The Catholic Message Board

Stella wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 11:45 pmCan you explain the right legal approach to the charge of paying a sex provider to be silent on what she provided, to ensure a presidential candidate wasn't questioned about the sex transaction?

You might direct your question to the lawyers representing Bill and Hillary.

Riverboat wrote: ↑Fri Jun 14, 2024 11:06 pm You might direct your question to the lawyers representing Bill and Hillary.

And those lawyers are democrats.

Stella wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 11:45 pm

Doom wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 10:25 pm

Stella wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 5:36 pm It's surprising to the non American sensibilities that a convicted felon qualifies as a presidential candidate in the first place. Anyone have insights or predictions on how it will impact Trumps chances on November 5th?

The charges are bull**** and politically motivated, they are MISDEMEANORS, and the statute of limitations has expired, yet hardcore leftwing Democrat, George Soros funded prosecutor Alvin Bragg decided to raise them to the level of a FELONY based on a legal theory that no one understands and which he hasn't even attempted to defend.

Can you explain the right legal approach to the charge of paying a sex provider to be silent on what she provided, to ensure a presidential candidate wasn't questioned about the sex transaction?

Mr. Trump was convicted of falsifying business records.

https://www.npr.org/2024/05/30/g-s1-184 ... -34-counts

It is not illegal to pay someone for their silence on a sexual matter. That was not the charge.

The conviction was based on the allegation that the business records were falsified to cover up another crime. What was the other crime? Nobody knows. It was never named - not in the indictment, not in court, not anywhere.

Signum Crucis wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:06 pm The conviction was based on the allegation that the business records were falsified to cover up another crime. What was the other crime? Nobody knows. It was never named - not in the indictment, not in court, not anywhere.

Falsified Invoices for legal services
Guilty on 11 of 11 charges


Checks paid for falsified legal services
Guilty on 11 of 11 charges


Ledger entries for those falsified legal expenses
Guilty on 12 of 12 charges

Kage_ar wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:46 pm

Signum Crucis wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:06 pm The conviction was based on the allegation that the business records were falsified to cover up another crime. What was the other crime? Nobody knows. It was never named - not in the indictment, not in court, not anywhere.

Falsified Invoices for legal services
Guilty on 11 of 11 charges


Checks paid for falsified legal services
Guilty on 11 of 11 charges


Ledger entries for those falsified legal expenses
Guilty on 12 of 12 charges

That doesn't answer the question. What is the crime that was supposed to have been covered up by these actions? None of those are felonies, btw, only misdemeanors.

I read that in several places, so, I did the homework.

The jury instructions cite each law for each count:

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/pre ... -23-24.pdf

One can read all of the charges and then do a xref of the NY Penal Code:

34 Counts

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10

§ 175.10 Falsifying business records in the first degree.

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree
when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second
degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony.

Signum Crucis wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 2:04 pm

Kage_ar wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:46 pm

Signum Crucis wrote: ↑Mon Jun 17, 2024 1:06 pm The conviction was based on the allegation that the business records were falsified to cover up another crime. What was the other crime? Nobody knows. It was never named - not in the indictment, not in court, not anywhere.

Falsified Invoices for legal services
Guilty on 11 of 11 charges


Checks paid for falsified legal services
Guilty on 11 of 11 charges


Ledger entries for those falsified legal expenses
Guilty on 12 of 12 charges

That doesn't answer the question. What is the crime that was supposed to have been covered up by these actions? None of those are felonies, btw, only misdemeanors.

Our local media reported that they were in relation to hush money paid to Stormy Daniels.

"Donald Trump has been found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records.

A jury found the former US president paid hush money to adult film star Stormy Daniels and falsified business records to conceal the payment during the 2016 election campaign."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-31/ ... /103916844

I always go to the source, because "news" outlets do make mistakes and sometimes intentionally misleading statements. While the falsified business records were all tied to these payments, it is the false business records that are a felony in the state of New York.

There was no evidence presented that Trump had anything to do with that. Not a shred. Not a single person testified that Trump ever told anyone to falsify records, never indicated he wanted that to happen.

Cohen actually testified in open court that he stole tens of thousands from Trump for perceived slights, including not taking him to DC. The jury was not required to vote unanimously on the individual charges. If 4 voted guilty on a charge, it was considered unanimous.

Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor. Falsifying business records to cover up a crime is a felony. They do not specify what the underlying crime is. Not anywhere. What did the court do? They gave the jurors a list of things they could decide on as the underlying crime. Trump and his team were not given an underlying crime to be able to form a defense to.

"Hush money" payments are not a crime. Period.

How can allegedly falsified records indicate an attempt to sway an election, after the election? Additionally, the statute of limitations had already run on any action by the prosecutor on the falsification of records.

Federal elections laws are not under the jurisdiction of the NY prosecutor.

Judge Merchan donated to the Stop Trump campaign. How is that a fair and impartial jurist? He refused to recuse himself. He disallowed the testimony of defense experts, and restricted what some others could testify to. The prosecution brought in Stormy Daniels, whose testimony had nothing to do with business records or payments to an attorney for services. It was solely an attempt to cause political harm to Trump. An attempt that back-fired.

Judge Merchan has refused to lift the gag order on Trump, the Trump family, the Trump organization, and the Trump campaign.

I know you dislike Trump, but what the Biden organization is doing to him is wrong, unscrupulous, and unconstitutional. It's a blatant attempt to stop a political rival from exercising his right to run for the highest office in the land. The Biden DOJ refused to prosecute Trump for the alleged crime of trying to sway an election, because it was a weak case.

The indictment document

https://manhattanda.org/wp-content/uplo ... ctment.pdf

and Statement of Facts document:

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

Are clear to me, I am not an attorney. I would bet that Mr Trump's legal team are WAY smarter than me when reading these documents.

To the election laws, there are both federal and state laws. The state of NY election laws (cited in the court documents) do say that trying to sway an election is a crime. From my reading of the NY state law (cited above) there is no distinction made where falsifying records to cover up a misdemeanor crime is different than falsifying records to cover up a felony crime. Maybe the constituents of NY will want to make a change to that law because of this case, but, as it was written.

New York, as well as many other states, the statute(s) of limitations were tolled in 2020 because of the pandemic.

https://www.nycourts.gov/whatsnew/pdf/EO-202.8-ocr.pdf

https://www.law.com/newyorklawjournal/2 ... 0518134130

Regardless of my personal opinions, I do my best to find the facts from source documents. In this case, so very many editorial outlets seem to have just pulled "facts" out of the air.

People agree or disagree with the verdict, it helps to disagree based on the facts.

Signum Crucis wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2024 1:21 pm

Judge Merchan donated to the Stop Trump campaign. How is that a fair and impartial jurist?

I have donated to many campaigns to candidates from 4 different parties and one independent. While I am not a judge, I know I could sit on a jury where someone from a political campaign was charged and be impartial. Most smart people could, I know you could.

Stella - it's amazing to me that anyone in the country or outside the country doesn't see this as absurd. Stalin and Zedong would blush at this sort of political persecution for an entirely made-up crime that was never even described.

I think to posit that paying someone off is really an attempt to sway an election is really pushing the boundaries of language.

Tired wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2024 7:37 pm Stella - it's amazing to me that anyone in the country or outside the country doesn't see this as absurd. Stalin and Zedong would blush at this sort of political persecution for an entirely made-up crime that was never even described.

I don't know how they did it in China and the Soviet Union, but the Commonwealth has it's fair share of wanna be Prime Ministers with similar track records. Lord Archer in the UK. Clive Palmer in Australia. It's just that they could never make it to the top here. We don't seem to have the blind loyalty in politics that the US does.

peregrinator wrote: ↑Wed Jun 19, 2024 1:52 pm I think to posit that paying someone off is really an attempt to sway an election is really pushing the boundaries of language.

It's incredible timing if that's the case since Stormy Daniels was paid off just before the election.

Tired wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2024 7:37 pm Stella - it's amazing to me that anyone in the country or outside the country doesn't see this as absurd. Stalin and Zedong would blush at this sort of political persecution for an entirely made-up crime that was never even described.

As posted in the links above, the crime(s) were described in the the indictment documents and also in the jury instructions. Agree or disagree with the verdict, there are some pretty off the wall accusations out there. One can go to the source documents and know that the whacky stuff is simply made up (like the story that the crimes were made up and never described). The proof is in black and white.

It is as illegal for me, as the finance person at a non-profit, to falsify business records as it is for a celebrity turned politician to do it... or as it is illegal to falsify a federal document like an application for a gun permit. The laws apply to everyone, except, I would likely go and serve time because I do not have the $$$ for a defense to keep me out of prison if I were to break the law.