Boom! Boom! Boom! This is How the Case Against Trump Falls Apart

326

• (edited )

here's why the case is completely bogus:

bragg has charged trump with falsification of business records (same crime repeated 34 times). falsification of business records???

trump owns his own company. it is not a public corporation. he has no duty to anyone but himself about his accounting. it's his money. if he wants to pay someone, he can, regardless of the purpose. (if trump owned a publicly traded company, it might be a small issue from an accounting perspective if he didn't disclose it in the financial statements released quarterly/annually). but frankly, this would never rise to the issue of fraud. ever. it would be a rounding error to a corp the size of the trump organization

bragg and michael cohen have zero insight into trump's accounting. they are fishing -hoping trump screwed up. trump could have reimbursed cohen via corporate checks and then repaid the company out of his own accounts. perfectly legal, and frequently done. but trump didn't even need to do that -because it's all his money! i am betting trump's accountants handled it this way, just for the sake of transparency.

here's the one area that could possibly trip up trump -but again it is very, very minor and would not rise to the level of fraud. did he account for the money correctly from a tax perspective? guess what, companies keep a different set of books for tax records. trump's attorney joe tacopino told hannity last night that the transactions were never included for tax purposes. in other words, trump didn't deduct the expense from his records in a way that reduced his tax liability. booooooom! bragg is fcked and now he's exposed.

(as a side note, companies typically account for nuisance payoffs and other settlements as legal costs because they would otherwise need to litigate it. no way a cpa or the irs would dispute this accounting treatment. in fact, hillary accounted for the payments to perkins coie for the fake steele dossier as a legal expense.)

(here's why we know bragg's case is about "taxes" --at tues. press conference bragg said prosecutors have brought these types of falsificaction of business records cases before for 'sex crimes' (doesn't apply to trump) and tax cases (bingo!)

democrats must realize their big mistake -they've now backed away from this indictment. and mitt romney is now criticizing da bragg. that's how you know they are caught.

lmao.

here's a similar take on the bogus charges against trump:

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/04/trumps-indictment-is-a-tempest-over-bookkeeping

Trump's attorney went on hannity last night and revealed a key tidbit that is gonna get this case thrown out -and {{{{possibly}}}} entrap those criminal prosecutors. (it's unlikely to happen however until an honest appeals judge gets the evidence -a stupid and rigged ny jury will likely still convict him on tds alone.) here's why the case is completely bogus: bragg has charged trump with falsification of business records (same crime repeated 34 times). falsification of business records??? trump owns his own company. it is not a public corporation. he has no duty to anyone but himself about his accounting. it's his money. if he wants to pay someone, he can, regardless of the purpose. (if trump owned a publicly traded company, it might be a small issue from an accounting perspective if he didn't disclose it in the financial statements released quarterly/annually). but frankly, this would never rise to the issue of fraud. ever. it would be a rounding error to a corp the size of the trump organization bragg and michael cohen have zero insight into trump's accounting. they are fishing -hoping trump screwed up. trump could have reimbursed cohen via corporate checks and then repaid the company out of his own accounts. perfectly legal, and frequently done. but trump didn't even need to do that -because it's all his money! i am betting trump's accountants handled it this way, just for the sake of transparency. here's the one area that could possibly trip up trump -but again it is very, very minor and would not rise to the level of fraud. did he account for the money correctly from a tax perspective? guess what, companies keep a different set of books for tax records. trump's attorney joe tacopino told hannity last night that the transactions were never included for tax purposes. in other words, trump didn't deduct the expense from his records in a way that reduced his tax liability. booooooom! bragg is fcked and now he's exposed. (as a side note, companies typically account for nuisance payoffs and other settlements as legal costs because they would otherwise need to litigate it. no way a cpa or the irs would dispute this accounting treatment. in fact, hillary accounted for the payments to perkins coie for the fake steele dossier as a legal expense.) (here's why we know bragg's case is about "taxes" --at tues. press conference bragg said prosecutors have brought these types of falsificaction of business records cases before for 'sex crimes' (doesn't apply to trump) and tax cases (bingo!) democrats must realize their big mistake -they've now backed away from this indictment. and mitt romney is now criticizing da bragg. that's how you know they are caught. lmao. here's a similar take on the bogus charges against trump: https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/04/trumps-indictment-is-a-tempest-over-bookkeeping

(post is archived)