I couldn’t find a thread just about this case, and thought we should have one since it’s Trump’s first criminal trial. He has to attend every day, as I understand it. Here is a quick reminder of what it’s about. His former lawyer Michael Cohen already went to prison for his involvement in this case.
Trump Election Interference / Falsification of Business Records Criminal Trial (3 Viewers)
- Thread starterMT15
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Users who are viewing this thread
coldseat
Well-known member
Offline
Maybe he'll bring back the bone spurs for nostalgic reasons in true MAGA fashion.
- Thread starter
- #20
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
So he was whining in PA because he can’t move the date for the election to this month. He says other countries can name the date of their elections and have them when they want to have them. He’s really worried about these trials.
- Thread starter
- #21
- Thread starter
- #22
OP
OP
MT15
Well-known member
Offline
Text of Eisen’s points.
1-it’s not an “ arguable” crime for Trump & Cohen to conspire for the latter to make a $130,000 campaign contribution when Cohen’s limit was $2700– that’s a serious offense.
2-And it’s not a very good defense to an alleged crime for the defendant to say there was another legal way to do it. Yes I could’ve simply bought that candy bar instead of shoplifting it – but that’s not a defense to shoplifting.
3-Remember, this scandal was suppressed immediately after the Access Hollywood tape and immediately before the election. In a contest that was decided by just 80,000 votes across three states, another sex scandal could have been outcome determinative. There was a serious act of voter deception here to grasp power. Sure sounds like election interference to me
1-it’s not an “ arguable” crime for Trump & Cohen to conspire for the latter to make a $130,000 campaign contribution when Cohen’s limit was $2700– that’s a serious offense.
2-And it’s not a very good defense to an alleged crime for the defendant to say there was another legal way to do it. Yes I could’ve simply bought that candy bar instead of shoplifting it – but that’s not a defense to shoplifting.
3-Remember, this scandal was suppressed immediately after the Access Hollywood tape and immediately before the election. In a contest that was decided by just 80,000 votes across three states, another sex scandal could have been outcome determinative. There was a serious act of voter deception here to grasp power. Sure sounds like election interference to me
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Offline
The People of the State of New York v Donald J Trump will conclude, according to long-established court procedure.
The former US president’s defense attorney will make a closing argument. He will assert that his client is not guilty of the charges of bribery and business fraud to manipulate the 2016 election.
Judge Juan Merchan will issue his instructions to the jurors. They will deliberate. When they emerge, the foreperson will read the verdict in open court. If Trump is found guilty, Merchan will adjourn to a later date for sentencing.
If Trump is found guilty on all 34 felony counts, he could theoretically face a maximum of 136 years in prison.
Post-conviction, the major question would be whether his sentencing involves actual imprisonment, probation, a fine, or some combination, along with various parole arrangements.
To be sure, Trump would then almost certainly file an appeal, but this would not forestall his immediately incurring certain civil disabilities. Above all, he would instantly lose his right to vote.
The first former president ever to be convicted of a crime would also be the first disenfranchised felon to be nominated by a major party.
In this current electoral cycle, Trump has managed to pass himself off as a normal candidate despite separate juries finding him to be a rapist and a fraudster.
But those were civil cases. A criminal verdict may crack Trump’s aura of magical legal invincibility intrinsic to his image as a strongman.
In the grand ritual of election day 2024, surrounded by the clicking cameras of the press corps, assuming he is still out on appeal, Trump could tag along with his wife Melania, a naturalized citizen, to the polls in Palm Beach, but he could not enter a voting booth. He could not vote for himself, or anyone else, for any office…….
www.theguardian.com
The former US president’s defense attorney will make a closing argument. He will assert that his client is not guilty of the charges of bribery and business fraud to manipulate the 2016 election.
Judge Juan Merchan will issue his instructions to the jurors. They will deliberate. When they emerge, the foreperson will read the verdict in open court. If Trump is found guilty, Merchan will adjourn to a later date for sentencing.
If Trump is found guilty on all 34 felony counts, he could theoretically face a maximum of 136 years in prison.
Post-conviction, the major question would be whether his sentencing involves actual imprisonment, probation, a fine, or some combination, along with various parole arrangements.
To be sure, Trump would then almost certainly file an appeal, but this would not forestall his immediately incurring certain civil disabilities. Above all, he would instantly lose his right to vote.
The first former president ever to be convicted of a crime would also be the first disenfranchised felon to be nominated by a major party.
In this current electoral cycle, Trump has managed to pass himself off as a normal candidate despite separate juries finding him to be a rapist and a fraudster.
But those were civil cases. A criminal verdict may crack Trump’s aura of magical legal invincibility intrinsic to his image as a strongman.
In the grand ritual of election day 2024, surrounded by the clicking cameras of the press corps, assuming he is still out on appeal, Trump could tag along with his wife Melania, a naturalized citizen, to the polls in Palm Beach, but he could not enter a voting booth. He could not vote for himself, or anyone else, for any office…….
Trump used to scold felons who wanted to vote. Now he could be in the same spot | Sidney Blumenthal
If criminally convicted in New York, Trump will face legal humiliations of the sort he loves when applied to other people
Optimus Prime
Well-known member
Offline
Of all of Donald Trump’s charged crimes, spelled out in 88 felony counts – from plotting to overthrow the government of the United States to stealing national security secrets, and obstruction of justice along the way – there is one case that most closely parallels the greatest political crime in American history: his trial in New York, scheduled to begin 15 April, for falsifying business records.
Yet against the enormity of the former president’s transgressions, that case’s gravitas has been diminished by some legal pundits as the “runt of the litter” and “probably the least serious of the crimes he’s been charged with”.
This case, brought by the Manhattan district attorney, however, reveals Trump as having essentially the same purpose as Richard Nixon in Watergate, hiding the truth through fraud and bribery in order to manipulate the outcome of a presidential election……
Echoing Nixon, Trump in his 2016 campaign conspired to exchange hush money for silence about certain of his actions that he believed would cost him the election if the public knew about them.
As in Watergate, his crimes involved bribery, illegal campaign contributions and tax fraud. Trump directed his cover-up when he was a candidate, when he was the president-elect, and, in one instance, when he was president.
Every one of the 34 felony counts in Trump’s indictment begins with a citation of the same New York State criminal statute, §175.10, on falsifying business records in the first degree, which requires a mens rea – a state of mind – that “includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof”.
Essentially, Trump has been indicted on what the Watergate prosecutors in the road map called the “concealment theory” that was at the heart of Nixon’s cover-up. In short, both Trump and Nixon committed business crimes to further their political crimes……
www.theguardian.com
Yet against the enormity of the former president’s transgressions, that case’s gravitas has been diminished by some legal pundits as the “runt of the litter” and “probably the least serious of the crimes he’s been charged with”.
This case, brought by the Manhattan district attorney, however, reveals Trump as having essentially the same purpose as Richard Nixon in Watergate, hiding the truth through fraud and bribery in order to manipulate the outcome of a presidential election……
Echoing Nixon, Trump in his 2016 campaign conspired to exchange hush money for silence about certain of his actions that he believed would cost him the election if the public knew about them.
As in Watergate, his crimes involved bribery, illegal campaign contributions and tax fraud. Trump directed his cover-up when he was a candidate, when he was the president-elect, and, in one instance, when he was president.
Every one of the 34 felony counts in Trump’s indictment begins with a citation of the same New York State criminal statute, §175.10, on falsifying business records in the first degree, which requires a mens rea – a state of mind – that “includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof”.
Essentially, Trump has been indicted on what the Watergate prosecutors in the road map called the “concealment theory” that was at the heart of Nixon’s cover-up. In short, both Trump and Nixon committed business crimes to further their political crimes……
If cover-up is the real crime, Trump’s hush-money charges have a Nixonian ring | Sidney Blumenthal
Trump’s New York trial is only superficially about his tawdry sex life and really about his ultimate victim: the constitution
Taurus
Well-known member
Offline
And yet, he will do it anyway.The People of the State of New York v Donald J Trump will conclude, according to long-established court procedure.
The former US president’s defense attorney will make a closing argument. He will assert that his client is not guilty of the charges of bribery and business fraud to manipulate the 2016 election.
Judge Juan Merchan will issue his instructions to the jurors. They will deliberate. When they emerge, the foreperson will read the verdict in open court. If Trump is found guilty, Merchan will adjourn to a later date for sentencing.
If Trump is found guilty on all 34 felony counts, he could theoretically face a maximum of 136 years in prison.
Post-conviction, the major question would be whether his sentencing involves actual imprisonment, probation, a fine, or some combination, along with various parole arrangements.
To be sure, Trump would then almost certainly file an appeal, but this would not forestall his immediately incurring certain civil disabilities. Above all, he would instantly lose his right to vote.
The first former president ever to be convicted of a crime would also be the first disenfranchised felon to be nominated by a major party.
In this current electoral cycle, Trump has managed to pass himself off as a normal candidate despite separate juries finding him to be a rapist and a fraudster.
But those were civil cases. A criminal verdict may crack Trump’s aura of magical legal invincibility intrinsic to his image as a strongman.
In the grand ritual of election day 2024, surrounded by the clicking cameras of the press corps, assuming he is still out on appeal, Trump could tag along with his wife Melania, a naturalized citizen, to the polls in Palm Beach, but he could not enter a voting booth. He could not vote for himself, or anyone else, for any office…….
Trump used to scold felons who wanted to vote. Now he could be in the same spot | Sidney Blumenthal
If criminally convicted in New York, Trump will face legal humiliations of the sort he loves when applied to other people
superchuck500
U.S. Blues
Offline
Seeing the Trump acolytes out there crying that this case is over-charged and had it not been Trump, anyone else would have been able to accept a misdemeanor or two and put an end to it before it began.
Okay maybe, but that's because a typical defendant in this case would have begun plea negotiations quickly, perhaps even before the charges and pled down the case. Donald Trump did very much the opposite, banking on the idea that they wouldn't charge him for fear of political and social fallout, and then when they did, he went on the attack - personal attack against the people involved - like he always does. Donald Trump would never plea to misdemeanor crimes, that means he has to affirmatively say he was guilty . . . the man whose mantra is "I did nothing wrong"? It's pure nonsene.
It can't be both ways. It can't be that Trump shouldn't be charged or tried because he's the Republican presidential candidate, or that he enjoys presidential immunity, or that he's too famous to get an impartial jury or whatever else but then also it's such a shame that this isn't going like it would in most other cases . . . it's because of him and how he insists on operating. This AG office files business records crime cases to the tune of hundreds a year. I read that they filed like 40 some odd similar cases against New York defendants in the same quarter reported for the quarter of the Trump charges.
Okay maybe, but that's because a typical defendant in this case would have begun plea negotiations quickly, perhaps even before the charges and pled down the case. Donald Trump did very much the opposite, banking on the idea that they wouldn't charge him for fear of political and social fallout, and then when they did, he went on the attack - personal attack against the people involved - like he always does. Donald Trump would never plea to misdemeanor crimes, that means he has to affirmatively say he was guilty . . . the man whose mantra is "I did nothing wrong"? It's pure nonsene.
It can't be both ways. It can't be that Trump shouldn't be charged or tried because he's the Republican presidential candidate, or that he enjoys presidential immunity, or that he's too famous to get an impartial jury or whatever else but then also it's such a shame that this isn't going like it would in most other cases . . . it's because of him and how he insists on operating. This AG office files business records crime cases to the tune of hundreds a year. I read that they filed like 40 some odd similar cases against New York defendants in the same quarter reported for the quarter of the Trump charges.
Last edited:
Taurus
Well-known member
Offline
"Anyone else" Who is this "anyone else" that was running for President at the time?
superchuck500
U.S. Blues
Offline
Fair but that's really only the context (and some of the predicate "other criminal activity") - the felony charges themselves are falsifying business records, which are quite common.
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
I saw Trump's comments before he went into the courtroom and his "political persecution" spiel was classic Trump messaging to his supporters.
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
Apparently Trump's legal team request/motion for recusal was denied by the judge.
fooferdoggie
Well-known member
Offline
they have filed so many crap things. its all they have and they know it. when you have crap lawyers and a crap defense.
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
Wait...there's a gag order, yet a Trump attorney just commented on the case live on CNN... isn't that a violation of the gag order? And the attorney complained that the judge shouldn't be sitting on this case and should have recused himself. He even commented on a witness, Karen McDougal, being irrelevant to the case.
I mean, if I'm the judge, I'm sanctioning the lawyer for violating the gag order.
I mean, if I'm the judge, I'm sanctioning the lawyer for violating the gag order.
coldseat
Well-known member
Offline
Is McDougal a witness in this case? If not, then he likely didn't violate the gag order. I think criticizing the judge is okay.
superchuck500
U.S. Blues
Offline
She has been identified as a witness and it is believed that the prosecution will introduce some testimony regarding the "catch and kill" process - including Daniels and McDougal.
superchuck500
U.S. Blues
Offline
I think the bigger problem for Trump re: the gag order is what he posted over the weekend about Cohen.
DaveXA
Well-known member
Offline
Yeah, I haven't seen those. Interesting.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account on our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.