Trump NY Case: DA Alvin Bragg Sued for Collusion with Biden Admin. (June 12, 2024)

America First Legal filed this week a complaint with the Federal Election Commission alleging that Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg coordinated with the Biden campaign to prosecute Donald Trump and to influence the 2024 election. The link here is prosecutor Matthew Colangelo According to The New York Times, Colangelo “has a history of taking on Donald J. Trump and his family business” and: – worked in the Obama administration – then went to work for the New York attorney general’s office where he led dozens of lawsuits against the Trump Administration, oversaw the investigation into the Trump Foundation (which caused the organization to dissolve), led the civil inquiry which resulted in AG Letitia James’ lawsuit against Trump. – became the #3 in Biden’s Dept. of Justice – then was hired (a reduction in rank!!) by local NY DA Alvin Bragg to lead the Manhattan prosecution of Trump where a jury decided to convict Trump. [RELATED: Irregularities in NY v. Trump Trial: The Prosecutors & Biden] The FEC complaint also cites Colangelo’s donations to Alvin Bragg and alleges violation of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA). Summary of the Complaint via the Washington Examiner: ‘Bragg and Biden campaign ‘coordinated’ to influence 2024 election: FEC complaint’ [America First Legal] claimed that Bragg’s prosecution constitutes a “coordinated expenditure” under FECA, resulting in an in-kind contribution to Biden’s campaign exceeding the $3,300 per election limit. The Biden campaign failed to disclose this alleged contribution, violating FEC regulations. … The complaint also detailed that in December 2022, Bragg hired prosecutor Matthew Colangelo to expedite the investigation of Trump. Colangelo, who left his position as the No. 3 official in the Biden Justice Department, has a history of legal actions against Trump. Prior to joining Bragg’s office, Colangelo held senior roles in the DOJ and the New York attorney general’s office, both of which had investigations into Trump. Notably, Colangelo also contributed to Bragg’s district attorney campaign before joining the Biden DOJ. Details via Arizona Defense Lawyer Robert Gouveia’s Podcast: Bragg SUED for ILLEGAL Collusion Pertinent topic at 0:00 and 7:31 video marks. SHOW NOTES: Trump Prosecutor Alvin Bragg was hit with a formal FEC complaint for colluding with the Biden Administration in their political prosecution of Trump. #Trump #Trial #NewYork

READ THE FEC COMPLAINT Via America First Legal: FEC Complaint Press Release: America First Legal Files Complaint with the Federal Election Commission Against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and the Biden Campaign for Violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, America First Legal (AFL) filed a formal administrative complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg, Jr. and Joe Biden’s principal campaign committee, Biden for President, for violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act. In December 2022, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg reportedly hired Matthew B. Colangelo to “jump-start” his office’s investigation of President Trump due to Mr. Colangelo’s “history of taking on Donald J. Trump and his family business.” Colangelo left his post as the number three in the DOJ to join the district attorney’s office – a move that reeks of partisanship. Colangelo previously held senior positions in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the New York Attorney General’s Office, both of which had competing investigations related to President Trump. Notably, before joining the Biden DOJ, Colangelo contributed several times to Bragg’s District Attorney campaign. … The available information indicates that Bragg’s hush money prosecution was “coordinated” with President Biden, i.e., it was made “in cooperation, consultation or concert with, or at the request or suggestion of” Biden. … The overall record in these matters — including Colangelo’s “jump-starting” of the case, Garland’s refusal to disclose communications between his Department and Bragg’s office, and the Biden campaign’s press event and statement immediately after the trial and conviction — indicates that Bragg’s hush money prosecution was made to harm President Trump’s 2024 candidacy and would not have been made absent President Trump’s status as a presidential candidate. The outlined information indicates that the Biden Campaign violated its disclosure obligations under the Federal Election Campaign Act when they failed to publicly disclose required contribution information in connection with the Bragg prosecution as a “coordinated expenditure.” A coordinated expenditure must be reported as both a contribution received by and an expenditure made by the authorized committees of the candidate with whom the expenditure was coordinated. Video: AG Garland refusing to disclose communications between the DOJ and Bragg’s office “Without denying the existence of communications between the Biden DOJ and Bragg’s District Attorney’s Office, Attorney General Merrick Garland refused during a congressional hearing to commit to turning over communications between the DOJ and Bragg’s Office,” America First Legal explained. Video: BREAKING: Coordinated Lawfare Against President Trump EXPOSED! AG Merrick Garland says it’s a “dangerous conspiracy theory” to allege that the Department of Justice is communicating with state and local prosecutions against Trump. But former senior DOJ official Matthew… pic.twitter.com/iYWpEqlM80 — Rep. Matt Gaetz (@RepMattGaetz) June 4, 2024 .

American First Legal also posted on X/Twitter the Complaint’s Details Here are some of their posts: X post: /1🚨BREAKING🚨 We filed a complaint with the FEC against Bragg and the Biden Campaign for illegal coordination under the Federal Election Campaign Act. Evidence reveals Bragg’s political prosecution aimed to assist the re-election of Joe Biden. Read on… pic.twitter.com/Nt8995Hq0c — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) June 12, 2024 X post: /3 Colangelo left his post as the number three in the DOJ to join the district attorney’s office – a move that reeks of partisanship. https://t.co/WbQFsGHeGr — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) June 12, 2024 X post: /6 Notably, before joining the Biden DOJ, Colangelo contributed several times to Bragg's District Attorney campaign. pic.twitter.com/9tFTB8uwM1 — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) June 12, 2024 X post: /9 Without denying the existence of communications between the Biden DOJ and Bragg’s District Attorney’s Office, Attorney General Merrick Garland refused during a congressional hearing to commit to turning over communications between the DOJ and Bragg’s Office. https://t.co/MqSiV9xtlg — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) June 12, 2024 X post: /11 Because the available information supports a conclusion that Bragg’s prosecution of President Trump was coordinated with President Biden and made to influence the 2024 presidential election, it is a “coordinated expenditure” under the Act resulting in an in-kind contribution… — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) June 12, 2024 X post: /16 Read more here: https://t.co/i82rblqsIR — America First Legal (@America1stLegal) June 12, 2024 .

###

This post might be updated later on.

Hearing on the Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (June 13, 2024)

Hearing on the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office Video via House Judiciary GOP / YouTube

###

This post might be updated later on.

Prank or Juror Misconduct at NY v. Trump Trial? READ: Judge Letter to Attorneys about Facebook Post Previewing Jury Verdict

DID JUROR SPEAK WITH A RELATIVE ABOUT THE TRUMP TRIAL OR IS THIS FROM AN ONLINE TROLL? Today, NY judge Merchan notified Trump defense lawyers and prosecutors about a comment on the court’s Facebook page revealing the jury’s guilty verdict a day before Trump was convicted. According to acting judge Merchan, the user, “Michael Anderson,” stated: “My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted [ ] Thank you folks for all your hard work!!!! [ ].”

New York v. Trump Trial on Monday, May 20, 2024. (Photo: Mark Peterson/Pool Photo via AP)

PRANK? Latest report: – HuffPost says the post’s “author claims to be a “professional s**t poster”: HuffPost was unable to find the comment quoted by the judge. However, a similar comment was posted by someone with the same name on May 29, the day before the jury returned its historic guilty verdict[.] “My cousin is a juror on Trumps criminal case and they’re going to convict him tomorrow according to her,” the comment read, on an unrelated post from the New York State Unified Court System. The commenter’s profile claims he is a “professional shit poster.” JURY MISCONDUCT? Earlier today: – NBC: Judge in Trump’s hush money case raises questions about social media post appearing to preview jury verdict: “Today, the Court became aware of a comment that was posted on the Unified Court System’s public Facebook page and which I now bring to your attention,” Judge Juan Merchan wrote in a letter dated Friday. … NBC News has not verified the claims made in the comment or the identity of the user who published the post, which has since been deleted. READ THE JUDGE’S LETTER Via NY Court: Letter PDF | Archive Letter from acting judge Juan Merchan to Trump defense lawyer Todd Blanche and prosecutor ADA Joshua Steinglass dated June 7, 2024: R.e: People v. Trump, Ind. No. 71543-2023 Dear Counsel: Today, the Court became aware of a comment that was posted on the Unified Court System’s public Facebook page and which I now bring to your attention. In the comment, the user, “Michael Anderson,” states: “My cousin is a juror and says Trump is getting convicted [ ] Thank you folks for all your hard work!!!! [ ].” The comment, now labeled as one week old, responded to a routine UCS notice, posted onMay 29, 2024, regarding oral arguments in the Fourth Department of the Appellate Division unrelated to this proceeding. The posting, entided “The Appellate Division, Fourth Department, will hear oral arguments this morning at 10,” and the comment are both viewable at https://www.facebook.com/NewYorkCourts/.

###

This post might be updated later on.

Irregularities in NY v. Trump Trial: The Witnesses (Part 5)

LIST OF IRREGULARITIES BEHIND THE PROSECUTION OF FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP Case: New York v. Trump, No. 71543-23

PART 5: WITNESSES FOR THE PROSECUTION

L-R: “Stormy Daniels,” Michael Cohen, judge Juan Merchan (Image via NYT)

MICHAEL COHEN (Trump’s former lawyer and the prosecutions’ key witness) • In court, Michael Cohen said he’d like to see Trump in jail From the trial: Trump’s lawyer Blanche: You’ve regularly commented that you want President Trump in jail? Cohen: Yes I would like to see that. Sure. Blanche: You sell a T-shirt depicting President Trump in an orange jumpsuit behind bars? Cohen: Yes sit [sir]. … Trump’s lawyer Blanche: You said President Trump should be in handcuffs- & you made money off it? Cohen: I did. Details: Trial update (day 17 – May 14, 2024) [Related: Bob Costello, Cohen’s former legal advisor, said Cohen told him: I’ll do whatever the f**k I have to do, I’ll never spend one day in jail.…I don’t have anything on Donald Trump.” On Stormy Daniels’ NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement) payment, Cohen told Costello: “This was my idea.”] • In court, Cohen said he has earned about $4.4 million in bashing Trump over the last four years Trump lawyer Blanche cross-examined Cohen: Q So, since you started your podcast the fall of 2020, and wrote your book, how much have you made on a yearly basis until now? A In total between the books and the podcasts, about $ 4 million. Q So , you testified last week that you made 3.4 million from your two books, is that right? A Correct. Q So, are you saying you made about $600,000 from your two podcasts? A Probably more since it started. Q How much more? A A million dollars in total. Q So, that would make it 4.4 million since the fall of 2020? Does that sound about right? A Yes. Details: Forbes, court transcript (May 20, 2024), transcript via NYT • In court, Cohen lied about phone call with Trump’s bodyguard, Keith Schiller The phone call on Oct. 24, 2016 was about a 14-year old pranker and not to “discuss the Stormy Daniels matter and the resolution of it.” Details: here, testimony on 5/16/2024 • On the stand, Cohen acknowledged he stole $30+K from Trump but was never charged even though it’s larceny worse than Trump’s charges Details: here

WHAT WE KNEW ABOUT COHEN BEFORE THE TRIAL • NYT: Bragg’s case relies on Michael Cohen, a disbarred lawyer who served prison time What may further complicate the case is that it relies heavily on testimony from Cohen, a disbarred lawyer who served prison time after pleading guilty to violating campaign-finance laws, evading taxes, making false statements to a bank and lying to Congress. After the indictment, a chorus of critics — some but not all on the right — questioned the legal reasoning, wisdom …of the hush-money case. Details: Summary, NYT, here • A serial perjurer used by DA to prove an old misdemeanor against Trump in an embarrassment for the New York legal system By GWU law professor Jonathan Turley Details: here • The criminal record of Michael Cohen, the prosecutors’ key witness Details: here, summary: – Tax Evasion – Felony false statements – Lied to Congress – Violated campaign finance laws – Lied in Court • Michael Cohen to his Attorney: I’ll Do Whatever…I’ll Never Spend One Day in Jail Former Cohen legal adviser Bob Costello: Michael Cohen's former attorney Bob Costello on Alvin Bragg's "star witness": Michael Cohen "said, 'Guys, I want you to know I will do whatever the f I have to do. I will never spend one day in jail.' Now, what he’s saying is I’ll lie, cheat, steal, shoot somebody. I will not… pic.twitter.com/1LFz6tafdx — MAGA War Room (@MAGAIncWarRoom) March 21, 2023 – More videos: Cohen Ex-Lawyer’s Testimony & Interviews Contradicting Cohen’s #TrumpTrial Testimony

– 2018 LETTER: Cohen Confesses Paying Stormy Daniels with Personal Funds Not Trump’s

– READ Judge Order: Trump Prosecutor Star Witness Lied to Court (3/20/2024)

– Michael Cohen on TikTok Selling Trump-In-Jail Shirts (Images)

– LIST: NY Trial Key Witness Michael Cohen’s Podcasts Talking About Trump

– Fmr. SCOTUS Clerk: Trump Gagged but Not Michael Cohen. Bragg Has No Authority to Enforce Federal Law.

– Michael Cohen in 2016: Trump is Generous, Compassionate, Principled, Empathetic, Kind, Humble, Honest, and Genuine (Video, Transcript)

– READ: Trump Attorney’s Letters Re: Cohen Testimony & Access Hollywood Tape (April 17, 2024)

– #TrumpTrial: Who are the Witnesses for the Prosecution?

STORMY DANIELS (a.k.a Stephanie Clifford) • In court, Daniels acknowledged she hates Trump From court live Tweets by Inner City Press: (Day 13 – May 7, 2024) [Trump’s lawyer] Necheles: You hate President Trump, right? Daniels: Yes. Details: here • In court, Daniels acknowledged she owes Trump $500K in legal fees From court live Tweets by Inner City Press: [Trump’s lawyer] Necheles: You owe him $500,000 in legal fees? …March 2022, you were ordered to pay attorney’s fees for the appeal too, right? Daniels: Yes Necheles: More in 2023 because of your frivolous suit- Details: here • In court, Daniels acknowledged she won’t pay Trump From court live Tweets by Inner City Press: Necheles: You have said you will never pay, right? Daniels: Correct Necheles: I offer her tweet into evidence Prosecution: Objection! Justice Merchan: Sustained. Approach · [After sidebar] Justice Merchan: Accepted into evidence. [The tweet: “I will go to jail before I pay a penny.”] Trump’s lawyer Necheles: That was you saying you didn’t care about a Federal order, right? Stormy Daniels: I won’t pay for telling the truth. · Trump’s lawyer Necheles: You wrote this, I don’t owe him shit and I’ll never give that orange turd a dime? Stormy Daniels: Yes Necheles: You make fun of how he looks too, right? Details: here • CNN: Stormy Daniels’ Responses were Disastrous, Irrelevant (Video) Details: here • Former Clinton federal judge Shira Scheindlin: Stormy’s testimony is irrelevant Sheindlin to CNN: The material that came in was not relevant to this criminal case at all. And I think it shows that she was trying to ‘get Trump.’ I actually thought there was a motive there. Details: report,video BEFORE THE TRIAL • Stormy Daniels’ “documentary” about Trump before initial trial date Judge Merchan denied the defense motion seeking all materials related to the “documentary” film titled “Stormy.” Details: explainer

MORE – PART 1: THE JUDGE – PART 2: THE PROSECUTORS & BIDEN – PART 3: THE TRIAL – PART 4: THE CASE

###

This post might be updated later on.

Irregularities in NY v. Trump Trial: The Case (Part 4)

LIST OF IRREGULARITIES BEHIND THE PROSECUTION OF FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP Case: New York v. Trump, No. 71543-23

PART 4: THE CASE

No Crime • Trump charges are obscure, unprecedented, and are seemingly crafted individually for the former president and nobody else. CNN legal analyst Elie Honig: The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge. Details: here • There is nothing unlawful about purchasing negative information to suppress its publication Details: here • Hush-money (Non Disclosure Agreement) payments are not campaign expenditures. NDAs per se are perfectly legal and common in civil-law settlements of claims. Former FEC chairman Brad Smith: – They are ‘personal use’ expenses and are not to be paid with campaign funds, even though the candidate might benefit from the expenditure. Details: here, here, here • NYT: Only 2 Other Cases in Manhattan Similar to Trump’s With No Underlying Crime Details: summary

The Trick • NYT: Manhattan Trump Case Hinges on Untested, Novel Theory The case against the former president hinges on an untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws, all amounting to a low-level felony. (…) …hush money is not inherently illegal… Combining the criminal charge with a violation of state election law would be a novel legal theory for any criminal case, let alone one against the former president, raising the possibility that a judge or appellate court could throw it out or reduce the felony charge to a misdemeanor. Details: here • The statute of limitations on a misdemeanor had expired CNN legal analyst Elie Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor: Details: here • To get around the statue of limitation for the misdemeanor, Bragg claims that the misdemeanor was committed in the furtherance of a felony, but he refuses to say what felony FNC legal analyst Gregg Jarrett: Alvin Bragg, the [district attorney] claims that Trump falsified records, which is a mere misdemeanor. The statute of limitations expired four years before the indictment. So to get around that, [Bragg] claims that the misdemeanor was committed in the furtherance of a felony, but he refuses to say what felony. He sort of vaguely refers to: “Trump Violated election laws.” OK. What laws? What statutes? Well, Bragg won’t say, because in a federal election he has no authority to prosecute a federal crime. He is a local prosecutor. He has no jurisdiction. So he is sort of cleverly playing ‘hide the crime.’ Details: here • Bragg bootstrapped “a federal election violation onto state law by claiming Trump falsified the business records to conceal campaign finance crimes,” and that the charges were “even more pathetic than anticipated.” Details: here

Experts: The Case is Terrible, Dubious, Baseless, Absurd • 12 Anti-Trump Pundits And Lawmakers Who Think Bragg’s Case Is Terrible Details: here • Experts called case dubious and baseless Details: here, here • GWU law professor Jonathan Turley slammed the case as “absurd” Details: here

Bragg Has No Authority to Enforce Federal Law • New York local DA doesn’t have the authority to enforce federal law Former SCOTUS clerk Chris Landau: Details: here • Bragg Refuses to Say What Election Law Trump Violated, Because He Has No Authority to Prosecute a Federal Crime Legal analyst Gregg Jarrett: Details: here • As a local DA, Bragg has no jurisdiction to pass judgment on federal campaign laws Constitutional lawyer Mark Levin: Details: here

OTHER AUTHORITIES DECLINED TO CHARGE TRUMP • Others declined to charge Trump (SNDY, previous DA, FEC) No other authority — not the federal prosecutors, not the previous Manhattan district attorney, not even the Federal Election Commission (FEC) — thought that what Trump did was unlawful or that it broke any rule. Details: here

DEMOCRATS NOT PROSECUTED • Hillary Clinton was Fined but Trump Indicted for Misreporting Spending Details: here, FEC letter • Hillary Clinton & other Democrats orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 election but were not punished for their Russia-collusion hoax/propaganda Details: here • Democrat John Edwards not convicted on similar case Details: here, here • Biden & Blinken need to be indicted for election inference in 2020 Details: here, here, here

MORE – PART 1: THE JUDGE – PART 2: THE PROSECUTORS & BIDEN – PART 3: THE TRIAL – PART 4: A WEAK CASE

###

This post will be updated later on.

Irregularities in NY v. Trump Trial: The Trial (Part 3)

LIST OF IRREGULARITIES BEHIND THE PROSECUTION OF FORMER PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP Case: New York v. Trump, No. 71543-23

PART 3: THE TRIAL

• Legal expert: We didn’t know is really what he was found guilty of GWU law professor Jonathan Turley said: [T]his case was legally unfounded. When they were reading those guilty verdicts, the one thing that we didn’t know is really what he was found guilty of. Because if you remember, the judge allowed the jury to find guilt on any one of three secondary crimes. We weren’t told whether the jury found any one of those crimes or whether they found all three of those crimes. I’m not too sure we will know that. That’s one of the many issues that I think presents reversible problems in this case. Details: here • Prosecutors never identified an underlying felony to the resurrected misdemeanor bookkeeping charges that had lapsed. – Legal scholars say a defendant’s right to a fair trial and due process is undermined when not having the specific charge they are facing spelled out for them to properly defend. – The judge instructed jurors that they would only have to find that Mr. Trump committed bookkeeping infractions to conceal a campaign finance violation, tax law infraction or the falsification of business records. They didn’t have to agree on what the underlying crime was to find the former president guilty. Details: here, here • The judge told jurors they didn’t have to agree on what the underlying crime was to find the former president guilty. The judge instructed jurors that they would only have to find that Mr. Trump committed bookkeeping infractions to conceal a campaign finance violation, tax law infraction or the falsification of business records. They didn’t have to agree on what the underlying crime was to find the former president guilty. Details: here, here • The judge essentially told jurors that if they’re split on what crime Trump committed, he’d treat that as unanimous. GWU law professor Jonathan Turley: “…Merchan just delivered the coup de grace instruction. He said that there is no need to agree on what occurred. They can disagree on what the crime was among the three choices. Thus, this means that they could split 4-4-4 and he will still treat them as unanimous…” “According to Judge Merchan, the jury could come back with a guilty verdict without agreeing on whether Trump committed election fraud, tax fraud, or falsification of business records. He essentially divided the jury into three groups of four, saying that if they’re split 4-4-4 on what crime Trump committed, he’d treat that as unanimous. To say this is unusual is of course a gross understatement. Details: here, here • CNN legal expert: Prosecution fell way short of proving case against Trump (After closing arguments) Details: here, here • CNN Jake Tapper: Prosecutors have not proved case beyond reasonable doubt (After closing arguments) Details: here, here • Constitutional lawyer Mark Levin: This is a non-case. There is no crime, federal, state, or local. The state misdemeanor having to do with corporate reporting was not violated. The NDA was a legal expense and reported as such. The misdemeanor statue had already run anyway. Details: here, here • Judge placed unconstitutional gag order on Trump only Details: here, Letter from Senator J.D. Vance, here • Judge Merchan warned of arrest if Trump disrupts or skips trial Details: here

MORE – PART 1: THE JUDGE – PART 2: THE PROSECUTORS & BIDEN – PART 4: A WEAK CASE

###

This post might be updated later on.