We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong

[Mavideol]

On 4/6/2023 at 6:22 AM, ThailandRyan said:

Hush money in political circles has been paid for many years going all the way back to Warren Harding, who paid his mistress to stay quiet about their ongoing affair, even while he was still president.  Yet none of them went to the depths that Trump has gone t to create fictitious business records in order to hide the fact he paid money, and how much of Trumps funds for these payments came from his campaign finance money donated by the millions of followers he has instead of out of his own pocket.

a crook always a crook... would it had been known/on the news back in 2016 he wouldn't have been elected.... 3 words Lock Him Up

[Mavideol]

12 hours ago, Furioso said:

It's a weak case:

1. Trump has been charged with falsifying business records, a misdemeanor in New York State. 

2. This allegedly happened 6 years ago, so the statute of limitations expired 4 years ago, thus the case should have been thrown out. 

3. However, Bragg claims there's a higher crime that the falsifying enabled, but won't say what this higher crime is. 

4. Most judges would have thrown out this case because Bragg basically says "I don't have to tell you what the higher crime is".

5. As it stands right now, the case is a misdemeanor where the statute of limitations have long since expired.  

6. Bragg insinuates Trump deceived the voters but New York Congressman Santos lied about EVERYTHING, yet not one single charge against Santos has been filed. 

7. The next hearing is Dec 4th, the case should get throw out before then, but New York judges are pretty corrupt so the case could continue..

8..and if the case continues it'll go Federal and then definitely get thrown out by the Feds. 

surprised we still have deniers around 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, Mavideol said:

a crook always a crook... would it had been known/on the news back in 2016 he wouldn't have been elected.... 3 words Lock Him Up

The mere mention of an investigation against Clinton by the FBI in 2016 cost her the election so it seems a stretch to imagine that Trump would benefit by these charges.

[eisfeld]

7 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think you meant  "Trump and supporters would not be so angry about it all". If that's what you meant, it's not just about this specific case they are PO about. It's the continual persecution using the law to try and prevent him running again ( with no success so far ).

Yes that is what I ment ot say. Thanks. But I disagree with this case trying to prevent him from running - it's just not. He is free to run again. These are two totally disconnected matters. There's even the completely contradictory opinion of some supportors that this case just strengthens Trumps political position.

[Jingthing]

3 minutes ago, eisfeld said:

Yes that is what I ment ot say. Thanks. But I disagree with this case trying to prevent him from running - it's just not. He is free to run again. These are two totally disconnected matters. There's even the completely contradictory opinion of some supportors that this case just strengthens Trumps political position.

It does increase his chance of being nominated by the Republicans but it decreases his chances of winning the presidency.

Of course we know if he does lose again he will claim he won and attempt another coup.

[The Snark]

"We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong".

This is not the relevant issue here. A can't see the forest for the trees thing. The major issue has now moved from a person's culpability to court subpoena powers and the threats of perjury. No more fancy footwork, ignoring subpoenas and hedging and dodging. All than has gone before is now different. It was all civil matters.

Now it's all criminal. Avoiding a summons, ignoring a subpoena, attorneys obstructing proceedings and so forth is no longer acceptable. Regardless of reason or purpose, disobeying a court order now falls under obstruction of justice. An entirely separate criminal offense. Dozens of such obstructions have already taken place but now, as the saying goes, the buck stops at the courtroom door.

 

This is a major concern with many of Trump's former and present attorneys as well as cronies. They too can be found guilty of obstruction as well as criminal contempt. Criminal acts in and of themselves that will stand even if Trump proves his innocence. Trump's allies have been moved from an eight lane highway to a very narrow tightrope.

Edited April 7, 2023 by The Snark

[The Snark]

People need to keep in mind, all the noise, lying, avoiding, and endless congressional hearings that has gone on until now was moot. Everything so far has been on the legislative level, even the Mueller report. Congressional hearings are pissing up a rope. They have no judicial prosecutorial powers and can only refer matters to the judiciary. Even contempt of congress gets scoffed or laughed at.

 

It's a whole different ballgame now. And there's a whole lot of judicial junk yard dogs that are salivating right now that would have frightened Pavlov. Most likely the domino effect will kick in as the courts uncover new facts.

Edited April 7, 2023 by The Snark

[Furioso]

I doubt Trump get's elected President again, he's got too many enemies and that Jan 6th ordeal should be the nail in his coffin. But, the media has kept him alive solely for one reason, to make tons of money. Even though Trump is favored in the polls right now(7% over Biden) I think Biden will win reelection.

 

Regardless who wins, nothing really changes for the better. Only worse. 

Edited April 7, 2023 by Furioso
it was just a small error, I swear.

[Jingthing]

1 hour ago, Furioso said:

I doubt Trump get's elected President again, he's got too many enemies and that Jan 6th ordeal should be the nail in his coffin. But, the media has kept him alive solely for one reason, to make tons of money. Even though Trump is favored in the polls right now(7% over Biden) I think Biden will win reelection.

 

Regardless who wins, nothing really changes for the better. Only worse. 

You can't not cover the man with the most power by far over the republican party. 

[jerrymahoney]

As noted on a parallel topic, the Trump defense will have until AUG 08 to submit their motions -- one of which, according to the legal buzz, will be a motion for summary dismissal of all charges.

 

Prosecution will have until SEP19 to respond; the Judge will rule 04 DEC.

[The Snark]

32 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

As noted on a parallel topic, the Trump defense will have until AUG 08 to submit their motions -- one of which, according to the legal buzz, will be a motion for summary dismissal of all charges.

 

Prosecution will have until SEP19 to respond; the Judge will rule 04 DEC.

With his own business's convictions providing probable cause, it's safe to say a whole lot of us want to see the carpet they are going to try to sweep this under. Not allegations but convictions and only a lengthy trial will be able to exonerate him from responsibility. All their arguments for dismissal will require proofs that will stand up in a court as being self evident. Leprechauns, character witness attestation from Santa Claus and sworn testimony from the tooth fairy don't count.

 

At this juncture, with the charges being so carefully thought out. it appears the only self evident proof that could be submitted is several experts written diagnosis of mental incompetence.

 

Self evident: No room for debate or reason for cross examination.

Edited April 7, 2023 by The Snark

[Mavideol]

2 hours ago, The Snark said:

"We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong".

This is not the relevant issue here. A can't see the forest for the trees thing. The major issue has now moved from a person's culpability to court subpoena powers and the threats of perjury. No more fancy footwork, ignoring subpoenas and hedging and dodging. All than has gone before is now different. It was all civil matters.

Now it's all criminal. Avoiding a summons, ignoring a subpoena, attorneys obstructing proceedings and so forth is no longer acceptable. Regardless of reason or purpose, disobeying a court order now falls under obstruction of justice. An entirely separate criminal offense. Dozens of such obstructions have already taken place but now, as the saying goes, the buck stops at the courtroom door.

 

This is a major concern with many of Trump's former and present attorneys as well as cronies. They too can be found guilty of obstruction as well as criminal contempt. Criminal acts in and of themselves that will stand even if Trump proves his innocence. Trump's allies have been moved from an eight lane highway to a very narrow tightrope.

how can a guilty person prove his/hers innocence

[billd766]

20 hours ago, mistral53 said:

One part is for certain - if Mr. Trump is found guilty, you can kiss the 'United' part of the US good bye. No real winners either way, this is one bridge too far for the Dem's.

And ALL caused by one person only.

 

Donald Trump.

[billd766]

On 4/6/2023 at 5:48 PM, jvs said:

Thirty four charges?

All made up and part of the witch hunt?

Some will stick for sure and each carries a four year term but not in the

White House!

Do YOU have the proof that they are all made up charges?

 

If so, then publish it on the social media, send it to the courts and prove them wrong, send it to the GOP as they are looking to disprove it.

 

But PROVE it, if you can.

[billd766]

7 hours ago, Mavideol said:

surprised we still have deniers around 

Nothing surprises me about Trump supporters, either here on ANN or in the USA.

 

It proves that you can fool some of the people all of the time.

[jvs]

41 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Do YOU have the proof that they are all made up charges?

 

If so, then publish it on the social media, send it to the courts and prove them wrong, send it to the GOP as they are looking to disprove it.

 

But PROVE it, if you can.

Looks like we have a misunderstanding.

I can not prove that they are made up and i even believe they are real.

Maybe you missed my question mark?

[Hawaiian]

9 hours ago, ozimoron said:

The mere mention of an investigation against Clinton by the FBI in 2016 cost her the election so it seems a stretch to imagine that Trump would benefit by these charges.

Judging from some of the comments here and many other comments on other social media it surprises me how strong the support for Trump remains.  Will it help him to win?  First of all he has to win the GOP nomination.  If he does, then who his Democrat opponent is can make a difference.  Anybody But Clinton comes to mind.

Another factor is the mindsets of right-leaning conservatives and left-leaning liberals.  Each have there own unique ideas of ethics and morality.

[Jingthing]

30 minutes ago, Hawaiian said:

Judging from some of the comments here and many other comments on other social media it surprises me how strong the support for Trump remains.  Will it help him to win?  First of all he has to win the GOP nomination.  If he does, then who his Democrat opponent is can make a difference.  Anybody But Clinton comes to mind.

Another factor is the mindsets of right-leaning conservatives and left-leaning liberals.  Each have there own unique ideas of ethics and morality.

It's not that complicated.

The criminal stuff helps Trump win the nomination.

He will be running against Biden, the incumbent (a big built in advantage).

Trump lost last time and the loss would be bigger in 24.

The swing demographics are suburban white women and the majority political party INDEPENDENTS who lean right but aren't fascist like maga.

 

[Hawaiian]

14 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It does increase his chance of being nominated by the Republicans but it decreases his chances of winning the presidency.

Of course we know if he does lose again he will claim he won and attempt another coup.

Would be interesting to see what the Vegas oddsmakers are saying about this.

[2baht]

16 hours ago, Mavideol said:

surprised we still have deniers around 

No bigger denier than the clown they follow!

[ThailandRyan]

13 hours ago, billd766 said:

And ALL caused by one person only.

 

Donald Trump.

True just 1 is responsible but the way I see it is as 3 people. Thats when the Donald says it as "He, Himself and I" as he speaks.  Yes he has only himself to blame looking through the issues he has created and the incitefullness of his tweets and press conferences.

[The Snark]

Well, dismissing all charges since they are self evident of anything is impossible. The waters around Trump enterprises is as muddy as it can get.

As for 34 acquittals and zero convictions, I could be wrong but I don't think that has ever happened in the history of the US judicial system.

[ozimoron]

Georgia DA expected to 'go big' with Trump indictment

 

The Times reports, "While nothing is certain, there are numerous signs that she may go big, with a more kaleidoscopic indictment charging not only Mr. Trump, but perhaps a dozen or more of his allies," before adding, "Nearly 20 people are already known to have been told that they are targets who could face charges, including Rudolph W. Giuliani, Mr. Trump’s former personal lawyer, and David Shafer, the head of the Georgia Republican Party."

 

It further notes: "The wide scope of the investigation has been evident for months, and Ms. Willis has said that seeking an indictment under the state’s Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations, or RICO, statute is an option that she is considering," the Times report added that Willis "may do so after a new grand jury begins its work in the second week of May, though nothing is set in stone.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/donald-trump-fani-willis-2659756915/

[bendejo]

Listen to Bragg's summary at he beginning of the post-indictment press conference:

". . . intent to conceal another crime . . ." which is itself a felony.

He did not elaborate on what exactly the other crime(s) is.  To say that this is only the beginning is an understatement.

Shades of Nixon: the crimes committed in the first place is one matter, but then the attempts to cover-up and stonewall investigations can give LE an easier criminal case to make than it would have been for the originals crimes. 

E.g. guy steals something from a store, store clerk chases him, thief picks up a rock and smashes the clerk's skull.  If caught the shoplifter would have been fingerprinted and released (if he didn't have any warrants out), but now the charge is murder.

 

Let's not forget the daily scandals that his term in the Oval generated, none of which was he taken to task for, until now.  He should be held to answer to all of them.

 

[still kicking]

Donald Trump’s worst delusion, that no rules bind him, is finally under threat

Donald Trump charged: Stormy Daniels case threatens Trump’s worst delusion | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site

[thaibeachlovers]

On 4/7/2023 at 5:59 PM, stoner said:

ill take that jail cell bet. 

 

donald trump will not spend time in jail. guilty or not. 

I'll agree that he won't spend any time in jail for this case, but sadly I suspect they will keep trying, and trying, and trying till they get him on something.

 

It's interesting that the basis of the case is apparently a misdemeanour, but was bumped up to a felony by Bragg ( according to what I heard on Al Jazeera ).

I can't provide a link as I watch a lot of AlJazeera and it could have been on any of many different news items, which would take many hours to find, so apologies for that.

 

However I did find this

 

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/how-manhattan-charged-donald-trump_uk_642d2138e4b0128419904e2e

 

Falsification of business records is often charged as a misdemeanour but can be bumped up to a Class E felony under New York state law if committed in conjunction with another crime.

Edited April 8, 2023 by thaibeachlovers

[thaibeachlovers]

On 4/8/2023 at 3:35 AM, Hawaiian said:

Judging from some of the comments here and many other comments on other social media it surprises me how strong the support for Trump remains.  Will it help him to win?  First of all he has to win the GOP nomination.  If he does, then who his Democrat opponent is can make a difference.  Anybody But Clinton comes to mind.

Another factor is the mindsets of right-leaning conservatives and left-leaning liberals.  Each have there own unique ideas of ethics and morality.

it surprises me how strong the support for Trump remains. 

 

IMO it's more that people "dislike" the Dems more than support Trump and will vote for him as a protest against the Dems, in particular Biden and especially Harris.

 

Apparently, the Bragg case has actually increased Trump's support, so could be a huge mistake on Bragg's part. Be ironic if Bragg actually helped Trump become next POTUS.

 

Using a pay off with a former porn star to convict Trump seems rather petty.

 

BTW, seems that even a convicted felon can become POTUS, so the US faces the possibility of having a POTUS serving time. Couldn't make it up, but immensely entertaining for sure if it happens.

[thaibeachlovers]

23 hours ago, 2baht said:

No bigger denier than the clown they follow!

Perhaps, but if so he's probably the best entertainer around in these sad days.

Somewhat enjoyable seeing the Washington establishment tearing itself apart in a seemingly endless crusade to convict Trump of something.

[heybruce]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps, but if so he's probably the best entertainer around in these sad days.

Somewhat enjoyable seeing the Washington establishment tearing itself apart in a seemingly endless crusade to convict Trump of something.

You do realize that it is not the purpose of government to entertain, don't you?

[2baht]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Perhaps, but if so he's probably the best entertainer around in these sad days.

Somewhat enjoyable seeing the Washington establishment tearing itself apart in a seemingly endless crusade to convict Trump of something.

People are wising up, his base is in decline!