@averagejoe1 saidDon’t mince words. Interfering in one is, and so is falsifying financial records pertaining to a campaign. I expect Marauder can cite chapter and verse.
What are we to be considering for making a decision? Influencing an election is not a crime. Fact from Avjoe.
15d
@averagejoe1 saidThe Donald's whole life has been a crime.
What are we to be considering for making a decision? Influencing an election is not a crime. Fact from Avjoe.
15d
@averagejoe1 saidTell Trump that.
What are we to be considering for making a decision? Influencing an election is not a crime. Fact from Avjoe.
We aren't doing your homework on this.
Try being an actual Constitution-regarding adult.
15d
@kmax87 saidYeah, the blue side knew that going in.
The Donald's whole life has been a crime.
For years, every single one of his interactions in the press was always the ravings of a lunatic. Now we see the right loves lunatics. (MTG, Matt Gaetz, I'm looking at you.)
It is usually the reds who get all of this stuff wrong.
15d
@averagejoe1 saidWe are not doing your homework.
@kmax87
But, What is This crime? Should I rephrase?
If you manage to present a paper void of facts, you WILL get marked down.
@AverageJoe1
WE are making that decision? I may be wrong but I kind of thought it was up to the JURY to make that decision, Did I miss something here?
Or are you trying to say there WAS no crime? What if Biden had done the same things as Trump? Would THAT have been crimes then?
@averagejoe1 saidFalsifying financial records. It’s a felony.
@kmax87
But, What is This crime? Should I rephrase?
EDIT: copy-pasted from Marauder's thread on the case:
<<
NY Penal Law "§ 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."
As to the object crimes, Bragg is basing the "intent to commit another crime" which elevates the charge from a misdemeanor 2nd Degree to a felony First Degree Falsifying business records, Bragg uses three theories any one of which the Judge found adequate to sustain the charges at this point (a fourth was rejected):
"(1) The People allege that Defendant "violated federal election laws because the payoffs to both McDougal and Daniels violated FECA's restrictions on corporate and individual contributions." People's (Apposition pg. 24 The People presented evidence to the Grand Jury that Cohen pled guilty in the Southern District of New York to violating FECA for engaging in the very acts which are at issue here, i.e. making unlawful campaign contributions and that he did so at the direction of, and in coordination with, "a candidate for federal office," later identified as Donald J. Trump - the Defendant herein.
(2) Under the second theory, the People allege that Defendant intended to violate N.Y. Election Law § 17 152 by conspiring to "promote the election of any person to a public office...by entering a scheme specifically for purposes of influencing the 2016 presidential election; and that they did so by 'unlawfull means,' including by violating FECA through the unlaw individual and corporate contributions by Cohen. Pecker, and AMI; and...by falsifying the records of other New York enterprises and mischaracterizing the. nature of the repayment for tax purposes." People's Opposition at pg. 25.
(3) Under die [sic] third theory, the People allege that the Defendant intended to violate New York fax [sic] Law §§ 1801(a)(3) and 1802. this theory is premised on evidence introduced to the Grand Jury that when Cohen was reimbursed for the $1.30,000 payment he made to Daniels, the amount he received was "grossed up" to compensate him for taxes he would have to pay on the reimbursement."
"The Court has considered the respective arguments of the parties and finds that the evidence presented to the Grand Jury for the first three theories was legally sufficient to support the intent to commit the "other crime" element of falsifying Business Records in the first Degree."
https://casetext.com/case/people-v-trump-20 pp. 13-14
>>
Now, what part of "felony" do you not understand? Two too many syllables?
15d
@averagejoe1 saidI’d have assumed a given, that we are speaking of the NY trial.
What are we to be considering for making a decision? Influencing an election is not a crime. Fact from Avjoe.
There is no crime. Influencing an election is not a crime. It is part of the game they all play. Hillary did it with fake dossier, but I digress…irrelevant.
Here is an explanation for you-all.
What is, regardless of filings and fluff, the crime? Specificity, please.
https://www.google.com/[WORD TOO LONG]