Connect with us

Published

on

The much-awaited charges against Donald Trump show Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg (D) plans to largely rest on campaign laws to prosecute the former president for obscuring his reimbursement of hush money payments.

But sprinkled into charging documents and public statements from Bragg are references to tax law violations — a sign New York prosecutors may be hedging their bets by bringing a broader case against the former president.

Trump was charged on 34 felony counts during his arraignment Tuesday, each stemming from an arrangement Trump made with fixer Michael Cohen after he made a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels.

The case is built on falsification of business records charges, with prosecutors arguing the “unlawful scheme” violated election laws.

“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,” Bragg’s office wrote in a statement of facts accompanying the bare bones indictment.

Hush money payments are not illegal, but when Trump reimbursed Cohen for the payoff, the funds were characterized as legal expenses.

Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor under New York law, one that can be bumped to a felony when done to obscure another crime.

The financial crimes that serve as the underlying basis for Trump’s prosecution are what Bragg referred to as the “bread and butter” of his office, located in the financial capital of the world.

But in hanging much of the case on election laws, Bragg delves into more complex territory, one that requires demonstrating the payments were made in an effort to influence the election as well as grappling with Trump’s status as a federal candidate in the state-level prosecution.

Bragg outlined two voting statutes he alleges Trump violated.

“The scheme violated New York election law, which makes it a crime to conspire to promote a candidacy by unlawful means. The $130,000 wire payment exceeded the federal campaign contribution cap,” he said.

Bragg’s choice of state law is a telling one. In choosing that statute, the prosecutor sidestepped other options under New York law, including those dealing with state campaign finance violations that may have problematic language when it comes to dealing with a federal candidate.

Meanwhile, exceeding campaign contribution limits, a federal crime, is the same crime Cohen pleaded guilty to, one that will require showing the spending was done to influence the election.

Trump’s attorneys have already begun to counter both. Todd Blanche, defense attorney for former President Trump, leaves Manhattan criminal court April 4 in New York. Trump appeared in a New York City courtroom on charges related to falsifying business records in a hush money investigation, the first president ever to be charged with a crime. (AP Photo/Yuki Iwamura)

They’ve argued the payout to Daniels via Cohen was not to win the election, but rather save Trump’s marriage by burying the story of a sexual encounter he denies. And they’ve said that the state doesn’t have the power to prosecute Trump, a federal candidate, on either state or federal charges, asserting that such charges would have to come from a federal prosecutor.

“We’re not going to get to a jury… I think this case is going to fall on its merits, on legal challenges well before we get to a jury,” Trump attorney Joe Tacopina said in a Wednesday morning interview on NBC News.

Bragg does appear to have evidence Trump saw the payout through the lens of the election. Trump allegedly told Cohen, according to paraphrasing of the conversation detailed in court documents, that “if they could delay the payment until after the election, they could avoid paying altogether, because at that point it would not matter if the story became public.”

Norm Eisen, counsel for Democrats in Trump’s first impeachment, has encouraged Bragg to bring charges under both federal and state election laws.

“Look, it can’t be that Donald Trump lives in some special universe when neither state nor federal campaign law applies to him. It has to be that one or the other applies, and I don’t think that a judge is going to buy into that Catch-22,” he told The Hill.

But Bragg implied there may be more charges to the case.

The statement of facts notes that Trump’s organization inflated payments to Cohen to account for the taxes the fixer would have to pay on what was being reported as income rather than a reimbursement. 

“If Trump knows about that, was aware of that, and approved of the falsification of the records in order to conceal the hush money payments and in order to allow Michael Cohen to get a full repayment for the hush money payments he had made, then the tax violation here — offering a false instrument for filing — is in fact one of the crimes that is being covered up through the falsification of business records,” said Josh Stanton, an attorney with Perry Guha who has penned analyses of Bragg’s case. 

The documents say Trump and others “mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme,” but when asked to elaborate, Bragg declined.

“I’m not going to go beyond the plain language in the statement of facts, we think it speaks for itself,” he said in a press conference with reporters just after Trump’s arraignment concluded.

Eisen said the tax statute does give Bragg additional options as he builds his case. Attorneys aren’t expected in court again until December on the matter.

“The DA is notifying Trump and all of us this may be an issue that he will litigate at trial. You know, it’s very common for prosecutors to cast a broad net and then to focus in on their case,” Eisen said.

“Think of it this way. There’s two campaign finance [violations]. There’s state campaign finance violations; federal campaign finance violations — that’s belt and suspenders. This is an additional possibility. Think of it as belt, suspenders, and duct tape. He’s taking no chances on holding up his case, and there’s nothing wrong with that.”

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.

“They do not have to specify the crime at this juncture; they will have to down the road. And the best way to read the sprinkling of the reference to potential tax violation is that they are clearly reserving the right to use that state tax statute as a third way of elevating what would ordinarily be a misdemeanor into a felony,” said Jeff Robbins, a former prosecutor now in private practice.

The dozens of charges reflect each of the checks that Trump signed to Cohen, at least nine of which he signed directly. 

Stanton noted it’s not unusual for prosecutors to hold back on some elements of their case. House GOP probe into Trump indictment spurs new battle Trump’s New York legal drama: What’s next

“This is a lot of counts, but it’s really a simple indictment: Trump is charged with falsifying business records in his repayments to Michael Cohen through 11 checks in 2017, including nine he signed personally,” he said. 

“The detailed Statement of Facts makes plain that Bragg is pursuing both campaign finance violations, as well as tax offenses to bump up the charges to felonies. He need not say that outright in the indictment. Indeed, that’s normal.” 

Updated at 5:36 p.m.

Continue Reading

Business

Post Office scandal: Victims say government’s control of redress schemes should be taken away

Published

on

By

Post Office scandal: Victims say government's control of redress schemes should be taken away

Post Office scandal victims are calling for redress schemes to be taken away from the government completely, ahead of the public inquiry publishing its first findings.

Phase 1, which is due back on Tuesday, will report on the human impact of what happened as well as compensation schemes.

“Take (them) off the government completely,” says Jo Hamilton OBE, a high-profile campaigner and former sub-postmistress, who was convicted of stealing from her branch in 2008.

“It’s like the fox in charge of the hen house,” she adds, “because they were the only shareholders of Post Office“.

“So they’re in it up to their necks… So why should they be in charge of giving us financial redress?”

Jo Hamilton OBE, a high-profile campaigner and former sub-postmistress
Image:
Nearly a third of Ms Hamilton’s life has been dominated by the scandal

Jo and others are hoping Sir Wyn Williams, chairman of the public statutory inquiry, will make recommendations for an independent body to take control of redress schemes.

The inquiry has been examining the Post Office scandal which saw more than 700 people wrongfully convicted between 1999 and 2015.

More on Post Office Scandal

Sub-postmasters were forced to pay back false accounting shortfalls because of the faulty IT system, Horizon.

At the moment, the Department for Business and Trade administers most of the redress schemes including the Horizon Conviction Redress Scheme and the Group Litigation Order (GLO) Scheme.

The Post Office is still responsible for the Horizon Shortfall scheme.

Lee Castleton OBE, a victim of the Post Office Horizon scandal
Image:
Lee Castleton OBE

Lee Castleton OBE, another victim of the scandal, was bankrupted in 2007 when he lost his case in the civil courts representing himself against the Post Office.

The civil judgment against him, however, still stands.

“It’s the oddest thing in the world to be an OBE, fighting for justice, while still having the original case standing against me,” he tells Sky News.

While he has received an interim payment he has not applied to a redress scheme.

“The GLO scheme – that’s there on the table for me to do,” he says, “but I know that they would use my original case, still standing against me, in any form of redress.

“So they would still tell me repeatedly that the court found me to be liable and therefore they only acted on the court’s outcome.”

He agrees with other victims who want the inquiry this week to recommend “taking the bad piece out” of redress schemes.

“The bad piece is the company – Post Office Limited,” he continues, “and the government – they need to be outside.

“When somebody goes to court, even if it’s a case against the Department for Business and Trade (DBT), when they go to court DBT do not decide what the outcome is.

“A judge decides, a third party decides, a right-minded individual a fair individual, that’s what needs to happen.”

Pic: AP
Image:
Pic: AP

Mr Castleton is also taking legal action against the Post Office and Fujitsu – the first individual victim to sue the organisations for compensation and “vindication” in court.

“I want to hear why it happened, to hear what I believe to be the truth, to hear what they believe to be the truth and let the judge decide.”

Neil Hudgell, a lawyer for victims, said he expects the first inquiry report this week may be “really rather damning” of the redress claim process describing “inconsistencies”, “bureaucracy” and “delays”.

“The over-lawyeringness of it,” he adds, “the minute analysis, micro-analysis of detail, the inability to give people fully the benefit of doubt.

“All those things I think are going to be part and parcel of what Sir Wynn says about compensation.

“And we would hope, not going to say expect because history’s not great, we would hope it’s a springboard to an acceleration, a meaningful acceleration of that process.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

June: Post Office knew about faulty IT system

A Department for Business and Trade spokesperson said they were “grateful” for the inquiry’s work describing “the immeasurable suffering” victims endured.

Their statement continued: “This government has quadrupled the total amount paid to affected postmasters to provide them with full and fair redress, with more than £1bn having now been paid to thousands of claimants.

“We will also continue to work with the Post Office, who have already written to over 24,000 postmasters, to ensure that everyone who may be eligible for redress is given the opportunity to apply for it.”

Continue Reading

Politics

MP recalls childhood abuse as he calls for law change to make domestic abuse a specific criminal offence

Published

on

By

MP recalls childhood abuse as he calls for law change to make domestic abuse a specific criminal offence

An MP who decided until recently to “never speak” about the abuse he suffered as a child has shared his harrowing story so that “no kid has to go through” what he did.

Josh Babarinde describes being physically abused by his mother’s former partner from the age of four, and remembers crying himself to sleep under the covers “hearing shouts, hearing screams and things smash”.

He says he became hypervigilant growing up and felt safe at school but “like he was treading on eggshells” in his own home.

The Eastbourne MP, who is also the Liberal Democrats’ justice spokesperson, says his experience has driven his politics. He is calling on the government to stop abusers “slipping through the net” and being released from prison early.

Opening up about his story in his twenties was “difficult” but looking back, Mr Babarinde says, he is “so proud of the resilience of that kid”.

The MP recently found his childhood diary containing Star Wars drawings alongside an entry he wrote from the bathroom. The diary, he recalls, wrote: “I’m really going to try to go (to the toilet) but I can’t. Oh my goodness, I’m gonna be in so much trouble, I’m going to get smacked so hard.”

Then an entry five minutes later: “I still haven’t done anything, I’m going to be in so much trouble.”

More from Politics

He says reading the entry reminded him of how “helpless” he felt.

“It was mortifying,” he says. “An abuser takes away your sense of self-worth.”

Josh Babarinde speaking to Sky's Ali Fortescue.
Image:
Mr Babarinde says he wants the government to ‘properly recognise domestic abuse crimes in the law’

The 32-year-old is calling on the government to change the law to make domestic abuse a specific criminal offence. The change would mean, he argues, abusers can no longer effectively disguise their history under other offences like assault.

He says the Ministry of Justice’s early release scheme, which has seen thousands of prisoners released early to ease overcrowding, has failed to exclude domestic abusers despite government promises because there is no formal categorisation for offenders.

It is impossible, he argues, to know exactly how many domestic abusers are in prison currently so perpetrators are “slipping through the net” on early release.

Read more from Sky News:
Remembering the bravery of 7/7 victims and responders 20 years on
Met Police chief calls for ‘mega’ forces in push for shake-up

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

January: Rising violence against women and girls

Mr Babarinde says the uncertainty means victims and survivors are not able to prepare for their abuser’s release.

He said: “They might need to move house or move their kids to a new school, shop in different places. All of these kind of things are so important, and so that’s why that commitment the government made was so important.”

A spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice said: “Our thoughts are with all victims of domestic abuse – it takes immense courage to speak out.

“We are building a justice system that puts victims first – strengthening support, increasing transparency, and giving people the confidence to come forward and be heard.”

Continue Reading

Environment

CNBC Daily Open: Most people don’t start a political party after separation

Published

on

By

CNBC Daily Open: Most people don't start a political party after separation

US President Donald Trump, right, and Elon Musk, chief executive officer of Tesla Inc., during a news conference in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, US, on Friday, May 30, 2025.

Francis Chung | Bloomberg | Getty Images

When they find themselves without a significant other, most men finally start living: They pay attention to their personal grooming, hit the gym and discover new hobbies.

What does the world’s richest man do? He starts a political party.

Last weekend, as the United States celebrated its independence from the British in 1776, Elon Musk enshrined his sovereignty from U.S. President Donald Trump by establishing the creatively named “American Party.”

Few details have been revealed, but Musk said the party will focus on “just 2 or 3 Senate seats and 8 to 10 House districts,” and will have legislative discussions “with both parties” — referring to the U.S. Democratic and Republican Parties.

It might be easier to realize Musk’s dream of colonizing Mars than to bridge the political aisle in the U.S. government today.

To be fair, some thought appeared to be behind the move. Musk decided to form the party after holding a poll on X in which 65.4% of respondents voted in favor.

Folks, here’s direct democracy — and the powerful post-separation motivation — in action.

 — CNBC’s Erin Doherty contributed to this report.

What you need to know today

Trump confirms tariffs will kick in Aug. 1. That postpones the deadline by a month, but tariffs could “boomerang” back to April levels for countries without deals. Trump on Friday said letters with “take it or leave it” offers will go out to 12 countries Monday.

U.S. stock futures slipped Sunday. Despite the White House pushing back the return of “reciprocal” tariffs, some investors could be worried trade negotiations would result in higher-than-expected duties. Europe’s Stoxx 600 index dropped 0.48% Friday.

OPEC+ members to increase oil output. Eight members of the alliance agreed on Saturday to hike their collective crude production by 548,000 barrels per day, around 100,000 more than expected.

Elon Musk forms a new political party. On Saturday, the world’s richest man said he has formed a new U.S. political party named the “American Party,” which he claims will give Americans “back your freedom.”

[PRO] Wall Street is growing cautious on European equities. As investors seek shelter from tumult in U.S., the Stoxx 600 index has risen 6.6% year to date. Analysts, however, think the foundations of that growth could be shaky.

And finally…

Ayrton Senna driving the Marlboro McLaren during the Belgian Grand Prix in 1992.

Pascal Rondeau | Hulton Archive | Getty Images

The CEO mindset is shifting. It’s no longer all about winning

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/07/06/the-ceo-mindset-is-shifting-its-no-longer-all-about-winning.html

CEOs today aren’t just steering companies — they’re navigating a minefield. From geopolitical shocks and economic volatility to rapid shifts in tech and consumer behavior, the playbook for leadership is being rewritten in real time.

In an exclusive interview with CNBC earlier this week, McLaren Racing CEO Zak Brown outlined a leadership approach centered on urgency, momentum and learning from failure. 

— Spriha Srivastava

Continue Reading

Trending