Is Big Boy Alvin Braggs, the BIG man, hiding that he has NOTHING? Is he Hiding Something? Report Delves into Alvin Bragg’s Media Silence...now whispers that he HAS NOTHING!!!!
Is Big Boy Alvin Braggs, the BIG man, hiding that he has NOTHING? Is he Hiding Something? Report Delves into Alvin Bragg’s Media Silence...now whispers that he HAS NOTHING!!!!
avoiding scrutiny—or praise—for his decision to hijack the judicial system to bring what many have criticized as dubious and “flawed” charges against former President Donald Trump....hhhmmm
Alvin "chipmunk" Bragg is a racist blowhard puppet of the Biden regime; just like racist philanderer liar Fanni Willis; just like evil racist biotch Letitia James. They are the worst of the worst, put there by those who hate America and hate you and me.
In other words - they are doing the bidding of the criminal regime that overthrew America in 2020. Yes, we are an occupied nation, and most of the population are entirely ignorant of that fact.
Sadly, this time in history .. IF .. there is any history to write in a few years, will be one of sad tyranny, two standards of "justice" and .. well, it will be a dark spot, 2/b sure.
I hope we can rise above this soon and find the America that we lost.
Trump should really tick off the Lefties. Each day in court, he should wear a different tie. [Maybe even get some of the old classic Rush Limbaugh "No Boundaries " ties, or some other freedom loving creations from "tie-preneurs".] Then put the ties up for auction each week. Have the proceeds go to a worthy charity. [Maybe for families whove had member killed by illegals who came over the open southern border.] Issue an authentication certificate with each. Trump initials the back label with a Sharpie. Would make another great campaign trail talking point. Call them "Freedom Ties".
We have recently learned a few more things about the charges brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg against former President Donald Trump. One
thing is for sure. The D.A.’s team checked some of their basic knowledge of the law at the door.
In New York, misdemeanors must be prosecuted within two years of the date of the offense. Felonies like those Bragg has alleged must be prosecuted
within five years or be forever barred by the statute of limitations. These are not new, complex, or difficult-to-manage rules and deadlines. Team
Bragg is aware.
The D.A. has charged Trump with felonies for a variety of reasons, one of which is to trigger the five- rather than two-year limitations period on
bad bookkeeping crimes. Felonies often bring jail time, which is the left’s fever dream for Trump.
Statutes of limitations are firm dates. There is little leeway for a prosecutor to ask a judge to set aside the statute to allow a time-barred charge
to still proceed to trial. Putative criminal defendants have a right to rely on the passage of time as a complete defense to potential charges.
Prosecutors must work in a timely fashion and are perpetually on the clock. That does not change simply because their target is an important person.
Bragg is largely also stuck with the formal findings of other courts regarding when certain events occurred on which he premises his charges.
Everyone but Bragg, including his predecessor as Manhattan D.A., federal prosecutors, and the Federal Election Commission, had years to charge Trump
with crimes within various statutory limitations periods and decided not to do so. Federal prosecutors did, however, charge candidate Trump’s former
lawyer, Michael Cohen, with crimes related to the same “hush money,” and he went to prison. That was a document-intensive process, and the official
papers filed in that case do not help Bragg’s case against Trump.
According to Cohen’s filed-in-federal-court sentencing memorandum, the Trump Organization “falsely accounted for these (hush money) payments as
‘legal expenses'” sometime in 2017. Thus, the D.A. had to bring any misdemeanor charge related to that transaction in 2019 and any felony charge in
2022 to survive a defense motion to dismiss. Bragg’s grand jury handed up charges in 2023 after the five-year limitations period expired.
Bragg needs to cook up a convincing reason for his failure to timely indict Trump on state charges and balance it on top of his already shaky case.
He should not succeed, and this is not a close call. How will the media try to help him? By painting with a broad brush or lying, of course.
--- CNN has been telling us since 2021, two years before Bragg’s indictment of the former president, that the time Trump spent in the White House would
be tacked on to the New York statute of limitations to keep the prospect of criminal charges against Trump alive. Other networks have mimicked that
conclusion. Each has focused on the contention that any period following the commission of the offense during which a defendant resided outside of
New York will serve to extend the statutory time bar. I heard and saw this quoted several times last week. In some cases that conclusion is wrong.
In others, depending on the source, it is intentionally misleading. Much of the media are taking their cues from the Jan. 6 Committee and its curated
half-emails and spliced clips.
The theory is that because Trump lived in Washington, D.C., during his presidency and in 2019 switched his official state of residence to Florida,
the felony limitations period in New York City is still open. The time Trump spent away from New York will simply be subtracted from the time that
has elapsed since the Trump Organization allegedly misrepresented Cohen’s reimbursement. This is dreaming and relies on only part of the statute
while ignoring the rest.
New York law, in fact, addresses this concept in its Rules of Criminal Procedure, which provide that if the defendant was “continuously outside” the
state or “the whereabouts of the defendant were continuously unknown and continuously unascertainable by the exercise of reasonable diligence,” the
time for the state to bring charges against a person may be extended.
Suppose the D.A. informed you that you were the target of a criminal investigation, and you promptly fled New York to a non-extradition country until
the statute of limitation on your alleged crimes expired. Then you came home to Manhattan. In that case, provided you remained continuously outside
of New York and purposely hid from the D.A.’s diligent pursuit, the law might extend the statute of limitations and provide the prosecutor more time
to indict you.
Does it sound at all like this concept applies to President Trump?
Trump was front-page news for his entire presidency. He was not hiding from anyone. He did not evade Bragg. He loves and lives in the limelight. He
was not told until recently that Bragg had empaneled a grand jury regarding Stormy Daniels. Trump routinely visited New York City over the last
several years and maintains at least one home and business assets there. If Bragg could not figure out where Trump was from 2016 to 2022, he has
bigger problems than this weak indictment. Based on Bragg’s own timeline in the indictment he prepared, the charges he has conferred against Trump
are time-barred with no basis for leeway.
Bragg also alleges that the bookkeeping fraud influenced the 2016 election to try to make it a felony. But the indictment contends the fraudulent
ledger entry occurred in 2017, post-election. A person cannot retroactively affect an election. D.A. Bragg has also suggested that even if the
limitations period expired on the crimes he has charged, alleged lies about the related events might also extend the time for him to charge Trump.
The indictment does not include legal support for that position, which continues to stretch sense and jurisprudence.
On one hand, Bragg has alleged a factually unprovable charge (a post-election, election interference) to try to reach a more favorable time limit for
charges. On the other, he has charged crimes that are plainly time-barred based on the chronology he wrote and published. Either way, he loses badly.
The push and pull are tearing apart Bragg’s indictment, leaving him nothing on which to proceed.
The presiding judge will decide whether each count in Bragg’s indictment is defective or may proceed past this early stage of the case and be
considered by a jury. A concern for the defense and many Americans will be whether a Manhattan jury could ever fairly weigh the evidence or would
simply convict Trump on all charges the court allows to advance to trial.
A 2018 letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyers admitting Trump knew nothing about the Stormy Daniels ‘hush money’ transaction re-emerged as the judge set the
trial for April 15.
Last year the Daily Mail obtained a 2018 letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyer stating Cohen used his own personal money to pay Porn Star Stormy Daniels in 2016.
The letter also states that the Trump Org nor the Trump campaign reimbursed Michael Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels.
This directly contradicts Cohen’s testimony – not surprising given Michael Cohen is a convicted perjurer.
Trump has been accused of paying Daniels ‘hush payments’ through his then-attorney Michael Cohen in a scheme to silence her and stop the story about
their alleged affair from being published in the National Enquirer.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 felony counts related to the Stormy Daniels ‘hush payment’ transaction.
Michael Cohen’s former legal advisor Robert Costello last year appeared before the Manhattan grand jury to set the record straight.
Costello blasted Michael Cohen as a “convicted perjurer” in remarks to reporters in New York last March.
The prosecutors “cherry-picked” 6 emails out of more than 300 emails, Costello said.
Costello told reporters that Michael Cohen used the money “pursuant to a HELOC (Home Equity Line of Credit) loan” to pay Stormy.
“And why did you take the loan, Michael?” Costello said recalling a conversation he had with Cohen about the payment to Stormy Daniels.
“‘I wanted this secret. I didn’t even want my own wife to know. Much less Melania Trump,’” Costello said recalling Cohen’s remarks about using money from
"Michael Cohen is far from solid evidence:" Cohen's former legal advisor Robert Costello attacked his ex-client's credibility as the "star witness" in the
hush money case against former President Donald Trump.
A 2018 letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyer to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) blows another hole in Cohen’s testimony.
“In a private transaction in 2016, before the U.S. presidential election, Mr. Cohen used his own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to
Ms. Stephanie Clifford,’ Cohen’s lawyer Stephen Ryan, who worked form McDermott Will & Emery wrote.
“Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed Mr. Cohen for the payment
directly or indirectly,” the lawyer wrote.
“Contrary to the allegations in the complaint, which are entirely speculative, neither Mr. Cohen nor Essential Consultants LLC made any in-kind
contributions to Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., or any other presidential campaign committee.” he said.
Alvin "chipmunk" Bragg is a racist blowhard puppet of the Biden regime; just like racist philanderer liar Fanni Willis; just like evil racist biotch Letitia James. They are the worst of the worst, put there by those who hate America and hate you and me.
In other words - they are doing the bidding of the criminal regime that overthrew America in 2020. Yes, we are an occupied nation, and most of the population are entirely ignorant of that fact.
The only thing that fatass is hiding is the keys to unlock the cookie jar!
Bragg should lose his license. He’s a disgrace to the profession
Sadly, this time in history .. IF .. there is any history to write in a few years, will be one of sad tyranny, two standards of "justice" and .. well, it will be a dark spot, 2/b sure.
I hope we can rise above this soon and find the America that we lost.
Every person who’s pulling this lawfare nonsense needs to pay a steep price
https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/trumps-ex-lawyer-didnt-violate-campaign-finance-laws-and-neither-did
Donald Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, may have been convinced by the Office of the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to
plead guilty to a supposed violation of campaign finance law, but that doesn’t mean that what happened is actually a federal crime.
In fact, neither the Federal Election Commission—which is the independent agency tasked with enforcing the Federal Election Campaign Act—nor its
former commissioners would likely agree with the overaggressive view that the Southern District is taking. Indeed, the Southern District’s
aggressive stance on this issue might have violated the Justice Department’s own policy.
Robert Khuzami, the acting U.S. attorney standing in for Geoffrey Berman, who has recused himself from the Cohen case, says in the government’s
sentencing memorandum that Cohen committed a campaign finance violation by arranging payments from corporations to two women—Woman-1 and Woman-2
(Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels, respectively), who claimed they had affairs with Trump—in order to buy their silence. Cohen eventually invoiced
the Trump Organization for the Daniels payment.
Khuzami asserts these were illegal corporate contributions to the Trump campaign because they were made with “the intent to influence the 2016
presidential election.” Thus, he claims, they were campaign-related expenses and all of the rules governing federal campaigns apply to the payments.
But there are numerous problems with Khuzami’s claim.
First, his theory that anything intended to “influence” an election is a campaign-related expense fails to take into account the statutory
limitation on this definition. FECA (52 U.S.C. 30114 (b)(2)) specifically says that campaign-related expenses do not include any expenditures “used
to fulfill any commitment, obligation, or expense of a person that would exist irrespective of the candidate’s election campaign.”
These payments were relatively small given Trump’s net worth—the kind of nuisance settlement that celebrities often make to protect their
reputations, especially when faced with claims that will cost far more to defend than making a quick payoff without all of the bad publicity that
usually accompanies such cases. Given Trump’s celebrity status, the potential liability to these women existed “irrespective of the candidate’s
election campaign.”
As Trump’s lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, has said, the payment to Daniels was made “to resolve a personal and false allegation in order to protect the
president’s family” and “it would have been done in any event, whether he was a candidate or not.”
Trump should really tick off the Lefties. Each day in court, he should wear a different tie. [Maybe even get some of the old classic Rush Limbaugh "No Boundaries " ties, or some other freedom loving creations from "tie-preneurs".] Then put the ties up for auction each week. Have the proceeds go to a worthy charity. [Maybe for families whove had member killed by illegals who came over the open southern border.] Issue an authentication certificate with each. Trump initials the back label with a Sharpie. Would make another great campaign trail talking point. Call them "Freedom Ties".
Fat Alvin is a paid political hack who ran on a promise to "Get Trump."
He initially refused to prosecute the case (lousy case), but pressure
from the Bidenistas forced him to do it anyway. Biden sent I think
Colangelo, a special Justice Dept. Fix Man to push the terribly faulty
case through.
Detailed analysis by legal scholars such as Johnathan Turley say the
cobbled-together case is illegal and an embarrassment. They took what
was possibly at worst a bookkeeping error for which the statute of
limitations had expired--and used an obscure election law in a manner
it wasn't designed to be used, to bump the charges up to a several count
felony case.
It's a Legal Frankenstein's monster that deserved only to be buried.
But they don't care. The goal is to prevent Trump from campaigning
by tying up his time and money. Clear election interference. Judge's daughter,
a Dem political consultant, also benefits financially from the case.
Judge Merchan should have recused himself but he's another political hack
so he didn't. He wants his daughter and himself to get richer. Maybe he'll
write a book. That's a common payoff for political errand boys.
When legal scholars like Turley say this thing is a turkey, you know it smells
to high heaven.
https://thefederalist.com/2023/04/10/yes-the-statute-of-limitations-has-passed-on-braggs-get-trump-case/
We have recently learned a few more things about the charges brought by District Attorney Alvin Bragg against former President Donald Trump. One
thing is for sure. The D.A.’s team checked some of their basic knowledge of the law at the door.
In New York, misdemeanors must be prosecuted within two years of the date of the offense. Felonies like those Bragg has alleged must be prosecuted
within five years or be forever barred by the statute of limitations. These are not new, complex, or difficult-to-manage rules and deadlines. Team
Bragg is aware.
The D.A. has charged Trump with felonies for a variety of reasons, one of which is to trigger the five- rather than two-year limitations period on
bad bookkeeping crimes. Felonies often bring jail time, which is the left’s fever dream for Trump.
Statutes of limitations are firm dates. There is little leeway for a prosecutor to ask a judge to set aside the statute to allow a time-barred charge
to still proceed to trial. Putative criminal defendants have a right to rely on the passage of time as a complete defense to potential charges.
Prosecutors must work in a timely fashion and are perpetually on the clock. That does not change simply because their target is an important person.
Bragg is largely also stuck with the formal findings of other courts regarding when certain events occurred on which he premises his charges.
Everyone but Bragg, including his predecessor as Manhattan D.A., federal prosecutors, and the Federal Election Commission, had years to charge Trump
with crimes within various statutory limitations periods and decided not to do so. Federal prosecutors did, however, charge candidate Trump’s former
lawyer, Michael Cohen, with crimes related to the same “hush money,” and he went to prison. That was a document-intensive process, and the official
papers filed in that case do not help Bragg’s case against Trump.
According to Cohen’s filed-in-federal-court sentencing memorandum, the Trump Organization “falsely accounted for these (hush money) payments as
‘legal expenses'” sometime in 2017. Thus, the D.A. had to bring any misdemeanor charge related to that transaction in 2019 and any felony charge in
2022 to survive a defense motion to dismiss. Bragg’s grand jury handed up charges in 2023 after the five-year limitations period expired.
Bragg needs to cook up a convincing reason for his failure to timely indict Trump on state charges and balance it on top of his already shaky case.
He should not succeed, and this is not a close call. How will the media try to help him? By painting with a broad brush or lying, of course.
--- CNN has been telling us since 2021, two years before Bragg’s indictment of the former president, that the time Trump spent in the White House would
be tacked on to the New York statute of limitations to keep the prospect of criminal charges against Trump alive. Other networks have mimicked that
conclusion. Each has focused on the contention that any period following the commission of the offense during which a defendant resided outside of
New York will serve to extend the statutory time bar. I heard and saw this quoted several times last week. In some cases that conclusion is wrong.
In others, depending on the source, it is intentionally misleading. Much of the media are taking their cues from the Jan. 6 Committee and its curated
half-emails and spliced clips.
The theory is that because Trump lived in Washington, D.C., during his presidency and in 2019 switched his official state of residence to Florida,
the felony limitations period in New York City is still open. The time Trump spent away from New York will simply be subtracted from the time that
has elapsed since the Trump Organization allegedly misrepresented Cohen’s reimbursement. This is dreaming and relies on only part of the statute
while ignoring the rest.
New York law, in fact, addresses this concept in its Rules of Criminal Procedure, which provide that if the defendant was “continuously outside” the
state or “the whereabouts of the defendant were continuously unknown and continuously unascertainable by the exercise of reasonable diligence,” the
time for the state to bring charges against a person may be extended.
Suppose the D.A. informed you that you were the target of a criminal investigation, and you promptly fled New York to a non-extradition country until
the statute of limitation on your alleged crimes expired. Then you came home to Manhattan. In that case, provided you remained continuously outside
of New York and purposely hid from the D.A.’s diligent pursuit, the law might extend the statute of limitations and provide the prosecutor more time
to indict you.
Does it sound at all like this concept applies to President Trump?
Trump was front-page news for his entire presidency. He was not hiding from anyone. He did not evade Bragg. He loves and lives in the limelight. He
was not told until recently that Bragg had empaneled a grand jury regarding Stormy Daniels. Trump routinely visited New York City over the last
several years and maintains at least one home and business assets there. If Bragg could not figure out where Trump was from 2016 to 2022, he has
bigger problems than this weak indictment. Based on Bragg’s own timeline in the indictment he prepared, the charges he has conferred against Trump
are time-barred with no basis for leeway.
Bragg also alleges that the bookkeeping fraud influenced the 2016 election to try to make it a felony. But the indictment contends the fraudulent
ledger entry occurred in 2017, post-election. A person cannot retroactively affect an election. D.A. Bragg has also suggested that even if the
limitations period expired on the crimes he has charged, alleged lies about the related events might also extend the time for him to charge Trump.
The indictment does not include legal support for that position, which continues to stretch sense and jurisprudence.
On one hand, Bragg has alleged a factually unprovable charge (a post-election, election interference) to try to reach a more favorable time limit for
charges. On the other, he has charged crimes that are plainly time-barred based on the chronology he wrote and published. Either way, he loses badly.
The push and pull are tearing apart Bragg’s indictment, leaving him nothing on which to proceed.
The presiding judge will decide whether each count in Bragg’s indictment is defective or may proceed past this early stage of the case and be
considered by a jury. A concern for the defense and many Americans will be whether a Manhattan jury could ever fairly weigh the evidence or would
simply convict Trump on all charges the court allows to advance to trial.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11891633/Smoking-gun-letter-Michael-Cohen-claiming-NOT-reimbursed-Donald-Trump.html
A 2018 letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyers admitting Trump knew nothing about the Stormy Daniels ‘hush money’ transaction re-emerged as the judge set the
trial for April 15.
Last year the Daily Mail obtained a 2018 letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyer stating Cohen used his own personal money to pay Porn Star Stormy Daniels in 2016.
The letter also states that the Trump Org nor the Trump campaign reimbursed Michael Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels.
This directly contradicts Cohen’s testimony – not surprising given Michael Cohen is a convicted perjurer.
Trump has been accused of paying Daniels ‘hush payments’ through his then-attorney Michael Cohen in a scheme to silence her and stop the story about
their alleged affair from being published in the National Enquirer.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 felony counts related to the Stormy Daniels ‘hush payment’ transaction.
Michael Cohen’s former legal advisor Robert Costello last year appeared before the Manhattan grand jury to set the record straight.
Costello blasted Michael Cohen as a “convicted perjurer” in remarks to reporters in New York last March.
The prosecutors “cherry-picked” 6 emails out of more than 300 emails, Costello said.
Costello told reporters that Michael Cohen used the money “pursuant to a HELOC (Home Equity Line of Credit) loan” to pay Stormy.
“And why did you take the loan, Michael?” Costello said recalling a conversation he had with Cohen about the payment to Stormy Daniels.
“‘I wanted this secret. I didn’t even want my own wife to know. Much less Melania Trump,’” Costello said recalling Cohen’s remarks about using money from
a HELOC to pay Stormy Daniels.
https://twitter.com/NewsNation/status/1637939140548329474
"Michael Cohen is far from solid evidence:" Cohen's former legal advisor Robert Costello attacked his ex-client's credibility as the "star witness" in the
hush money case against former President Donald Trump.
A 2018 letter from Michael Cohen’s lawyer to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) blows another hole in Cohen’s testimony.
“In a private transaction in 2016, before the U.S. presidential election, Mr. Cohen used his own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to
Ms. Stephanie Clifford,’ Cohen’s lawyer Stephen Ryan, who worked form McDermott Will & Emery wrote.
“Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed Mr. Cohen for the payment
directly or indirectly,” the lawyer wrote.
“Contrary to the allegations in the complaint, which are entirely speculative, neither Mr. Cohen nor Essential Consultants LLC made any in-kind
contributions to Donald J. Trump for President, Inc., or any other presidential campaign committee.” he said.
https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/552271-fec-drops-investigation-into-trump-hush-money-payments/
https://www.fec.gov/files/legal/murs/7313/7313_19.pdf
The FEC voted 4-1 to close the inquiry after failing to find that Trump or his campaign “knowingly and willfully” violated campaign finance law when
his former attorney Michael Cohen paid $130,000 to porn star Stormy Daniels to keep her from disclosing an alleged affair.
Cohen was convicted in 2018 of lying to Congress, tax evasion and other charges relating to the payments to Daniels and other women. He served three
years in prison.
His attorney said Cohen testified in court that the payment was made “for the principal purpose of influencing an election.”
The FEC’s Office of General Counsel issued a report in December finding that there was “reason to believe” that Cohen and the Trump campaign
knowingly and willfully violated campaign finance law.
What goes around… comes around… those who sling mud… often end up buried in the stuff.
I don’t know. My gut says he’s going to get a conviction with operation get Trump. Let’s hope his lawyers have a get Fani strategy.
https://nypost.com/2018/01/30/stormy-daniels-now-denies-ever-having-an-affair-with-trump/
An adult film star who previously alleged an extramarital affair with Donald Trump now says in a statement the affair never happened.
A lawyer for porn actress Stormy Daniels confirmed his client’s statement Tuesday. Daniels’ real name is Stephanie Clifford.
Clifford has been on a publicity tour in recent weeks amid news of the alleged 2006 tryst with the president. She is scheduled to appear Tuesday on
ABC’s “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” Her publicist hasn’t answered questions about the statement.
Clifford has sought to tell her story before, in 2011 and again during the 2016 presidential campaign.
The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that Trump’s personal lawyer brokered a $130,000 payment to Clifford in October 2016 to keep her
from publicly discussing it.
Trump’s lawyer has denied any affair.