The left's viewpoint:
A Surprise Accusation Bolsters a Risky Case Against Trump The unsealed indictment against former President Donald Trump on Tuesday laid out an unexpected accusation that bolstered what many legal experts have described as an otherwise risky and novel case: Prosecutors claim he falsified business records in part for a plan to deceive state tax authorities.
For weeks, observers have wondered about the exact charges Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg would bring. Accusing Trump of bookkeeping fraud to conceal campaign finance violations, many believed, could raise significant legal challenges. That accusation turned out to be a major part of Bragg’s theory — but not all of it.
Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times
“Pundits have been speculating that Trump would be charged with lying about the hush-money payments to illegally affect an election, and that theory rests on controversial legal issues and could be hard to prove,” said Rebecca Roiphe, a New York Law School professor and former state prosecutor.
“It turns out the indictment also includes a claim that Trump falsified records to commit a state tax crime,” she continued. “That’s a much simpler charge that avoids the potential pitfalls.”
The indictment listed 34 counts of bookkeeping fraud related to Trump’s reimbursement in 2017 to Michael Cohen, his former lawyer and fixer...............
..................But bookkeeping fraud is normally a misdemeanor. For it to rise to a felony, prosecutors must show that a defendant intended to commit, aid or conceal a second crime — raising the question of what other crime Bragg would contend is involved.
On Tuesday, Bragg suggested that prosecutors are putting forward multiple theories for the second crime, potentially giving judges and jurors alternative routes to finding that bookkeeping fraud was a felony.
As was widely predicted, he is pointing toward alleged violations of both federal and state elections laws. By doing so, he is in part plunging forward with a premise that has given pause to even some of Trump’s toughest critics.
As a matter of substance, it can be ambiguous whether paying off a mistress was a campaign expenditure or a personal one.
As a matter of legal process, to cite federal law raises the untested question of whether a state prosecutor can invoke a federal crime even though he lacks jurisdiction to charge that crime himself. Still, Article 175 does not say that the second intended crime must be a state-law offense.......................
https://www.yahoo.com/news/surprise-accusation-bolsters-risky-case-113626001.html
