Here is the question. Why isn't Michael Cohen the one being charged.

The strange admission of inadmissible evidence against Trump seems to bolster the case that Cohen (not Trump) would be guilty of falsification of business records.

Obviously, the falsification of business records (Checks, receipts, and bookkeeping) was driven by the invoice sent by Michael Cohen (the only tangible piece of evidence that states this was ongoing fees). I don't believe that anyone undermined the Trump bookkeeper who stated that she entered the payments as legal expenses and provided receipts as legal expense based on the statement from Michael Cohen

The judge allowed the prosecution to bring up the fact that Cohen plead guilty to a campaign violation, but also stated that by law it cannot be used to say Trump is guilty.

Doesn’t this prove that Cohen (not Trump) would have had incentive to create the false impression of ongoing services and that Cohen (not Trump) has something to hide? The only evidence that the prosecution has to say it was not Cohen (but rather Trump) responsible for the wording of the statement was Cohen’s word under oath that he was “told” to do so by Allen Weisselberg? Allen Weisselberg was not even called to corroborate. Still a degree of separation from Trump. Also, the prosecution has failed to provide even the slightest bit of evidence of criminal intention.

Now obviously neither Trump nor Cohen committed a campaign violation. But just using the prosecutions own logic and evidence, it seems clear that Cohen should be the one charged with falsifying the business records (with the invoice) in order to cover up the non-crime he confessed and plead guilty too later. Their legal logic appears to take Cohen completely at his word that he was forced into what they claim is a crime by Trump’s CFO. Therefore, somehow through no real explanation the bad orange man must be guilty.