NY: Trump on Trial!

[Redban]

https://nypost.com/2023/03/20/house-wants-ny-da-bragg-to-answer-for-politically-motivated-trump-case/

House wants NY DA Bragg to answer for ‘politically motivated’ Trump case


The chairmen of the House Oversight and Judiciary committees on Monday demanded that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg hand over documents and testify about “what plainly appears to be a politically motivated” prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

...

The request for Bragg’s testimony could become a subpoena if he doesn’t comply.

I expect that such a subpoena would be easily quashed.  Congress has no jurisdiction over a state DA, nor is there a "legitimate legislative interest" that would allow them to compel testimony.

their letter:

“If these reports are accurate, your actions will erode confidence in the evenhanded application of justice and unalterably interfere in the course of the 2024 presidential election,” Jordan and Comer wrote in the letter, which was also signed by House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil (R-Wis.).

And what legislation, specifically, are they considering that's relevant?  

"Legitimate legislative interest" doesn't mean there has to a specific legislation pending. Bragg's testimony would aid general consideration of whether and how to legislate on election laws or local DA's ability to target federal elections, such as presidential campaigns

[Redban]

https://nypost.com/2023/03/22/2018-letter-shows-michael-cohen-lying-to-federal-officials/

[Redban]

https://www.rove.com/article/3-23-23-wsj

I just read Karl Rove's article, "Trump’s Indictment Won’t Win Him Votes"

Usually, Rove is the most astute political commentator whom I've read / listened to. But this article is weak.

The main reason, he says, that Trump's indictment won't win him votes is that "if the charge is filed and the former president doesn’t plead guilty, the case will be heard. With Mr. Trump running again, there will be political fallout, especially if more indictments follow."

And Rove also argues that Trump made a lose-lose mistake by calling on his supporters to "PROTEST! PROTEST! PROTEST!"

But in this same article, Rove admits that Trump is now front-and-center on mainstream news whereas he was, for a while, an afterthought. He acknowledges that Trump has raised a ton of money since the story broke. He explains that the indictment has put the other GOP primary hopefuls in a tough spot, as they struggle to respond to questions about Trump's indictment. All of these details would indicate that the indictment is helping Trump, contrary to the title of Rove's article

[Redban]

This is so annoying and frustrating Trump has never paid a price other than losing reelection by a larger that should have been greater for any of his wrongdoings. I understand that investigations need to be run properly and thoroughly, but c'mon, this is turning into a circus. For how long is it known that he made these hush money payments? And what about January 6, where all his calls for violence are literally on video/tape?

Dang, relax brah. This you right now?

[Redban]

Re: 34 counts

I hear it's because he paid Cohen in installments, not all at once. Each check = 1 count?

[Redban]

So how do you reconcile this indictment with the John Edwards' case from years ago? I'm guessing most of you think it's (D)ifferent for a particular reason?

Edwards was charged by the DOJ for campaign-finance charges. He allegedly paid about $1 million to support his pregnant mistress. Prosecutors tried to argue that the money, which never passed through Edwards' campaign accounts, was a campaign donation because it was intended to prevent damage to his campaign (it is the same argument that Bragg is allegedly using against Trump). Edwards and his attorneys countered by arguing that the payments were personal expenses and that Edwards made the payments to keep his wife out of the loop, not to help his presidential bid.

In the end, the jury acquitted Edwards. At the time, many Democrats and legal experts criticized the DOJ's decision to seek charges against Edwards, arguing that considering personal expenses to be campaign donations is too much of a stretch.

[Redban]

DOJ reportedly 'irritated' by Manhattan DA's decision to indict Trump because they believe hush money charges are weak and could damage more serious Georgia electoral fraud and January 6 probes'


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11922971/Justice-Department-irritated-Manhattan-DAs-indictment-Donald-Trump.html

[Redban]

You're niave if you believe the bolded.

Even Democrat Andrew Cuomo said: "It’s a coincidence that Bragg goes after Trump and Tish James goes after Trump and Georgia goes after Trump? That’s all a coincidence? I think it feeds the cynicism and that’s the cancer in our body politic right now."

As if anyone cares about the opinion of Andrew Cuomo.

Yeah, it's not like he was a golden boy in the Democrat's party for 10 years or so

[Redban]

Bill Barr (who has actually criticized Trump since leaving office, especially in his book) has now bashed Bragg's indictment case:

Former US Attorney General Bill Barr said Friday that the indictment against Donald Trump is “pathetically weak” and a “political hit job.”

Speaking at a National Review Institute Ideas Summit in Washington, D.C., Barr – who served as Attorney General under Trump from 2019 through 2020 – said it was “the archetypal abuse of the prosecutorial function to engage in a political hit job…legally, it's a pathetically weak case."

Trump, 76, was indicted by the Manhattan DA on Thursday evening on multiple counts of fraud reportedly stemming from a hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels.

"It's a very weak case just on the misdemeanor. And on the federal issue, they've gotten the statute completely wrong in my mind,” Barr continued.

Barr also noted that he does not believe the $130,000 payout to Daniels’ was actually “hush money.”

"[The payment] wasn't done because of the election; it was done to protect Trump's reputation,” he reasoned.

[Redban]

I believe NY had passed a law back in 2019 that bans the release of mugshots. It was a good law to pass because websites would have mugshots of people whose cases had been long dismissed and sealed

[Redban]

WAPO's fact checker got fact checked by twitter LOL

[Redban]

Given the timing of the alleged sexual encounter (2006) and the fact that she asked him for money before he ran for President, it is a stretch to argue that the expense would not have existed unless Trump ran for President. Hence, it is a stretch to argue it was a campaign contribution as defined by the FEC

If I owe $10k in child support for a few years before I run for office, and I choose to pay the $10k only when I run. Is that $10k a campaign contribution? ... No, because the obligation to pay the $10k child support existed irrespective of my campaign 

[Redban]

MTG, Gaetz, Rudy Giuliani, Bernie Kerik, and Mike Piazza may protest outside the courthouse tomorrow, so NYC is gonna be problematic to travel to.

My friends work in the city and they want to work from home.

My favorite player growing up!!!!

[Redban]

I read Piazza's book. Very religious - he used to travel to visit the Pope during the offseason. No surprise of his Republican leanings

[Redban]

What I don't understand about the conservatives claiming that this is a political witch hunt... why did the grand jury vote to indict then? If Trump is so clearly innocent, then why didn't the grand jury see it that way? After all, they had access to all sorts of evidence and information that the public didn't. Are the jurors all in on it? Are they on the Soros payroll too?

Prosecutor / ham sandwich / indictment

[Redban]

Judge won’t let news cameras broadcast Trump’s full court appearance

News outlets will not be allowed to broadcast former President Donald Trump’s arraignment on Tuesday in a Manhattan state court, a judge said Monday night.

New York Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan rejected a request by several media organizations, including CNN, for permission to broadcast the historic proceedings.

Five still photographers will be allowed to take pictures of Trump and the courtroom before the hearing begins, however.

Trump’s arraignment – like most arraignments in the Manhattan courthouse – is a public proceeding, but news cameras are not usually allowed to broadcast from inside the courtroom.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/03/politics/trump-courtroom-camera/index.html

Damn, that sucks.

I feel as though this needed to be televised. This is just protecting Trump's feelings, in my opinion.

Your “opinion” is wrong. The judge made the decision because NY has a law that bans video-taping court proceedings involving testimony. It’s why court TV never broadcasts NY court cases

https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/CVR/52

NY’s highest court also ruled that the ban is constitutional

https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/2005/2005-05120.html

[Redban]

After all his racism it's almost poetic that a Black man wiped all that smugness off his face.

Typical liberal sleaze - insert a racial element to something that has nothing to do with race

[Redban]

NBC NEWS is reporting that Fulton County District Attorney Fanni Willis will bring charges this Summer in Georgia Election Probe.

Conclusion: Trump will be indicted for a 2nd Time this year and I would not be surprised if it happens before the 1st Debate.

I wonder what it will take for Trump to withdraw or lose support in the primary. If he’s found guilty in the rape civil trial and then gets the 2nd indictment soon afterwards, could that do it?

I supported Trump hard in 2016 and 2020. But he needs to give someone else a chance in 2024, an election that should be a Republican win. Trump can’t win, and as Chris Christie said, Trump is running only for his own vanity to make himself feel better: he’s more interested in lessening the sting of his 2020 loss than in actually helping the country

[Redban]

I got around to skimming Merchan’s denial of the motion to dismiss … I’m surprised this case held up to the motion. Back when the indictment happened last year, I thought this case had a great chance of being tossed on motion to dismiss. Some of the arguments that Merchan denied (eg prosecutors didn’t state the “other crime,” prosecutors try to use a federal crime to enforce a state crime etc) were the same arguments that, last year, I thought would win.

Since the case is going ahead, I believe Trump will be a convicted felon when this trial ends in April or May. I have no confidence in Trump, given that he is consistently been getting his ass kicked in court all over the country. So convicted felon status is coming

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/People-v-DonaldTrump2-15-24Decision.pdf

[Redban]

Damn, I wanted this trial to start this month

[Redban]

Apparently, the judge's daughter had a picture of Trump behind bars in her twitter account, and she was/is partner of this company that publicly claims to serve Biden, Whitmer, Hobbs, and other Dems: https://authentic.org/case-studies/

I think Trump can fairly bring up the judge's daughter to argue possible bias, so long as he doesn't say anything violent or threatening . Defendant should get leeway in these matters

[Redban]

Apparently, the judge's daughter had a picture of Trump behind bars in her twitter account, and she was/is partner of this company that publicly claims to serve Biden, Whitmer, Hobbs, and other Dems: https://authentic.org/case-studies/

I think Trump can fairly bring up the judge's daughter to argue possible bias, so long as he doesn't say anything violent or threatening . Defendant should get leeway in these matters

No, that wouldn't be fair. Why would his daughter's private political opinions matter?

Because it's a case involving a major politician, and daughters can have influence on their fathers. A defendant should be able to pursue the angle if he/she wants. You put someone's freedom and/or good name on trial, then that person is on the hot seat and should get leeway, as long as there is nothing threatening or violent. All the Biden supporters ITT are just complaining because he isn't acting gentlemanly, which isn't a basis for a gag order in this matter

[Redban]

Apparently, the judge's daughter had a picture of Trump behind bars in her twitter account, and she was/is partner of this company that publicly claims to serve Biden, Whitmer, Hobbs, and other Dems: https://authentic.org/case-studies/

I think Trump can fairly bring up the judge's daughter to argue possible bias, so long as he doesn't say anything violent or threatening . Defendant should get leeway in these matters

No, she did not. Please get your facts straight.

She is a partner or president (not sure which) at authentic.org, which has heavy Democratic ties. You get your facts straight

[Redban]

Apparently, the judge's daughter had a picture of Trump behind bars in her twitter account, and she was/is partner of this company that publicly claims to serve Biden, Whitmer, Hobbs, and other Dems: https://authentic.org/case-studies/

I think Trump can fairly bring up the judge's daughter to argue possible bias, so long as he doesn't say anything violent or threatening . Defendant should get leeway in these matters

No, that wouldn't be fair. Why would his daughter's private political opinions matter?

Because it's a case involving a major politician, and daughters can have influence on their fathers. A defendant should be able to pursue the angle if he/she wants. You put someone's freedom and/or good name on trial, then that person is on the hot seat and should get leeway, as long as there is nothing threatening or violent. All the Biden supporters ITT are just complaining because he isn't acting gentlemanly, which isn't a basis for a gag order in this matter

You'd be laughed out of court with such a speculative argument. You aren't privy to what sort of relationship the judge has with his daughter and "daughters can have influence on their fathers" is a overly broad statement not rooted in fact.

But we're not talking about an argument in court. We're just talking about whether he should be able to talk about the judge in public

There was twitter account handle "lorenm426," which looked like Judge Merchan's daughter's handle by all appearances. Only by Trump's bringing attention to the twitter handle did OCA find a need to explain that Loren Merchan dropped that handle at some point and that the handle was picked up by someone else, who posted a picture of Trump behind bars. The mere fact that OCA had to give the explanation is evidence of the legitimacy of Trump's complaint ... according to users on this site, Trump should not have been able to even mention the twitter account. A guy can be on trial for a felony, and he can't make statements concerning a possible bias in the judge?

[Redban]

Two-thirds of registered voters say Trump’s hush money charges are serious
Reuters/Ipsos poll finds one-quarter of potential Trump voters say they would not vote for him if he was serving time in prison

Ahead of former President Donald Trump’s trial next week, the latest Reuters/Ipsos poll finds that nearly two-thirds of registered voters (64%) say the charges—for allegedly falsifying business records around hush money to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal during the 2016 presidential election—are serious, including 36% who say they are very serious. Registered voters share similar concerns around the other three criminal charges against Trump, including allegedly soliciting election fraud, pressuring Georgia state officials to overturn the presidential election, and illegally removing classified documents from the White House and keeping them at a private home after leaving office. About seven in ten say each of these additional charges is serious, and at least half say each charge is very serious.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/two-thirds-registered-voters-say-trumps-hush-money-charges-are-serious

Hard luck. The left-wing Quinnipiac begs to differ. Nearly 2/3rds of Americans say the charges are politically motivated, including 70% of indies.