NY: Convicted Felon Donald Trump!

[Torie]

It's time to get back to the case at hand, after an interruption in the usual programming.

One major problem with the Bragg case is mixing and matching state and federal law. Using purported federal violations to extend the SOL for state violations causes considerable skepticism in elite legal circles. But now a new angle is the state bookkeeping fraud was to facilitate state tax fraud, state on state rather than state on federal.

The NYT article does not get very far in the weeds on this, so indulge me while I speculate a bit. Trump seemed to take a phony tax deduction by converting a non-deductible hush money payment into deductible legal services. Cohen converted a non-taxable reimbursement payment into pseudo taxable income for himself, and thus the gross up payment. The state might have ended up net with more tax revenue, but it was attended by fraud and involved switching taxpayers.

Normally a state would not be too motivated to pursue tax fraud where it made money, but nothing about this case is normal. Wheels within wheels within wheels. The new theory is confusingly pleaded, perhaps by design, but soon the prosecution will have to lay its cards on the table, and spill its guts:  

“What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery,” he said. “Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/us/politics/trump-bookkeeping-fraud-taxes.html

Falsify business records 1st degree has an intent-requirement

So Trump's intent was to hide the payment to influence the election (campaign violation), or his intent was to gain a tax benefit? Make up your mind . (The idea that the had the intent to gain a tax benefit is quite dubious too. Trump had financial gain in mind when he wrote "legal expenses" in the company's books?)

He wanted to cover up the hush money payment, but the way he did it also happened to be tax fraud.

We are done. I am putting you on ignore. I don't think you post in good faith, and that together with your sharp elbows, make for a negative experience for me.

[Torie]

It's time to get back to the case at hand, after an interruption in the usual programming.

One major problem with the Bragg case is mixing and matching state and federal law. Using purported federal violations to extend the SOL for state violations causes considerable skepticism in elite legal circles. But now a new angle is the state bookkeeping fraud was to facilitate state tax fraud, state on state rather than state on federal.

The NYT article does not get very far in the weeds on this, so indulge me while I speculate a bit. Trump seemed to take a phony tax deduction by converting a non-deductible hush money payment into deductible legal services. Cohen converted a non-taxable reimbursement payment into pseudo taxable income for himself, and thus the gross up payment. The state might have ended up net with more tax revenue, but it was attended by fraud and involved switching taxpayers.

Normally a state would not be too motivated to pursue tax fraud where it made money, but nothing about this case is normal. Wheels within wheels within wheels. The new theory is confusingly pleaded, perhaps by design, but soon the prosecution will have to lay its cards on the table, and spill its guts:  

“What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery,” he said. “Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/us/politics/trump-bookkeeping-fraud-taxes.html

I was really hoping the indictment would involve some allegation of tax fraud.  But going by the statement of facts released by Bragg’s office, it doesn’t.

This might help courtesy of the NYT annotations. The inference drawn by a couple of sources, including the NYT, is that Bragg was trying to hide the ball some, perhaps to give him more flexibility, but the stall tactic won't work for very long, as Trump's lawyers drop discovery on Bragg.

[Torie]

It's time to get back to the case at hand, after an interruption in the usual programming.

One major problem with the Bragg case is mixing and matching state and federal law. Using purported federal violations to extend the SOL for state violations causes considerable skepticism in elite legal circles. But now a new angle is the state bookkeeping fraud was to facilitate state tax fraud, state on state rather than state on federal.

The NYT article does not get very far in the weeds on this, so indulge me while I speculate a bit. Trump seemed to take a phony tax deduction by converting a non-deductible hush money payment into deductible legal services. Cohen converted a non-taxable reimbursement payment into pseudo taxable income for himself, and thus the gross up payment. The state might have ended up net with more tax revenue, but it was attended by fraud and involved switching taxpayers.

Normally a state would not be too motivated to pursue tax fraud where it made money, but nothing about this case is normal. Wheels within wheels within wheels. The new theory is confusingly pleaded, perhaps by design, but soon the prosecution will have to lay its cards on the table, and spill its guts: 

“What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery,” he said. “Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/us/politics/trump-bookkeeping-fraud-taxes.html

Is the New York state statute of limitations for tax fraud longer than the 3 years for the feds?

https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/publications/general/pub131.pdf

[Torie]

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-asks-republicans-defund-doj-fbi-truth-social-tirade-2023-4

Just when you think that Trump has reached the apogee of his narcissistic derangement, he exceeds expectations yet again. Does he know that his indictment was not brought by the outfits he wants to defund? I guess if totally defunded, then there would be no money the document case to be pursued further, so maybe Trump is just thinking ahead.

One virtue of the documents case, is that it much simpler legally than the hush money case.

[Torie]

It's time to get back to the case at hand, after an interruption in the usual programming.

One major problem with the Bragg case is mixing and matching state and federal law. Using purported federal violations to extend the SOL for state violations causes considerable skepticism in elite legal circles. But now a new angle is the state bookkeeping fraud was to facilitate state tax fraud, state on state rather than state on federal.

The NYT article does not get very far in the weeds on this, so indulge me while I speculate a bit. Trump seemed to take a phony tax deduction by converting a non-deductible hush money payment into deductible legal services. Cohen converted a non-taxable reimbursement payment into pseudo taxable income for himself, and thus the gross up payment. The state might have ended up net with more tax revenue, but it was attended by fraud and involved switching taxpayers.

Normally a state would not be too motivated to pursue tax fraud where it made money, but nothing about this case is normal. Wheels within wheels within wheels. The new theory is confusingly pleaded, perhaps by design, but soon the prosecution will have to lay its cards on the table, and spill its guts: 

“What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery,” he said. “Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/us/politics/trump-bookkeeping-fraud-taxes.html

IANAL, but is it possible that Bragg will tie these charges to the existing felonies for the Trump Organization?

That was not pled, and Trump was not personally tagged in that proceeding for some reason.

[Torie]

It's time to get back to the case at hand, after an interruption in the usual programming.

One major problem with the Bragg case is mixing and matching state and federal law. Using purported federal violations to extend the SOL for state violations causes considerable skepticism in elite legal circles. But now a new angle is the state bookkeeping fraud was to facilitate state tax fraud, state on state rather than state on federal.

The NYT article does not get very far in the weeds on this, so indulge me while I speculate a bit. Trump seemed to take a phony tax deduction by converting a non-deductible hush money payment into deductible legal services. Cohen converted a non-taxable reimbursement payment into pseudo taxable income for himself, and thus the gross up payment. The state might have ended up net with more tax revenue, but it was attended by fraud and involved switching taxpayers.

Normally a state would not be too motivated to pursue tax fraud where it made money, but nothing about this case is normal. Wheels within wheels within wheels. The new theory is confusingly pleaded, perhaps by design, but soon the prosecution will have to lay its cards on the table, and spill its guts:  

“What is going to happen now is that the prosecutors are obligated to disclose things in discovery,” he said. “Defense counsel will learn in discovery the nature of the elections laws violations and the tax issues that were raised by Mr. Bragg in his statement of facts.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/04/us/politics/trump-bookkeeping-fraud-taxes.html

Is the New York state statute of limitations for tax fraud longer than the 3 years for the feds?

https://www.tax.ny.gov/pdf/publications/general/pub131.pdf

Come on Tori my man. I'm not lucky enough to have retired yet and still have to earn my daily quota of billable hours You can't expect me to find time to read all that for myself. Just spoon feed me the answer you lucky retired old barrister.  

The SOL is 3 years, unless the tax evasion was "abusive," and then it is 6 years. What is abusive? Seems kind of subjective, but below is one fact pattern that was found abusive, where the mark up, instead of being 10%-25% was 500% - pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered and this was a hog. You can make up your own mind about a hush money payment via a conduit being called legal fees.

[Torie]

We already have enough threads of Trump's legal troubles, so I just thought I would drop this here as to Trump's impending trial about who raped who when. Trump wants to send a message to the jury that he would love to testify but will not to spare everyone the inconvenience of having to cope with Trump's security protocols. The judge did a LOL back.

What surprises me is Trump's lawyer here is Joe Tacopina, who having seen him on the tube, comes across as on of the biggest aholes in the Bar who has not been disbarred yet, whom any normal jury person would come to loathe. Why does Trump do that to himself? Never mind. No need to answer.

https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-49b11e30e71d1d903680c9aa32ad4a2e

[Torie]

Back to the hush money case, the NYT did an investigation the conclusion of which the factual basis of the case is unprecedented compared to previous prosecutions, and some issues before or after a conviction will go up on appeal that could take years to resolve.

My impression is that this case has considerable potential to backfire on Bragg.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/07/nyregion/trump-indictment-bragg-strategy.html

[Torie]

It's a bit late in the game, but I don't understand what the poll question is. Is yes, that Trump will be convicted, and no that he will not be, or visa versa? That might be why the poll has relatively few replies.

[Torie]

Blanche: "President Trump is being very careful to comply" with the gag order.

Merchan, sharply: "Mr. Blanche, you are losing all credibility."

Ouch. If God loves me, Trump will totally lose it, and start ranting.