If the DA believes Trump committed election interference under NY state law, why isn't he charged with election interference in the indictment?
The DA may not believe he committed election interference under NY state law. The DA may believe he committed election interference under NY state law but may think there is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. The DA may believe he committed election interference under NY state law and think there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he did but may think a jury will not be convinced that there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he did. The DA may believe he committed election interference but is using his prosecutorial discretion to charge what he believes is his strongest case so as not to overcharge. It's probably 1 of those.
But if he believes any of this, how can he assert election interference as the underlying crime to make falsification a felony? Don’t you have to prove all elements of a crime beyond a reasonably doubt to convict on the crime? So if there jury believes there’s reasonable doubt on election intereference, they can’t convict on records falsification for the purpose of election interference.