USA Midterms....

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
Milzy said:
So let's parse this out: She tries to extort Trump for "hush money". He pays, which is not a crime. She violates the agreement, going public, and he sues. She looses, and has to pay damages. But 7 years later, an ambitious and partisan DA, who's policy is to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors, upgrades this misdemeanor to a felony. On a bookkeeping violation. Really?? I told you so.
Click to expand...
Quick explainer:
Not crimes:-
  • Paying hush money to porn stars and people you had affairs with - not a crime.
  • Violating agreements you have been paid for = breach of agreement = getting sued and fined.
Crimes:
  • Getting your lawyer to pay the porn star then giving the money to your lawyer via a series of payments claimed as business expenses - a crime (You can't put your hooker down as a business expense - there isn't a category for that, not even entertainment).
  • Getting the payments from your election fund rather than your own wallet - a crime
  • Trying to hide the payments in your business accounts - a crime
  • Doing that 34 times in respect of payments to 3 different women - a crime
 
Milzy

Milzy

Well-Known Member
icowden said:
Quick explainer:
Not crimes:-
  • Paying hush money to porn stars and people you had affairs with - not a crime.
  • Violating agreements you have been paid for = breach of agreement = getting sued and fined.
Crimes:
  • Getting your lawyer to pay the porn star then giving the money to your lawyer via a series of payments claimed as business expenses - a crime (You can't put your hooker down as a business expense - there isn't a category for that, not even entertainment).
  • Getting the payments from your election fund rather than your own wallet - a crime
  • Trying to hide the payments in your business accounts - a crime
  • Doing that 34 times in respect of payments to 3 different women - a crime
Click to expand...

This would be great in the news. Well simplified & I concur they are crimes. I still say he’s going to come out smelling of roses. Otherwise he’ll go on a rampage and bring a few people down.
 
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
Milzy said:
This would be great in the news. Well simplified & I concur they are crimes. I still say he’s going to come out smelling of roses. Otherwise he’ll go on a rampage and bring a few people down.
Click to expand...

It's interesting. I think if it were a federal crime he might do. The fact that this is a state felony and therefore comes under the jurisdiction of New York makes it a bit harder for him to wiggle out of. I imagine he'll escape doing time though. There are lots of other fraud crimes being investigated so this may just be an hors d'oeuvre to test the water...

There's a civil investigation that could potentially bankrupt him, the DOJ criminal investigation into removing top secret documents and of course the Capitol Riot. Then there are the Dominion libel cases - I think Trump might be up against one of those as well.
 
Last edited:
Bazzer

Bazzer

Active Member
Milzy said:
So let's parse this out: She tries to extort Trump for "hush money". He pays, which is not a crime. She violates the agreement, going public, and he sues. She looses, and has to pay damages.
But 7 years later, an ambitious and partisan DA, who's policy is to downgrade felonies to misdemeanors, upgrades this misdemeanor to a felony. On a bookkeeping violation.
Really?? I told you so.
Click to expand...
As with many involved in evasion, Trump got greedy.
Paying hush money isn't a crime in the States. As I understand it, had Trump paid the hush money out of his own funds, he wouldn't have committed a crime. But he didn't. He seemingly chose, not only to use Trump Organisation funds, but also to make false entries in the books and records of the Trump Organisation and gain tax relief on payments which had nothing to do with his business. Also in doing so he also breached campaign fund limits.
But then, based upon what emerged from the Weiselberg jailing, Trump seems to think the taxation system is there to be ignored.
Bookkeeping violation? Seriously? This isn't a corner shop business, where a proprietor is working 14 hours a day and may make the odd mistake in their records. Rather, Trump lauds how wealthy (allegedly) he has become and how successful his businesses are.
BTW, you appear to be suggesting Daniels was sued for breaching the NDA. Your source for this is where? Daniels lost a defamation case against Trump and has had to pay his legal fees.
 
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
Bazzer said:
But then, based upon what emerged from the Weiselberg jailing, Trump seems to think the taxation system is there to be ignored.
Click to expand...
He learned that from his dad I think. His whole wealth is based upon the fact that he says he is wealthy. He doesn't own a lot of "his" property he licenses the Trump name.

In January 2022, a filing by the New York AG reported that Trump's tax documents show that his liquid assets were about $93 million in 2020.[137] In September, James sued Trump, his three oldest children, and the organization, alleging over 200 instances of fraud and asserting that Trump "wildly exaggerated his net worth by billions of dollars". The lawsuit seeks $250 million in damages and the instatement of a five-year ban from real-estate transactions.[138]
Click to expand...

For him everything is someone else's fault. He says he is worth 8 or 9 billion. Nobody else does.
 
Milzy

Milzy

Well-Known Member
The conspiracy theorists believe no hush money was paid and that Stormy Daniels is part of a satanic cult.
 
E

ebikeerwidnes

Well-Known Member
I am seeing a lot of things from trump supporters saying that a lot of these would be misdemeanours for anyone else
be
The point that they miss
apart from the fact that if it turned out that Obama had done this they would have been screaming for a charge of treason

is that the campaign at the heart of this was a campaign for President of the USA

i.e. this was not some ordinary person who only has influence over his own life

and some jobs - and people applying for them - SHOULD be held to a higher level of responsibility
and SHOULD be punished higher if they are found to have done it

for example - a teacher who is found guilty of thumping someone outside a pub on night might well loose their job
a bricklayer would not loose their job for teh same thing
same applies to drunk driving for teachers - you can loose you job for it - other people not so much

A Police officer could loose their job for many things - pretty much any criminal conviction

so if a teacher and a police officer are held to a higher standard
surely a senior politician - i.e. a law maker - should also be held to a higher standard and a higher level of punishment

and in the USA the President it at the top of that pile!

which is one reason why it SHOULD be a felony - even if someone standing to be elected as a small town dog catcher (or whatever) might just get a slap on the wrist for the same offence
 
icowden

icowden

Legendary Member
ebikeerwidnes said:
I am seeing a lot of things from trump supporters saying that a lot of these would be misdemeanours for anyone else be
The point that they miss apart from the fact that if it turned out that Obama had done this they would have been screaming for a charge of treason
is that the campaign at the heart of this was a campaign for President of the USA
Click to expand...
Apparently that isn't the actual issue.
In order to be a felony according to NY laws, falsification of business accounts only becomes a felony if the falsification was done “with the intent to commit another crime”. The challenge is going to be to prove that Trump intended to commit another crime, as thus far that hasn't been indicated in the indictment.

A good explainer is here:-
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/05/gaping-hole-trump-indictment-00090701

Of course, this article may be biased, but I suspect that the legal premise is sound, and the article has the ring of logic about it.
 
E

ebikeerwidnes

Well-Known Member
icowden said:
Apparently that isn't the actual issue.
In order to be a felony according to NY laws, falsification of business accounts only becomes a felony if the falsification was done “with the intent to commit another crime”. The challenge is going to be to prove that Trump intended to commit another crime, as thus far that hasn't been indicated in the indictment.

A good explainer is here:-
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/05/gaping-hole-trump-indictment-00090701

Of course, this article may be biased, but I suspect that the legal premise is sound, and the article has the ring of logic about it.
Click to expand...

Thanks
I was speaking more morally and ethically than legally - interesting to see the legal justification as well though
 
Bazzer

Bazzer

Active Member
icowden said:
Apparently that isn't the actual issue.
In order to be a felony according to NY laws, falsification of business accounts only becomes a felony if the falsification was done “with the intent to commit another crime”. The challenge is going to be to prove that Trump intended to commit another crime, as thus far that hasn't been indicated in the indictment.

A good explainer is here:-
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/04/05/gaping-hole-trump-indictment-00090701

Of course, this article may be biased, but I suspect that the legal premise is sound, and the article has the ring of logic about it.
Click to expand...
According to some reports, Trump could potentially have screwed himself some more.
Yesterday, Trump seemingly spent many hours answering questions under deposition from New York attorney Letitia James in connection with the civil fraud case against the Trump Organisation due to be heard later this year. - Unlike his last appearance before her, when he took the 5th amendment >400 times.*
Information from the deposition may be helpful for Bragg to bring further criminal charges against the orange one. But due to the timings the judges have issued, the criminal case already instituted by the DA will now automatically be behind the civil case.

*Trump would have been faced with Hobson's choice for his latest appearance. Unlike a criminal case, adverse implications can be made in a civil case where a defendant takes the right to silence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom