3 misdeamers to pick from. Each juror can choose one of the 3 they think he’s guilty of. They don’t have to all agree on which misdeamer he’s guilty of. What the hell ? Oh And the kicker is the misdemeanor will be elevated to a felony.
So judge gave jury
- Thread starter 55dawg
- Start date
Hilariously incorrect. It’s like a big fat ass lie that suckers believe and repeat on the internet.
There are 34 counts. He will not be convicted on any of those 34 counts unless the jury does so unanimously.
The lies y’all swallow and regurgitate. Goodness, is there no end.
There are 34 counts. He will not be convicted on any of those 34 counts unless the jury does so unanimously.
The lies y’all swallow and regurgitate. Goodness, is there no end.
You got it wrong scooter! That’s the 3 counts they can choose from. This was put to the jury at the last minute by this pos judge so the defense couldn’t object to it.
It’s so outrageous he’s assuming it can’t be correct. It’s in direct conflict with recent Supreme Court rulings. And will absolutely be overturned on appeal. But they don’t care. They’re Just hoping to use a conviction until November.
Do whatever it takes to convict him, so Joe can have some ammo. Doesn't matter if it's unfair, illegal, and unethical. Doesn't matter the verdict will be DOA on appeal.....just say he's guilty.
You sticking with this ?
If I’m an unbiased juror, I have no clue what those instructions really mean but it gives me a wide range of latitude to come back with a felony conviction. We just don’t need to agree on the exact nature of the crime, really? If you are trying to charge a former POS you better dam$ well know the nature of the crime. I think the jury comes back with a guilty verdict today. Biden and several judges better hope Trump doesn’t win in November, retribution would most certainly come and I can’t blame Trump….
The fact that no one really understands this case is probably the best evidence that the fact it was brought at all is total bullshit. Agreed - Guilty today.
When you can't pound the facts, pound the witness.
Let me break it down.
The jury must find unanimously that Trump knowingly caused a business record to be falsified.
The jury must then find unanimously that Trump intended to defraud by concealing a conspiracy to promote his election as president by “unlawful means.”
Finally, the jurors must find at least one of several possible “unlawful means,” but they don't have to be unanimous regarding which one. That’s because this is not an element of the offense, but a "manner and means" of committing it. The instruction is consistent with the law and due process.
All a fair interpretation. The point remains - the fact that we all have to go through these crazy mental and legal gymnastics to make sense of any of it is the single most relevant evidence that this whole thing is bullshit. A political hitjob.
Can you at least admit there is absolutely no way this case would be prosecuted or even brought up at all if the accused were anyone besides Donald Trump?
If the accused were any Presidential candidate who did what Trump did, yes indeedy, the case would have been prosecuted.
Really? There are actual undisputed emails and wire transfers that have enriched Joe Biden's family sent directly from foreign entities with government ties with clear motives to influence US policy. Where is the criminal trial? I guess you have to pay a woman $130k for an NDA (totally legal and undisputed) to get indicted?
Give me a freakin' break. All you guys who can't stand Trump....that is totally fair. And it is totally fair to root against him in this thing. But if you can't at least admit that this trial is politically motivated and commissioned by elected democrat opponents of Trump, you lose all credibility in all debate relating to Trump.
I dont need you to break it down for me. Thanks. I understand it.
At 0:48 he says " This is what happens in normal media". Not sure if hes been paying attention , but normal media no longer exists. Which makes him seem not serious. As soon as he started talking he attacked the " right wing media. "
So which side is he on ?
Really? What if a candidate used an illegal secret private server and destroyed emails that were under subpoena? Go ask James Comey and then get back to me.
Or stole top secret documents and hid them behind his Corvette in his garage?
Bullshit. It has never been done before. Ever. We drug a former president into court over a clerical error. Basically. From a hit job put out on him by democrats before the 2016 election. The amount of spin it takes make this look like anything other than that is hilarious. If he isn’t running again, no way this even gets brought up. Which makes it nothing more than political. This statement is complete and utter horseshit. Anyone without an agenda knows better.
I don’t think any instructions have been out of line. That doesn’t really matter. The main issue is still the massive conflict of interest. You can pound facts all you want. That one is in full force and in no way arguable. This is done on appeal before it gets started. You can’t be a shill for the Democrat party and have one of your kids make money off the verdict in a trial without major issues. We are wasting a shitload of time and government money focused on nothing that will fix what is going on here and abroad. Because your admin is such a clusterf that have no choice but to lean on desperation. It is embarrassing
You and others keep mischaracterizing what Trump has been charged with.
And to answer your question, if the GOP had proof of a crime by Joe Biden, the impeachment trial would be underway. If they thought they would ever get to proof, they would be discussing Biden's crimes incessantly to distract from Trump's issues.
Of course Trump is being pursued because of who he is. Is this surprising? That tends to happen when you want the most powerful job in the world.
He has also provided an almost unfathomable number of issues that leave him open to attacks via the judicial system. You can say it's unprecedented, but so are the number and nature of his offenses. We are exploring new ground here because of Trump, his choices and his utter lack of character, which we've seen over and over again.
The GOP did the same thing to Clinton, but again, Clinton's moral shortcomings opened the door to those efforts. And after all that, they still only nailed him for lying about the office BJ. Clinton's legal issues pale in comparison to Trump's.
Conflict, you say? Sounds like you support Alito and Thomas recusing themselves from any J6 or election matter, given Alito flew two different insurrection flags outside his home and Ginni was an active participant is lobbying for election interference. Both of these examples are far more problematic than what Merchan's daughter does for a living.
We are talking about the felony criminal prosecution of an individual, not the interpretation of some case law in a civil law suit. That is a big difference. An elected DA who ran on a platform to get Trump. A judge who's family stands to make more money if he assists in this process.
Alito? Give me a break. Getting to the point where your stated MO: I'm not a democrat I just hate Trump....is starting to sound like bullshit. Why attack Greg Abbott?
So, cases involving presidential immunity and presidential involvement in overturning an election are dismissed as simply unimportant "case law in a civil lawsuit"? The SCOTUS could fundamentally alter the balance of power between the three branches of government and you want to dismiss that as no big deal? Excuse my language, but you have to be ****ing kidding me.
Alito flew an upside-down American flag outside his home between J6 and Biden's inauguration. Thomas's wife and best friend actively lobbied for extreme efforts to hold the presidency after the lost election. That creates an undeniable appearance of bias in what can arguably be called the most important SCOTUS decision of our lifetimes.
Ginni has been paid millions over the years by right wing entities, which immediately becomes a marital asset of Clarence. Merchan's daughter works for Dems. You want to tell me that this is worse than what Clarence and Ginni do?
I am demanding Ketanji Brown "Mrs. Jackson if ya nasty" recuse herself from all cases involving women because she doesn't even know what one is.
There, I have demanded it and now it has to happen. Sorry, them's the rules.
You're right about one thing, Zing: it's never been done before. Donald Trump is the first of his kind. If anybody else in history had done what Trump did, they'd have faced the same circumstances as The Donald. And as we all know, Trump has never won the popular vote in any election, and he'll do any damn thing he can to overturn election results he doesn't like.
Charting the Legal Theory Behind People v. Trump
The mechanics of the case as District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting it.
www.lawfaremedia.org
I know you guys want to make this a Donald Trump thing only. And I grant you he is one of a kind. Not always in a good way, But you think no one has ever become richer by embellishing real estate value. You think the Clinton’s never paid anyone off. Or the Obama’s. If he didn’t run for office, no case ever arises. Period. Which means this is of a political nature only. They are making a case a felony that has never been this way for Trump only. There is no spin here. It is desperation.
It isn’t just results he doesn’t like. It is results from an election with a lot of new rules. That’s glossed over. There was a 300 percent increase in voter turnout from one election to another. 22 million more voted during the most deadly time of a pandemic. More old people voted by ballot than ever, when they were not seeing family over holidays but got their ballot in. It wasn’t a stolen election. But the rules allowed for shenanigans. Not acknowledging what caused that is disingenuous
When Thomas rules Trump immune from any and all prosecution, I’ll concede your point. If he doesn’t it will demonstrate that those potential biases don’t “Trump” adherence to the law and precedent. Can we say the same thing with Merchan? By even Cobb’s account, his decision-making has been uniquely pro prosecution.
Alito? Again your stated MO of “not a democrat just hate Trump” is on trial here. Didn’t The NY Times or Wash Post know about this in 2021 but decided not to run it because they knew it had nothing to do with Alito’s opinion of the election?
The Supreme Court has proven time and time again that even their conservative makeup doesn’t Trump common sense or law. They have frustrated the hell out of the far right.
Last edited:
Why did she come forward? Why’d she start all of this? Why is this being turned into a felony? Better yet, have these charges ever been raised to a felony level previous to this case? I really can’t believe you are defending this like it is real.Charting the Legal Theory Behind People v. Trump
The mechanics of the case as District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting it.
It's amazing. They literally know they are talking to well educated people who don't know crap about how things legally have to work in the US. And these people are voting based on this kind of BS fed to them.
Trump is such a good person. It's incredible. I don't understand it. Poor Trump.
What I wrote is 100% accurate. These reports say exactly what I posted . Then they pull One helluva spin. They start out stating the jury must be unanimous. Then they go on to explain how they can choose from 3 misdemeanors. Guess we have different definitions of unanimous
Latest posts
-
Peak Offseason thought, was 2015 the worst collection of games in a season ever?- Latest: donalsonville_dawg
-
-
-
-