This may be a somewhat long post but worth reading if you're interested in what's really going on with this case.
Now that I've pieced together that it is the felony violation of federal election law that Cohen was prosecuted for that is the crime that Trump's falsification of records was meant to cover up, some things are clearer.
So I was wondering why Cy Vance had not prosecuted Trump over the hush money. Well he was asked that by Chuck Todd, and he gave a partial answer (not wanting to get into "internal deliberations"), but he mentioned that he had expected some action from DoJ but it didn't happen. Which to me means that Vance thought that Trump needed to be prosecuted and perhaps convicted by DoJ in order to give him the "other crime" he needed to make the falsficiation of records a felony under NY law. But DoJ didn't do it.
I can only assume this was Garland's DoJ we're talking about, as Vance's last term overlapped Biden by 1 year, and Trump's DoJ could never be expected to comply as a standing DoJ policy says no indicment of sitting POTUESES. So it would have been on Garland's DoJ to prosecute, but they did not. The question is why?
Well the answer frequently given is that the case was based on the testimony of Cohen, who is a proven and admitted liar. Cohen has been complaining that they prosecuted him but not Trump even though both committed the crime. I kind of think he has a point.
Now that I'm looking at the indictment and statement of facts, it seems clear to me that David Pecker is also a direct witness, who pow-wowwed with Trump and Cohen in at least two conversations about these hush money payments. He signed an immunity agreement in 2018, which means he is likely testifying against Trump. On top of that, there is a mountain of corroborating paper, though it will be a challenge to present that to a jury without putting them to sleep.
I don't know. I think Garland is too risk averse. It's why they're taking too long on the records and why they kicked the can to a special counsel who also likely won't recommend prosecution over 1/6.
As to this case, Bragg seems to disagree with Vance that it is necessary for Trump to have been convicted by DoJ for the federal election felony. He seems to think it's enough that Cohen was prosecuted for it, and implicated Trump in his guilty plea allocution. So Bragg is attempting to do here essentially what DoJ has failed and refused to do. His case is really more about the underlying election law felony than it is about business records.
This isn't going to be a big case in terms of jail time, if any, but I'm a rule of law guy and I also understand the reasons behind election laws that Trump intentionally violated. He knew it, too. He took elaborate measures to cover it up. And that's what is useful about the trial: to bring out even more of his deplorable self-serving behavior to light. I also applaud his courage in being willing to go first even though he has the least consequential case. Maybe this will encourage the others.