The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
What’s he being charged with then? Paying off an extortionist? Oh, ok.Nobody said he was...
That's the big question: what's the crime, keeping in mind the fact that paying "hush money" isn't illegal. The following article gets into the weeds a but, this quote pretty well sums it up:
"What about the “object crime”—that is, the crime that Trump allegedly intended to commit or conceal in such a way as to transform the underlying misdemeanor offense into a felony?
If you’re looking for the clearest statement of Bragg’s legal theory, you can find it in a November 2023 court filing opposing Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, along with Merchan’s ruling on that motion. Notably, in that ruling, Merchan clarified that § 175.10 “does not require that the ‘other crime’ actually be committed”—“all that is required is that defendant … acted with a conscious aim and objective to commit another crime."
So here we have a NY trial against Trump with no crime to go along with the other NY trial with no fraud and no victim. Political persecution at it's finest.
Charting the Legal Theory Behind People v. Trump
The mechanics of the case as District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting it.
www.lawfaremedia.org
Last edited:
Any judge with common sense, integrity and wasn’t conflicted would throw this case out of his courtroom and severely admonish the prosecution for wasting the court and city’s resources with this.That's the big question: what's the crime, keeping in mind the fact that paying "hush money" isn't illegal. The following article gets into the weeds a but, this quote pretty well sums it up:
"What about the “object crime”—that is, the crime that Trump allegedly intended to commit or conceal in such a way as to transform the underlying misdemeanor offense into a felony?
If you’re looking for the clearest statement of Bragg’s legal theory, you can find it in a November 2023 court filing opposing Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, along with Merchan’s ruling on that motion. Notably, in that ruling, Merchan clarified that § 175.10 “does not require that the ‘other crime’ actually be committed”—“all that is required is that defendant … acted with a conscious aim and objective to commit another crime."
So here we have a NY trial against Trump with no crime to go along with the other NY trial with no fraud and no victim. Political persecution at it's finest.
Charting the Legal Theory Behind People v. Trump
The mechanics of the case as District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting it.
Last edited:
Any conviction from either of the NY cases will be reversed on appeal, but that will come after November. The Democrats don't care - it's all about election interference between now and then.
ut o, Trumps trial may have just come undone,,,,,we will see tomorrow,,,physics is at work now,,,
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Just proving what we already know, Trump is for sale, will do anything for the right price.
The Trump trials are disintegrating as more Democrat corruption is exposed. The Atlanta fiasco is dead in the water, the Mar-a-Lago documents trial has been placed in limbo and the Alvin Bragg trial in NY is like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
Not really surprised, I don’t doubt there were a couple of Trump supporters on the jury, but now we know there were no Trump worshipers.
Not that this trial means much, won’t be any prison time, just a fine and slap on the wrist. Next up we will see what the Supreme Court says about immunity.
Not that this trial means much, won’t be any prison time, just a fine and slap on the wrist. Next up we will see what the Supreme Court says about immunity.
Agreed. This jury pool came from a district that voted 85% for Biden in 2020, just like the group that decided the Carroll trial. They voted for prosecutors that ran on getting Trump, and were glad to help out when they were given the chance.
Yep, and maybe probation to add a little inconvenience.
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Yeah ... The Orange Mobster still has 3 trials still to go ... not over by a longshot.
You might wish to revisit the Republicans' records on "investigations" ...
And "impeachment hearings" ...
Durham or Hur ring any bells ?