Read the Trump indictment here


The complete copy of the Trump indictment, unsealed today by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg:


  1. Prepare yourself for what is next (AK is a sovereign nation?) because what we used to know of as the United States is over except the shouting- and hopefully not too much more bloodshed. This indictment is just another signpost along the way.

  2. They are really searching. Did not see anything about not paying the proper state or federal taxes. Nor anything that he would not have entrusted to his accountants or attorneys to handle without a nod. Doesn’t matter how you feel about the man, he is being screwed with intent. Much like our own Ted Stevens. This new level of accountability should be held to everyone.

    • Nothing sticks but “Hell, we’ll give it all we’ve got for now!”…and for the libs reading these comments-just know that Trump will be back stronger and more powerful with each indictment. And yes, we know there will be more.

    • Pretty simple. His criminal law screwing finally caught up with his civil law screwing. He finally screwed himself, like he’s been screwing others for the last 50 years. He will go down in history as America’s biggest loser. Bigger than Nixon.

      • Wow. He has been screwing others for 50 years.
        Yet, over the last eight years, no one alive has been subjected to this level of scrutiny. And, the worst they can come up with is “the entry in the ledger is not in a column titled “Pay off the whore.””
        Trump is either a genius level supercriminal, capable of covering his tracks and leaving behind no evidence, or he is clean. Cannot be both.

  3. So. Invoices from Cohen. Checks paying those invoices. Ledgers (books) altered, as the indictment indicated. The Trump organization basically “cooked the books”. The charges are Class E felonies and can receive 1-5 years imprisonment, each.

    Now the real clown show will start.

    • I’m not reading the indictment as “altered”
      I am reading it more as “not properly classified.”
      Then again, do you know of a business that has a “pay the whore to be quiet” accounting category?

      • Back during the Savings and Loan issues a fellow testified about where the money from his bank had gone and he said they spent $250K on prostitutes and the rest was wasted.

        • Did he properly identify those funds as “Pay the prostitute?” If not, I hope he did not do that in NY State, otherwise DA Bragg will be all over it.
          And, seriously, someone (who is not President Trump) said something more than a decade ago, and for some reason, you consider it relevant?

          • It’s about as relevant as a “pay the whore to be quiet” accounting category CB. And that crisis was back in the 80s and at least some had a sense of humor then.

        • Actually, the “pay the whore” category is relevant. It is the very basis of the indictment. Had the Trump organization listed the payment as “pay off the prostitute so that she will keep her mouth shut.” Bragg would have no case at all.

    • If there were legs to this, why did two (not one, two) different Biden DOJ prosecutors pass on them?

      Simple. They don’t have legs.

  4. It’s official – the United States of America is now a bonafide Banana Republic! No wonder countries around the world are dumping the US dollar as their reserve currency. It only took the putrid carcass in the White House a couple of years to totally destabilize the USA.

  5. Interesting that it took a minority DA, Affirmative Action attorney, to bring charges (felonies, no less), when no previous non-minority DA could find any charges that could be supported by the evidence, or the law. George Soros uses Affirmative Action educated attorneys to do his dirty work, because they can be bought off, and, don’t understand the law well enough to be credible or competent in their work.

  6. Even the President of El Salvador recognizes the US is losing its’ “ Democracy”. We have lost our standing on the world stage.

  7. So the ‘crime’ is paying hush money, correct? Then how come all these charges are from 2017? Everyone already knew about ol stormy by then. Why would anyone pay hush money for an incident the public already knew about? There is no specific crime listed here. Doesn’t that strike anyone else as strange? Just claims of fraudulent business entry made in order to cover another crime. So what WAS that crime?

    • Paul, you need to change your on-screen name to Jethro Tull as you are thick as a brick. Imagine that, a MAGA unable to recognize a conspiracy!

      Suzanne, you may also want to post the Statement of Facts that accompanies the indictment. This may stop Paul’s head from spinning.

      • What, exactly, is the alleged conspiracy? Or is it porn, you’ll know it when you see it.

        Be very specific.

        • Masked Singer, its not that complicated. A conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. Trump and Cohen conspired to violate New York State Election Law (not to mention federal election law) by hiding adverse information from the voting public just prior to the 2016 presidential election. They each committed several other illegal acts in connection with the conspiracy.

    • Paul:
      The crime is “falsifying” the entries in the records.
      Note, the amounts were not “falsified” nor where the person sending the check, or the person receiving the check. But, apparently DA Bragg thinks there should be a column in the Trump organization for “paying off whores.”
      Wonder if he will require every person and company that includes monetary compensation as part of the NDA to list exactly what the money is for. Sue a company for negligence, settle out of court for an undisclosed amount, and the company must list it in their accounting ledgers as “payment of $$$ to Person to settle lawsuit over…” otherwise, that company will be as guilty as Trump is.

    • For example, do you recall a man by the name of Michael Cohen? Well this well intentioned attorney paid hush money to a porn star approximately two weeks before the 2016 presidential election. No it was not paid to hide Trump’s affair from Melania, but to hide the affair from the voting public. Trump’s activities in 2017 was to reimburse Cohen and then commit several crimes in the process. Bragg refers to this as a scheme. MAGA types know it as a conspiracy.

      • What NY state law was broken by paying hush money? This broken law, chapter and line number is supposed to be on the indictment. Bragg cannot file a federal charge, whether he wants to or not, as he is a local DA.

          • For there to be a crime of attempting to cover up a crime, first a crime has to be committed. The indictment (a legal document) listed no original crime. A ‘statement of facts’ is a narrative generated from braggs office and not a legally binding document.

          • Here is a quote from article in The Hill: “Trump on Tuesday pleaded not guilty on all 34 counts, but it’s still not entirely clear what charges Bragg plans to bring.
            Trump’s attorneys must file a bill of particulars in order to get the full scope of Bragg’s claims.”

          • Believe it or not Bill, you nailed the problem. How can an indictment be filed without an original charge/crime? The statement ‘but it’s still not entirely clear what charges Bragg plans to bring’ seems absurdly wrong and looks as if bragg is acknowledging no original crime.

            If you or I were to be brought into court after a grand jury indictment, the particulars would be laid out at that time. Instead we read ‘Trump’s attorneys must file a bill of particulars in order to get the full scope of Bragg’s claims’. If bragg filed charges, why would Trump’s attorneys be forced to file paperwork for a list of those charges.

            Bill, you have to admit that at the very least, this is a completely unhinged case.

          • Paul, evidently you can’t read-the DA listed the charges and according to The Hill, his attorneys must file to get the particulars of those charges. You can bet that the “entirely clear” charges will eventually be specified, but aren’t required at this time. If (big if) Trump’s attorneys have an issue with the 6th amendment you can also bet they will be vocal about it and did you hear of their objection in court?
            Doesn’t seem to be unhinged to me, just you.

          • How can anyone in our ‘justice system’ be charged without specific charges? That’s what’s happening here. They came to Trump with the indictment and told him we are charging you with covering up a crime. And now they won’t say what that crime was. How can you not see that as a problem?

          • This is a courtroom problem (of yours) that Trump’s attorneys were comfortable with Paul. Thus I don’t see it as a problem, either.
            Check with Lakreesha. Heheh!

      • The “well intentioned attorney” you refer to has been shown him to be a pathological liar who was convicted & sentenced to 3 years in prison for financial fraud and tax evasion!

    • The prostitute blabbing about their affair might have impacted the election in November 2016. The non-disclosure agreement was probably struck long before November 2016, but the payment from Michael Cohen came afterward. Then Trump reimbursing Cohen came even later than that.

  8. Falsifying business records in the 1st degree. SO WHAT? Who did it harm? The State of New York? There’s no harm whatsoever, to anyone.
    The crime must show the individual or entity that was harmed, in other words, who is the victim?. The only evidence are some receipts that show disgraced attorney Michael Cohen received money, allegedly to pay off a sleazy woman who gets porked on videos for a living. Any underage child can view her naked *SS getting it on the internet. Two witnesses. A porn POS and a serial lying, disbarred lawyer.
    How can this be a state crime if the money was used contractually for a NDA,…..IF it even occurred? No crime exists.

    • Well DF, it seems that you’ve spent so much time trying to deflect this indictment as so much dependent on “disgraced attorney” and “sleazy woman” that you missed its point. This DA knows what the crime is and will likely prove it beyond a reasonable doubt but the particulars will be left to Discovery.
      As to harm, falsifying business records is a crime in NY and it really depends on the reasons for that falsifying to pinpoint said harm. Could be income tax evasion-who knows?

      • What exactly is the crime? The indictment reads that the fraudulent business entries were made in support of a crime. So what was the crime that was supported?

        • From the statement of facts issued yesterday: “From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects. In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.”

      • Russia collusion, Impeachments, etc. etc. All failures, just like our current administration. There is no case here, just like all the previous accusations. The idea is to broadcast that Trump was arrested and this will be played out until elections.

      • Yankee, if the DA can’t verbalize and articulate the alleged felony with factual specificity, then there is no crime. His indictment looks like it was written by a high school student who used a boiler plate. He’s still looking for a crime. This DA must have been dragged and pulled through law school by his radical left wing law professors. On his own, he is an inarticulate baffoon and doesn’t qualify as an attorney, let alone a DA.
        These law school minority quota standards are going to undo our entire legal system.

        • That’s just not how the justice wheel turns Lakreesha. Heheh!
          Specifics will eventually be articulated, even to your satisfaction, throught “probable cause” and “discovery” IMO. By the way, what is your expertise in these matters? Judge Judy?

          • Because you seem to disparage Lakreesha’s comments if she cannot prove some type of legal training. Even without legal training, the man on the street (and woman on the street, Maureen, lol) can make simple observations. I’m not a trained stylist but I know what a bad haircut looks like.

          • No Paul it’s because she posts bullchit, as in “Yankee, if the DA can’t verbalize and articulate the alleged felony with factual specificity, then there is no crime.”
            And “His indictment looks like it was written by a high school student who used a boiler plate. He’s still looking for a crime. This DA must have been dragged and pulled through law school by his radical left wing law professors.”
            Then she tops it off with “On his own, he is an inarticulate baffoon and doesn’t qualify as an attorney, let alone a DA.” Her entire post was nothing but BS requiring some knowledge of Law Schools and the prosecutorial profession so I asked what expertise she had. Frankly, the only person who would make such comments has none IMO, like you. And all you got is you don’t like the decision-so what?

          • Thank you, Paul. Attorney, with 40 years of practice. I earned it all on my own. Affirmative Action is for whiners who can’t cut it, and fudge on their knowledge of the law. They’ve undercut the profession immensely through erroneous arguments and decisions, and cry racism when taken to the mat. And Btw, I’m a minority.

    • I am not exactly seeing where the indictment demonstrates any falsification at all. So, just grabbing text from the charge I have open in front of me, here is the claim “made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for Donald J. Trump, bearing voucher number 858770, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.”
      But, where is the crime? There is no statement of what the entry said, nor any demonstration of why it was falsified. I guess that will come out in the trial, but so far, I am seeing nothing.
      If the Manhattan DA is going to demand that every Non-Disclosure Agreement payment in the ledger of a business include text about what was supposed to remain undisclosed and why, that kind of negates the commonly used NDAs across business, personal, and legal matters. How many lawsuits are settled for money with a NDA? Is the DA going to require the entry contain the reason for the entry?

      • As was accurately stated here at previous MRAK comments:
        Democrats have a perpetrator, but are still in search of a crime, in search of reliable witnesses, but they finally found a prosecutor who got into law school under Affirmative Action and found a government job in the legal field because he isn’t competent to work in the private sector.
        Americans see through all of this nonsense.
        This is what happens to our justice system when unqualified, Affirmative Action attorneys are unleashed unto the public.
        Complete chaos.

      • See the statement of facts that accompanies the indictment, that will stop your head spinning in tandem with Paul’s.

        You seem to be missing the basic point here. The costs of a NDA related to a personal issue, like paying hush money to shut up a porn star, is always a personal expense, never a business expense. The costs of a NDA related to the Colonel’s secret recipe of seven herbs and spices would be a valid business expense (assuming he didn’t use it to hush up a porn star)!

        • So… a payment to a lawyer for taking care of legal business (paying a NDA settlement) is not a legal expense?

          • Remember here that these payments were done along with Weisselberg, who has also testified on this matter. You want to die on this hill CB? Heheh!

          • Its called a personal legal expense. Nothing to do with any business activity. Much like having your attorney draft your personal will. That is a personal legal expense, absolutely nothing do with a business.

            Now I have seen many businesses pay personal expenses of their shareholders or owners, however, those that act with integrity will not charge those to any expense. They are typically charged to a “Due from Shareholder” account.

      • The DA said those entries were labeled as legal expenses when they know them to be payback to Cohen, etc. for his initial payments to Daniels and another payment to the other woman. The why is given in the “Statement of Facts.”

        • “Trump It” is another wannabe who can’t toot his horn correctly. The legal theory from which the charges are filed doesn’t explain the difference between private money being paid through a confidential third party under a valid NDA and ANY criminal violation which results in harm to a victim. NDAs are valid contracts. Go study Restatement of Contract Law. Trump It, you ain’t got no brains but you are a pretty good talking parrot. Stay in your cage.

          • What valid NDA are you referring to? The one Stormy signed with Cohen was deemed unenforceable by a judge and she was released from it. Did Stormy sign another NDA that was actually VALID as you have indicated?

            You may what to retake the Restatement of Contract Law class again and pay closer attention this time.

            Please try to comment in the correct location next time. I almost missed this gem. Heading back to my cage.

          • Stormy was just ordered to pay Trump for legal expenses BECAUSE she violated the NDA. Means the NDA was legit.

          • All of these far Left-wing, Democrat legal pretenders need to come to my office for therapy. The unauthorized practice of law, even at MRAK, is a crime. Schizophrenia may not be totally curable, but it can be treated as a suppressionable disorder. My office opens at 8:00 am Monday through Friday. I can get you started on Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) medication, followed by group therapy. But please, future TDS patients, don’t recite the law when you know nothing about it.

          • Sorry Paul, Trump actually had to pay her legal fees of $44k when he tried to enforce the NDA. Stormy was ordered to pay Trump’s legal fees of $122k related to her failed defamation suit against him.

            You can look all this up, as ChrissyBobb above noted I am just parroting the internet.

        • Reimbursing your lawyer for money he paid as part of a non-disclosure agreement is not legal expenses?

          • Attorney/client privilege means that the lawyer can’t disclose ANY communications he had with his client. Unless of course, it’s Michael Cohen…….a serial liar, disbarred attorney who has no other means to make a living unless he kisses the asses of Democrats who promise to buy his upcoming book in exchange for falsified witness testimony. Cohen will take the highest bidder. As for Stormy, I watched one of her hundreds of sex videos on the internet. She is about as classless as a woman can get. Mixing Cohen and Stormy Daniels together gets you two witnesses who would serve society better if they get a cell together at Ryker’s Island. The DA’s credibility is less than zero with these two witnesses.

          • Marco, attorney/client privilege doesn’t hold if a crime is involved. You thinking there is no crime here? Heheh!
            Cohen has already spent time in prison for some of this crime.

          • No crime. Only the Democrat DA forcing one, and the ridiculous Democrat judge making an ass of the law……..and himself.

          • “How much experience do you have with these things?”
            Not terribly much. I am not a lawyer, even though I do have some measurable experience with the law, I am still not a lawyer.
            However, there are a lot of legal experts, even the liberal ones that are making it very clear that the expense was not illegal. One of the most outspoken about how ridiculous these charges are is Alan Dershowitz, and liberal Democrat that actually hopes Trump is the 2024 GOP nominee so he can vote against him a third time. He sees nothing in these charges.

  9. The Democrats learned how to destroy an Office Holder, by inflicting an excessive number of frivoless lawsuits by what happened to Governor Sarah Palin, eventually driving her from office. In Trump’s early Primary Campaign he brought her onboard as an advisor. She probably told him about how bad the Media Bias would be, and also about the Frivoless Lawsuits. But nobody could have expected that it could be this bad. I’m goñna send him a hundred bucks, he’s gonna need help from all of us. We lose him, we lose the USA as we Knew it, cuz you can barely recognize it now.. MAGA

  10. Basically it comes to this: a DA trying to gain political cred is attempting to bootstrap a very thin felony charge to a series of past statute misdemeanors.

    It’s an attempt to force the Biden DOJ to do what it has twice passed on doing. Charging Trump on things they know can’t hold up.

    I don’t doubt it can get a conviction in Manhattan. 85% voted Biden. But when it gets to appeal, it will be laughed out of court.

    Saddest part is the left knows this but can’t restrain themselves.

  11. I was not a Trump supporter when he first ran in 2016. There were other Republicans that I thought had a better temperament for office. Now that I have seen the carnage brought to our country by the lunatics on the political left, my opinions about President Trump have changed. I now believe that it is fundamental to the survival of our free republic that President Trump wins reelection in 2024. Should he lose, we would be on the slow painful descent into tyranny. Most free thinkers recognize this fact. Speaking personally, I would crawl over broken glass to vote for Trump again.

  12. Things ignored by the left:

    -an indictment is supposed to tell the person charged what they are charged with. In so many words. Bragg is attempting to create linkage “in furtherance of….? What? It’s not listed, and as such the whole thing is bound to fail.

    -Trump can make a very compelling case for malicious prosecution by Bragg. Bragg ran on going after Trump specifically.

    -the 34 counts are a list of the same alleged offense over and over again.

    -it is not illegal to pay someone hush money, even if the person is running for office.

    In almost any other circumstance this would be tossed out by a reputable judge, the people who wrote it fired, and Bragg disbarred. But since it’s Orange Man, rules and standards be damned.

    This has shown me one thing. The progressives want Trump so badly they are willing to irretrievably damage our system of Justice.

    To call US a banana republic is an insult to Banana Republics.

    • Point #1 is perhaps the most damning of all. First of all it is a clear violation of the 6th Amendment which guarantees the accused “…to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation;”
      Having an indictment that says… this and whatever else we decide later, if needed, is not going to fly in any court.
      The only way Trump gets convicted on any of this is if he gets the John Gotti treatment, where the judge was so fixated on a guilty verdict that he prevented the defense from… well, from actually defending their client.

      • Here is a quote from The Hill on how Trump gets informed CB: “Trump on Tuesday pleaded not guilty on all 34 counts, but it’s still not entirely clear what charges Bragg plans to bring.
        Trump’s attorneys must file a bill of particulars in order to get the full scope of Bragg’s claims.”
        The rest of your post is nothing but gibberish IMO.

        • No one is clear what the charges are there Bill.
          That is why it is a clear 6th amendment violation. Cannot charge someone on squishy charges. Either have a charge, or don’t, and this is another big nothingburger.
          And, I know I am right, and you have nothing because I go the famous Bill Yankee “it’s gibberish.”
          Once again, a loss in Bill’s column

          • CB, this is an old common law practice. Only a small number of states still use it, NY being one of them. Cornell Law defines as follows:

            A bill of particulars is defined as a written itemization of claims in a lawsuit that the defendant may demand of the plaintiff in some situations in order to clarify the details of the claims.

          • Trump-it:
            Did you actually pass the bar exam, or are you more of a Lisa Murkowski-type lawyer?

  13. The charges are the lies in the bookkeeping records used to cover up hush money which in New York are crimes, which when used to commit a crime become felonies. We’ve been lied to so much during the man’s reign that we probably don’t think much about ‘cooking the books’ or any of his chicanery, but every person still has a chance at redemption if they are still alive.

    • Lies in bookkeeping. OK, if an entity is required to clearly state what the payment associated with a non-disclosure agreement is for, and who is receiving it, there is no NDA. And, NDAs happen all the time in business, legal, and personal situations. So… not saying “money to pay off a loudmouth prostitute” in the ledger entry is not a crime.
      Hush money is not a crime in NY either, by the way. In fact, businesses have employees/consultants sign non-disclosure agreements all the time, which will often come with some monetary compensation (hush money).
      Which then leaves, committing, or covering up a crime. Paying someone to keep their mouth shut is not a crime. Lawsuits are often settled with keep silent clauses in the settlement. So… no crime. Perhaps adultery is a crime, well there is no actual proof that Trump committed adultery. It is her word against his. Added bonus, adultery is not a crime in NY.
      So, while the DA can claim the intent was to cover up a crime, I do not see it.

  14. When things get to convoluted, go back to the beginning. So bear with me.

    The original ‘crime’ as is claimed here is that Trump was schtuping Stormy. Can we all agree with that? Two things to think about here. First, no one in the Trump family or organization has said that Don was actually doing the nasty with Stormy. The only ones publicly claiming that, are Stormy and Avenatti. Maybe he was or maybe he didn’t and Stormy was telling him that if he didn’t pay cash, she would go public with the claim. Lots of men/businesses have paid hush money over these things as it would be easier than fighting it in court. High profile people like pro athletes have been targeted like this fairly often. Secondly, if Don was doing Stormy, that in itself is not illegal. The claim has been made here that the hush money was paid to protect the campaign and not the family. Who originally claimed that and what evidence was there to back up this claim? You can’t charge someone with a he said/she said case, it just never happens. There has to be some kind of evidence to support the charge.

Comments are closed.