How strong is the legal case against Donald Trump?

[ad_1]

360 shows you diverse perspectives on the days top stories and debates.

What’s happening

In the weeks since news broke that former President Donald Trump was on the brink of impeachment, there has been a nonstop flood of opinions from lawmakers and pundits about the implications of charging a former president and current presidential candidate with a crime. With the details of the actual indictment finally released on Tuesday, legal experts can now discuss the actual merits of the case and the legal risk it poses to Trump.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 felony counts connected to an alleged scheme to cover up a $130,000 hush-hush payment made to porn actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. Not guilty Trump in all cases.

We cannot and will not normalize serious criminal behavior, Bragg said at a press conference outlining the case.

There is nothing inherently illegal about paying someone not to disclose an alleged affair. But Trump is accused of illegally planning to falsify business records in an effort to hide the payment. Under New York law, that crime itself is a misdemeanor, but it can be charged with a felony punishable by up to four years in prison if the records are falsified with the specific intent to commit or cover up another crime. The indictment released Tuesday did not specify what that second crime was, but there are indications that Bragg may have tried to connect the payments to campaign finance violations or tax fraud.

Trump is the first former president to be formally indicted, but the Manhattan case is far from his only source of legal danger. The Justice Department is investigating his role in inciting the January 6 attack on the US Capitol and alleged mishandling of classified documents after leaving office. He also faces an inquiry in Georgia about his attempts to overturn the state’s 2020 election results and several civil lawsuits, including one filed by a woman who claims Trump raped her in the 1990s.

The story continues

Why is there a debate?

Outside of Trump and his GOP allies, who all say the entire case is a politically motivated witch hunt, there is generally broad agreement that Bragg appears to have enough evidence to warrant a conviction. on misdemeanor counts of falsifying business records. There is serious disagreement, however, on the most important issue: Can Bragg successfully tie minor infractions to a secondary crime?

Skeptics from both sides of the political spectrum say the felony portion of the case is built on shaky and untested legal reasoning that will require solid evidence to corroborate evidence that many believe is likely. without Bragg. There are also major technical issues that could derail the indictment, particularly the untried question of whether a federal crime such as a campaign finance violation counts as a second felony under the business records-level law. of New York state. Some skeptics add that the strength of the Braggs’ case will be irrelevant if the trial is not completed in time for the 2024 election, a prospect they say is highly unlikely.

But others argue that the case is not nearly as weak as the skeptics make it out to be. They say Bragg and his team, with jurisdiction over the heart of the US financial system, are incredibly adept at litigating complex financial issues like this one. The lack of details about how Bragg plans to connect the critical dots in the case, they added, is a sign that the district attorney is just saving his most powerful ammunition for later, not now. he doesn’t have it.

Finally, some legal commentators say that the indictment is so short on details and the circumstances are unprecedented that it is impossible at this early stage to make any real judgments about how the case might play out.

what next

Trumps next personal hearing in the case is scheduled for Dec. 4, just two months before voting begins in the Republican presidential primary. It is likely, however, that Trumps legal team will file several motions aimed at challenging the case in the coming months that could reveal more information about the evidence that Bragg intends to rely on in trying to convict the former president.

Views

Even the small amount of information we have shows that Bragg had plenty of evidence to support his case

The statement of facts provides sufficient evidence and detailed evidence of the contours and the aspects of this scheme to deceive, and to hide the payments because there is an upcoming election. When you have documents that are blatantly false, and you seem to have them here, and you have witnesses corroborating each other, that combination is very powerful for a jury. That’s a bold charge. And if it is proven, it has a lot of jury appeal. Gene Rossi, former federal prosecutor, in USA Today

Bragg is keeping details about the case secret because he knows it’s built on quicksand

We don’t have to wonder why Bragg was so shy about it. He has no other crimes. At his press conference, he ranted about federal campaign-finance law, but knew he had no jurisdiction to enforce federal law. He said something more about state election laws, but those you can imagine apply to elections for state office, not the presidency. Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

We should not assume that Bragg was out of his depth because he did not immediately make his full strategy public

Bragg did not mention the specific laws he would rely on to pursue felonies. But there is nothing sneaky or secret about that. Bragg presented what he thought he needed no more and no less. The impatience of the media is no reason to reveal more of an indictment than he normally would at this stage. Jennifer Rubin, Washington Post

Until there is clear evidence of a second crime, the case should be considered a flop

Here is the big question that Mr. Bragg: Where is the second crime? Remember that falsifying business records is a misdemeanor in New York. It is a felony only if the books are cooked with the intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. When Mr. Trump made this reimbursement arrangement with Mr. Cohen, what other crime is he allegedly trying to cover up? Editorial, Wall Street Journal

Bragg and his team have a ton of experience getting convictions in cases like this

We can now say that there is nothing novel or weak about this case. Allegations of creating false financial records continue to be brought by Mr. Bragg and other New York DAs. Specifically, the creation of false documentation to cover up campaign finance violations has been repeatedly prosecuted in New York. That is exactly what Mr. Trump accused. Karen Friedman Agnifilo and Norman Eisen, New York Times

There is a very real possibility that the case will be thrown out before it even gets to trial

There is a serious risk that a judge in New York will throw out the charges against Trump on technical legal grounds unrelated to the actual conduct of former presidents. And even if Braggs’ legal team convinces New York’s own courts that this prosecution can move forward, there’s also the very real danger that the United States Supreme Court, with its GOP-appointed supermajority, will may decide it needs to weigh whether Trump should be shielded from this prosecution. Ian Millhiser, Vox

Just because a legal theory has not been tested does not mean it is weak

The mere fact that a legal theory is said to be novel or involves unusual facts does not mean that it is invalid or somehow illegitimate under the law. This means that prosecutors must try to assemble a solid legal basis based on the textual and historical underpinnings of relevant statutes as well as broader legal principles in order to persuade trial and appellate courts to decide which is in their favor. Ankush Khardori, New York

Connecting all the dots in a way that proves convincing to a jury will be a huge challenge

These charges are difficult to prove. There is no doubt that the district attorney faces an uphill climb. They tell the story of a complex conspiracy to illegally alter the course of the 2016 election, a powerful story of corruption that convinces the jury and the public of the need for prosecution. But Braggs legal theory is, if not messy, a somewhat confusing effort to lump together disparate offenses into one alleged crime. This is not the slam-dunk case that so many Democrats want. Mark Joseph Stern, Slate

None of the details of the case matter if it is not decided before the election

Braggs’ particular case that Trump falsified business records is strong, and, it appears, is backed up by ample documentary evidence. But, as usual, Trumps goal is to simply delay the proceedings until well past the point of the 2024 election. So far, he is close to achieving that goal. Elie Mystal, The Country

The weakness of this case could make it more difficult to convict Trump of more serious crimes

Trump simply cannot defeat the charges, at trial or on appeal. He may use those charges to create the impression among his supporters that he is the victim of a politically motivated vendetta. In turn, it could make it more difficult for Georgia or federal prosecutors to bring and pursue more serious charges against him. Noah Feldman, Bloomberg

There are so many unknowns that can be done more than speculation

As the case progresses, Bragg will be forced to show his hand (likely in response to Trump’s moves) and learn more about his specific theories and their chances of success. For now, be skeptical of some predictions. Ken White, Rolling Stone

Is there a topic you’d like to see covered on The 360? Send your suggestions to [email protected].

Photo illustration: Jack Forbes/Yahoo News; photos: Seth Wenig-Pool/Getty Images, Selcuk Acar/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images (2)

[ad_2]