That’s still untrue, the jury convicted on the charges that he falsified business records in order to further campaign fraud. The business record crimes were only part of the piece; the jury could have found him guilty on those charges alone but also convicted him on the rest. You keep denying it in this thread but the court records and jury verdicts on the specific charges as well as the jury instructions are all public.
And the crime isn’t Trump funding himself, I’m not sure why you keep strawmanning that. The crime was that he took campaign money and used it for hush money payments and then falsified the records to make it seem like other legal work. We have those records, Trump’s signatures on the checks, witnesses describing the conversations and plans to hide the story, and even the payment system to launder the money through Cohen and even give him extra to cover the taxes so it wouldn’t raise suspicion.
Edit: plenty of people in New York are in jail for the same crime, why should Trump be treated any different than the average citizen?
the jury convicted on the charges that he falsified business records in order to further campaign fraud.
This is true*. What I was trying to convey was that this statement does not claim that Trump himself perpetrated a campaign finance violation, only that he falsified the business records, etc, etc, so that a campaign violation occurred.
The jury did not have to find that Trump directly participated** in any of the underlying crimes to convict. The conviction is for the false business records. Trump was not on trial for the predicate crimes.
The “strawman” example, as you put it, was too show how absurd it would be to try to claim that Trump himself participated directly in this underlying election crime.
The prosecutors presented three underlying predicate crimes: a New York law election crime, Cohen’s tax fraud to the IRS, and the Cohen illegal campaign contribution. Under New York law for this business records statue, the jury is not required to say which of the three they believed in. They’re not even required to agree amongst themselves. So it’s possible that they all went for the tax crime and discounted the campaign crime. We may never find out.
**For instance, if they thought that Trump was helping to cover up one of the underlying crimes, that’s enough to convict.
That’s still untrue, the jury convicted on the charges that he falsified business records in order to further campaign fraud. The business record crimes were only part of the piece; the jury could have found him guilty on those charges alone but also convicted him on the rest. You keep denying it in this thread but the court records and jury verdicts on the specific charges as well as the jury instructions are all public.
And the crime isn’t Trump funding himself, I’m not sure why you keep strawmanning that. The crime was that he took campaign money and used it for hush money payments and then falsified the records to make it seem like other legal work. We have those records, Trump’s signatures on the checks, witnesses describing the conversations and plans to hide the story, and even the payment system to launder the money through Cohen and even give him extra to cover the taxes so it wouldn’t raise suspicion.
Edit: plenty of people in New York are in jail for the same crime, why should Trump be treated any different than the average citizen?
This is true*. What I was trying to convey was that this statement does not claim that Trump himself perpetrated a campaign finance violation, only that he falsified the business records, etc, etc, so that a campaign violation occurred.
The jury did not have to find that Trump directly participated** in any of the underlying crimes to convict. The conviction is for the false business records. Trump was not on trial for the predicate crimes.
The “strawman” example, as you put it, was too show how absurd it would be to try to claim that Trump himself participated directly in this underlying election crime.
**For instance, if they thought that Trump was helping to cover up one of the underlying crimes, that’s enough to convict.