Posted on 04/24/2024 3:56:22 PM PDT by Libloather
For many of us in the legal community, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against former President Donald Trump borders on the legally obscene: an openly political prosecution based on a theory even legal pundits dismiss. Yet Monday the prosecution seemed to actually make a case for obscenity.
It wasn’t the gratuitous introduction of an uncharged alleged tryst with a former Playboy Bunny or expected details on the relationship with an ex-porn star. It was the criminal theory itself that seemed crafted around the obscenity standard that Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart famously described in 1984’s Jacobellis v. Ohio: “I shall not today attempt further to define [it]. … But I know it when I see it.”
The prosecution must show Trump falsified business records in “furtherance of another crime.” After months of confusion on just what crime underpinned the indictment, the prosecution offered a new theory so ambiguous and undefined, it would have made Stewart blush.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass told the jury that in listing payments to Stormy Daniels as a “legal expense,” Trump violated this New York law: “Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.”
So Trump committed a crime by conspiring to unlawfully promote his own candidacy, by paying to quash a potentially embarrassing story and then reimbursing his lawyer Michael Cohen with other legal expenses.
Confused? You’re not alone.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
This might be the one.
I’d say their Kangaroo Court “trial” is already falling apart.
1. Dirty PDJT up by linking him to Stormy Daniels, and
2. Get the words "convicted felon" put before Trumps name.
He doesn't care if the conviction is overturned, he doesn't care if this case ends his political career, he doesn't care if his theory of the case makes him a laughing stock among other lawyers.
He's been promised that in effect he'll never have to work again, and that he'll be a hero in certain circles. That's all that matters to him.
I can’t see how anyone can hear the doorman’s story and not have a reasonable doubt raised about motivations of someone ( specifically Trump) paying hush money. And they presented that to a jury.
Turley only cares because Fox News pays him.
He will vote for Biden.
And his Hair Color For Men looks stupid.
I hope that President Trump’s lawyers make the jury members realize just how stupid Bragg and his bunch think that they are
““Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.””
We learned today that it’s NY law that this pertains to BUT why not use it against Bragg, Biden, James and everyone else who conspires to prevent Trump from campaigning for office???? They can use a NY law to prosecute Trump, Trump can use it too. Throw the kit’n’kaboodle in!!!! There definitely IS a CONSPIRACY against him!
Kangaroo Courts don’t need a crime.
The real criminals are wearing robes.
Does Turley still stare into the Fox camera wearing a pained look on his face?
News reports have made it clear that Trump may well have been the victim of a conspiracy to commit election fraud and election interference, under color of office, at several different levels and even by a sitting President of the United States. Shielded by that huge thumb on the scales of justice, qualified immunity.
Yes. So “concerned “.
He looks like a minstral.
What was the doorman’s story?🤔
Dershowitz did ok for Trump in the impeachment though the stakes were low, never going to get 67 votes.
Found it. Never heard it before.
Here’s your new Trump Trial kit, some assembly required.
Be sure a parent is close by to help you over the difficult
spots.
Sorry i missed your previous question. That seems like a story the defense would present, had nothing to do with a political campaign, and the premise was proven false.
I’ve read that the underlying “crime” (uncited, yet) is a state crime, but the law they’re railroading DJT on applies to Federal raps only. Stay tuned; if so, that’s BIG. (Disclaimer: WTFDIK?)
Both Donald Trump and Daniels say the affair never happened, she, swearing an affidavit to that effect.
I'm not a barrister (my standards are low, but not that low), but, it seems to me that is extortion.
Am I off base, here?
I envision PDJT saying "Cohen, I don't know who this woman is, but she's distracting me from my businesses and the campaign. Look under the sofa cushions, give he what you find and tell her to go away."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.