\n\n“Manhattan prosecutors allege that Trump concealed hush money payments by falsely labeling related transactions as legal expenses and by arranging for a tabloid publisher to bottle up the story of a woman who said she had a sexual relationship with Trump.
In doing so, the prosecutors say, Trump repeatedly violated a New York corporate record-keeping law and agreed to break campaign finance laws.” <\/p>\n\n\n\n
… The most obvious candidate for that aggravating element is the admission from Trump\u2019s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, that he arranged a $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels in consultation with Trump and to aid Trump\u2019s 2016 presidential campaign.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe defendant Donald J. Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election,\u201d the statement of facts says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThe participants [in the scheme] violated election laws,\u201d the statement continues, though it does not explicitly cite which ones. The statement also mentions Cohen\u2019s guilty plea in 2018 to two federal campaign finance crimes. And in a press release, Bragg said Trump and others sought to conceal \u201cattempts to violate state and federal election laws.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The references to federal election violations are virtually certain to be the focus of pre-trial motions from Trump\u2019s attorneys, who have contended publicly that this state-law offense cannot be piggybacked on a federal-law crime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If defense attorneys prevail on such motions, it would not necessarily wipe out the criminal case against Trump. Instead, the case could remain as 34 misdemeanor charges. That would amount to a legal, public relations and political victory for Trump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Such a result would further diminish the chances of Trump being jailed if found guilty. The maximum sentence on a second-degree falsifying business records charge is up to one year in prison on each count. A downgrading of the case to a misdemeanor might also aid Trump\u2019s efforts to delay a trial.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “For Trump to be convicted of falsifying business records, the records at issue have to be, well, business records.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The New York law at issue requires that the falsification involve the records of \u201can enterprise,\u201d and each count of the indictment claims that Trump falsified records \u201ckept and maintained by the Trump Organization.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The facts are more complicated. It\u2019s true that the checks sent to Cohen, which labeled the payments as legal expenses, were issued by employees working for Trump\u2019s business empire. But they were not charged to Trump\u2019s businesses. Instead, the payments were made from one of Trump\u2019s personal accounts or from a Trump family trust.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The key question, and one that is sure to feature in efforts by Trump\u2019s lawyers to derail the case, is whether documents that happened to pass through the Trump Organization or handled by Trump Organization personnel are automatically classified as business records, even if the source of the funds was Trump\u2019s personal accounts.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n …<\/p>\n\n\n\n “Legal experts said they expect Trump\u2019s lawyers to argue to the judge and, if necessary, a jury that wholly personal expenses that are simply handled by an accountant or other clerical personnel don\u2019t become the \u201crecords of an enterprise\u201d just by virtue of that process.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
“The charge at the heart of the case \u2014 falsifying business records \u2014 can amount to only a misdemeanor<\/a>, but it becomes a felony<\/a> if the defendant falsified the records to obscure a separate crime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n