Trump Found Guilty on All 34 Counts In Hush-Money Trial

[DaisyDay]

The appeal is going to be based on the people filing it being ignorant of the law? That doesn't seem like a winning approach.

They gotta go with what they got.

 

[DaisyDay]

No, waiting to see what comes from appeals.

There is nothing for Biden to appeal - which is what the post you quoted was about.

Cohen paid Daniels out of his own pocket to hush up her once having had sex with Donald (thereby cheating on McDougal and Melania). The payment came after the "I grab them by the..." tape came out. This counts as an illegal campaign contribution as it was not disclosed and way over the limit by individual contributors.

Donald reimbursed Cohen for the contribution plus some extra for expenses. However, Donald filed false business expense as legal services. It is illegal to repay someone for an illegal political contribution and illegal to write it off as a business expense when it was a political campaign expense, not a legal expense and it is illegal not to disclose campaign donations.

Merchan was more than fair to Donald who repeatedly violated his gag orders. Joe Schmoe would have seen the inside of a jail cell (not prison) for similarly putting witnesses and court personnel at risk; intimidating witnesses is illegal.

Donald is not only walking around a free man, he still has his passport and has traveled out of the country since his several arraignments.

 

[ralliann]

There is nothing for Biden to appeal - which is what the post you quoted was about.

Correct, I have already said there are no convictions on the other side . There is nothing to LEGALLY point to.
We will see what comes of the appeals process for Trump.

Cohen paid Daniels out of his own pocket to hush up her once having had sex with Donald (thereby cheating on McDougal and Melania). The payment came after the "I grab them by the..." tape came out. This counts as an illegal campaign contribution as it was not disclosed and way over the limit by individual contributors.

Donald reimbursed Cohen for the contribution plus some extra for expenses. However, Donald filed false business expense as legal services. It is illegal to repay someone for an illegal political contribution and illegal to write it off as a business expense when it was a political campaign expense, not a legal expense and it is illegal not to disclose campaign donations.

Merchan was more than fair to Donald who repeatedly violated his gag orders. Joe Schmoe would have seen the inside of a jail cell (not prison) for similarly putting witnesses and court personnel at risk; intimidating witnesses is illegal.

Donald is not only walking around a free man, he still has his passport and has traveled out of the country since his several arraignments.

Again we will see in the Appeals process...

 

[FreeinChrist]

It truly baffles me how “Christians” can defend millions of illegals immigrants.

It reminds me of abortion and school shootings:

Christians: School shootings kill a few dozen a year, but gun rights matter
Democrats: abortions kill millions per year, but “bodily autonomy matters”

Be careful there - you are separating Christians and Democrats, and many Democrats are Christians. Many MAGA voters are not.

I'd edit your post to be from Christian to:
Republicans :School shootings kill a few dozen children and adults a year, but that is an acceptable sacrifice on the alter of gun rights. Their lives did not matter. What is more important is that Johnny gets his AK 47 or AR15.

Edit to clarify - Some republicans not all.

 

[Belk]

Nope, the trial was clearly biased. I guarantee many Democrats don’t care. They want Trump out of the election, even if it means by an unfair trial.

I have seen no outcry from court watchdog groups. Certainly nothing from the international community that I would expect if an unfair trial happened. There seems to be a discrepancy with this claim.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I have seen no outcry from court watchdog groups. Certainly nothing from the international community that I would expect if an unfair trial happened. There seems to be a discrepancy with this claim.

That's because they're all Deep State operatives and Globalist Elites. (For those who may not know me, this is supposed to be obvious sarcasm).

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ralliann]

I have seen no outcry from court watchdog groups. Certainly nothing from the international community that I would expect if an unfair trial happened. There seems to be a discrepancy with this claim.

International community? What do other nations have to do with it?

 

[Pommer]

We will see in the appellate courts (plural). As I do think it will have to go to the federal court to get justice.

Why would this go to the federal courts?

 

[ralliann]

Why would this go to the federal courts?

Because the New York courts might have the same bias. I do hope not. Jonathan Turley seems to be of the opinion, their state courts, will not want to mess with this issue. So, it might even go all the way to the supreme court.

 

[Pommer]

Because the New York courts might have the same bias. I do hope not. Jonathan Turley seems to be of the opinion, their state courts, will not want to mess with this issue. So, it might even go all the way to the supreme court.

No, I meant “what legal principle, (i.e., what Constitutional matter) could Trump’s attorneys claim that would force this case out of the state courts and into the federal courts?”

There has to be a legal basis for trying to get this into the Federal judiciary beyond, “we didn’t get a fair shake”!

 

[Adam56]

Be careful there - you are separating Christians and Democrats, and many Democrats are Christians. Many MAGA voters are not.

I'd edit your post to be from Christian to:
Republicans :School shotting kill a few dozen children and adults a year, but that is an acceptable sacrifice on the altar of gun rights. Their lives did not matter. What is more important is that Johnny gets his AK 47 or AR15.

Edit to clarify - Some republicans not all.

Gun rights are not an “alter”. (You spelled that wrong). Nor are they an “altar”. Banning those guns will not stop school shootings.

 

[Adam56]

I have seen no outcry from court watchdog groups. Certainly nothing from the international community that I would expect if an unfair trial happened. There seems to be a discrepancy with this claim.

That doesn’t prove anything.

 

[Pommer]

That doesn’t prove anything.

The absence of outrage isn’t proof that Trump got a “fair trial”, this is true, but it is noteworthy that people who look for things that are unfair in the legal/justice system* are quietly going about their day, without mentioning anything about this.


*excluding partisans

 

[essentialsaltes]

International community? What do other nations have to do with it?

We The People have tried Donald Trump and said it was a fair trial. If you don't agree with the State of New York or the United States in general, and you think this was a politically motivated kangaroo court, you'd be in a stronger position if you could point to a 'second opinion' from independent legal experts outside the country.

For instance, Russia says it convicted Alexei Navalny fair and square. Why don't we believe Russia?

Officially, he stands accused of violating conditions of a suspended sentence for a 2014 fraud conviction, which international observers have criticized as unfounded.


Or Vietnam: Yet another politically motivated trial...

Or Venezuela:

Opposition Leader Unjustly Convicted​

Due Process Violations, Lack of Evidence in Trial of Lopez, Students

 

[The Barbarian]

No, waiting to see what comes from appeals.

First they have to find a crime and get a conviction before there are appeals. It's just like Trump. He's been convicted by a jury of his peers, so now, he can appeal. But there has to be some kind of factual basis for that appeal, if it's to be upheld. Remember Trump tossed up dozens of appeals against the election? And the courts tossed them out because he had no facts.

It's going to be like that, again.

 

[The Barbarian]

For instance, Russia says it convicted Alexei Navalny fair and square. Why don't we believe Russia?

You expect Trump to criticize his boss? Remember, Putin's got kompromat on him.

 

[ralliann]

No, I meant “what legal principle, (i.e., what Constitutional matter) could Trump’s attorneys claim that would force this case out of the state courts and into the federal courts?”

There has to be a legal basis for trying to get this into the Federal judiciary beyond, “we didn’t get a fair shake”!

Reversible errors throughout the trial. Even before actually. According to Trumps lawyer, They could not even get a clear answer from the prosecution what the particular crime was he was being charged. Which is the right to a defendant, to be able to prepare a defense against a charge. They did not know that even the day they began trial, though they asked several times. Scholars I have watched on t.v. still are not sure what his guilt was based on.

I believe you can look up Turley to get more info.

 

[The Barbarian]

Reversible errors throughout the trial. Even before actually. According to Trumps lawyer, They could not even get a clear answer from the prosecution what the particular crime was he was being charged.

That is what an "indictment" is. And they had them all well before the trial.

 

[ralliann]

That is what an "indictment" is. And they had them all well before the trial.

You asked, I answered to the best of my knowledge. I will go by what I have heard from several legal scholars, as well as other legal people I have heard discussing the issues as they occurred. Several of these people even attended the trial themselves to see what was going on in that court room. I will let them decide what they thought and what should happen now. Some of them, were not Trump fans. But were disturbed by what they heard and seen in that courtroom.

 

[Brihaha]

Because the New York courts might have the same bias. I do hope not. Jonathan Turley seems to be of the opinion, their state courts, will not want to mess with this issue. So, it might even go all the way to the supreme court.

It seems people forget those other Turley comments of the past couple weeks were quite inaccurate. He gets paid to mislead folks who cannot accept reality. Remember when Jonathan recently said "I think this case is gone."? Or when he called Cohen "the most compromised, unbelievable witness in the history of the federal legal system."? These people profit from our gullibility. The simple fact that Dershowitz, Mccarthy or Turley claims something on foxnews broadcasts does not mean it is accurate. Lol. Their predictions were for the benefit of the gullible viewers. And none came to fruition.

If you could revisit the past two or three weeks in your own mind, you would see these biased "legal experts" continue to get it wrong. While simultaneously spewing more of the same nonsense our delicate neighbors can handle and want to hear. Despite the fact that their comments are disingenuous. They are trading any of their ethical principles for money. Likewise, believing liars because one wants to is trading ethical principles for peace of mind.

People are stressing themselves out of denial. I remember those last uncomfortable days of my drinking career. My denial was keeping me from getting back to reality and getting sober. Once I faced the truth I was quickly on my road to recovery. Everyone is different I reckon.