https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/05/politics/trump-hush-money-indictment-bragg/index.html
왜 트럼프의 뉴욕 비자금 혐의가 위험해 보이는가
위험해 보인다는 게, 검사들이 트럼프 혐의를 입증하는 데 리스크가 크다는 뜻으로 보임
The case that Manhattan prosecutors have brought against former President Donald Trump for allegedly falsifying business records to disguise hush money payments related to the 2016 campaign presents novel legal questions that make the prosecution risky - but not impossible - legal experts say.
How Manhattan Distric Attorney Alvin Bragg has laid out his allegations against Trump has attracted skepticism among election law scholars and white-collar defense attorneys. But other experts stress that Bragg has a case that plausibly could end in a guilty verdict and that his legal theories are on solid, albeit untested, ground.
"There are some risks and complications, but i also think there's a path to conviction," said Cheryl Baderm a former federal prosecutor who now teaches criminal law and procedure at Forham Univeresity School of Law.
Trump has been charged with 34 counts of falsification of business records, which on its face is a fairly clear-cut allegation.(겉으로 보기에는 상당히 명백한 혐의이다) But Bragg has brought the charges - which by themselves(그들 자체로는), are misdemeanors - as felonies, That will require his team to show that the records were falsified with the intent to conceal or further another crime, yet Tuesday's court papers provided only a little clarity on how Bragg intends to establish an underlying crime.
Prosecutors are not obligated to show their hand at this stage of the proceedings and there are minimal requirements for what an indictment must say. But given the monumental stakes of the case and how it seems to rest on a novel theory for bringing felony charges, critics say the public would have been better served with more detail.
"I'm not saying there isn't a hint of what the other crime is," said Robert Kelner, a defense attorney who specializes in political and election law. "But when you have this weird local statute - in which to prove one crime, you have to show he intended to commit another - you think you'd be very specific."
The Manhattan hush money prosecution is not the only source of legal jeopardy for the former president and leading(명확한) 2024 Republican White House candidate. In the coming weeks or months, Trump could be facing criminal charges in Georgia, stemming from a special grand jury investigation into his attempts to undermine the 2020 election. Two federal grand jury investigations being led by special counsel Jack Smith – one focused on the 2020 election subversion allegations and the other concerning White House documents that were taken to Mar-a-Lago – also present significant legal peril for Trump.
"I think the Bragg case is the water pistol unnecessarily preceding the missile-launching F-35 attack piloted by Jack Smith with Merrick Garland as his wingman," said Ty Cobb, a defense attorney who represented the Trump White House in special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation.
A simple record-keeping case made more complicated by charging as a felony
The first part of the prosecutors' case is providing that a series of Trump business records - invoicees, checks and general ledger entries - were false, and here the case is straightforward, experts told CNN.
Prosecutors will have physical evidence showing that the checks cut to Michael Cohen were wrongly documented as being for legal fees, when in fact he was allegedly being reimbursed for paying off adult film star Stormy Daniels.
If Bragg was bringing the charge solely as a misdemeanor, he'd need to just show that the records were falsified with the intent to defraud - another fairly easy hurdle to overcome.
But Bragg has brought the 34 counts all as felonies and convincing courtsm and ultimately a justym that this is justified will be ther "trickiest part" of the case, according to Paul S. Ryan, an elections law expert who is deputy executive director of the Funders' committee for Civic Participation.
To make it a felony, prosecutors wiil have to pooint to another potential crime that Trump was trying to further or concealed when he allegedly falsified how the Cohen payments were recorded.
Exactly what this underlying crime was is not specified in the indicment itself, but rather teased in accompanying statement of facts and in prosecutors' remarks Tuesday. They describe an "unlawful" scheme to influence the 2016 election by keeping damaging information aboout Trump from reaching the public.
The district attorney's theory, as well as the lack of transparency around how Bragg intends to lay it out, is raising concern about whether the case will stand up in court.
Election law expert Rick Hasen told CNN it was "far from a slam sunk."
"It raises some political questions whether this is the case to bring," said Hasen, a professor at UCLA School of Law.
The complexity makes it possible that years of litigation lie ahead before the case is fully resolved.
"I see this case as probably ultimately going to the US Supreme Court.", said John Coffee, Jr., a white-collar crime professor at Columbia Law School. "You don't convict an ex-president on a novel legal theory without the Supreme Court looking at it."
- Supreme Court looking at it : 대법원의 검토 없이
Three routes to a felony, each with their own obstacles
Manhattan prosecutors have teased three different potential underlying crimes that could support the felongy charges, but each present their own assrotment of novel legal questions.
The first appearent argument is that the business records were falsified to conceal the federal campaign finance crimes committed with the 2016 hush money payments to women alleging extramartial affairs with Trump - crimes to which Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018.
Hasen said he was "skeptical" that a federal campaign finance prosecution could be used to back charges in a state court. Braggs' defenders have noted that the New York false records statute seems to contemplate the commission
or concealment of any crime, and therefore, they argue, it covers federal law violations. Either way, the question could be litigated in the pre-trial phase.
The second potential underlying crime is a state election law Bragg referenced in his press conference: a New York misdemeanor prohibiting two or more people from conspiring to promote a candidacy by unlawful means.
Election law experts are divided on whether that state crime allegation could work as the foundation for the felony. The debate centers on a legal concept known as preemption, which comes into play when the federal law appears to supersede a state law, and whether state prosecutors can go after conduct that is tied to a federal election, i.e. the 2016 presidential campaign.
"Federal election law, generally speaking, preempts state election law when it comes to a governing of federal elections, except there are exceptions whereby certain state election laws can come into play," said Jerry H. Goldfeder, a veteran election and campaign-finance lawyer at Stroock & Stroock & Laven. "Appearenly [prosecutors] have looked at this seriously enough to conclude they were within their bounds."
"일반적으로 연방 선거 관리와 관련해서는 특정 주 선거법이 적용될 수 있는 예외적인 경우를 제외하고는 연방 선거법이 주 선거법보다 우선합니다."라고 제리 H. 골드페더는 말합니다.
Finally, the charging papers seem to hint that there was an intent to violate New York tax law, suggesting that rationale could be used as the backing for the felony. Under the theory, the way the Cohen reimbursements were structured in the Trump business records would give them different tax treatment that what they would have gotten had they been documented accurately.
"That is state tax crimes," Ryan Goodman, a New York University Law professor, told CNN's Erin Burnett Tuesday night. "That is a stronger case because it is insulated from a bunch of the legal challenges, of which there are strong legal challenges to be made to election law crimes."
여기서 to be made는 "이의가 제기될 수 있다"라는 뜻으로 사용되었다.
단어
Case : 소송 사건 대립하는 양당사자간에 법정 또는 다른 법률 절차를 통해서 해결 해야하는 분쟁. 또는 사안
be obligated to : ~ 할 의무가 있다
rest on : 기반하다
bring : 제기하다
for bringing felony charges
jeopardy : 유죄가 될 위험성, 위험
stemming: 시도
rather :
1.(흔히 비판, 실망, 놀람을 나타내는 표현에서) 꽤, 약간, 상당히
2. 좀, 약간(동사와 함께 써서 진술의 강도를 완화시킬 때)
rather teased : 좀 놀림을 받았다
describe a to b : a를 b라고 묘사하다
keep a from b: a 가 from 이하의 동작을 못하게 하다
lay a out: (공식적으로)설명하다, 공개하다
stand up in court: 법원 재판에서 판사가 받아들일 수 있음을 입증하는 것
litigation: 소송 (과정)
- litigate : 재판하다
lie ahead: (위험 따위가) 기다리고 있다, 앞에 놓여 있다
convict : 유죄를 선고하다
far from : ~와는 거리가 먼, 전혀 ~이 아닌, ~은 커녕(instead of)
Supreme Court: 대법원
novel : 참신한, 이전에는 볼 수 없었던
assortment: (같은 종류인데 여러가지인거)모음, 종합
예를들어 크리스피 도넛의 어쏘티드 더즌은 다 다른 맛이 12개 들어있는 박스임
skeptical: 의심 많은, 회의적인, 무신론적인
back charges: 혐의를 뒷받침하다
statute :
1. 법규, 법령
2. (조직·기관의) 규정, (학교의) 학칙
contemplate :
1. (어떤 일의 가부나 방법에 대해)고려하다(=consider, think of),
2. (어떤 일의 발생 가능성을) 생각하다 (예상하다)
3. 심사숙고하다
either way: 어떤 경우든
pre-trial phase: 사전 공판 절차
allegation: (증거 없이 누가 부정한 일을 했다는) 혐의(주장) (=accusation)
preemption: 선점.
preempt : 우선하다
supersede : 대체하다
generally speaking: 일반적으로 말해서
when it comes to : ~에 관한
whereby : (부사)그로 인해, 그것을 통해. 그것에 따라 ~하는
except there are exceptions whereby certain state election laws can come into play, -> 특정한 주 선거법이 작용할 수 있는 예외사항
come into play : 시행되다, 적용되다
enough to : ~할만큼 충분히 ~하다. ~할 정도로
seriously enough to conclude they were within their bounds
rationale : 이유
reimbursement: 반환
insulate: 격리하다
구문분석
To make it a felony, prosecutors will have to point to another potential crime that Trump was trying to further or concealed when he allegedly falsified how the Cohen payments were recorded.
https://www.findsvoc.com/demo/result
gpt 버전
분석해보겠습니다!
문장: To make it a felony, prosecutors will have to point to another potential crime that Trump was trying to further or concealed when he allegedly falsified how the Cohen payments were recorded.
구문 분석:
- To make it a felony: 동명사구 (gerund phrase)로, 전체적인 목적을 나타내며 이 문장에서는 "it"이 무엇인지는 나와있지 않습니다.
- prosecutors will have to point: 주어 "prosecutors"와 동사 "will have to point"로, 미래 시제의 수동태입니다.
- to another potential crime: 전치사구 (prepositional phrase)로, "point to"와 함께 사용되어 "어떤 범죄를 가리키다"는 뜻입니다.
- that Trump was trying to further or concealed: 관계절 (relative clause)로, "crime"을 수식합니다. "was trying to further"와 "concealed"는 과거시제의 수동태로, "Trump이 범죄를 교사하려고 했거나 숨겼다"는 뜻입니다.
- "that Trump was trying to further or concealed" 부분에서 "further"와 "concealed"은 각각 동사입니다. "further"는 여기서 "촉진하다"라는 뜻으로 사용되었으며, "concealed"은 "숨기다"라는 뜻으로 사용되었습니다. 이 부분은 앞에 나온 "another potential crime"과 연관되어 있습니다.
- 즉, 검찰이 Trump이 조작한 코엔 지불 내역 기록 외에도 추가적인 범죄를 가리키지 않으면, 이 조작된 기록이 단순히 위조나 변조가 아니라 다른 큰 범죄(예를 들어 돈을 받고서 법적인 의무를 수행하지 않은 것 등)를 촉진하거나 숨기는 것으로 간주되지 않는 한, 형사적 처벌이 이루어지지 않을 수 있다는 것입니다.
- when he allegedly falsified how the Cohen payments were recorded: 시간적 절 (temporal clause)로, "when"과 함께 사용되며 "falsified"는 과거시제의 동사입니다. "Cohen payments"는 "how"와 함께 기록되었는데, 이 기록을 조작했다는 뜻입니다.
해석:
트럼프가 코엔(Cohen) 지불 내역이 기록된 방법을 조작했다는 혐의가 제기되었는데, 이것이 형사적으로 처벌될려면 검찰이 추가적인 범죄를 가리켜야 합니다. 그 추가적인 범죄가 있어야, 조작된 기록이 더 이상 단순한 위조나 변조가 아니라 더 큰 범죄의 일환이 되는 것이죠.
