The core issue was Trump’s motion to dismiss the entire case. Point by point, Justice Juan Merchan shot down each Trump argument and, by implication, the critics who scorned the case. His ruling put to rest the notion that this is a picayune matter. “The Court agrees that the instant matter involved a complex investigation. Further, while it is true that the charges involve the lowest level felony and no one suffered physical harm, it can hardly be said that the allegations are nor severe.” He emphasized, “The People claim that the Defendant paid an individual $130,000 to conceal a sexual encounter in an effort to influence the 2016 Presidential election and then falsified 34 business records to cover up the payoff.” In short, the judge wrote; “Those are serious allegations.”
The media routinely calls this the “hush money” case. But the payment of hush money is neither illegal nor relevant. It is the attempt to illegally conceal damaging information from voters that is at issue. If the “big lie” about a stolen election was the central feature of Trump’s attempted coup after the 2020 election, the lie about the nature of his payments was an effort — just days after the “Access Hollywood” revelation — to con voters in 2016.
The judge specifically held that Trump (infamous for delaying his cases) did not suffer any deprivation of due process rights because of the district attorney’s office. The case is going to trial on March 25. Period.
Merchan also explained that the elevation to felony counts was fully justified under New York law: The falsification of business records rises to a felony when “his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.” (The allegation of lying to conceal other crimes echoes the obstruction charge in the Mar-a-Lago case; the coverup is at least as bad as the underlying crime.)
Merchan held that “the invoices, checks, and general ledger entries are in fact ‘business records’” under the statute. (“The invoices, checks, and general ledger entries created in 2017, that were kept and maintained by the Trump Organization, reflected payments made to [then-Trump-lawyer Michael] Cohen for a scheme that was discussed and implemented by Cohen and the Defendant in 2015 and 2016.”) Noteworthy: The scheme originated before Trump became president and was unrelated to his job as president.
As for lifting the counts to felonies, Merchan cited prior cases (yes, this is nothing new) to show that all that is required is intent to commit other crimes. Of those on offer here — federal election finance laws, state election finance laws, tax laws (by grossing up amounts to Cohen) and causing other false records (i.e., for the “catch and kill” scheme) — Merchan found all but the last sufficient to present to the jury. That gives Bragg three solid theories, with factual support, to present in support of his felony charges.
Bragg also presented evidence of Trump’s intent to defraud sufficient to defeat any motion to dismiss. “The People submit that Defendant’s ‘intent to defraud’ was established in the Grand Jury by evidence that Defendant sought to suppress disclosure of information that could have negatively impacted his campaign for President of the United States and that he made ‘false entries in the relevant business records to prevent public…
This article was originally published by a www.washingtonpost.com . Read the Original article here. .
