Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg held a press conference on Tuesday afternoon shortly after former President Trump was indicted on 34 felony charges of falsifying business records in the first degree. Trump pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.
The charges that were brought were the ones that were brought.
And in no way limit further charges by in New York County or elsewhere …
“There were no facts in there. I mean, normally in an indictment you have alleged facts,” Joe Tacopina, one of Trump’s lawyers, said. “They said that this was a false business record entry to aid and abet another crime without saying what the other crime was.”
Bragg was asked about this issue at his press conference. He said the law “does not require” him to specify the other crime in an indictment. Bragg also pointed to alleged crimes he described in his remarks including “more additional false statements including statements that were planned to be made to tax authorities.”
I’ve been assuming that Bragg is going to link the falsifcation of business records to some of the counts mikey cohen already pled guilty to. That wraps things up neatly without Bragg having to do anything but point to the plea deal.
The ones he can make stick…
Off topic: Thuja placata stump with the springboard cut they used to get up above the base of the ancient tree. Ghost forests of the northwest 🥲🥵
When he took questions from reporters, Bragg was pressed about why he did not file charges for other crimes if he believed they had occurred.
“I’m not going to go into our deliberative process on what was brought,” Bragg said. “The charges that were brought were the ones that were brought. The evidence and the law is the basis for those decisions.”
Yeah, I’m a little disappointed that it’s just the falsification of business records. But at least the ball is rolling and it is huge that the country now has to wrap its mind around the concept that the president is not a king with lifetime immunities.
c.f. Capone, Al, tax fraud?? 
Which got him something like 13 years in the clink. I wish Bragg would pursue the tax fraud angle (maybe he did and there’s just not enough there). What he’s got ain’t enough to guarantee prison time, though as txlawyer points out a prior felony conviction in NY state would result in an enhancement when sentencing for other crimes.
Is he lighter than a duck?
Pick battles small enough to win but large enough to matter.
That is what I thing Bragg is doing.
I mean Trump’s only defense seems to be that he is above being prosecuted for these sorts of crimes. Republicans will rush to Trump’s defense that he is being persecuted like the way all god fearing male White Christians are persecuted in Joe Biden’s America.
The media will give them all the free time they want to get this message out. Whereas the only take we can really make is that we believe in the American judicial system and the result will be what it should be.
In regard to the American legal system, I am more concerned about the election in Wisconsin than I am about this case.
Not with the full weight of the indictments
Well, other defenses are infinite delay (which he will attempt, including creating as much scheduling conflict as possible with his other trials), and the falsification of a business record is kind of complex to explain to a jury. But I’m sure Bragg has gotten convictions before on falsification. TFG can also blame his accountant (hello weisselberg, who already took one plea deal) and attack the credibility of the key witnesses cohen and weisselberg and pecker (AMI, and took a non-prosecution agreement): “you’ll say anything to stay out of the clink, right?”
Yeah, every legal pundit in the media has got it wrong.
It’s a shame the judge in this case used to be an auditor for large construction companies and will be well-equipped to understand whatever machinations Cockholster used to disguise the payments.
“There were no facts in there. I mean, normally in an indictment you have alleged facts,” Joe Tacopina, one of Trump’s lawyers, said. “They said that this was a false business record entry to aid and abet another crime without saying what the other crime was.”
I’m seeing this mentioned all over the place as a basis for claiming the indictment is invalid because it doesn’t specify the other crime.
Imagine if you had to specify an intent to cover up a specific crime in the indictment and all the defendant had to do is claim, I wasn’t covering up that crime. I was covering up this other crime.
Though the indictments will burn just as well since they’re all made of wood. And Trump’s defense strategy is certainly wooden.
“Just lifted off for Palm Beach, Florida,” T$%#^p wrote on Truth Social. “The hearing was shocking to many…Virtually every legal pundit has said that there is no case here. There was nothing done illegally!”
David Frost. The Nixon defense.
