THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY

[VHrox12]

This will be a pretty stupid move to arrest this guy. It still won't prevent him from running for president in 2024. This will backfire big time on them. He's got enough money for some pretty good lawyers, lol.

My advice to them don't do it.

If Biden has a working brain, he's putting a stop to this nonsense.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

He would probably get hard wood from it. He won't. This is the same guy that called a sitting president a clown on live TV during the presidential debates. How disrespectful is that and it was ok because it's Trump. Not to me I never cared for that wisecrack it was highly disrespectful to do that on live TV.

[bklynboy68]

Get ready for Manhattan DA’s made-for-TV Trump prosecution: high on ratings, but short on the law

BY JONATHAN TURLEY 03/18/23



“The moment that we are waiting for, we made it to the finale together” — those familiar words from “America’s Got Talent” — could well be the opening line for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg next week, when he is expected to unveil an indictment of former President Trump. With Trump’s reported announcement that he expects to be arrested on Tuesday, it would be a fitting curtain raiser for a case that has developed more like a television production than a criminal prosecution. Indeed, this indictment was repeatedly rejected only to be brought back by popular demand.

Trump faces serious legal threats in the ongoing Mar-a-Lago investigation. But the New York case would be easily dismissed outside of a jurisdiction like New York, where Bragg can count on highly motivated judges and jurors.

Although it may be politically popular, the case is legally pathetic. Bragg is struggling to twist state laws to effectively prosecute a federal case long ago rejected by the Justice Department against Trump over his payment of “hush money” to former stripper Stormy Daniels. In 2018 (yes, that is how long this theory has been around), I wrote how difficult such a federal case would be under existing election laws. Now, six years later, the same theory may be shoehorned into a state claim.

It is extremely difficult to show that paying money to cover up an embarrassing affair was done for election purposes as opposed to an array of obvious other reasons, from protecting a celebrity’s reputation to preserving a marriage. That was demonstrated by the failed federal prosecution of former presidential candidate John Edwards on a much stronger charge of using campaign funds to cover up an affair.

In this case, Trump reportedly paid Daniels $130,000 in the fall of 2016 to cut off or at least reduce any public scandal. The Southern District of New York’s U.S. Attorney’s office had no love lost for Trump, pursuing him and his associates in myriad investigations, but it ultimately rejected a prosecution based on the election law violations. It was not alone: The Federal Election Commission (FEC) chair also expressed doubts about the theory.

Prosecutors working under Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus Vance Jr., also reportedly rejected the viability of using a New York law to effectively charge a federal offense.

More importantly, Bragg himself previously expressed doubts about the case, effectively shutting it down soon after he took office. The two lead prosecutors, Carey R. Dunne and Mark F. Pomerantz, resigned in protest. Pomerantz launched a very public campaign against Bragg’s decision, including commenting on a still-pending investigation. He made it clear that Trump was guilty in his mind, even though his former office was still undecided and the grand jury investigation was ongoing.

Pomerantz then did something that shocked many of us as highly unprofessional and improper: Over Bragg’s objection that he was undermining any possible prosecution, Pomerantz published a book detailing the case against an individual who was not charged, let alone convicted.

He was, of course, an instant success in the media that have spent years highlighting a dozen different criminal theories that were never charged against Trump. Pomerantz followed the time-tested combination for success — link Donald Trump to any alleged crime and convey absolute certainty of guilt. For cable TV shows, it was like a heroin hit for an audience in a long agonizing withdrawal.

And the campaign worked. Bragg caved, and “America’s Got Trump” apparently will air after all.

However, before 12 jurors can vote, Bragg still has to get beyond a series of glaring problems which could raise serious appellate challenges later.

While we still do not know the specific state charges in the anticipated indictment, the most-discussed would fall under Section 175 for falsifying business records, based on the claim that Trump used legal expenses to conceal the alleged hush-payments that were supposedly used to violate federal election laws. While some legal experts have insisted such concealment is clearly a criminal matter that must be charged, they were conspicuously silent when Hillary Clinton faced a not-dissimilar campaign-finance allegation.

Last year, the Federal Election Commission fined the Clinton campaign for funding the Steele dossier as a legal expense. The campaign had previously denied funding the dossier, which was used to push false Russia collusion claims against Trump in 2016, and it buried the funding in the campaign’s legal budget. Yet, there was no hue and cry for this type of prosecution in Washington or New York.

A Section 175 charge would normally be a misdemeanor. The only way to convert it into a Class E felony requires a showing that the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.” That other crime would appear to be the federal election violations which the Justice Department previously declined to charge.

The linkage to a federal offense is critical for another reason: Bragg’s office ran out of time to prosecute this as a misdemeanor years ago; the statute of limitations is two years. Even if he shows this is a viable felony charge, the longer five-year limitation could be hard to establish.

Of course, none of these legalistic problems will be relevant in the coming frenzy. It will be a case that is nothing if not entertaining, one to which you can bring your popcorn — so long as you leave your principles behind.


Indeed, some will view it as poetic justice for this former reality-TV host to be tried like a televised talent show. However, the damage to the legal system is immense whenever political pressure overwhelms prosecutorial judgment. The criminal justice system can be a terrible weapon when used for political purposes, an all-too-familiar spectacle in countries where political foes can be targeted by the party in power.

None of this means Trump is blameless or should not be charged in other cases. However, we seem to be on the verge of watching a prosecution by plebiscite in this case. The season opener of “America’s Got Trump” might be a guaranteed hit with its New York audience — but it should be a flop as a prosecution.


https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...rt-on-the-law/

[jetm]

Trump-Stormy Daniels settlement at heart of potential NY DA indictment didn't violate campaign law: FEC expert

Former president says will be indicted next week in case over alleged hush money payment

By Aaron Kliegman | Fox News
Facebook


Prosecutors in the Manhattan district attorney's office won't have much of a legal leg to stand on if they indict former President Donald Trump on violating campaign finance law, according to a legal expert and former member of the Federal Election Commission (FEC).


"If the state charges are based on a supposed violation of federal campaign finance law, then the Manhattan DA is way off base," Hans von Spakovsky told Fox News Digital.

Von Spakovsky's comments came shortly after Trump said Saturday that he expects to be arrested Tuesday amid reports saying the Manhattan district attorney's office is preparing to issue an indictment for alleged hush money payments that Trump made as a presidential candidate in 2016.


TRUMP SAYS 'ILLEGAL LEAKS' INDICATE HE'LL BE ARRESTED TUESDAY

"NOW ILLEGAL LEAKS FROM A CORRUPT & HIGHLY POLITICAL MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEYS OFFICE, WHICH HAS ALLOWED NEW RECORDS TO BE SET IN VIOLENT CRIME & WHOSE LEADER IS FUNDED BY GEORGE SOROS, INDICATE THAT, WITH NO CRIME BEING ABLE TO BE PROVEN, & BASED ON AN OLD & FULLY DEBUNKED (BY NUMEROUS OTHER PROSECUTORS!) FAIRYTALE, THE FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE & FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK. PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!, [sic]" Trump posed to his Truth Social account.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office will reportedly meet with law enforcement officials to discuss logistics for some time next week regarding a potential indictment, which stems from a years-long investigation into Trump's alleged hush money scandal involving porn star Stormy Daniels.

In the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump's then-lawyer Michael Cohen sent $130,000 to Daniels to prevent her from disclosing her alleged 2006 affair with Trump, who has denied the affair. Trump subsequently reimbursed Cohen.


It's been widely speculated that Trump could be charged with overseeing the false recording of the reimbursements in his company's internal records as "legal expenses."

Prosecutors are also expected to charge Trump with violating campaign finance laws by arranging the payments to buy Daniels' silence weeks before the 2016 election. However, experts have questioned the legal reasoning behind such a charge.

"A settlement payment of a nuisance claim is not a federal campaign expense," said von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation. "The state DA has no authority to prosecute a federal campaign finance violation in any event."

Such cases, he argues, are within the province of the FEC, where he served as a commissioner, or the U.S. Justice Department, explaining that both agencies have known about the facts for years but have chosen not to prosecute Trump.


"So, the federal agencies with jurisdiction did not consider it a violation," said von Spakovsky, who's been following this case for years.

In 2018, von Spakovsky wrote that the payment to Daniels seemed to be a "nuisance settlement," which celebrities often make, especially when faced with the threat of a false or salacious claim.

"Critics of the president claim this not only was a campaign expense that should have been reported but a potentially illegal loan by Cohen.

But the settlement was ultimately paid out of Trump's personal funds and had nothing to do with the campaign since their alleged one-night stand occurred 10 years before the campaign," wrote von Spakovsky. "No reasonable member of a jury would consider this to be a campaign-related expense that needed to be reported, or to which any other campaign finance rules in the Federal Election Campaign Act apply."

Von Spakovsky noted in his 2018 analysis that the Department of Justice already tried out this theory with former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, whose campaign donors paid up to $1 million to Edwards' mistress, Rielle Hunter, while she was working as a videographer for Edwards and his presidential campaign.


The Department Justice tried to argue these were campaign-related payments, even though they didn't go through the Edwards campaign's accounts, because they were intended to protect Edwards' reputation during his presidential bid. A jury acquitted Edwards on one charge of accepting an illegal campaign donation and failed to reach a verdict on the other charges, resulting in a mistrial.


The Department of Justice dropped its prosecution and never retried Edwards.

"The alleged one-night stand between Daniels and Trump is far more of a stretch," wrote von Spakovsky. "Daniels had no connection to the presidential campaign of any kind and the encounter — if it occurred — didn't happen during the campaign itself. In any event, even if the Daniels payment were to be considered a campaign-related expense, unlike Edwards, the nominal $130,000 payment wasn't made by Trump campaign donors but by Trump's personal attorney (not the campaign's attorney) with whom he has a long-standing business relationship. . . . Even if one might be able to reasonably construe the payment to Daniels as somehow related to the presidential campaign, there still would be no violation since candidates are allowed to spend as much of their own money as they want on their own campaigns."



Von Spakovsky told Fox News Digital that his "opinion hasn't changed" since writing that article.

Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung described the ongoing probe as a "witch hunt," calling the former president "completely innocent" and accusing Bragg of being in the pocket of President Biden and "radical Democrats."


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...law-fec-expert

[Scott]

I have to believe the deal made will be DJT retires, shuts down truth social and STFU- this all goes away

[CaboChris]

I have to believe the deal made will be DJT retires, shuts down truth social and STFU- this all goes away

C'mon.

That's not his style.

[It's Mike]

I have to believe the deal made will be DJT retires, shuts down truth social and STFU- this all goes away

No f-ing way.

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[VH1986]

I hope he resists and the officers are intolerant.

[bklynboy68]

C'mon.

That's not his style.

As usual, the world adores a weakened America.

Nothing but the worst for us constantly.

[bklynboy68]

I have to believe the deal made will be DJT retires, shuts down truth social and STFU- this all goes away

Do you realize what you’re saying?

This country would have to accept that an unelected bunch of thugs within a bureaucracy own this country and they will do as they like…TO ANYONE.

We’re Americans. To us, that is not just a stamp on passport.

[It's Mike]

As usual, the world adores a weakened America.

Nothing but the worst for us constantly.

It's not the world you need to be concerned with. "The Calls Are Coming from Inside the House"

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

[bklynboy68]

It's not the world you need to be concerned with. "The Calls Are Coming from Inside the House"

Sent from my SM-A536W using Tapatalk

You got that right. To think it’s taken some people decades to start getting it.

[VHrox12]

So looking into this a little more it's obvious what is going on they will try to get him on a felony so he can't run for president in 2024. IMO such bullshit and pure evil. This is all a strategy to take him down like all the other impeachment crap. Trumps lawyers will fight this.

The reason they hate him so much is he is an outsider to them and not one of them. All of them are crooked including Joe Biden. Trump isn't a saint and he is full of shit quite alot but he fits right in, lol.

Got to love the hypocrisy in USA politics. They are hell bent on doing whatever they can to continue destroying and smearing this mans image for political gain.

They know they are gonna get ass fucked in 2024 if Joe Biden or Harris runs so lets take the orange man down for good.

Right now Ron has my vote if he runs in 2024. If it's Trump vs Biden in 2024 it will be like voting for whatever pile of shit smells better.

Still in defense of Trump this shit from the left is borderline disgusting and hopefully people start seeing the truth they are being played and manipulated.

In 2024 people vote with best intentions on what you think is right for you and America and not what the media tells you. They want to keep the power.

[fudd]

I hope he resists and the officers are intolerant.

Only handcuffs he will see is beside Melania’s bed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fudd]

Quite honestly, I don’t care if get the dead dude from weekend at Bernie’s to run on a republican ticket. I’m tired of shit. I’m tired of us getting laughed at and fucked with, I’m tired of the pervasive incompetence of the White House and his staff with ANYTHING not related to Ukraine, political correctness run amok, cost of living and the administration not doing fuck all except releasing the oil that backs our currency, and the fact that other militaries think they can get away with fucking with us and our hardware.

It’s disgraceful. If it’s trump, I’ll vote for him. If it’s DeSantis, I’ll vote for him. Hell if it is Rubio, I’ll vote for him.

The more and more I see shit, the more it makes me think that some of the guys saying shit that was off the wall 5 years ago were right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CaboChris]

Yep.

I just want the nightmare of Biden to go away already. It's humiliating knowing we have a guy in charge that's literally senile.

Think about how many people are ok with that. How many millions if votes a senile man will receive.

I just want it over.