MovieChat Forums > Donald Trump Discussion > So whats the charge ?

So whats the charge ?

posted 20 days ago by moviechatterer (13558)
15 replies | jump to latest

I'm not clear why its illegal to pay Stormy Daniels to keep quiet. NDAs are a thing.
It seems its more about the book keeping , but even then:
He wrote it down as "tech services" instead of "hush money" .
So What ? He still paid the right amount of business tax didnt he ?

If you take a client out to dinner as a business expense and write down "$100 at KFC" when it was McDonalds - does that put you in prison?

With the help of his former fixer Michael Cohen, Trump would allegedly pay Stormy Daniels $130,000 in 2016 to keep quiet about her story. After Trump became president, prosecutors say, he started reimbursing Cohen for the payment, which he would record in his financial records as legal fees to Cohen.

These payments could land Trump in prison. Prosecutors allege that Trump broke the law by falsifying these business records to hide illegal hush-money payments and protect Trump’s chances during the presidential election.

[–] Martoto (4340) 20 days ago

You are expected to declare truthfully what you've paid for as expenses. For example. If you declare that you paid somebody something when in fact you just loaned them it for a short while or vice versa, that's fraud.

[–] moviechatterer (13558) 20 days ago

yeah that sounds more serious , like money laundering

Trumps thing is not changing the type of exchange , its just an "outgoing expense"

[–] BKB (6473) 20 days ago

The charge is that Trump is running for President, he's winning in swing states that would normally be Democrat, is poised to win in November along with the trial with Fani Willis & Jack Smith are all of sudden falling apart, especially Jack Smith who was never officially appointed.. They were in such a hurry t throw this man in prison for a whole lot of nothing, even the Stormy Daniels crap is a fucking misdemeanor being magically turned into a Felony

[–] Ranb (7405) 20 days ago

If that was true, then all Trump has to do is say this to the judge and the charges will be dismissed. But he will not say it because it would be just another Trump lie. Even Trump is not stupid enough to say that in a court room.

So we have to ask ourselves, why is BKB not defending Trump in the court room?

I think if they were in a hurry, they would have charged much sooner. But Trump pushed for delays so that he would have to campaign during his trials. Just another stupid move by Trump. Trump should have invoked his right to a speedy trial instead of the delays.

[–] Ranb (7405) 20 days ago

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-all-of-charges-against-trump-in-the-new-york-hush-money-case
“The People of the State of New York allege that Donald J. Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal crimes that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election,”

Just like the people who support Roman Polanski never say the words "child rape", the MAGA will not say the words "business fraud".

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-SOF.pdf

Lawyer A made the $130,000 payment through a shell corporation he set up and funded at a bank in Manhattan. This payment was illegal, and Lawyer A has since pleaded guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution and served time in prison.

Further, false entries were made in New York business records to effectuate this payment, separate and apart from the New York business records used to conceal the payment

The link goes on and on to describe the illegal activities that Trump allegedly engaged in. As far as I know, Trump is not accused of the "crime" of sleeping with a prostitute or giving her money. Trump is accused of hiding the payments in an illegal manner. Rules are rules. But Trump will be Trump and violate them to his own risk.

[–] moviechatterer (13558) 19 days ago

" falsified New York business records to conceal crimes that hid damaging information from the voting public"

So whats the charge? which is it ?
falsifying records or not telling the voting public he screws porn stars?

Would he be perfectly fine paying Stormy to stfu as long as his accountants had handled it correctly?
and if so what method would that be?

[–] Ranb (7405) 19 days ago

Falsifying business records is the crime. Concealing the crime in he manner in which he is accused of doing, is the amplifying information in this case. Understand?

Handing Stormy an envelop of cash or a check made out to her would have have been fine as far as I know.

The link I provided is not that vague. Which parts did you not understand?

TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct

the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in
furtherance of the scheme

false entries were made in New York business records to effectuate this payment, separate and apart from the New York business records used to conceal the payment.

Defendant reimbursed Lawyer A for the illegal payment through a series of monthly checks, first from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust (the “Defendant’s Trust”)—a Trust created under the laws of New York which held the Trump Organization entity assets after the Defendant was elected President—and then from the Defendant’s bank account. Each check was processed by the Trump Organization, and each check was disguised as a payment for legal services rendered in a given month of 2017 pursuant to a retainer agreement. The payment records, kept and maintained by the Trump Organization,
were false New York business records. In truth, there was no retainer agreement, and Lawyer A was not being paid for legal services rendered in 2017

So does any of this seem legal to you?

[–] moviechatterer (13558) 19 days ago

"So does any of this seem legal to you?"

It seems trivial. If you cant take a step back from the legal-ese and express the crime in English , then its clearly some kind of technicality. Who is the victim?

In essence , what all that stuff you quoted says is:
"Trump put in his ledger that he had spent some money on legal advice , but he had actually spent it on a porn stars silence"

He's not laundering money,
He's not stealing it from anyone ,
He is not dodging paying tax to the IRS

I refer you my KFC example in the OP .
All he has done is labelled a business expense "nicely" to avoid having "porn star payoff" written in his books , I cant see how thats illegal - small difference (kfc example)

its the same as if he had written "spent $100k on a new black limo" when it was a white one

[–] Martoto (4340) 19 days ago

"..its the same as if he had written "spent $100k on a new black limo" when it was a white one.."

That's wishful thinking.

More accurate to say it's as if someone had written "spent $100k on a black limo", when in fact gave it as a bribe to a porn star so they could lie to voters without consequence...

[–] Ranb (7405) 19 days ago

You are unable or unwilling to explain why falsifying business records should not be illegal. Why?

Surely you understand that certain legal and business expenses are tax deductible? If Trump can convince the jury that paying money to a prostitute is deductible, then he should be in the clear.

I think Trump is dodging taxes by listing the hush money as a legal expense.

[–] moviechatterer (13558) 19 days ago

well , that does bring me closer to what the actual problem is.

If he is claiming thats "deductible" ,and getting a tax rebate or whatever then I can see the problem.
They haven't really phrased the charge as "tax avoidance" though.
( and thats assuming its not deductible - paying for NDAs could be a legitimate business expense for all i know)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68309680
This article claims:
Prosecutors have described this as an attempt to "unlawfully influence" the 2016 election.
That there is a whole new , and extremely questionable , angle!

[–] Ranb (7405) 19 days ago

Taxes were brought up three times in the charges I linked to in that pdf. Might want to read those parts.

[–] Bubbathegut (17258) 18 days ago

The charge is that the democrats are trying to steal another election.

[–] NorrinRad (5059) 18 days ago

[–] Bubbathegut (17228) 7 minutes ago
The charge is that the democrats are trying to steal another election.

Gee, Mr. TheGut you use the word Another like you don't know what it means. Democrats have not stolen an Election from DJT, nor the Republican Party, nor the Citizens of the USA.

Do you care to amend or correct your posit? You sure won't and can't Defend your statement. 🗽👍🗽

[–] Ziggy (1569) 18 days ago

Election interference, which is a felony charge.