this falsification of so called records? Banks and creditors testified in court they were paid, often times early and wanted to continue doing business.
You are using federal law. Not state law. He was charged under state law.
You’re conflating cases. That was the civil case.
And who was the victim? The little guy who plays by the rules. That’s why the law is on the books, and has been for longer than you have probably been alive.
“But he’s My Pwecious TwumpyBear, AND I WUVS HIM!!!”
If not for double-standards, you would have no standards at all! “Differing weights and differing measures—the LORD detests them both.” Prov. 20:10.
Smarter-than-Turley George is incapable of comprehending the real differences in these cases. If it were that simple, the Second Circuit could have denied appeal on a “lack of substantive grounds” basis.
False. Fraud REQUIRES actual harm – and this is a fraud statute.
None other than Justice RBG wrote and oppinion confirming that there is no fraud if there is no harm. Worse still Fraud requires TANGLIBLE harm – theft of property or something similar.
Even the infamous 18USC1001 – lying to a federal agent REQUIRES that the lie obstructs justice in some way.
It is NOT a crime to tell a federal agent that you had a grilled cheese for lunch when you actually had a BLT.
It would not have been a crime for Trump to Tell NY that the money to cohen was for meals at Chick-a-fil-et – so long as the “lie” did not result in someone losing something tangible that they had a right to.
Trump did NOT record the expense as a campaign expense – hence he WAS NOT fined by the FEC as Clinton was.
Taxes were properly paid on income.
This is just one of the long long list of errors made by Merchan.
Those of you on the left do not grasp you can not make anything you want into a crime.
Those of you on the left post lies here all the time – that is not a crime.
Lying is not a crime.
Cite an exampel of a prosecution under the NYS statute that Trump was charged with where the falsified records did not result in real harm to someone – such as a failure to pay taxes ?
This case is the perfect example of WHY fraud requires tangible harm.
There is not even disagreement here over whether Trump “falsified” business records,
Calling payments to a lawyer “legal expenses” is Truthful.
Calling payments for a non-disclusre “legal expenses” is Truthful.
You left wing nuts disagree. That is PRECISELY why fraud requires ACTUAL TANGIBLE HARM.
It is NOT generally a matter of opinion whether Trump paid his taxes or not.
We do NOT want crimes and criminal prosecution to hinge on disagreements over the correct use of words – unless you are a left wing nut.
We did not agree to the social contract that gives government its legitimacy to have government micromanage the WORDS we use.
The NYS crime of falsifying business records is NOT about the words you use in your business records. It is about lying in a way that causes actual harm to others.
Legitimate govenrment exists to protect us from force and actual fraud.
Illegitimate govenrment attempts to microparse words where there is no use of force or fraud.
John, you’re citing federal law. Trump was charged under state law. Trump wasn’t accused of fraud. He was accused of falsifying business records. You keep conflating federal statutes with state statutes.
“Cite an exampel of a prosecution under the NYS statute that Trump was charged with where the falsified records did not result in real harm to someone – such as a failure to pay taxes ?”
NY statutes do not require that harm be the underlying requirement.
Just falsifying business records is a crime in NY.
“The NYS crime of falsifying business records is NOT about the words you use in your business records. It is about lying in a way that causes actual harm to others.”
Nope. You’re conflating federal requirements as state requirements. There is no state requirement that harm must be proven.
Cite the NY law saying it’s required.
It’s only a felony when it’s used to conceal a second crime
if he was never charged with another crime there can’t be a felony
Steve, he does’t have to be charged with a second crime. NY law only requires that another crime was comitted. Hiding the nature of the payments is the ‘second’ crime. If Trump openly admitted he was paying Stormy Daniels to keep her from telling her story then the charges wouldn’t have been felonies.
Not how it works. Intent is the aggravating factor. If he is successful in avoiding the crime, he doesn’t get a pass.
“But he’s My Pwecious TwumpyBear, AND I WUVS HIM!!!”
If not for double-standards, you would have no standards at all! “Differing weights and differing measures—the LORD detests them both.” Prov. 20:10.
John Say,
Yes, falsifying business records is a crime in New York State. It is covered under New York Penal Law § 175.05 and § 175.10. Specifically, § 175.05 addresses falsifying business records in the second degree, while § 175.10 deals with falsifying business records in the first degree.
Falsifying business records in the second degree (a misdemeanor) involves making or causing a false entry in business records with intent to defraud or mislead. The intent is crucial; it’s not just about making an incorrect entry, but about doing so with a purpose to benefit oneself or another.
To defraud OR mislead.
In simpler terms: Making or causing a false entry in a business record to deceive or benefit yourself is a crime in New York, and the severity of the crime depends on whether it’s also used to conceal or commit another crime.
Trump’s intent was to deceive by commission.
“Trump’s intent was to deceive by commission.” what does that mean and what’s the “other ” crime?
“We did not agree to the social contract that gives government its legitimacy to have government micromanage the WORDS we use.”
Yes we did. That’s why we have the judicial branch. That’s their job.
There is actual harm, and a law on the books. NY is the world’s financial epicenter, and they call it closer than you do in Couzinfuk, Arkansas. If you don’t like the law, do your business in Couzinfuk, Arkansas.
HEY GEORGE READ THE ARTICLE! “misdemeanor for falsifying business records” CRIME? a lowly MISDEMEANOR!!!
But the statute of limitations had expired on those misdemeanors
Wrong as usual. The “crime” was not easy to prove. Whether the payments were improperly categorized was questionable at best.
George – Trump’s bookeeper labeled the payments from Trump to Cohen, as “legal expenses”. Cohen was Trump’s attorney and his work related to handling of various legal matters, including dealing with the threat of the stripper to embarrass Trump. Why is that not a “legal expense”?
edwardmahl: A very important point. I don’t think George totally understands the nuances of law, except what is available for edification through Google.
Moreover, if the predicate offense was to defraud the public before an election (to hide marital infidelity) did marital infidelity stop JFK from being elected president? Trump was even easily reelected with the added exposure.
Bragg’s ability to fashion and proffer an unpalatable motive before a hostile antiTrump jury is not as convincing as George would like.
Notwithstanding, the jury did reject Trump’s argument and convicted him, …so that’s that for now.
p.s. your granddaughter’s little smiling eyes make me smile. If you covered the lower half of her face and just showed her eyes, you would see just through her eyes an innocent child happily loved and content with her environs. Nice that you have contributed to that security for her.
Trump’s fatal flaws are stupidity, greed, and hiring bottom-feeding lawyers. If he comes into my office, I tell him to just pay the lady fast and be done with it. Paying her out of a nondescript corporate account delays notice until the election is over. Problem solved.
Trump’s fatal flaws are relying on the advice of others expected to provide good advice. You miss the whole point
Because it wasn’t legal services. (I’m also a CPA.) You can’t write off payments to a stripper.
edward, because the act of re-labeling the expenses as “Legal expenses” when they were indeed payoffs to a porn star to keep her mouth shut are not legal expenses.
If that was the crime then the SOL had run. Care to opine on that.
It wasn’t hard to prove. That’s a crime in NY.
When you’re a Republican in that city – especially if your name is Trump – it is completely impossible for a defendant to raise a reasonable doubt in those courtrooms. Especially before a judge that had their offspring merching out their office for millions of dollars – exactly like Biden’s First Felon Crackhead Kid did.
New York is where Democrat mayors, attorney generals, and prosecutors get elected on promising they will use bills of attainder to “get Trump” if elected.
George is here to continue lying that this Soviet style prosecution was “Equal Justice For All”.
George is, as always, a police state fascist cheap fake American.
Trump was a Democrat before he switched to Republican.
Kill any mockingbirds lately?
Document cases are easy to prove. He would have been convicted pretty much anywhere. Judges are corrupt AF, but juries are pretty fair.
for a lawyer, you sure speak dumb. Juries can only be “pretty fair” if they are provided judges and lawyers who are not corrupt, biased, manipulative, or devious.
You should also put the “Judge” in air-quotes. White-collar crimes are crimes. https://www.scribd.com/document/873889958/Doe-Motion-for-TRO
The NY appellate court heard the arguments on the Letitia James fraud case last fall and still have not issued their ruling.
They are delaying.
They are near certain ruling for Trump.
Anything else would destroy business in NY.
But the ruling will give Trump a positive news cycle.
It is not hard to see the judicial racism at play here. The mental connections to realty by these two racists are faulty and no one seems to want to do anything about it. Involved or not, the Chinese could not have shown how to groom a better couple to further erode America’s confidence in its institutions.
The funny thing is that every person that isn’t a lawyer knows how this was rigged but those in black robes think we believe them
It not not the color of the robe…
Judge Juan Merchan, master of the Star Chamber, now get his first day in court.
Of course, Merchan’s daughter works only on Democratic campaigns. How much did Trump’s prosecution bring into party coffers, and thus into her bank account.
Now, do Aileen “Loose” Cannon.
“But he’s My Pwecious TwumpyBear, AND I WUVS HIM!!!”
If not for double-standards, you would have no standards at all! “Differing weights and differing measures—the LORD detests them both.” Prov. 20:10.
Merchan sought an ethics opinion within weeks of being assigned the case. He was deemed fit to sit, and if you are fit to sit, you have a duty to sit. I can find no flaw in his handling of the case, other than that I would have been inclined to throw his a$$ in the slam for contempt. No one else can get away with what he got away with.
Do you have any proof of her getting money?
Wall-Eye James and Baggman have been counting that interest from day 1, hoping they could buy retirements (or in Tishie’s case, a house in Virginia where she could get with her dad-husband). Good to see it’s finally moving somewhere. They should be made to pay back for all this wasted time and wasted lawfare.
I hope they’re ready for political cardboard box living, because there’s no way the Dems will accept them back when this sinks.
-Rabble
Turley still misinterprets the case especially the jury instructions. NY law allows for such instructions and since it’s state law it’s peculiar requirments have not been questioned by multiple appeals against verdict.
Trump wants to move the case to federal court because he can argue immunity. But even Turley acknowledges, tacitly, that it will be very hard to do so. The road to a supreme court hearing the case is a long and difficult one.
The verdict is already in and Trump is already convicted. If the 2nd circuit rules against Trump it will be even more difficult to appeal to the Supreme Court. The facts are not in Trump’s favor.
And what was Trump convicted of?
Being white . His dad wouldn’t rent property to blacks.
Falsifying business records. It’s a crime in NY. 34 counts.
Yeah, servicable up to 4 years and a 5k fine. How many millions is Tishie salivating over? Doesn’t the number seem excessive?
_rabble
You keep saying that, but the statute of limitations for falsifying business records had passed. What was the other crime that allowed for the resurrection of the falsifying business records counts? That’s the point in Turley’s article when he says the jury could have split 4-4-4 on the three possible secondary crimes that were alleged. There is no indication the jury agreed on what the alleged second crime was, which is the legal basis for Trump’s appeal. As a self-professed New York State legal expert, why are you ignoring this point? Is New York State law so peculiar they’ve discarded the concept of jury unanimity in criminal convictions?
Even if the statute of limitations had not passed – there is no Fraud.
Alleged lies are not automatically fraud.
Fraud has required elements – 2 of which no evidence was presented at this trial.
When the proseuction fails to provide atleast plausible evidence of any element of a crime, the case can not go to the jury.
John you are right, but the SOL HAD RUN and therefore proving fraud is irrelevant. As for Mr or MS Anonymous, he is right to point out the the so-called secondary crime never reached a unanimous decision by the jury since the corrupt Merchand gave illegal jury instructions and therefore it will be overturned.
Does anyone think that if the courts were going to affirm the decisions that the NY courts wouldn’t have already handled the appeals?
This is a crime of Fraud.
That REQUIRES
1). A LIE – what is the lie ?
Calling payments to a lawyer legal expenses is truthful.
Calling payments to a lawyer to secure an NDA legal expenses is truthful.
2). Who relied on this alleged lie ?
Anyone ?
Fraud requires not only a lie, but it also requires being mislead.
3). Who was actually and tangibly harmed by this alleged lie ?
Bragg presented NO evidence that anyone relied on this alleged lie.
He presented no evidence that there was tangible harm.
There is no crime here – and YOU know it.
Your just suffering from TDS.
Nope. You don’t understand how NY law works.
This is a crime of concealment. Falsifying business records to conceal payments made to stormy Daniels is a crime.
You keep relying on federal statutes. This is not a federal case.
It is in part the breadth of the New York law which, unlike the law in many states, criminalizes falsifying internal business records even when they are private and not used to cheat the tax system or defraud anyone. But even in New York, generally falsifying private business records is a misdemeanor. It becomes a felony only if, as the jury found here, the actions are used to cover up or conceal a crime.
In this case, the jury was persuaded by the prosecution’s argument that the crime covered up was essentially a scheme to defraud the American people by concealing information about the character and conduct of a presidential candidate.
They had a lot of witnesses and reams of business records showing it.
Is paying your own lawyer now a crime?
What was falsified: his name, the check, or your grasp on reality?
Was it legal advice or marital discretion that triggered you?
Next time, should he list it as “Hush Fund, Line 1”?
Explain how a legal fee becomes a felony without laughing.
PS Don’t put on any makeup before going outside, or you will be defrauding the public.
…. It becomes a felony only if, as the jury found here, the actions are used to cover up or conceal a crime.
Again, you can’t claim he was covering up a crime if he wasn’t charged with one
Every other case has had a second criminal charge which caused the falsification ie: embezzlement, in which records were falsified to cover it up
Also, he never paid stormy, he paid his lawyer for an nda, 100% legal
A MISDEAMNOR!! GEORGE!!! READ the article AGAIN!! “misdemeanor for falsifying business records”
Even though it wasn’t arguing that it was an election contribution violation would make it a federal offense not a state crime
The facts are in Trump’s favor. And it will soon be Letitia James facing a 15 year prison sentence for fraud.
The US Constitution does not allow for such instructions.
Bingo!
Where in the Constitution does it say that?
“Turley still misinterprets the case especially the jury instructions. NY law allows for such instructions and since it’s state law it’s peculiar requirments have not been questioned by multiple appeals against verdict.”
False, False and False.
SCOTUS has long ago ruled that Jury verdicts must be UNANIMOUS on ALL Elements of a crime.
Please cite a case anywhere in the US where:
a jury did not have to be unanimuous about every element of a crime ?
an uncharged and unconvicted crime was used as a required element for another crime.
No evidence of several crimes used as required elements of another crime was even presented.
The jury was asked to make a determination on a crime not indicted, and not charged.
The jury was asked to make a determination based on an uncharged alleged crime that was outside of the jurisdiction of the court.
All of these errors were in this trial and Merchan’s jury instructions.
Each of these errors individually is sufficient to toss the case.
All of these are violations of criminal due process and constitutional rights.
George you are full of schiff.
NYS is only entitled to peculiarities of law and procedure that are CONSTITUTIONAL.
These are not.
This case has myriads of errors.
Worse the errors are all stupid.
Brag and Merchan could have followed the law and hoped – with a great deal of certainty that an NYC jury would convict anyway.
Instead they violated the constitution, the law, due process willy nilly and the only question in this case is WHICH error of Merchan’s gets the case tossed.
But your BIG problem is that there is no crime.
That is NOT likely the reason the case will be tossed – because the violations of due process are easier for judges. They can pretend Trump is guilty and being freed on a techicality.
I suspect that 2nd circuit will determine that Merchan did NOT conduct the required immunity analysis prior to taking the case to the jury and that he allowed evidence that should not have been allowed. That is the easiest way for the courts to get rid of this tar baby.
But there has been no merit in this from the start.
“Trump wants to move the case to federal court because he can argue immunity.”
No he wants it in federal court because that is the fastest way to get this mess tossed.
Merchan clearly screwed up the immunity issue and allowed evidence he was barred from allowing. The case can be tossed at either the state or federal level on those grounds.
“But even Turley acknowledges, tacitly, that it will be very hard to do so. ”
Nope, pretty black letter law.
Evidence and testimoney was allowed that was NOT allowed – the Testimony that SCOTUS already foreclosed in the Immunity opinion being only ONE such issue. There is little basis for Daniels testimoney – this is a falsification of records case. What happened between Trump and Daniels is completely irrelevant. While the charges are bogus for other reasons,
they do NOT hinge on the truth or falsity of daniels story. NDA’s are bought for true and false stories.
But it gets worse. Marchan allowed Daniels to stray into new territory alleging that Trump raped her. You can not introduce evidence of an uncharged crime.
Cohen also went far outside of his allowable testimony.
Next Merchan severely limited testimony to impeach Cohen – impeachment is ALWAYS admissible.
Next Merchan allowed the jury to decide non-unanimoulsy over alleged uncharged federal crimes, that were not introduced into evidence.
There are dozens of ways to toss this.
the 2nd circuit can easily decide Trump does not have immunity for these ACTS but that Merchan allowed testimony that was barred by SCOTUS’s immunity decision.
If Trump wins at any level – this is likely over.
Bragg is not likely to appeal.
“The road to a supreme court hearing the case is a long and difficult one.”
Probably not.
“The verdict is already in and Trump is already convicted.”
AQnd with absolute certainty will be reversed which nullifies the verdict and means Trump was NEVER convicted.
“If the 2nd circuit rules against Trump it will be even more difficult to appeal to the Supreme Court.”
ROFL
The question is NOT IF this will be reversed only WHEN.
I honestly do not think it is going to SCOTUS.
Brag will fold with the first appelate loss.
This is a bad case for Bragg and it is only likely to get worse.
There likely will be civil suits and damages.
“The facts are not in Trump’s favor.”
ROFL
There are NO facts of any kind in Braggs favor.
There is not even an actual falsification of a business record.
John say, again you keep conflating federal rules as state rules.
“SCOTUS has long ago ruled that Jury verdicts must be UNANIMOUS on ALL Elements of a crime.”
When they involve federal charges. You conveniently keep leaving that out. SCOTUS was referring to federal cases. Not state cases.
“a jury did not have to be unanimuous about every element of a crime ?
an uncharged and unconvicted crime was used as a required element for another crime.
No evidence of several crimes used as required elements of another crime was even presented.
The jury was asked to make a determination on a crime not indicted, and not charged.
The jury was asked to make a determination based on an uncharged alleged crime that was outside of the jurisdiction of the court.”
In NY this is allowed. This is why the jury was instructed according to NY state law. You and Turley keep using federal law as your argument. This is a state case and state charges.
“AQnd with absolute certainty will be reversed which nullifies the verdict and means Trump was NEVER convicted.”
I wouldn’t be too sure of that. Nullifying a conviction wont erase the fact that he was convicted.
“There is not even an actual falsification of a business record.”
Wrong. There were 34 falsifications and they were presented to the jury.
In today’s appeals court hearing Trump’s lawyers admitted that he’s not immune from the 34 felonies.
Right now Trump has to show he had a plausible defense. Plus there’s the problem of timing. He didn’t appeal within 30 days of his conviction. That technicality may hinder his bid to appeal his conviction.
John Say, Trump will have to prove his payments to stormy Daniels are within the scope of presidential acts.
He must show the hush money prosecution relates to an act “under color” of his presidency, a potential complication given that his 34 charges stem from reimbursements for a hush money payment made before his presidency.
^^^Straight from Google.
And Still not wrong
George says, with some sort of self given authority, that NY state allows “this” with “this” being UNFRIGGINCONSTITUTIONAL! This is as if NY passed a law that you don’t need to read Miranda Rights to a presidential candidate that is being arrested, if said candidate is a Republican. Or George, how about if Florida has a statute that states that defendants shall not be allowed to confront their accuser? Would you then claim, “but, this is Florida law’?
Hullbobby, your using false equivalence as an argument. Your examples are not relevant to the NY statutes.
You haven’t explained how its unconstitutional?
Trump never paid stormy Daniels he reimbursed his lawyer. Also is the account department assumed since it was an invoice from his lawyer that it was a legal expense, which makes sense
Lastly there was no hush money. It was a confidentiality agreement signed by his lawyer and Daniel’s.
And by the way, the only reason they were 34 count is because they included each monthly check. if you shoot somebody six times they don’t charge you with six counts of attempted murder so it also is excessive prosecution
steve,
“Also is the account department assumed since it was an invoice from his lawyer that it was a legal expense, which makes sense”
“Assumed”. that the accounting department assumed something is irrelevant. Trump still signed the checks and when he did so and stating that the purpose of the checks was for “legal expenses” when they were not is still falsifying a business document under NY law. Trump knew they were not for “legal expenses” he knew they were for payoffs to a porn star because Cohen told trump he did it as a favor to him and by signing the checks knowing that they were for something other than a legal expense constitutes falsifyication under NY state law.
georgie, AS his lawyer and advisor, did cohen tell Trump that “by signing the checks knowing that they were for something other than a legal expense constitutes falsifyication[sic] under NY state law.?????
Cohen didn’t have to tell him anything. Signing the checks made him complicit in the act of falsifying the documents. He knew what the payments were for and still signed them as “legal expenses” when they were not.
Cohen went to prison over this. Trump is part of that same crime.
WARNING: Never hire George as your lawyer.
“NYS is only entitled to peculiarities of law and procedure that are CONSTITUTIONAL.
These are not.”
Where in the Constitution does it say these peculiarities are unconstitutional?
It is unbelievable that something so fundamental to a criminal case’s theory of guilt, is not defined — either in the indictment, during the trial, or at jury instructions.
The whole idea of a fair trial is to inform the defendant what he is being charged with, so that he can prepare for and mount a viable defense.
This is the very definition of Kafkaesque, and mirrors the story of The Trial by Kafka, where the defendant was told he was being prosecuted for a crime, but the state refused to tell him what the crime was, forcing him to defend against something he didn’t know he was being charged with.
It violates the very fundamental rules of due process within our legal system.
*. Wonderful comparison, Trieste.
DJT faces 3 charges. Count 1. White
Count 2. Rich
Count 3. Male
He’s guilty of all charges. Remedy should have been self imposed as skin scarification, giving all worldly goods to charity and wearing dresses for the remainder of his life and the next.
He’s being persecuted and not prosecuted. So what’s a billing error worth and committed by a Mr. Cohen? Maybe a fine or dismissed as paid. James and Bragg are loons.
You forgot Count 4. Republican
“You forgot Count 4, Republican”, which is a felony in NY. Just ask George.
Gee, you now have 13 likes for your comment, the most I have ever seen on this site…and they are all well deserved!
Trump had plenty of time to prepare. Remember, he had multiple delays and appeals before a jury got to hear the case.
These political NY cases are exhausting the public and showing the legal system as biased and basically rendering it useless. What chance does anyone have against a corrupt legal system. Letitia James and Bragg are so politically motivated that they become more dangerous that they are still heading the NY legal system than this case against Trump! What a waste of time by two people who should be shown the door! New Yorkers look equally as bad because they voted for these people and let their hate fester.