Trump: 34 felony counts, no misdeamors

T. A. Gardner said:
I would say, Bragg has little or nothing. That's not to defend Trump, but 34 of the exact same charge over bookkeeping entries, and Bragg's primary witness in this is Cohen? That's not a good combo for a prosecution. Cohen is a convicted perjurer. That's going to be a huge liability using him as a witness. Then you are trying to read into bookkeeping entries stuff that isn't there.

On the whole, I'd say it looks a lot weaker than the case against Fife Symington (an AZ governor some decades ago). The jury there threw out 90% of the charges--and they were varied, not all the same.

Here, you have 34 of the exact same change. One fails, it's likely that all 34 fail. It looks to me like an all-or-nothing case and that doesn't bode well for Bragg either.

Then when you throw in Bragg's public statements about getting Trump, etc., he's got issues where it will be argued that this is a malicious prosecution for political reasons rather than a dispassionate execution of the law.

On the whole, I wouldn't be betting on Bragg to win this one. Again, that has nothing to do with Trump, and everything to do with the prosecutor and charges brought.
Click to expand...

Then why did Cohen spend time in prison?
 
evince said:
Then why did Cohen spend time in prison?
Click to expand...

Because he lied his ass off, got caught, and then had committed several felonies not related to Trump that he was found guilty of.

337594c2eb5312dd1b42fde2178ed996.jpg
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I would say, Bragg has little or nothing. That's not to defend Trump, but 34 of the exact same charge over bookkeeping entries, and Bragg's primary witness in this is Cohen? That's not a good combo for a prosecution. Cohen is a convicted perjurer. That's going to be a huge liability using him as a witness. Then you are trying to read into bookkeeping entries stuff that isn't there.

On the whole, I'd say it looks a lot weaker than the case against Fife Symington (an AZ governor some decades ago). The jury there threw out 90% of the charges--and they were varied, not all the same.

Here, you have 34 of the exact same change. One fails, it's likely that all 34 fail. It looks to me like an all-or-nothing case and that doesn't bode well for Bragg either.

Then when you throw in Bragg's public statements about getting Trump, etc., he's got issues where it will be argued that this is a malicious prosecution for political reasons rather than a dispassionate execution of the law.

On the whole, I wouldn't be betting on Bragg to win this one. Again, that has nothing to do with Trump, and everything to do with the prosecutor and charges brought.
Click to expand...

Bragg's primary witness isn't Cohen. Bragg's primary witness is the documents and the criminal prosecution of Cohen.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
There is no charge of conspiracy. All the charges are for falsifying business records.
The falsifying the records was in furtherance of a scheme to hide the illegal campaign contributions.
Click to expand...

I heard that early on. Apparently they reference a scheme without calling it a conspiracy. It's still pretty damning for Trump.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I would say, Bragg has little or nothing. That's not to defend Trump, but 34 of the exact same charge over bookkeeping entries, and Bragg's primary witness in this is Cohen? That's not a good combo for a prosecution. Cohen is a convicted perjurer. That's going to be a huge liability using him as a witness. Then you are trying to read into bookkeeping entries stuff that isn't there.

On the whole, I'd say it looks a lot weaker than the case against Fife Symington (an AZ governor some decades ago). The jury there threw out 90% of the charges--and they were varied, not all the same.

Here, you have 34 of the exact same change. One fails, it's likely that all 34 fail. It looks to me like an all-or-nothing case and that doesn't bode well for Bragg either.

Then when you throw in Bragg's public statements about getting Trump, etc., he's got issues where it will be argued that this is a malicious prosecution for political reasons rather than a dispassionate execution of the law.

On the whole, I wouldn't be betting on Bragg to win this one. Again, that has nothing to do with Trump, and everything to do with the prosecutor and charges brought.
Click to expand...

If Trump can produce a document that shows that he actually paid Cohen for work performed then this will go away quickly. The problem for Trump is no such document appears to exist. It was an agreement that was made to hide the true nature of the payments. This wasn't an agreement with just Cohen and Trump. Others were also witness and/or party to the scheme to pay Cohen and hide the nature of the payments.

A voice recording of Trump and Cohen discussing how to pay off woman-1 and hide the payment.
Trump CFO was included in discussions of how to pay off Cohen for the payment to woman-2 and hide the reimbursement so it looked like income for Cohen instead of a reimbursement.
 
Concart said:
I heard that early on. Apparently they reference a scheme without calling it a conspiracy. It's still pretty damning for Trump.
Click to expand...

The scheme to hide the payments seems to be the crime that makes falsifying the documents a felony.

I guess Trump's lawyers will argue that it isn't a crime if it's a federal crime and not a state crime. I don't see how they will get very far with that but I am sure they will try.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
The scheme to hide the payments seems to be the crime that makes falsifying the documents a felony.

I guess Trump's lawyers will argue that it isn't a crime if it's a federal crime and not a state crime. I don't see how they will get very far with that but I am sure they will try.
Click to expand...

They are apparently alleging state campaign violations as well, and also tax fraud.
 
I swear - I can't imagine caring about a politician so much. Especially one that has so clearly played loose w/ the law, for decades.

They're defending him like he's family. It's 100% a cult.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
There is no charge of conspiracy. All the charges are for falsifying business records.
The falsifying the records was in furtherance of a scheme to hide the illegal campaign contributions.
Click to expand...
that's obviously going to be a problem if Trump didn't prepare any of the business records.........if he didn't commit the act they would have to claim he conspired with someone else to do it on his behalf........
 
BartenderElite said:
I swear - I can't imagine caring about a politician so much. Especially one that has so clearly played loose w/ the law, for decades.

They're defending him like he's family. It's 100% a cult.
Click to expand...

odd that if he has "clearly" played loose with the law for decades that he's never been found guilty of doing it.......why have you never shared your evidence with prosecuting attorneys?.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top