How can President Trump be charged with a crime that is a misdemeanor that supposedly happened past the statute of limitations? ?

[exitseven]

Many legal scholars explain that what Trump is being charged with happened past the statute of limitations. In other works it is not even legal to hold a trial for it.

[Red_Arrow]

REPUTABLE legal scholars go the other way. We already know that he paid Stormy Daniels hush money. No charge for that, but when he reimbursed his lawyer for handling it, Trump recorded the payment to Stormy as legal fees. Only an idiot would try that, and he is one. With all that was recorded, he is being charged with 34 counts of fraud under campaign finance laws.

For his illegal attempts to overturn the election results of the 2020 election, he has been charged with four criminal counts, including conspiracy to defraud the US and conspiracy against the rights of citizens.

Trump and others are being charged with criminally conspiring to overturn his very narrow defeat in the state of Georgia in the 2020 election.

The huge racketeering investigation, led by Georgia prosecutor Fani Willis, was sparked in part by a leaked phone call in which the former president asked the state's top election official to "find 11,780 votes".

Mr Trump was hit 13 criminal counts, subsequently reduced to 10. They include one alleged violation of Georgia's Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (Rico).

There are also charges of mishandling classified documents for his taking of those documents when the law requires them to remain in the archives, plus claiming they had all been returned when the FBI took some, but did not find the majority of documents which were hidden in Mar-A-Lago.

The majority of the counts are for the willful retention of national defense information, which falls under the Espionage Act.

There are then eight individual counts, which include conspiracy to obstruct justice, withholding a document or record and making false statements.

None are misdemeanors and none are past the statutes of limitations.

Plus many, many civil lawsuits.

[exitseven]

The One in New York today was for a misdemeanor that Trump supposedly committed in 2016. In New York that statute of limitations generally expres from one to 6 years. Unless your last name is Trump apparently.

[Red_Arrow]

The one in New York today is the start of the trial where he is charged with 34 counts of fraud under campaign finance laws. Not just one charge and felony counts not misdemeanor. The hook up was in 2006, and the law violations were after that. And the statute of limitations is not expired for these crimes. And the only thing about the last name of Trump that is important is that he thinks he can do anything and get away with it. When he came out of court today he tried to blow off the whole thing, but one could see he was so pissed that he made a quick statement, followed by a quick get away.

[Soteris]

I have not heard of any legal scholars that claims Trump is being charged for any crimes past the statute of limitations. All the crimes that has been revealed in court has to my knowledge been within the time limit. Furthermore there has been theories that the statute of limitations could even be suspended in certain cases for bureaucratic reasons but this is just academic since so far it does not apply to any of the cases in the first place.

In other words, what you are saying makes no sense since the statute of limitations does not apply to any known charges of Trumps cases.

[exitseven]

Google Jonathan Turley and Alan Dershowittz. They will explain it to you

[Soteris]

Very well. The only connection with Jonathan Turley I found with a quick google search is in regards to his theory that Alvin Bragg is trying to bootstrap a misdemeanor charge into a felony in the Manhattan case.
https://www.foxnews.com/video/6323742583112

This is first of all speculation since I dont think we actually know the charges in this case and secondly would have to be ruled on in the case if it can be brought forward or not, in which case it would not be outside the statute of limitations and entirely legal.

Regarding Alan Dershowittz:
podcasts.apple.com/.../id1531775772

Listening to what he says he is also just speculating on what is in the case. Which we dont know. And I did not find anything particularly interesting that he contributed to the conversation. Nothing these two has said has anything to do with my argument nor does it change my position. At best they are speculating, at worst they are arguing semantics, either way its not particularly persuasive.

[sage2021]

The message here is if it can happen to Trump, it can happen to anyone.

We all know this is so wrong and shouldn't be happening and for the life of me I can see how they are getting away with doing this to him when it's so illegal to do it in the first place.

7 what do you think about which political side the jury is going to be made up of? Just because of them he could go to jail.

[exitseven]

The population overwhelmingly voted for Biden 2 to1. The probability will be high that the jury will be packed with democrats.

[ApplePie409]

They know the charges won't stick, this is just about election interference, which is a federal crime.

[Lliam]

Fanatical Democrats will do anything to tar his reputation and cost him money in legal battles. They are taking him to court for things that no one else would ever be tried for.
This isn't about justice, it's about keeping him from winning the election.

[b_lova]

You should probably listen to legal scholars that are not on right wing news media too. Since most major media outlets are biased one way or the other none of them will give you the whole truth. Both sides make a compelling argument for why and why not, but I'm this instance the State of New York has decided to follow through with the charges.

Keep in mind that Trump is a New Yorker, born and bread, and been both a Republican and Democrat. Is this retaliation for something he has done... maybe, but I think this is just all the shady stuff he has done in his lifetime catching up.

[jshm2]

The key word is "supposedly" as all the cases so far suggest they haven't.

But in case you were living under a rock, Trump was president at one time. Hence all cases against him (yes there were cases outstanding before he became president as well) were paused as a result.

The statute clock does not run when the defendant is in such positions. We still don't know what cases Trump pardoned himself from as president. But everyone is piling in now before the election to ensure he doesn't pardon himself from more if he gets the chance.

That could really put the cat among the pigeons.

[Avicenna]

Each case brought against Trump has been done using forum shopping and carefully manipulated grand jury pools as well as severe misapplication of laws. They want to get Trump so badly that they have shown everyone how corrupt, unethical and rights-violating they are.

[msc545]

All of your prevariacations and delusions make no difference at all.

[exitseven]

The only verdict I really care about will be on Nov 5th

[Jamie05rhs]

@exitseven You mean like Nov. 8th (or 9th, or 10th, or 11th, or 12th.). When they finally finish counting those mail-in ballots.

[exitseven]

@Jamie05rhs Yes, I suppose that is true.

[spartan55]

Everyone forgets how Trump has been a con man come criminal since the 80's.

[Iron_Man]

Democratic lawmakers and judges. will do whatever it takes to put him down to put a stop to Donald Trump so he doesn’t become president.

[Dargil]

New York converted a Misdemeanor to a Felony to escape the statute of limitations. SCOTUS may blow this away when it gets to them. The purpose of this lawfare is to distract Trump and his voters and to bankrupt Trump.

[HighValue]

When it comes to democrats, the actual laws don't matter. They violate the law and constitution frequently and intentionally.

[dustybiker2]

Same could be said of either side in all honesty.

[HighValue]

Not even close. Only dishonest people would claim that, especially after the last few years.

[dustybiker2]

It's truth. Not wanting an argument. But as someone who removed themself from politics tiring of the modern changes, will say you have a clearer view from the sidelines. Not impressed with any side.

[JacobJordan]

If the situation was started before statute of limitations ran out then until they are dismissed in court the case remains live indefinitely.

[888theGreat]

It is called changing the law to convict a person you don't like and are afraid of. Like Democratic Judges did in 2020 election on election day.

[slatyb]

Which charge? Falsifying business records? He's been charged with multiple felony counts.

[Anonymous]

You haven’t been reading the New Your Post by any chance, have you?
lol It’s funny how fast these talking point get passes around.

[DextroShade]

The courts in New York are corrupt beyond belief; most of the judges and DAs there should die in prison.

[DrPepper12]

Which crime? Which trial? He's got 4 going on you know...

[Snakeyes7]

With the magic of commies, anything is the worst thing ever so long as it happens to the establishment.

[Abbycado]

He can’t, to my knowledge. Source?

[DryGermanGuy]

Trump himself. Including his vivid descriptions of "tears rolling down their faces" and bemoaning with "Sir, Siiir, how can you take this?"

[Abbycado]

@DryGermanGuy is just like a legal source. I probably won’t understand it. I’d still like one.

[DryGermanGuy]

There is none, is what I am trying to say. None reputable, for certain. Have you ever noticed the large delta between what Trump's legal entourage is babbling into the microphones of the media and what they are daring to say in front of a judge? The reason for that is, spouting these lies in a courtroom has consequences. Or as the joke goes, MAGA stands for "Make Attorneys Get Attorneys".

[exitseven]

This is from NY Civil Statute of Limitations
". Depending on the type of case or procedure, New York's statutes of limitations generally range from one (1) year to six (6) years. The point at which the clock starts ticking is typically the date of the incident or discovery of a wrong."
The alleged crime took place in 2016 which is seven years ago.
www.findlaw.com/.../...te-of-limitations-laws.html

[DryGermanGuy]

@Abbycado was asking for a direct quote from one of those mysterious "many legal scholars", as you very well know.
By the way, the second part of your law quote should give you some insight:
"The point at which the clock starts ticking is typically the date of the incident or discovery of a wrong."

[exitseven]

@DryGermanGuy The date of the alleged incidence was in 2016. That I think was 7 years ago.

[DryGermanGuy]

Right! And the date of discovery by investigators/prosecutors waaas?

[dustybiker2]

@DryGermanGuy exactly..

[exitseven]

@DryGermanGuy. This payment supposedly was made in 2016 . That was 7 years ago. Fat Alvin is making this up as he goes along.

[DryGermanGuy]

@exitseven
The discoveries of those crimes were in 2021 during the financial investigations into the Trump Organization.
Confusing these two dates would be a mistake for lawyers like Alina Habba to make, not the NYDA. You’re really grasping at straws here.

[KrakenAttackin]

Because law means nothing to leftists.