But they know Trump is innocent!
For you idiots, the alleged crimes!
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Callinectes
Proud MAGA Semi-Facist
You triggered me to laugh my ass off!
Callinectes
Proud MAGA Semi-Facist
I don't KNOW if he's "innocent", I KNOW that I don't care either way.
Wow, fascinating.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
For you idiots,
For it to be a felony there has to have been a previous, connected, crime that can be pointed to making it a felony. Without that other crime, it is a misdemeanor and that makes Bragg's case moot since the statute of limitations on that version has long passed.
“Previous, connected?” Where did you get that wording?
The statute says… “when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
From NY's statute:
...a person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when, with intent to defraud that includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof,...
Loading…
www.nycourts.gov
Exactly. That’s what Trump did. He faked a business record to avoid having to file the truth with the FEC, as would have been required if the records were accurate.
Trump called the payments to stormy “attorney fees” instead of “payment to Stormy” to get away with the crime not disclosing the payment. - thus it was a felony.
correct
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Then why was an FEC expert on federal election law that was going to testify that Trump broke no federal election laws barred from testimony by the judge?
That’s for the jury to decide, not some paid expert. You’re being silly, and do not understand the rules of evidence.
The jury cannot convict on "suggested possible crimes".
Trump did not have to break a federal law for this case to be a felony. He only had to intend to break or conceal a law.
You cannot seem to comprehend the difference between the law he is charged with, and the fact that attempting to break a different law in the process or attempting to conceal a different law in the process, makes the original charge a felony. He does not have to be convicted of secondary crime.
It’s a kin to the difference between breaking and entering, and burglary. The intent matters, not the completion of the secondary crime.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Which law did he break or conceal? Why wasn't he charged for doing that?
He failed at breaking and concealing the FEC laws, but he clearly attempted to break them.
If you break into someone’s home with the intent to hide evidence that you committed bank fraud, but were unable to find the documents…. You still committed burglary, not breaking and entering.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Then why was an FEC expert going to testify that Trump broke no campaign finance laws until the judge ruled the defense couldn't use him for that?
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
Burglary requires you take things not leave them. Breaking and entering is the act of getting inside through a barrier.
The other crime does not have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and in fact does not even have to have been committed.