Retainer v. Reimbursement
And the lack of error makes it a felony
In law school, one of the courses a student can take (beyond the required courses) is a class called Legal Elements.
In Elements, you learn a lot about levels of intent. More importantly, you learn how to the break down the legal requirements of statutes — a rather critical issue when it comes to criminal cases.
Why?
Prosecutors must not simply prove the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but they must prove each and every element of every offense charged beyond a reasonable doubt.
Criminal defense attorneys know this and plea agreements are brokered over basically what might be difficult to prove at trial.
With 34 counts of business record fraud, one would think Donald Trump’s attorneys might have a shot at beating some of the charges.
Unfortunately, the counts are essentially the checks, invoices, and ledger entries. It’s what is called a binary case. Each individual act is a separate violation of the law. Every time a check was signed, a fraudulent invoice was created, and/or a false ledger entry was recorded, the New York Business Record Fraud law was violated.
About the only defense in these cases is to show a lack of knowledge or a lack of intent. Unfortunately for Trump, his micro-management of his affairs (literal and figurative) has been revealed in dozens of exhibits.
At the core of the case is whether payments to Michael Cohen were retainers or reimbursements. If they were retainer payments (as Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche claimed in his opening statement), Donald Trump should and would be acquitted.
But the payments have been shown to be reimbursements. Shown with documents (some of which are directly admitted to by Donald Trump himself).1
Never mind the notion that people might disagree over what the payments were or that Michael Cohen is lying or that there was no intent to hide the the payment to Stormy Daniels, the case against Trump has been made.
That’s not me talking or legal analysts or podcasters’ impressions.
That’s the jury. They seem have nodded supportively at Michael Cohen and avoided even looking at Trump. And Michael Cohen, Donald Trump’s Fixer2, is the hub of Trump’s attempt to quiet a one-night stand with a porn star. And everything went through the Fixer’s hand in one way or another.
The jury likes Michael Cohen. They like Stormy Daniels (who looks like a 45 year old mom at this point in her life). And neither Donald Trump nor his lawyers have done anything to counter that impression.
Take a look. Michael Popok from Legal AF on how the jury is reacting to the trial.
Tomorrow, the court will hear closing arguments.
Watch the attached Legal AF podcast.
Michael Cohen for more than a decade plus had been described as Donald Trump’s “fixer” — a rather odious nom de plume for a personal attorney.