1094
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

edit: I have changed my title to match the new NYTimes headline. Sorry about the all caps, I guess they are really excited about this lol

Also shoutout to @SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone who shared a gift article link in the comments. I hope you don't mind but I kinda stole it and updated the post

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

That’s completely incorrect.

Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records. These were the charges in the NY “hush money” trial only.

Here’s a handy tracker for the other cases from the Associated Press.

[-] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 30 points 2 years ago

falsifying business records

To influence the outcome of the 2016 election.

He didn't decisively win, it's not inaccurate to deduce from this conviction that the 2016 election was stolen

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago

It’s true that the contents of this trial can be used for the arguments of the prosecution in the Federal and Georgia election trials, but he was not convicted of any crime other than falsifying business records.

Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, a class E felony that is punishable by a fine, probation or up to four years in prison per count.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-prison-hush-money-trial-verdict-rcna153963

[-] gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 2 years ago

but he was not convicted of any crime other than falsifying business records.

Cool, but irrelevant as nobody was talking about what laws were technically broken, they were pointing out what being guilty of that means in reality

[-] PrettyFlyForAFatGuy@feddit.uk 8 points 2 years ago

according to The Guardian, for it to be considered a felony charge they had to prove that Trump did it with the intent to commit another crime; The other crime being a New York state law that says it is illegal for “any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means”

So the election interference charge form part of the existing charges without being separate charges in and of themselves

[-] aphlamingphoenix@lemm.ee 4 points 2 years ago

The main argument from prosecution to this end was that the encounter happened in 2006 (ish, I might be off) but the hush money wasn't an issue until the election campaign. Therefore, they argued, it was paid (and covered up with false business records) to influence the election.

[-] EvacuateSoul@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

The felony upcharge requires he falsify in furtherance of another crime, which was argued to be hiding campaign contributions.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Yes. He used campaign funds to pay Cohen for his role as a personal attorney, but the payments were actually reimbursement for Cohen’s initially laid out hush money to Daniels.

All I said was he wasn’t charged with it. It’s absolutely going to be used to address his character in the other cases, but they may not get heard until after November at this rate.

The Federal election is postponed until SCOTUS rules on immunity. The Georgia election is postponed until the state Senate investigates Fani Willis, and the documents case is postponed indefinitely.

I’m surprised so many people think that this proves he’s guilty for all of the cases. We all knew he was before this trial even started. This legally only proves he’s guilty of fraud until he begins another trial.

this post was submitted on 30 May 2024
1094 points (100.0% liked)

News

36233 readers
2365 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS