This was a story I had never heard before.
The last time anything remotely similar happened was 150 years ago. It involved a speeding horse and buggy, the thunder of hooves near the White House and a repeat offender who happened to be the president of the United States.
Ulysses S. Grant, who had an eye for spirited horses and an apparent yen to test their mettle, was arrested in 1872 for speeding on a street in Washington, where he had been driving a two-horse carriage. It was the second time in two days that the policeman had stopped the president; the first time, the officer had issued him a warning.
1: Oops! The second paragraph should also be in italics.
I'm also watching the Chicago mayoral election. Pessimistic but fingers crossed.
Apparently Grant was cooperative with the arrest and paid a $20 bond, but never showed up and forfeited the bond. And we only know about it because the (Black) police officer told the story thirty-plus years later.
Wisconsin SCOTUS is critical, but I'm not paying attention to the other elections. I don't live in Chicago, and in the long run one mayor isn't a big deal, so if it's just a spectator sport for me I'd rather watch soccer, it's less agitating.
So, there is precedent for a president skipping bail?
It might be best to keep Trump in jail before trial. He could be a flight risk.
We won't get to see Trump being arraigned, but videocameras will be allowed in the halls as he walks into court, and there will be 5 photographers in the courtroom allowed to take stills before the actual arraignment starts.
How the stills got into the courtroom, they don't know.
Inside a still, the tweets become too dark to bear.
So long as there continues not actually to be any news.
https://www.unhcr.org/news/press/2023/4/642c2fa14/5-years-brazil-relocation-strategy-benefits-100000-venezuelans.html
India wanes.
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/4/3/politics-of-ruin-why-modi-wants-to-demolish-indias-mosques
Congo congoes.
https://apnews.com/article/congo-drc-rwanda-m23-rebels-uganda-bunagana-58787acda1f5ebc0ee2b3de2cbb12491
12 I'm reminded that the genocide of the Uyghurs started with the destruction of mosques and shrines.
All the little bitchy links are me, obvs.
https://phys.org/news/2023-04-kenya-satellite-week.html
Based on Google Maps, Trump could have gotten there faster by subway.
That was how I ended up making my first appearance in court as a baby lawyer. I took the subway, the partner and the client took a limo and got stuck in traffic.
I once took the Metro when I could have expensed a taxi.
I couldn't even expense the cost of the card thing they switched the Metro to.
I have tuned in but all I can see is Mr Miyagi in blurry closeup.
Question. Is lower Manhattan ever but a chaotic scene?
Anyway, 34 seems like many charges.
Darn, I was hoping the charges would be of a range of different things. At least all 34 seem to be felony counts.
I haven't seen text but people on Twitter are saying there are conspiracy counts.
DJT Jr is posting about the judge's kids.
https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-Indictment.pdf
https://www.manhattanda.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Donald-J.-Trump-SOF.pdf
New York indictment langauge is weird. How can someone create a business record "in the County of New York and eleswhere"?
All of the 34 counts are claims that Trump "made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise," all between February and December 2017, after he was President. So apparently they don't include the payments made to Stormy Daniels to keep her quiet in 2016. Or maybe false entries referred to earlier events? Some seem to be payments to Michael Cohen to reimburse fhim for the pre-eleciton payment.
I doubt that Trump "made" any false entries; presumably he caused them. Also doubt that he was in New York County on the vast majority of the dates, and since he was President, that should be easy to figure out.
No allegatiosn of conspiracy. It reads like he did this all by himself, which obviously isn't what happened.
So it's one felony charge per hush money installment cheque? If the installments were intended as a way to evade detection, seems fair to me. What does legal precedent say about this sort of thing in America? No idea myself, maybe someone can explain!
Three or four counts per check -- one for the check and one for each business record reflecting it. But the story is in the statement of facts, which is the second link.
And I think the timing is explained there -- Cohen fronted Trump the money by making the payoffs out of his own pocket, and the crime is Trump paying him back in 2017.
Why the "Lawyer A" form, when the person is known? Is the style to minimize people who aren't accused here or something?
"At the meeting, the AMI CEO agreed to help with the Defendant's campaign, saying that he would act as the "eyes and ears" for the campaign by looking out for negative stories about the Defendant and alerting Lawyer A before the stories were published."
Well, that got my attention. Is it new? It's certainly immoral.
Oh, the Statement of Facts is a separate document. OK, now it makes somewhat more sense. Cohem made a hush money payment in 2016 and expected to be reimbursed. To reimburse him and pay a bonus, Trunmp sent three checks from the Trump Foundation, and nine from his personal accounts, all funnelled through the Trump Organizaiton. each for $35,000. Three false statements with each payment: (1) Cohen sent an invoice falsely requesting a payment for a retainer for one month in 2017, (2) Trump Organizaiton sent him a check for $35,000 falely stating that the payment was for a retainer for one month in 2017, and (3) the Trump Organization entered the payment as a retainer on its books.
No claims of tax fraud, althoug presumably legal expenses are tax deductible and hush money reimbursements aren't. No claim of election law violations, probalby because all of Trump's crimes occurred adfter the electin was over. No payments for anyone ltoehr than Stormy Daniels. All in all kind of disappointing, but possibly sufficient to secure a conviction.
Huh: It talks about Trump's partially public pressure campaign to keep Michael Cohen from flipping, but doesn't charge that as obstruction or anything; is it therefore intended as evidence of knowledge of guilt?
Maximum sentence 4 years per count. #letsgo136
First time offender, he's still gonna walk.
Judges can be influenced by the movements in the cities around them.
No, judges only call balls and strikes, blind to everything except the letter of the law. Unless they are Republican judges.
43: Isn't there a claim of election law violation? It's not spelled out in detail, but the bookkeeping fraud claims need to have been in furtherance of another crime in order to be charged as felonies, and I thought the crime was influencing the election by hushing up the stories. I could be muddled, though -- if that's not the crime, what is?
49: I guess it's the other crime that makes this all rise to the level of felony false entries, as opposed to misdemeanors? If so by implication I suppose the other crime doesn't need to be explicitly stated in the indictment, but they're preparing the groundwork with the key facts for the connection.
It seems like mentioning Trump suggesting he could delay paying Karen MacDougall ("Woman 1") until after the election, at which point there would be no need to pay her at all, is intended as further proof that in his mind these actions were to help his election chances, and therefore hidden campaign expenditures.
Oops, he said that about the payment to Daniels (Woman 2; paragraph 19).
49: there is no reference to any election law in either the indictment or the sttement of facts. All of the counts say, "with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof," but it doesn't say what the cirme or the fraud is. Apparently at the pres conference Bragg said he isn't required to put that in the indictment, but that it really is tax fraud nad election law violations. More evidence of "indictment language is weird."
No, I'm being dumb, I think. The underlying crime isn't some loosey-goosey influencing the election, it's just simply whatever exactly Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to -- election finance and tax fraud.
It's in the statement of facts, but not with a lot of clarity. But read paragraphs 2-4 and then 41-44.
I wonder if Cohen got to expense his non-bribe costs while committing bribery?
And my mother's cousin's husband Bob is right in there as Lawyer C.
TL;DR: where should I fall on the glee to disappointment spectrum?
57: if Trump goes to jail for this (or flees the country, or whatever), I'll be happy. They got Al Capone on tax evasion, after all. Getting him on something more serious would have been nice but would also have a higher risk of activating some conservative on the jury.
Bragg was asked about this issue at his press conference. He said the law "does not require" him to specify the other crime [making it a felony] in an indictment. Bragg also pointed to alleged crimes he described in his remarks including "more additional false statements including statements that were planned to be made to tax authorities."
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/bragg-trump-falsified-business-records-as-part-of-a-larger-illegal-scheme
Trump didn't tear off his human skin costume and proclaim that since he is an alien the charges are invalid, so I was a little disappointed.
Maybe he's waiting for the trial
Johnson, the progressive for Chicago mayor, has been gaining over Vallas with every drop, and is now down only 370 votes! He seems likely to win.
That seems impossible about Johnson. I never saw a reputable poll where he was ahead. I hope it's true though.
Rick Hasen thinks the Trump case in NYC is weak.
I am now thinking that the necessary associated crime might not exactly be the federal crimes Cohen pleaded to, but NYS Election Law 17-152, which makes it a misdemeanor under NYS law to conspire to promote a candidacy by unlawful means. There are all the elements: Trump and Cohen agreed (conspiracy); to promote Trump's candidacy for office (by keeping bad stories about him under wraps); by unlawful means (Cohen's federal crimes). There's a nice clean NYS misdemeanor, and that's what you need to make falsifying business records a felony.
This is still what I want: https://mobile.twitter.com/TheMegSlay/status/1641609004538372096
65: I thought I saw some other nitpicker saying it was a question whether running for president counted under that state law? But whether you win a state's electoral votes is very much under the aegis of the state.
(I don't see how it should be naturally in question whether "in furtherance of another crime" includes federal crimes. Is a crime not a crime?)
63: The public can break for someone late in ways polls can't catch - and I wonder how reliable polls can be at the city level, even for one as big as Chicago.
Johnson is now up 7,100 votes.
And Dave Wasserman calls Wisconsin SC for Dems!!!
Wasserman also just called the Chicago mayoral for Johnson.
I admit to not knowing enough to have an opinion on Chicago.
TIL that there's a black man named "Brandon."
71: Neoliberal, white Dem who was in charge of the schools funded by right wingers loses to charismatic black teachers' union organizer who revived Harold Washington's coalition.
Most schools are funded by right wingers. That's what happens with property taxes.
The size of the Wisconsin victory looks to be gratifying (-10% as of now) but her opponent losy by a similar margin in 2020 so might just be him. Wisconsin's own Doug Mastriano.
75: "It brings me no joy to say this: I wish that in a circumstance like this, I would be able to concede to a worthy opponent. But I do not have a worthy opponent to which I can concede."
Well, hopefully the GOP will continue to nominate folks like him.
TIL that there's a black man named "Brandon."
Moby, that is not what "Dark Brandon" means.
64: Similarly Ian Milllhiser.
Article by Charlie Savage* in the NYT suggests state tax violations as possibly one of the crimes used to elevate.
It is certainly not that clearcut of a thing, but nor are the circumstances. Especially when you include tha various Barr directed ratfucks and meddling in the Federal case and investigations (see emptywheel https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/03/31/trump-has-attempted-to-cover-up-that-he-cheated-to-cover-up-cheating-in-2016-at-least-six-times/ and Geoffrey Berman's book).
And actually one if the most infuriating parts of the massive coverage is how very little of it even hints at that context (which per recent Cy Vance revelations extended to pressure on NY officials). Haberman and Swan did a whole thing on Barr's reaction without even mentioning his prior involvement. Insane Clown Press.
*Savage is generally quite good, and seems to leaven the PR hackishness of Haberman/Swan/Schmidt with some actual legal analysis on any byline he shares with them.
If i'm counting right Peter Baker has chimed in 3 times:
Can the country survive the divisiveness of the indictment?
Trump "flourishing" earlier this week.
Trump dominating media, Biden reduced to sideline (w/Schmidt).
Article by Charlie Savage* in the NYT suggests state tax violations as possibly one of the crimes used to elevate.
Right, that makes sense. Even though Cohen was only prosecuted for federal tax fraud, it's hard to commit federal tax fraud without simultaneously committing state tax fraud.
Because TurboTax includes one state return for free.
75: Swings in other races since February are toward the Dems, including +4% versus 2020 in a Wisconsin state senate special election yesterday: https://twitter.com/ECaliberSeven/status/1643474291655168002
83: Additionally, as rural Wisconsin gets redder, you can see the "WOW Counties" -- including critical Waukesha county -- start to get bluer as educational sorting slowly takes hold in white flight suburbs. Kelly got 58% of the vote in Waukesha last night, vs Prosser winning 74-26[1] in 2011.
[1] I remember in 2011 following along on Twitter when it seemed like liberals had flipped the SC seat, only for the Waukesha County clerk to announce an additional 7000 votes discovered two days later. (Unlike Alabama, where I think shady shit happened to Don Siegelman, I think this was legitimately incompetence on the part of the county clerk rather than election fraud, but still.)
Nice to see basically the whole Driftless Area back to voting Democratic. It's one of the more interesting small-scale geographical features of US politics, and I was sad that it looked like it was going away in the general movement of all rural regions to become way more republican.
I too read weird geological articles on Wikipedia.
in the general movement of all rural regions to become way more republican
Was the Wisconsin victory down to rural voters in any real sense, though? I haven't looked closely at a breakdown but I would assume it's mostly gains in the suburbs and possibly urbs.
I know about the Driftless Area from reading Virgil Flowers novels. Entertaining AND geologically informative!
There is a quirky little movie titled Driftless Area. Based on a book by that name by Tom Drury who seems to have written several books set in the area (he is from the Iowa part). Been meaning to read one.
My father is from a hardscrabble county just NE of the driftless area. Not driftless per se but not nice fertile WI either. Sand, marsh and bluffs. It has not moved back to slightly D as it was prior to 2016, but was closer (44-56).
I found Virgil to be trying, so I only read the one book and part of a second.
My dad lived in Milwaukee from August 1949 through May 1950. I don't know how he felt about the geography.
There is a strong implication in the name of "the last time something interesting happened in this specific area was the last major glaciation episode, when nothing happened in this specific area".
87: I'm not saying this is important, only that it cheered me up because it's a fun bit of geography.
I took the Wisconsin vote by county and divided them up by this urban/rural designation list, then divided Milwaukee and Dane alone out of the "urban" to be their own category, and compared to the 2020 supreme court election. Since the total margin was about the same (even the Republican candidate was the same), it should allow for some analysis of more sociological trends.
Milwaukee and Dane went from D+49% to D+55%. That combined with a healthy turnout increase gave 68k more of a vote margin to the Dem.
The other "urban" (presumably most are more suburban in common parlance) counties went from R+2.4% to R+2.3%. They also saw an increase in turnout almost as big as in Milwaukee/Dane, but the close split meant they only grew the R margin by 2.6k votes.
The rural counties went from R+3% to R+7%. Turnout increased by a little less than in the urban counties, improving R margin by 21k votes.
So a similar sorting picture as in other parts of the country, I think.
Then I tried breaking out by this map of regions, but again excluded Milwaukee and Dane counties from the regions shown as they tend to swamp out other trends. The Western and Southern regions went Dem, Southeast more Dem than in 2020, Western less; the other three regions R, and more R than in 2020, although all swings were in single digit percentages.
The other "urban" (presumably most are more suburban in common parlance) counties went from R+2.4% to R+2.3%. They also saw an increase in turnout almost as big as in Milwaukee/Dane, but the close split meant they only grew the R margin by 2.6k votes.
The D margin?
I guess it could still be an R margin.
No, the absolute R margin increased. 2.3% vs 2.4%, but of a larger base.
The overall margin at the moment seems exactly the same as in 2020 against Kelly (D+10.5%).
Obviously Dobbs plays a role, but it also seems yet to be proved that the new emphasis on transphobia is helping the GOP with anyone but the reliable base?
98: It seems to have made Jon Chait a little more open to new ideas.
My brother lives in the Driftless Area. Voted blue, I'm sure, though he does have annoying impulses toward Buttigiegism.
That's exactly what you expect in the Driftless Area! There's a reason Buittgieg won Iowa, and won all the counties in Iowa next to Wisconsin.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/02/04/us/elections/results-iowa-caucus.html
Iowa is full of dumbasses who clog Omaha to steal jobs and then crawl back to their lower-tax hovels after having exploited the infrastructure and economy others created.
Yeah, there is a certain strain of Midwestern Dems that just love the guy.
They love any secretary of transportation.
In čase anyone's interested in Chicago election detail, from an alderwoman disliked by the police union:
https://twitter.com/rossanafor33/status/1643750056951189506?s=21