Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes. The two I mentioned are very knowledgeable in this case. One problem here is the attempt to use Federal election law to revive past the statute of limitations on the book keeping misdemeanors.
The last few pages of this thread are a monument to your misinformed state on this off-topic case.
You have never cited any "fair-minded observers" only Trump sycophants.
He admitted on the stand that his income would probably be higher if Trump wins, but that is just his personal assessment.
You won't find anyone on here praising the character of Michael Cohen. What we do have is a witness saying: yeah I committed crimes with the defendant. Do the documents back his story? Yes. Is there any witness to any counternarrative? No.
Merchan's reputation before this trial (and the RW attack dogs focused on him) was as an experienced and fair-minded judge. I do not see how it is obvious that he is biased.
Gag orders are used to protect evidence and fairness in the court. They apply to all parties, lawyers, and anyone else under the court's jurisdiction. Trump is the only one *violating* those orders.
Name ONE.
Dershowitz and Turley have blown up any credibility on Trump related matters a long time ago. They will defend anything against him. Where are the actual experts on NY criminal law commenting on this case?
Trump appeals with a ferocity rarely seen. He keeps losing those appeals. This case is within the bounds of actual NY law. The issue to be decided (next week) is on the matter of facts sufficiency of evidence to hold a verdict that the jury will be making.
We already know your partisan position.
Maybe, but that doesn't mean they're right. A jury makes that call, not any outside legal experts.
My understanding is that falsifying business documents becomes a felony when used to cover up a further crime, so the statute of limitations on a misdemeanor wouldn't apply. If Trump violated federal election laws and falsified documents to cover that up, that's the felony.
Well, maybe you don't know, but you're not on the jury and not privy to the presentation of evidence in this case. It's the prosecution's job to show the jury what the crime was, and if they don't do that, the jury will return a verdict of not guilty.
I've posted We The People's statement in this thread, and the thread where it's actually relevant.
If I may:
NY vs. Trump is the 'weakest case I've seen in 60 years' of criminal law: Alan Dershowitz | Fox Business Video 60 years of experience in law. A law professor, in person observer in the court room. A liberal who is admittedly not a Trump supporter . All of the self proclaimed expertise on this and other threads has no standing on the Trump case to refute the academic knowledge of the law and actual court room experience of this man. This is the actual of the matter. I dare all of the liberals here to watch the entire video before make ill informed comments.
It take a lot of posts to combat the amount of liberal propaganda.
I know exactly what this case is about! Getting Trump is the only goal here.
You may , since at this time we still some free speech.
Don't you find it strange that the #3 guy in the Biden DOJ Matthew Colangelo who left that Cush position to assist Bragg with this persecution? No nothing to see here.
Quote him were he claims the charges are bogus. Otherwise his opinion of the strength of the case is noted but not really relevant to your claims.
Yeah yeah, we get it. Liberals are always wrong in your view.
You seem to present a fair amount of misinformation.
He has made money off of the trial while the trial is ongoing.
His conduct in THIS trial is what is relevant. Not fair minded at all to even a casual observer his is obviously biased against Trump.
According to this analysis Cohen should have been gaged but was not. Why not?
1. Gag order on Trump and not Cohen.
You have no basis for this rant against these two men except that they disagree with you.
Why would a crooked judge grant Trump any appeals? This is no surprise.
As well we know yours!
What Jim Jordan purports to find strange doesn't impress me.
So in topsy-turvy world, Cohen tells the truth when he's not under oath, and lies when he is under oath.
