False. There is solid evidence that Cohen committed Federal campaign fraud. He was charged and convicted in Federal court.
Cohen's conviction is not based on opinion. It's based on facts and evidence presented to the Federal court. The court is not allowed to accept a guilty plea unless the evidence supports such a conviction and both the Defense and Prosecution agree to the facts presented PRIOR to the guilty plea being accepted.
That is correct. And Mr. Cohen made an argument as to how and why he violated federal campaign law.
And the prosecutor and the court agreed.
But... Mr. Trump is allowed to argue why Cohens argument is false.
And if it is indeed false, then there is insufficient evidence to say that Mr. Trump intentionally falsified documents with intent to defraud in order to conceal another crime.
Correct, and the Cohen/Pecker/Conspiracy shows intent for Cohen to commit Federal campaign fraud.
Nothing to do with Trump.
Just because Mr. Cohen and Mr. Pecker both said they were in a criminal conspiracy with Mr. Trump, it doesn't mean Mr. Trump was in such a conspiracy.
Evidence was presented at trial showing Trumps intent to break the law with the conspiracy to hide/aid in Cohen's Federal crime. The prosecution demonstrated intent.
But since an NDA is legal, and there is no federal requirement to report it as a campaign expenditure, it doesn't matter his intent.
No federal law was broken.
Thus, no state law can be broken.
That Mr. Cohen and Mr. Pecker thought there was a federal law broken doesn't change anything with respect to Mr, Trump.
Perhaps the feds would not have charged Mr. Cohen had he indicated that that he would contest the charges (he pled guilty here to get a reduced sentence for the tax crimes he had engaged in).
Perhaps Mr. Pecker was being overly cautious.
The feds, after all, never actually charged Mr. Trump, either civilly or criminally, for federal election law violations.
There is not argument under State law that a Federal crime that has resulted in a conviction didn't happen. Cohen's conviction is the Federal crime that Trump attempted to hide/aid in.
No it's not "reasonable", Cohen's Federal conviction is prima facia evidence that such crime DID occur.
Yep-- its evidence that Mr. Cohen broke the law.
But-- Mr. Trump was on trial here, not Cohen.
Mr. Trump counter to that evidence is that federal election law requires intent, and that an NDA doesn't violate the election law.
Thus, Mr. Trump could not have conspired to violate New York state law because he had no intention for Mr. Cohen to commit a crime.
Agreed, Cohen and Pecker don't control that.
Federal prosecutors, the Federal Grand Jury, and the Federal judge DO get to control whether Cohen committed a crime. That is not "opinion" that is established fact.
There was no jury for Mr. Cohen. He pled guilty violating the FECA in exchange for a reduced sentence on the tax charges he faced.
And it is indeed the opinion of these prosecutors and judges as to whether Mr. Cohen had committed a crime (he after all volunteered). Others might present better and stronger arguments.
But the feds chose NOT to proceed against Mr. Trump, as they were well aware he would contest their claims.
Pecker wasn't an "opinion" of his own either. Once his lawyers found out about it they advised him to stop and to enter into an agreement to testify not to be prosecuted for his actions.
Peckers lawyers are not experts in the field of campaign finance law.
Perhaps there would have been no charges filed (Trump after all was not charged).
Maybe Mr. Pecker would have beaten the charges had they been filed.
Or perhaps the lawyers simply advised its not worth taking the chance.
Either way, its a legal opinion about the FECA law.
And, as we know, Mr. Trump was not permitted to present an opinion that the concerns of Peckers lawyers were inflated.
Cohen's crime wasn't used to prove Trump's actions were a crime. Cohen's conviction was used as the crime Trump was attempting to hide/aid in.
And as per the state law, there has to be an intent to do so (along with an effort to defraud).
But if Mr. Trump did not commit a campaign law violation by his actions (and the feds do not say he did) then he can't have committed a state violation of the law.
Cohen saying Trump did doesn't control.