Unfair Indictment and Legal Expenses: The Real Story

🔎The indictment against me is based on a misunderstanding of legal expenses and a minor bookkeeping issue.

💰The payment to a lawyer was inaccurately labeled as a 'legal expense' in the books, leading to the indictment.

🏛️The judge presiding over the trial had no understanding of basic legal concepts and made unfair rulings.

📜The prosecutor tried to build a false narrative by undervaluing assets and discrediting the bonding company.

🧙‍♂️The indictment and trial are politically motivated attempts to tarnish my reputation and hinder my campaign.

What was the basis of the indictment against you?

—The indictment was based on a misunderstanding of legal expenses and a minor bookkeeping issue.

Why was the payment to a lawyer labeled as a 'legal expense' in the books?

—The labeling of the payment as a 'legal expense' was a mistake and not a deliberate attempt to deceive.

Did the judge and prosecutor understand the case?

—No, the judge had no understanding of basic legal concepts, and the prosecutor tried to build a false narrative.

Were the assets undervalued in the trial?

—Yes, the prosecutor deliberately undervalued the assets to support their false narrative.

Is this indictment politically motivated?

—Yes, the indictment and trial are politically motivated attempts to damage my reputation and hinder my campaign.

00:02The indictment against me is based on a misunderstanding of legal expenses and a minor bookkeeping issue.

01:00The payment to a lawyer was inaccurately labeled as a 'legal expense' in the books, leading to the indictment.

03:10The judge presiding over the trial had no understanding of basic legal concepts and made unfair rulings.

05:54The prosecutor tried to build a false narrative by undervaluing assets and discrediting the bonding company.