Trump Indicted by Manhattan District Attorney

[N.E. Brigand]

May this be a sign of more to come! The way he handled the classified documents case is MUCH more important than bribing a porn star, and there is ample evidence that he tried to cover that up!

It's probably useful to emphasize that Donald Trump was convicted today of, essentially, cheating in the 2016 election. He thought he couldn't win if yet another sex scandal story broke after the Access Hollywood tape appeared, and in the process of covering up the news of his affair with Stormy Daniels, he falsified business records.

[Sunsilver]

I get that, N.E., but I think a lot of his followers will shrug this off as 'boys will be boys'. If I were a U.S. citizen, the national security risks posed by the mishandling of top secret files by a sitting president would certainly be a much greater concern to me.

[N.E. Brigand]

Donald Trump will be able to vote in November unless he's sentenced to jail for the 34 crimes he was convicted of today, which is unlikely. Florida defers to the disenfranchisement laws of the state where the conviction happens, and New York only bars imprisoned felons from voting.

[RoseMorninStar]

I get that, N.E., but I think a lot of his followers will shrug this off as 'boys will be boys'. If I were a U.S. citizen, the national security risks posed by the mishandling of top secret files by a sitting president would certainly be a much greater concern to me.

I agree that the mishandling of top secret files is a great concern, but had Trump not committed the crime of defrauding the voting public by "conspiring to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means." he may not have become president in 2016. While much has been made of this case with the misnomer (imo) the 'Hush Money Case' making it seem it was all about Stormy Daniels and the sex involved, the crux of the crime is a case of intent to defraud the American Public. Cheating.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Renatto Mariotti writes that Trump's team "lost a very winnable case."

This is where I get frustrated with how many lawyers seem to view the world. You're either guilty or you're not. There is an underlying truth that really exists. It shouldn't be possible for legal maneuverings to change that. And yes, I'm also thinking of prosecutors who get innocent people convicted.

With all due respect to Renatto Mariotti, who was a fine federal prosecutor in his day, he doesn't know what he is talking about. The people who closely followed this case and know the relevant law uniformly believed it was a very strong case.

That having been said, facts are very rarely as clear-cut as you seem to imagine, N.E.B.

[N.E. Brigand]

Donald Trump yesterday said there are a lot of witnesses who could have been called to prove his innocence in this case.

CNN's Caitlin Collins today asked Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche: so why didn't you call those witnesses?

Blanche replied, "That's a loaded question that should not be asked of a defense attorney or a defendant ... we don't have the burden of proof."

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Donald Trump yesterday said there are a lot of witnesses who could have been called to prove his innocence in this case.

CNN's Caitlin Collins today asked Trump's lawyer, Todd Blanche: so why didn't you call those witnesses?

Blanche replied, "That's a loaded question that should not be asked of a defense attorney or a defendant ... we don't have the burden of proof."

If he doesn't want to answer questions like that, tell his client not to make comments like that. I bet Collins didn't follow up with that.

[Frelga]

I honestly didn't expect a guilty verdict. So now I have to figure out how to explain this to my parents in 3 sentences or fewer.

Help?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Trump made a deal with the publisher of the National Enquirer to squash any negative stories about him before the election. When the publisher of the National Enquirer refused to pay off a porn star who had sex with Trump, Trump's fixer paid her off as part of that conspiracy. Trump then reimbursed his closer and covered it up by calling it legal expenses instead of reimbursement for paying off the porn star.

Three sentences.

[Frelga]

Awesome!

[Voronwë the Faithful]

Deal, not detail (I edited it).

[Frelga]

This is also a good explainer

Donald Trump Is Guilty on All Counts in Manhattan


This part helped clarify my confusion .

Under New York state law, that stacking of crimes elevated what would otherwise have been a misdemeanor to a felony.

Interesting times, my friends.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I thought about putting this in the 2024 election thread, but ultimately decided it should go here. Benjamin Wittes is editor in chief of Lawfare and a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution.

Thoughts on Donald Trump’s Conviction

[Sunsilver]

Excellent summary, Voronwë!

This paragraph in particular is troubling (though it's something I knew already):

Triviality is a matter of opinion, of course. But I confess that as I watched it, I did not find the case trivial. I found it nauseating, a grouping of some of the least attractive and sleaziest human beings I have ever imagined in proximity to the levers of power. And critically, these were people actively and consciously engaged in an effort to corrupt an election. I came away from the trial thinking it was actually important that Trump had to answer for this conduct, whether he was convicted of it or not.

[Frelga]

From something called Weaponization Committee, ran by Jim Jordan.

#BREAKING: @Jim_Jordan will demand Alvin Bragg and Matthew Colangelo to appear for hearing on June 13, 2024 to testify about the unprecedented political prosecution of President Trump.

Apart from everything else, does Congress have any standing to meddle with a state case?

[Voronwë the Faithful]

No. In fact, legally Bragg and Colangelo can't discuss specifics about the case while it is still active (which it is). This is all a show.

[Frelga]

I have womanfully resistes sharing any post-conviction jokes, not the least because I am not confident that even this will make any difference in the end.

But this cracked me up.

Screenshot_20240531-094424.png (385.25 KiB) Viewed 588 times

[Frelga]

Huh.

If Trump is convicted in either federal case, he will now receive an enhanced sentence because of his criminal record.

[N.E. Brigand]

Possibly mentioned before: "New York State Has Issued Nearly 9,800 Felony Charges of Falsifying Business Records Since 2015" (Law.com, Apr. 6, 2023).

Edited to add: Matt Yglesias points out that falsifying business records was a secondary charge in most of those cases, but to take just one year: there were 39 indictments brought in New York in 2022 in which it was the leading charge.

[N.E. Brigand]

Possibly mentioned before: "New York State Has Issued Nearly 9,800 Felony Charges of Falsifying Business Records Since 2015" (Law.com, Apr. 6, 2023).

Which is to say: how many of those 9,800 charges did Elon Musk object to at the time?