Trump found guilty on all 34 counts

[Reasonably Sane]

I was surprised to see Mark Garagos, in agreement with Dershowitz. He had ties with the Clinton's through McDougal, as well as Clinton's half brother.

That is a theme I've been seeing with a lot of these trials. i.e. those that may not be Trump fans are still calling out the problems with what is going on here. I suspect this is going to bite the Democrats hard. I've said for over a year that they are desperate and in "scorched earth" mode. That is, they are pulling out all the stops and either they win or nobody wins. That is why I think we are in for an historic year. I think this is just getting started.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

0 for 34.

But that is the lower court ruling. It's exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[Reasonably Sane]

Or to settle for millions :

Trump Pays $2 Million to 8 Charities for Misuse of Foundation (Published 2019)

Under a settlement, the president admitted he had used his charity to bolster his campaign and settle business debts.

www.nytimes.com

Trump's $175 million bond in New York civil fraud judgment case is settled with cash promise

New York state lawyers and an attorney for former President Donald Trump have settled their differences over a $175 million bond that Trump posted to block the collection of a large civil fraud judgment while he pursues appeals.

apnews.com

Unfortunately that only works for civil cases.

Yeah. He's not batting 1,000. But he's doing pretty well.

 

[expos4ever]

I said they believe as in as far as they're concerned there is evidence. That doesn't make them delusional.

You must surely know that to any reasonable person, "as far as they are concerned there is evidence" is basically a nothing-burger. As far as the flat-earthers are concerned, there is evidence that the earth is flat.

I see nowhere for you to go on this - without court-recognized or otherwise credible evidence, there is nothing here but speculation and exceedingly contrived conspiracy theories.

Could be because the system is corrupt.

Could be corrupt? Again, a reasonable person would want evidence.

Here is what I mean by evidence - actual facts (from the Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ukes-trumps-legal-case-judges-he-hand-picked/):

At least nine Trump-appointed judges or Supreme Court short-listers have declined to bolster his claims of election fraud.

 

[expos4ever]

That is a description of a lynch mob.

Come on now, you must really think the readers are idiots to make this shamelessly misleading statement.

Here is the statement to which you are responding:

I don't think you get it. You really don't. That shows the paucity of the defence. The evidence of his guilt was so strong that not one of the jurors had even reasonable doubt

You appear to be making the following, obviously flawed argument:

1. Fact: The jury unanimously had no reasonable doubt as to Mr. Trump's guilt
2. Fact: A lynch mob unanimously has no reasonable doubt as to the guilt of their "target"
3. Therefore, just as a lynch mob is wrong, the jury must be wrong.

The first 2 items are indeed facts, but the fact that the conclusion (item 3) does not follow from items 1 and 2. And it is drive-one's-head-into-the-wall obvious that the conclusion does not follow.

Sure, lynch mobs are "of one mind" (unanimous) and they are wrong to be so. But a 10 year old will know that unaminity, in and of itself, is not evidence of a problem! We all agree that leaping of a tall bridge is dumb - does that mean we reached that conclusion through "lynch mob" thinking?

 

[QvQ]

You appear to be making the following, obviously flawed argument:

This is the general opinion of many thoughtful readers of real fake news:

New York Prosecutor Says Nobody In America Is Above The Law He Made Up To Convict Them

NEW YORK, NY — Following the guilty verdict handed down against former President Donald Trump, New York Prosecutor Alvin Bragg used the case to issue a stern warning that nobody in America is above the law he made up to convict Trump.

babylonbee.com

 

[rambot]

That is a description of a lynch mob.

No. It's the description of EVERY SINGLE JURY that has EVER convicted someone in the US.

What has become of the right's understanding of the justice system?

 

[ralliann]

That is a theme I've been seeing with a lot of these trials. i.e. those that may not be Trump fans are still calling out the problems with what is going on here. I suspect this is going to bite the Democrats hard. I've said for over a year that they are desperate and in "scorched earth" mode. That is, they are pulling out all the stops and either they win or nobody wins. That is why I think we are in for an historic year. I think this is just getting started.

Yeah, I thought it was the same with Trey Gowdy. I perceived him as someone that did not care much for Trump personally. No,surprise many don't like his personality. But he started attending the trial as well. You could tell by his demeanor he was disturbed. He said it was like night and day the way the judge handled the Trump team vs the Bragg Team...

 

[rambot]

That's not confidence. Confidence would be saying: "I could be a good president". Humility would be: "I would try to be the best president I could". Narcissism would be: "I would be the best president".

I'm sorry but first off, when we talk about NPD, that's not "oh, we need to change the first letter of a single word" in a SINGLE statement. Ultimately, a single phrase is pretty meaningless when trying to make a "diagnoses of NPD" which means it's just silly to call someone a narcisssist because of ONE word.

You seem really focused on Biden's use of the word "would" to suggest he's a narcissist. I CANNOT imagine how much of a narcissist you must think Trump is given his delusional thoughts about his capacities.

 

[ralliann]

This is the general opinion of many thoughtful readers of real fake news:

New York Prosecutor Says Nobody In America Is Above The Law He Made Up To Convict Them

NEW YORK, NY — Following the guilty verdict handed down against former President Donald Trump, New York Prosecutor Alvin Bragg used the case to issue a stern warning that nobody in America is above the law he made up to convict Trump.

babylonbee.com

Eww, careful. The article used the term (Deleted) .........We know what he means as political (delete), legal (Delete) but Yikes....I decided not use the term in my post!

 

[BCP1928]

God does not approve of anyone who Hates another person like the Democrats hate Trump.
IT is the pure hatred of a howling mob.
I can't find any rational explanation for it.

I will tell you exactly why I won't vote for Biden
This is a video of Biden at an abortion rally in Florida
While the woman is extolling abortion, Biden makes the Sign of the Cross

40 Days for Life on Instagram: "President Biden makes the Sign of the Cross at an abortion rally in Florida! This is a stark reminder of the disconnect between his actions and Catholic teachings on the sanctity of life. Shameful."

579 likes, 110 comments - 40daysforlife.official on April 24, 2024: "President Biden makes the Sign of the Cross at an abortion rally in Florida! This is a stark reminder of the disconnect between his actions and Catholic teachings on the sanctity of life. Shameful.".

www.instagram.com

I am surprised, as Biden has mocked Christianity in many different ways, that he isn't even more unpopular than he is.

It's always hate? Do you not know the difference between hate and contempt? That, and a disinclination to let the people he leads run the country. That explains the reaction to Trump. Hate is not required.

 

[ralliann]

It's always hate? Do you not know the difference between hate and contempt?

One difference would be feelings about a person, verse actions towards people.

That, and a disinclination to let the people he leads run the country.

Ah, so those whom you dislike have no right to choose a president....I see. We are Americans. We don't do that sort of thing...

That explains the reaction to Trump. Hate is not required.

Yep, it sure does.

 

[expos4ever]

This is the general opinion of many thoughtful readers of real fake news:

New York Prosecutor Says Nobody In America Is Above The Law He Made Up To Convict Them

NEW YORK, NY — Following the guilty verdict handed down against former President Donald Trump, New York Prosecutor Alvin Bragg used the case to issue a stern warning that nobody in America is above the law he made up to convict Trump.

babylonbee.com

Methinks you are deflecting. What does an article from a satirical website have to do with my assertion? Again, here is my claim:

You appear to be making the following, obviously flawed argument:

1. Fact: The jury unanimously had no reasonable doubt as to Mr. Trump's guilt
2. Fact: A lynch mob unanimously has no reasonable doubt as to the guilt of their "target"
3. Therefore, just as a lynch mob is wrong, the jury must be wrong.

Are you making this argument? If so, it is obviously wrong - a 10 year old (probably) would know that even if 1 and 2 are true (which they are), it certainly does not follow that 3 is true.

If you are saying something else, exactly what are you saying? How are the deliberations of a jury connected to the action of a lynch mob? Please be specific and address the question.

 

[BCP1928]

One difference would be feelings about a person, verse actions towards people.

Ah, so those whom you dislike have no right to choose a president....I see. We are Americans. We don't do that sort of thing...

Those who we dislike have the same right to vote in a Presidential election as we do. That's all they are going to get. Trying to leverage it with election lies, insurrections, fake elector schemes and court packing is right out.

 

[ralliann]

Methinks you are deflecting. What does an article from a satirical website have to do with my assertion? Again, here is my claim:

You appear to be making the following, obviously flawed argument:

1. Fact: The jury unanimously had no reasonable doubt as to Mr. Trump's guilt
2. Fact: A lynch mob unanimously has no reasonable doubt as to the guilt of their "target"
3. Therefore, just as a lynch mob is wrong, the jury must be wrong.

Are you making this argument? If so, it is obviously wrong - a 10 year old (probably) would know that even if 1 and 2 are true (which they are), it certainly does not follow that 3 is true.

If you are saying something else, exactly what are you saying? How are the deliberations of a jury connected to the action of a lynch mob? Please be specific and address the question.

It was a joke. He used the word Battle. It has gotten to the point words like that are always msde into "violent". They so badly want Trump supporters to get angry and commit violence... Even simple words used everyday are made a serious threat.

 

[ralliann]

Those who we dislike have the same right to vote in a Presidential election as we do. That's all they are going to get. Trying to leverage it with election lies, insurrections, fake elector schemes and court packing is right out.

HM MM

 

[BCP1928]

It was a joke. He used the word Battle. It has gotten to the point words like that are always msde into "violent". They so badly want Trump supporters to get angry and commit violence... Even simple words used everyday are made a serious threat.

It's really not all that difficult to see Trump and his followers as a serious threat to the Republic. They hardly hide their intentions.

 

[QvQ]

1. Fact: The jury unanimously had no reasonable doubt as to Mr. Trump's guilt
2. Fact: A lynch mob unanimously has no reasonable doubt as to the guilt of their "target"
3. Therefore, just as a lynch mob is wrong, the jury must be wrong.

The question is WHEN did the jury not have reasonable doubt" of Trump's guilt?
The mob says "Hang him" Then there is some semblance of "trial" then the mob as jury stands up and say "Hang Him."
It is an enduring problem in American Jurisprudence

The problem with unbiased Jurors in Trump's trials is that there were 4 years of "trials" and 2 unsuccessful impeachment efforts.
And all the rest.
This Jury may have just decided, "finally we are going to get him."

We are all sinners
Trump has sinned.
However, I doubt the government would be searching Melania's underwear drawer if the accused were not Donald Trump.
The powers that be have spent an inordinate amount of time and money finding Any Sin of Trumps.
And the sins are all so vague and in some cases manufactured like the Russian Hoax.
The entire thing smells.

 

[Tinker Grey]

For those that like LegalEagle:

It's a pretty tight take down.

 

[7thKeeper]

So you'd say you're guilty even though you weren't. In my scenario the governor pardons you because he knows you're innocent.

But him knowing I'm innocent it moot. I'd still be admitting guilt to a thing I never did by taking the pardon, because the underlying crime was never overturned. Merely the punishment for it was forgiven. But I'd always have a criminal record for that. Taking the pardon would be me admitting to the crime, even if I didn't do it. The courts would have to overturn the judgement for me to become innocent.