• Re: DA Alvin Bragg Is Trying to Punish Trump For Something That's Not a

    From Malicious Prosecution@21:1/5 to All on Mon Feb 19 07:57:22 2024
    XPost: alt.politics.usa.republican, alt.society.liberalism, talk.politics.guns XPost: talk.politics.misc

    On 29 Nov 2023, patriot1@protonmail.com posted some news:uk7c4t$rfn2$1@dont-email.me:

    Another Soros nigger, Alvin Bragg. Wigger Kathy Hochul is a sellout
    and all in on the political corruption of East Coast states. They
    have sold out Americans at every opportunity.

    Much has been made of Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity as
    it relates to the criminal case in Georgia and other legal actions
    against the former president.

    Special counsel Jack Smith and prosecutor Fanni Willis claim Trump
    "unlawfully interfered with the 2020 presidential election by trying to
    enlist state and federal officials in his efforts to stop Biden from
    taking office," according to Reason.com's Jacob Sullum.

    But Trump's claim of immunity isn't quite as "wild" as some on the left suggest. Presidential immunity was designed to prevent "frivolous,
    politically motivated criminal charges against former presidents," as
    Sullum points out.

    That might not be the case entirely with the Smith and Willis cases.
    After all, there are statutes that may have been violated.

    The three-judge appeals court hearing Trump's immunity claim found the
    argument unconvincing. The court ruled that "the danger" Trump perceived "appears slight" given prosecutors' "ethical obligations" and
    "additional safeguards," such as "the right to be charged by a grand
    jury upon a finding of probable cause."

    So, trust Jack Smith. Trust Fanni Willis because they're prosecutors and wouldn't dream of putting their thumbs on the scale of justice, right?

    In the hush money case, District Attorney Alvin Bragg is taking Trump to
    trial not for committing a crime but for interfering with the 2016
    election by lying about his affair with Daniels and paying to cover it
    up.

    The idea of converting the Daniels hush money into a state crime was so unpromising that Bragg's predecessor, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., rejected it
    after lengthy consideration. When Bragg revived the idea after taking
    office in 2022, leading to a March 2023 indictment charging Trump with
    34 felonies, many people, including the former president's critics,
    thought the case reeked of political desperation.

    Bragg does not claim that paying off Daniels was itself a crime, because
    it obviously was not. The indictment instead alleges that Trump violated
    a New York law that makes it a misdemeanor to falsify business records
    "with intent to defraud." Trump allegedly did that by misrepresenting
    his reimbursement of Cohen as payment for legal services under a
    nonexistent retainer agreement. The 34 counts in the indictment are
    based on invoices, checks, check stubs, and ledger entries, each of
    which allegedly helped Trump conceal the hush payment.

    This stacking of charges based on the same course of conduct already
    looks like a vendetta. But why are they felonies? It is not exactly
    clear.

    Bragg came up with 32 meaningless charges just to pile on the potential felonies. His reasoning is that one of them ought to stick and give him
    a big notch on his tomahawk.

    Falsifying business records becomes a felony, punishable by up to four
    years in prison, when the defendant's "intent to defraud" includes "an
    intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission
    thereof." What was the other crime? Bragg claims Trump "violated
    election laws" when he instructed Cohen to pay Daniels. Which election
    laws? Bragg so far has refused to say. "The indictment doesn't specify
    them because the law does not so require," he told reporters last year.

    One possibility is that Trump violated federal election laws. But
    federal prosecutors did not pursue any charges against Trump based on
    that claim, and it is not clear that "another crime" can include federal offenses, as Vance's staff recognized. In 2022, The New York Times
    reported that prosecutors working for Vance "concluded that the most
    promising option for an underlying crime was the federal campaign
    finance violation to which Mr. Cohen had pleaded guilty." But "the
    prosecutors ultimately concluded that approach was too risky—a judge
    might find that falsifying business records could only be a felony if it
    aided or concealed a New York state crime, not a federal one."

    Bragg may actually have done Trump a favor. The Stormy Daniels hush
    money trial begins March 25. It's possible that Trump could be found not
    guilty on all charges, immediately leading to the perception that the
    other cases against Trump are equally as frivolous and accept Trump's
    view that these are all political prosecutions.

    It doesn't take much to bring down a house of cards.

    https://pjmedia.com/rick-moran/2024/02/18/da-alvin-bragg-is-trying-to-pun ish-trump-for-something-thats-not-a-crime-n4926536

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)