GUILTY NY - Ex-President Donald Trump, charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023, Trial 25 Mar 2024 #3

[RANCH]

I have hope that they will look at the facts. Although I can see why some might want them to look at the big picture. The facts that i’ve seen don’t lead to a felony conviction. imho

Yes. This jury needs to look only at the facts given to them during the trial and not judge President Trump for any other outside the court reasons. JMO.

 

[Jade]

I know. Isn't shocking that the State hasn't given the jury evidence to support that allegation. JMO.

I had replied to this with that link that 20 witness and over 200 exhibits from the State to support their case.

Sounds like they are giving the Jury evidence, imo.

The conduct surrounding the election is the basis of the case so we can safely assume they are submitting evidence to that end.

I read the link and I don't see anything about violating campaign laws. JMO.

2nd sentence:

Across four weeks of testimony, prosecutors have laid out their case against Trump by telling a story of sex, schemes and lies related to the 2016 election.

Several other references in the article but it does assume some understanding of the case.

Legalmommas link is even clearer of the violation of the law that governs political activity:

Trump’s alleged intent to violate New York Election Law § 17-152, which criminalizes “promot[ing] or prevent[ing] the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.” At one point during the trial, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass referred to the statute as “the primary crime that we have alleged.” (This object offense also has the advantage of looping in all the other object offenses, which in Bragg’s legal theory constitute the “unlawful means” required by the statute.)

What Must Prosecutors Prove in Trump’s NY Trial?


all imo

 

[RANCH]

I had replied to this with that link that 20 witness and over 200 exhibits from the State to support their case.

Sounds like they are giving the Jury evidence, imo.

The conduct surrounding the election is the basis of the case so we can safely assume they are submitting evidence to that end.



2nd sentence:

Across four weeks of testimony, prosecutors have laid out their case against Trump by telling a story of sex, schemes and lies related to the 2016 election.

Several other references in the article but it does assume some understanding of the case.

Legalmommas link is even clearer of the violation of the law that governs political activity:

Trump’s alleged intent to violate New York Election Law § 17-152, which criminalizes “promot[ing] or prevent[ing] the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.” At one point during the trial, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass referred to the statute as “the primary crime that we have alleged.” (This object offense also has the advantage of looping in all the other object offenses, which in Bragg’s legal theory constitute the “unlawful means” required by the statute.)

What Must Prosecutors Prove in Trump’s NY Trial?


all imo

Did the jury see this?

 

[Jade]

Yes. This jury needs to look only at the facts given to them during the trial and not judge President Trump for any other outside the court reasons. JMO.

They will; there are two attorneys on the Jury they and the others will have lengthy instructions as well.


The outside of courts antics are being staged by Trump who wants to deflect from the facts so there's that. I do agree its stupid.

[…]

Donald Trump has been calling the politicians who make the pilgrimage to stand behind him in the New York City court where he is on trial his “surrogates” — as they push the lines of personal attacks that he has been barred from making because of a gag order.

The coordination and organization between Trump and those supporters have stoked questions about whether the remarks by the cast of Republicans amount to a violation of Trump's gag order. But legal experts say that it's difficult for prosecutors to argue a violation has occurred when Trump isn't the one doing the talking and that, even if they were successful, it might trigger a consequence they're trying to avoid: sending Trump to jail.

[…]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-increasingly-relies-allies-deliver-attack-lines-gag-order-bars-u-rcna15281

all imo

 

[RANCH]

They will; there are two attorneys on the Jury they and the others will have lengthy instructions as well.


The outside of courts antics are being staged by Trump who wants to deflect from the facts so there's that. I do agree its stupid.

[…]

Donald Trump has been calling the politicians who make the pilgrimage to stand behind him in the New York City court where he is on trial his “surrogates” — as they push the lines of personal attacks that he has been barred from making because of a gag order.

The coordination and organization between Trump and those supporters have stoked questions about whether the remarks by the cast of Republicans amount to a violation of Trump's gag order. But legal experts say that it's difficult for prosecutors to argue a violation has occurred when Trump isn't the one doing the talking and that, even if they were successful, it might trigger a consequence they're trying to avoid: sending Trump to jail.

[…]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-increasingly-relies-allies-deliver-attack-lines-gag-order-bars-u-rcna15281

all imo

It don't see how the jury will see more evidence after the prosecution and defense has rested.

I'm not sure how the rest of your post relates to my post.

JMO.

 

[Jade]

Did the jury see this?

How could they not it literally says during the trial.

The article is saying what went on in Court in front of the Jury during the trail.

The articles clarify when the Jury is not present during consultations and so forth.


all imo

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

It don't see how the jury will see more evidence after the prosecution and defense has rested.

I'm not sure how the rest of your post relates to my post.

JMO.

I’m pretty sure the jury didn’t see it and imagine that. There was nothing there about which law was broken - only theories thrown around like spaghetti to see what might stick. It’s part of the reason why they didn’t allow any experts on election law.

It’s bizarre and opens up avenues for appeal. Hopefully it won’t get that far.

 

[RANCH]

How could they not it literally says during the trial.

The article is saying what went on in Court in front of the Jury during the trail.

The articles clarify when the Jury is not present during consultations and so forth.


all imo

Sorry I didn't see where a witness testified that Trump violated any election laws.

Looks like we need to agree to disagree on this.

JMO.

 

[RANCH]

I’m pretty sure the jury didn’t see it and imagine that. There was nothing there about which law was broken - only theories thrown around like spaghetti to see what might stick. It’s part of the reason why they didn’t allow any experts on election law.

It’s bizarre and opens up avenues for appeal. Hopefully it won’t get that far.

Thanks.

I have no doubt that if there's a conviction it will be thrown out on appeal. JMO.

 

[Jade]

It don't see how the jury will see more evidence after the prosecution and defense has rested.

I'm not sure how the rest of your post relates to my post.

JMO.

Not more evidence; the Judge will give the Jury lengthily instructions.

<modsnip: snark>


Quote:
"not judge President Trump for any other outside the court reasons."


My reply relates to Trump and his friends audacious interfering while making displays of themselves outside of the courthouse.


all imo

 

[RANCH]

Not more evidence; the Judge will give the Jury lengthily instructions.

<modsnip: snark>


Quote:
"not judge President Trump for any other outside the court reasons."


My reply relates to Trump and his friends audacious interfering while making displays of themselves outside of the courthouse.


all imo

Let's agree to disagree.

 

[SouthAussie]

Trump trial live updates: Witness testimony is finished in hush money case, setting up closing arguments next week

Robert Costello returns to the stand in what could be the last day of testimony in Trump's criminal hush money trial.

www.nbcnews.com

The defense has rested.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1792921447515529438

THE DEFENSE RESTS. Trump will not testify.

Always has so much to say and now, when it matters, silence.

imo

 

[Jade]

I’m pretty sure the jury didn’t see it and imagine that. There was nothing there about which law was broken - only theories thrown around like spaghetti to see what might stick. It’s part of the reason why they didn’t allow any experts on election law.

It’s bizarre and opens up avenues for appeal. Hopefully it won’t get that far.

It is complicated and bizarre with Trump as usual with him but maybe this link will help to figure it out.
There are easy to follow charts of the crimes connections.
To start:


Press Release

April 4, 2023

District Attorney Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Indictment of Former

President Donald J. Trump

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg, Jr. today announced the indictment of DONALD J. TRUMP, 76, for falsifying New York business records in order to conceal damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election. During the election, TRUMP and others employed a “catch and kill” scheme to identify, purchase, and bury negative information about him and boost his electoral prospects. TRUMP then went to great lengths to hide this conduct, causing dozens of false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity, including attempts to violate state and federal election laws.

TRUMP is charged in a New York State Supreme Court indictment with 34 counts of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree.[]
District Attorney Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Indictment of Former President Donald J. Trump



SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK STATEMENT OF FACTS IND-71543-23 –against DONALD J. TRUMP, Defendant. INTRODUCTION

1. The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election. 2. From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects. In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-04-04-SOF.pdf


THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, by this indictment, accuses the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows: The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf


all imo

 

[anneg]

It is complicated and bizarre with Trump as usual with him but maybe this link will help to figure it out.
There are easy to follow charts of the crimes connections.
To start:


Press Release

April 4, 2023

District Attorney Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Indictment of Former

President Donald J. Trump

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg, Jr. today announced the indictment of DONALD J. TRUMP, 76, for falsifying New York business records in order to conceal damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election. During the election, TRUMP and others employed a “catch and kill” scheme to identify, purchase, and bury negative information about him and boost his electoral prospects. TRUMP then went to great lengths to hide this conduct, causing dozens of false entries in business records to conceal criminal activity, including attempts to violate state and federal election laws.

TRUMP is charged in a New York State Supreme Court indictment with 34 counts of Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree.[]
District Attorney Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Indictment of Former President Donald J. Trump



SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK STATEMENT OF FACTS IND-71543-23 –against DONALD J. TRUMP, Defendant. INTRODUCTION

1. The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election. 2. From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects. In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/2023-04-04-SOF.pdf


THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, by this indictment, accuses the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows: The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf


all imo

That all seems crystal clear to me! I believe the prosecutors have made an thorough case for conviction.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Always has so much to say and now, when it matters, silence.

imo

That's what cowards do, IMO. All hat, no cattle.

 

[Thewiley]

The black out part is just weird to me. Maybe that’s what people in the sex industry do. idk Supposedly no drugs or alcohol involved. I’m keeping faith that one juror sees through this

The black out part is just weird to me. Maybe that’s what people in the sex industry do. idk Supposedly no drugs or alcohol involved. I’m keeping faith that one juror sees through this ..

Stormy Daniels doesn’t remember either. She blacked out.

Disassociation, when one “blacks out” or physiologically removes oneself from an unpleasant experience. Not associated with drug, alcohol or other substance abuse. Basically, you’re caught in a traumatic or vulnerable situation and you dissociate ie blackout. Real stuff

 

[Thewiley]

She doesn’t have much credibility. imo I was wondering how someone blacks out, yet remembers details. I doubt she was looking lovingly into his eyes because she was blacked out.

I respect that it makes no difference to a lot of people but it does to me. (hugs)

She disassociated IMO to get through this encounter

 

[Thewiley]

One thing for sure is Stormy Daniels knows nothing about whether President Trump falsified any business records. Hopefully a least one juror we see that her testimony is worthless. JMO.

You’re correct. And that does not matter in her testimony. She is there to establish motive, which she did IMO

 

[IzzyBlanche]

You’re correct. And that does not matter in her testimony. She is there to establish motive, which she did IMO

Also. She wouldn't have testified at all hadn't Blanche (no doubt at the insistence of his client) claim in his opening argument that DJT and she never had sex.

If he hadn't claimed that, there was no reason for the prosecution to call her as a witness, since obviously she would have known nothing about the business records.

But he did, so she was called as a witness, and the cross examination insofar as I've heard reported, focused on petty details about how she got to the hotel and whether she did or did not get dinner. In other words, whether she was lying about the sexual encounter--which has no bearing on the charges.

It might have been reported elsewhere, but as far as I know the defense never once asked her whether she knew anything about his business records.

That one question would have gotten her off the witness stand instantly because her reply would have obviously been no.

Yet AFAIK they never asked about that.

IANAL but it seems like a weird strategy to me.

 

[RANCH]

You’re correct. And that does not matter in her testimony. She is there to establish motive, which she did IMO

Motive for doing a NDA. Which is not illegal or what President Trump was charged with. JMO.