The Trump Indictment and Statement of Facts - attached.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Treeman
  • Start date Start date
T

Treeman

Well-known member
34 counts of filing false business records - designed to cover up payments to kill bad publicity against him in the lead-up to the election.

I recommend reading both documents which are attached to this post.
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Not yet, but am looking forward to it. I presume they will be outlining what a cheat he is.
 
You assume these freaks can interpret facts. I think you will be proven wrong.

?Bonelover the Clown?

C6C1B800-2298-4A5D-9BC1-844CFD9D0CC5.jpeg
 
Not yet, but am looking forward to it. I presume they will be outlining what a cheat he is.

Read the documents and get back to us. I have my own take on it but am curious as to what others think.
 
The complaint is written up wrong.
It should not say the people of the state of New York.
Should say the counties of NYC, Buffalo, Albany and Rochester.
Out of 63 counties he only lost those few.
All others support him
 
34 counts of filing false business records - designed to cover up payments to kill bad publicity against him in the lead-up to the election.

I recommend reading both documents which are attached to this post.
@Prof. Lawnchair A cursory glance tells me FUCK all. Legal jargon is DESIGNED to confuse people..............fact.

So, pls give it to us all straight?
 
@Prof. Lawnchair A cursory glance tells me FUCK all. Legal jargon is DESIGNED to confuse people..............fact.

So, pls give it to us all straight?

I hear you - the legal jargon can be confusing and off-putting - in essence as I read it it alleges:

1) Trump paid money to lawyers and / or others to kill bad publicity against him in the lead-up to and after the election.

2) He lied about the purpose of the payments.

3) In so doing 34 business records were created which were not truthful.

(And by Trump and He I mean Donald Trump and / or others working on his behalf such as Cohen - in other words, Trump himself may not have personally created a false business document but they were created at his direction.)
 
I hear you - the legal jargon can be confusing and off-putting - in essence as I read it it alleges

1) Trump paid money to lawyers and / or others to kill bad publicity against him in the lead-up to and after the election.

2) He lied about the purpose of the payments.

3) In so doing 34 business records were created which were not truthful.

(And by Trump and He I mean Donald Trump and / or other working on his behalf such as Cohen - in other words, Trump himself may not have personally created a false business document but they were created at his direction.)
@Prof. Lawnchair I understand but paying people to kill 'potential' bad publicity is a crime?

EVERY politician has a campaign manager who does JUST that.

This sounds like a SUPER LONG REACH ABUSING THE LAW for political reasons only ........................to me.
 
This is all bullshit to interrupt Trumps 2024 campaigning. The liberal media will start every Trump story with indictment and or trial in a concerted effort to prevent him from winning the 2024 election.

The effort against him has made me like him more. I’m going to help ballot harvest ?. I may even visit some nursing homes and graveyards to garner votes.
 
This is all bullshit to interrupt Trumps 2024 campaigning. The liberal media will start every Trump story with indictment and or trial in a concerted effort to prevent him from winning the 2024 election.

The effort against him has made me like him more. I’m going to help ballot harvest ?. I may even visit some nursing homes and graveyards to garner votes.
You can't beat the rigged Dominion hardware and voting software, bro !

:ROFLMAO:
 
@Prof. Lawnchair I understand but paying people to kill 'potential' bad publicity is a crime?

EVERY politician has a campaign manager who does JUST that.

This sounds like a SUPER LONG REACH ABUSING THE LAW for political reasons only ........................to me.
Preliminary thoughts:

It appears extremely thin to me - I need to research it further but as I appreciate it the false business records charge is typically a misdemeanor which would be prescribed by the passage of time. In this case it is charged as a low level felony because related to campaign financing which is connected to the payments or reporting. It thus beats the time bar issue.

But in my humble opinion this indictment is an incredible stretch which gives credence to the claim that it is politically motivated in the extreme.

As a further indication of Bragg’s bad faith note that the indictment references the “grab ‘em by the [expletive deleted]” video - which has zero to do with the substance of the charges and serves only to further sensationalize things.

Note also that one payment - to the doorman - was for something that was not true: a child out of wedlock.

So a guy running for office gets shaken down/ extorted - and lies about the nature of the payments.
 
It’s called judgment based upon facts - I read the thing before I condemned it.
Shocking to some I guess. But in my experience judgment based upon facts carries much more weight than that based upon partisan pre-judgment.
 
Last edited:
Preliminary thoughts:

It appears extremely thin to me - I need to research it further but as I appreciate it the false business records charge is typically a misdemeanor which would be prescribed by the passage of time. In this case it is charged as a low level felony because related to campaign financing which is connected to the payments or reporting. It thus beats the time bar issue.

But in my humble opinion this indictment is an incredible stretch which gives credence to the claim that it is politically motivated in the extreme.

As a further indication of Bragg’s bad faith note that the indictment references the “grab ‘em by the [expletive deleted]” video - which has zero to do with the substance of the charges and serves only to further sensationalize things.

Note also that one payment - to the doorman - was for something that was not true: a child out of wedlock.

So a guy running for office gets shaken down/ extorted - and lies about the nature of the payments.
As you point out, the elevation from misdemeanor to felony is related to “the intent to commit other crimes”, i.e. campaign finance law violations.

I think this is what this case will turn on. The campaign finance laws in question are state and federal. Both the State of New York and the Federal Election Commission declined prosecution some time back on these charges.

What you seem to have is a DA filing charges based on the belief that there were campaign violations.

The problem for Bragg imo is that there was never a trial or verdict surrounding any violation of campaign finance law by Trump to establish the claim that the payments were sommitted in support of another crime.

For that matter, I will not be surprised if Trumps attorneys argue that there was no crime because well, that pesky little thing: “innocent until proven guilty”. There has been no finding of guilt.

I think this evidence could potentially support misdemeanor charges, and that may be what we see happen in this case: Bragg gets his hand forced to downgrade the charges or the jury finds for a lesser charge.

Which would render all of this academic, petty, and personal. Misdemeanors will not keep Trump off any ballots.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top