Guilty on all counts: Last night, a jury found former President Donald Trump guilty on all 34 counts. He was convicted of falsifying business records to conceal hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels, with whom he had a tryst before the 2016 election.
Sentencing, which may include jail time but does not necessarily include jail time, is scheduled for July 11. Probation instead of throwing the presidential candidate in jail. In other words: There are a lot of different ways to do this, but Trump could still run for president (and get elected).
Since this happened last night, we don’t yet have polling data on how this verdict will affect the presidential race. But a recent Quinnipiac University poll found that 6% of voters would be less likely to vote for their preferred candidate if Trump is convicted, while “24% said they would be more likely to vote for Him” and an impressive “68% said they would vote for him”. There is no difference. ” That 6% could make a big difference in a tight race.
Critics on the left, many of whom long for Trump to go to jail, while critics on the right are willing to excuse his criminal and norm-breaking behavior time and time again, are often wrong, but in this particular case, writes, The legal argument is highly questionable. reasonJacob Salem, the verdict may have been handed down too quickly, providing fodder for the argument that it was politically motivated.
“The speedy verdict is difficult to understand from a legal perspective,” Salem wrote. “It’s not that there are so many counts to consider, each tied to a specific invoice, check or ledger entry, that were allegedly designed to disguise hush-money reimbursements as fees for legal services. Once jurors were examined The party’s theory of the case, in which they will almost inevitably convict Trump on all 34 counts, is complex, confusing, and in some versions highly implausible, if not absurd. of.
Basic knowledge: One of the prosecutors’ basic arguments is that Trump falsified business records “with the intent to commit another crime or to assist or conceal a crime.” That other The crime would violate New York State Election Code Section 17-152, which makes it a misdemeanor for “two or more persons” to “conspire by unlawful means to promote or prevent the election of any person to public office.”
But Judge Mocha told jurors they did not have to agree on what “illegal means” were used to reach a unanimous verdict. Prosecutors need to convince jurors that Trump “knowingly and knowingly” engaged in such a criminal conspiracy with his fixer Michael Cohen, which is beyond belief: One argument prosecutors made was that Cohen “did too many campaign contributions, thereby violating the Federal Campaign Act (FECA) when he used the money to pay Daniels” (per Salem) – Cohen pleaded guilty to the crime several years ago, jurors heard one piece of evidence but were instructed Use “to assess Cohen’s credibility,” not his guilt — but the fact that Trump likely didn’t know that directing Cohen to pay Daniels was illegal.
“Prosecutors have brought a dead misdemeanor back to life by claiming violations of New York State Election Law 17-152,” Jonathan Turley wrote on the website. hill. “The argument is that the crime was committed in furtherance of another crime as an unlawful means of influencing an election. However, the other crime may have been the falsification of business records. Therefore, the jury (or at least some jurors) may It was discovered that some people’s documents were forged as an illegal means of forging other documents.
Masked wink: It’s all legally shaky, but that doesn’t stop prosecutors from making crazy arguments (as they do), like hush money payments (also known as “[an] Efforts to deceive American voters”) “likely contributed to President Trump’s election in 2016,” and the cover-up of the Daniels incident amounted to “subversion of democracy” and meant “manipulation and deception of voters.”
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said at one point that the payment to Daniels “proved to be one of the most valuable contributions ever made to Trump.” But in the end, jurors were convinced by the arguments — even if much of the conservative legal movement and experts (even people who weren’t Trump fans) weren’t convinced.
Ankush Khadori wrote on the website that Trump has “a wealth of information at his disposal” when it comes to appeals. politics. “What he got was almost irrelevant to the salacious and allegedly irrelevant details Daniels provided about her sexual encounters with Trump — after all, Trump and his legal team foolishly invited themselves to provide testimony by denying their existence — But the case has to do with the underlying legal structure, which brings complex principles of federal election law into state law cases over false business records.
New York scene: That’s enough for New York today.
Quick click
- It’s really fun to use this tool – called “Building Trump Voters” https://reason.com/ “Building Biden Voters” – from economist.
- Bill Ackman prepares for Pershing Square IPO.
- I’m here to witness all the shots being fired at the baby boomers, but I’m not sure if it’s stinginess – also known as frugal or fiscal prudence——It is an issue that everyone is concerned about. Why are we trying to audit the consumer spending habits of an entire generation? who cares?
- In the world of TikTok influencers, they instruct their female followers on how to snag a rich guy.
- Ukraine is now allowed to use U.S.-made weapons against targets in Russia to defend itself against aggressors.
- Flooding in Brazil is displacing hundreds of thousands of people and leaving the government scrambling.
- Are you a left-libertarian wondering who Chase Oliver is? Stop asking. watch just asking questions (And send us hate mail/love letters, loyalty pledges, critical notes, whatever you want). Some say my opinion is “well-founded,” but I still don’t know what that word means and won’t investigate.
