Can anyone explain the crime Trump did?

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: JadedGhost

Was this “grossed up to cover taxes” thing from Weisselberg one of the underlying "crimes" Trump did? 👁‍🗨

and what does that even mean? I read it 5 times and it makes zero sense.

originally posted by: JinMI

Turns out, paying off hookers isn't in the drop down menu.

I wonder if congressional slushhush find is though....

Then we have old Stormy herself say they never had sex, so we are really talking about an extortion crime on Trump that it seems both Stormy and Cohen were in it to get money from Trump, and they did.

a reply to: Xtrozero

That would appear to be what the evidence is showing.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: JinMI

Turns out, paying off hookers isn't in the drop down menu.

I wonder if congressional slushhush find is though....

Then we have old Stormy herself say they never had sex, so we are really talking about an extortion crime on Trump that it seems both Stormy and Cohen were in it to get money from Trump, and they did.

And don’t forget the $60,000 that Cohen stole from Trump.
The Liberals don’t care about him adding thief to his title.

a reply to: JadedGhost


thanks for the breakdown......

one side-bar ->> the Judge should step down without fanfare

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: JadedGhost

originally posted by: Station27
So, it's taken 24 pages and still nobody could answer the question in the OP's title?

That says a lot about the whole case. And the people who are approving of it.

originally posted by: Boomer1947

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: alldaylong

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: EndTime

Yes, we have heard that part.

now, when he porked the whore, then Cohen paid the whore to sign the NDA they both agreed to, was that a crime?

if not, then when Trump paid Cohen the invoice he gave Trump and called it a legal expense, was that a crime? If so please explain why.

And for the trifecta, when John Edwards was accused of this, and found not guilty, what was different?

Any action that was carried out on the instruction from Trump., makes Trump culpable.

That's how the law works.

I can agree with that. So what part was illegal? agreeing to have an NDA? Paying the lawyer for making the NDA? You haven't answered that, which is the crux of all this.

You think you are asking a simple question that should have a simple answer, but this case actually has at least 3 moving parts.

The first part was falsifying business records in the second degree. This is NY State Penal Law 175.05(1)

"You are guilty of this subsection if, with the intent to defraud, you make, or even cause through other means, a false entry in an enterprise's business records."

When Trump signed the checks that repaid Cohen (all 34 of them), he entered them in the ledger of the Trump organization as legal fees. That wasn't entirely true and he knew it; that's where the intent to defraud comes in. $130,000 worth of those checks were repayment to Stormy for signing the NDA which, by itself, is perfectly legal. However, that $130,000 was not a legal fee; it's a campaign expense, since it was paid for the purpose of improving Trump's electability in the 2016 election and not for any legal service that Cohen provided while acting in his capacity as a lawyer. Disguising a campaign expense as a legal fee on an official document is where the fraud came in.

The second part is why Trump made the fraudulent entries. This brings us to New York Penal Law Section 17-152 - "Conspiracy to promote or prevent election."

"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."

It would seem that Trump, Cohen, and perhaps Pecker conspired to promote Trump's election by the unlawful means of creating fraudulent business records.

This brings us to the third part: New York 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."

In summary: Trump intentionally falsified business records in the second degree--a misdemeanor. He used this unlawful means for the purpose of promoting his election--a violation of law 17-152--another misdemeanor. Falsifying business records with the intent to commit or conceal another crime (violation of law 17-152) raises falsifying business records to the first degree--a felony.

Boomer answered the question in detail on page 7, yet it was conveniently ignored by the Trump defenders who think they’re experts on NY law.

Fact is, Trump was convicted with quite a complicated law. But just because you’re unable and/or refuse to understand it, doesn’t mean it’s not completely legitimate.

but the question is, what should the payment have been listed as to avoid this being a horrible crime?

Listing the payments as ‘legal fees’ wasn’t even the smoking gun evidence, even though it is actually tax fraud. It was witness testimony, documents and even voice recordings that convinced the Jury Trump deliberately labeled the payments as legal fees to conceal another crime.

There was a document with Weisselbergs own hand writing calculating the payments to Cohen, where it literally said “grossed up to cover taxes”, that’s a smoking gun right there. The defense tried to argue that the document couldn’t prove a crime was committed, because otherwise it would’ve been destroyed… lol.

so you have zero clue as to what the payment should have been listed as, but you are sure what was done was wrong. Typical.

"The Democratic Party’s strategy is to beat President Trump in the courtroom rather than the ballot box. This will backfire in November. Even worse, it is profoundly undemocratic," Kennedy wrote.

President Trump has not committed any crime, hence why no one, can explain what crime he allegedly committed.

On the other hand, literally everything leftist dems are accusing him of allegedly doing, they themselves have done.

Those who can't see it, are in denial.

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: RazorV66

Kind of hard to claim book keeping error when there’s documented evidence the payments where grossed up to cover taxes.

btw, bet it’s going to feel kind of weird voting for a person to be in charge of the most powerful military on earth when he himself isn’t even allowed to own a firearm.

explain what was illegal about paying Cohen for this. Also, explain why Trump's accounting team paying Cohen enough to cover his taxes as well was illegal. And be a lamb and bring a link, K?

a reply to: network dude

That's been the argument the whole time. Not that they can point to a statute and evidence but that "whatever Trump did, we're sure it was illegal!'

One brainlet here readily admitted here that because Trump probably did illegality elsewhere then this is justified.


True story

a reply to: JinMI

you would think asking them to provide facts would shut them up, but they are still squealing loudly as if they saw someone with a purdy mouth while offering nothing factual, just feelz. But if you use big words, you can extrapolate intelligence from them, through the juxtaposition of their wordy answers. the one's devoid of facts.

originally posted by: network dude

so you have zero clue as to what the payment should have been listed as, but you are sure what was done was wrong. Typical.

I wonder if the prosecution said what it should have been listed as if wrong. Can someone here tell me what the proper labeling should have been?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: network dude

so you have zero clue as to what the payment should have been listed as, but you are sure what was done was wrong. Typical.

I wonder if the prosecution said what it should have been listed as if wrong. Can someone here tell me what the proper labeling should have been?

no, not one of those little pinheads can tell you that. not one.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: TzarChasm

Suppose we take it all at face value as true

It can't be a FECA violation if it can be construed as private in any other scenario.

Which was the point of Peckers cross examination of this happening very often.

This is exactly correct.
FECA regulations are clear.
If a payment would occur outside of a campaign it CAN NOT be classified as a campaign expense.
Trump has paid people and set up NDAs before - when not running for office.
This is what the ex chairman of the FEC was going to testify to in court - and explain why the payment could not possibly be a campaign contribution - but the judge refused to let him.
There is absolutely no crime here at all.
There is not even a misdemeanor because the payment WAS a legal expense.

To give what just happened any legitimacy at all, you either have to have a clear agenda or be just plain dumb.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: TzarChasm
Did anybody figure out what manner of crime was committed and what law was used to determine that fact? Aside from NDA and election interference, aka suppressing scandals several months after the actual election was concluded?

originally posted by: frogs453
a reply to: JinMI

It was not. However Stormi testified that she was approached in 2011 for her story, was paid 15g for an interview but the story never ran. She was never paid by Trump until after the access Hollywood recording got out and there was interest from the National Enquirer for her story before the election. Trump had Cohen pay her off then.

Okay but that doesn't explain why checks and invoices apparently were dated AFTER the election was concluded.

On the other hand, it's also argued by the defense that Trump was not aware and did not endorse those payments which was defeated in court by explicit documents describing the transaction.

This all hinges on whether Trump did in fact purposely suppress the story, via NDA and 'catch and kill' tactics, prior to his election in November 2016 because of New York law prohibiting election interference (ignoring how democrats employed the same tactics to protect Biden, exposed in the Twitter files).

It does not come down to whether Trump tried to hide the payments because he was running for office.
There is no legal imperative to disclose NON-Campaign expenditure - it's perfectly legal to not do so.
The only expenditure you must declare is campaign expense.

The payment to Stormy Daniels cannot be classified as a campaign expense because it is an expense that would still be incurred if there were no election.

I would encourage people to read this thread - by Brad Smith - the former chairman of the FEC who the judge refused to let testify.

x.com...

Thank you. The issue I'm seeing is that this NDA and "hush money" situation was allegedly connected to his campaign, an attempt to protect his election. The counter argument is that this payment would have occurred in due time with or without the risk to his chances of being elected. If that's true, it seems that he took precautions after being elected instead of years prior when there was no motive to do so, while also skirting the election laws by waiting several months after his inauguration so there's no correlation. But they wanted to create the impression of correlation which then opens the door to a felony charge.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
But they wanted to create the impression of correlation which then opens the door to a felony charge.

Then we see nothing even remotely associated with his election and it was personal to prevent his family from seeing, and that isn't a crime either. I remember when they suggested he used election funds to pay it off, so they had been trying to align it with the election the whole time without actually doing it, but then the judge just said in his instructions to vote guilty on all counts if anything with in the 34 counts you might agree with...lol geez

a reply to: network dude

lol, you really think trying to pick my argument apart is really going to do anything to help your boy Trump?

These are the facts… Trump carried out an illegal act, which he knew full well was illegal when he did it and now his a convicted felon, justice has been served.

He may still well be elected POTUS, but as a convicted felon he can’t own a firearm or even travel to at least 37 different countries, including the UK, so no more golfing trips to Scotland for convicted felon Trump. lol, he most likely won’t even be able to vote for himself in Florida this November, since hell either be incarcerated or on probation.

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: network dude

lol, you really think trying to pick my argument apart is really going to do anything to help your boy Trump?

These are the facts… Trump carried out an illegal act, which he knew full well was illegal when he did it and now his a convicted felon, justice has been served.

Yes, Trump broke it down into payments to try to make it look like a legitimate expense.

originally posted by: JadedGhost
a reply to: network dude

lol, you really think trying to pick my argument apart is really going to do anything to help your boy Trump?

These are the facts… Trump carried out an illegal act, which he knew full well was illegal when he did it and now his a convicted felon, justice has been served.

He may still well be elected POTUS, but as a convicted felon he can’t own a firearm or even travel to at least 37 different countries, including the UK, so no more golfing trips to Scotland for convicted felon Trump. lol, he most likely won’t even be able to vote for himself in Florida this November, since hell either be incarcerated or on probation.

I'm actually grateful for all the left has done. I sincerely don't think Trump would be winning as solid as he is now without their help. But I do have questions about this.

You are sure Trump committed a crime. I think it's important to have people understand what crime he did. Paying his lawyer was a crime? Paying for an NDA was a crime? Trying to keep derogatory information from coming out during an election is a crime?

Look slick, you are the one who seems quite cocky about knowing all the facts. I honestly think you are DERPing and haven't a clue, but you could shut my silly ass down by explaining the facts to me and the rest of the site.

If Trump paying money is a crime, then the entire Congress is also guilty for using tax payers money for a HUSH FUND.

It's been posted dozens of times, yet leftist seems obvious.

If you hate orange man, then just go away.


You're a part of the problem, not the solution.
Real Americans are welcome, those who hate America can leave. No one's stopping you.

a reply to: JadedGhost

Agreed; it is such a cathartic experience when your political opposition get exactly what you think they deserve.

a reply to: network dude

Falsifying business records for the purpose of covering up another crime. Not the crime of the century, but a felony in NY all the same.

He also has 3 more criminal charges his clearly guilty of but his delaying them for as long as he possibly can.