New York Penal Law § 175.10: Falsifying business records in the first degree
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.
Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony.
2021 New York Laws
ELN - Election Article 17 - Violations of the Elective Franchise 17-152 - Conspiracy to Promote or Prevent Election.
17-152. Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Trump and his surrogates conspired to keep the public from learning about his misdeeds via "bribes". See 17-152 conspiracy.
Trump concealed the payments by illegally writing them off as legal expenses. see 175.10: Falsifying business records in the first degree. There was an intent to commit another crime and to both aid conceal the commission thereof.
You keep going back to the allegations.
In any similar situation, how would anyone not running for political office have categorized the expense ?
If Trump had categorized the NDA as a campaign expense would he have violated Federal campaign law ?
If, as alleged, that Bragg had knowledge of the theft of tens of thousands of dollars by the state's star witness from the Trump organization and did not inform the grand jury would that be prejudicial ?
This case is nothing more than a local DA attempting to make good on his campaign promises to go after a former President. Bragg's case is, or should be, more on trial than Trump's categorization of the expense as it not being a campaign expenditure.
"“I’ve never heard of it actually being used, and I’ve practiced election law for 53 years,” Brooklyn attorney and former Democratic NY state Sen. Martin Connor said of section 17-152."
https://electionlawblog.org/?p=142769Tell us again of your fears that Trump will use retribution if elected while you appear to support Bragg's efforts to fulfill a campaign promise by using state law in a novel way to apply it to federal elections and federal campaign law while Democrats are saying that the case is election interference.
RecentWTF is wrong with the lef... by ThePAMan
WTF is the deal with the ...
by murphstahoe 
Total Members: 142