GUILTY

[Pommer]

No MAGA supporters have answered this question. Why?

My children have been richly blessed only by virtue of me not having any, but the kid hiding his hands, stole the cookies. js

 

[Zaha Torte]

You obviously have an internet connection. You are reading this. Why are you asking people to explain to you what you should be investigating yourself?

You don't believe that people who seem happy that Trump was convicted should also be able to explain what he supposedly did wrong?

I did not create this thread. Is this not a discussion forum?

The result of the trial will obviously impact the election. And that has implications for everyone. And that is no exaggeration. Which makes me doubly confused as to why you seem to have made no attempt at even finding out why he is now a convicted felon. These plaintive comments along the lines of 'But what has he done' don't reflect well on you.

What do you mean I have made no attempt? I have been asking people here on this forum - and you are ridiculing me for it.

If you are unable to explain what he has done - but still claim to be happy about him being punished for it - does not reflect well on you.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Well, we’ll see how Trump plays this lie*, won’t we?

*golf

What lie? And why can't he play golf if he so chose?

 

[Zaha Torte]

And you have been explained this several times, in several threads to boot. You are at this point either intentionally playing ignorant or you don't bother actually reading the replies explaining this to you.

No explanation that I am aware of. Claims made. Statements given. Still no explanation.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Whoop-dee-doo, (was this germane to the jury’s charge?)

What evidence did they base the charges on?

He was involved in enough decisions to have been convicted on all 34 counts of the indictment.

You have evidence that he was involved?

I am seeing a lot of people on this site claiming that he did wrong without sharing any proof that he did - or even properly explaining what he supposedly did wrong.

So, I am not convinced that a jury convicting him is proof that he is guilty - because you all claim he is guilty without being able to explain why.

 

[Zaha Torte]

You haven't been reading the news? Falsifying business records in service of a crime, 34 counts.

He personally falsified records? And what crime are you referring to?

 

[Zaha Torte]

A group of elected officials who pass laws and effect governmental policy.

The crimes. Explain the crimes.

 

[Zaha Torte]

It's been posted several times so yes

Who posted it? Which post?

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

Who posted it? Which post?

You're being daft. This has been explained to you in several posts. You've been given links to the court docs and articles that say what he was charged and convicted of. It's one thing to say you don't agree with it, but don't act like you don't know.

And just like all the other posters parroting these same dumb talking points I'll ask you too... why weren't you Convicted Felon Trump's defense attorney? Why do you think his crack defense team missed all these obvious defenses and let their client be convicted? Make it make sense.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

What lie? And why can't he play golf if he so chose?

Is not getting or being intentionally ignorant of humorous puns and metaphors a right-wing trait or something?

It was a pun on the word "lie" which is a golf term referring to the situ of the golf ball after it's hit. Ever heard of the phrase "play it where it lies?" Do you know what that phrase means? Pommer was making a pun on that term since Convicted Felon Trump loves golf so much.

Did you seriously not get that or are you being intentionally obtuse? I'm asking a genuine question here. I really, actually, truthfully want to know.

 

[Zaha Torte]

You're being daft. This has been explained to you in several posts. You've been given links to the court docs and articles that say what he was charged and convicted of. It's one thing to say you don't agree with it, but don't act like you don't know.

And just like all the other posters parroting these same dumb talking points I'll ask you too... why weren't you Convicted Felon Trump's defense attorney? Why do you think his crack defense team missed all these obvious defenses and let their client be convicted? Make it make sense.

If you made a thread celebrating how a man was charged and convicted of murder - and I asked you to explain what the man did - and all you shared was that he was charged and convicted of murder - I did not learn anything.

You and others don't have to know exactly what Trump supposedly did in order to be happy about this conviction - you are free - but I don't think your attempt to gaslight me into believing that I am somehow at fault for thinking that those who made the thread were capable of answering my questions about his case is appropriate.

I don't think you know what Trump is supposedly guilty of. Sharing a link to documents or headlines that also don't answer my question doesn't help me.

 

[Zaha Torte]

Is not getting or being intentionally ignorant of humorous puns and metaphors a right-wing trait or something?

It was a pun on the word "lie" which is a golf term referring to the situ of the golf ball after it's hit. Ever heard of the phrase "play it where it lies?" Do you know what that phrase means? Pommer was making a pun on that term since Convicted Felon Trump loves golf so much.

Did you seriously not get that or are you being intentionally obtuse? I'm asking a genuine question here. I really, actually, truthfully want to know.

I honestly did not get the reference until you just explained it. I don't play golf.

 

[FaithT]

What lie? And why can't he play golf if he so chose?

Ha! Speaking of Trump lies and golf, remember what he either played in part of a tournament or not at all, then declared himself the winner?

 

[Zaha Torte]

Ha! Speaking of Trump lies and golf, remember what he either played in part of a tournament or not at all, then declared himself the winner?

No. I don't know a lot about Trump.

 

[The IbanezerScrooge]

If you made a thread celebrating how a man was charged and convicted of murder - and I asked you to explain what the man did - and all you shared was that he was charged and convicted of murder - I did not learn anything.

The crimes have been listed (falsifying business records to conceal another crime - election interference). The actual counts for which he was found guilty have been listed (instances of business documents signed by Convicted Felon Trump and related documentation that he knew weren't properly categorized). The statute(s) that apply have been listed (63(12) and 175.10). The documents from the court have been linked.

You and others don't have to know exactly what Trump supposedly did in order to be happy about this conviction - you are free - but I don't think your attempt to gaslight me into believing that I am somehow at fault for thinking that those who made the thread were capable of answering my questions about his case is appropriate.

It's you who is gaslighting, my friend. We're literally holding something in front of your face and you're telling us you don't see it. Not arguing about the color or what you think it's used for, but that you literally cannot see what is clearly visible.

I don't think you know what Trump is supposedly guilty of. Sharing a link to documents or headlines that also don't answer my question doesn't help me.

I absolutely do. And you do too. It's been explained over and over. You're being obtuse. Intentionally, I think.

And for like the 5th time now, I'll ask again... How did Convicted Felon Trump's crack defense team miss all these obvious flaws in the prosecution's case from the beginning?

 

[Bradskii]

You don't believe that people who seem happy that Trump was convicted should also be able to explain what he supposedly did wrong?

I consider that someone who expresses a belief that Trump did nothing wrong would be expected to know exactly what he was accused of in the first instance. 'He will appeal then SCOTUS will overturn...whatever it was they said he did' (the first phrase is a direct quote) doesn't cut much ice with me.

It really has me beat that you are convinced that whatever it was he's been charged with will get to the Supreme Court and will be overturned. Even though you have no real idea of what it is.

What do you mean I have made no attempt? I have been asking people here on this forum - and you are ridiculing me for it.

You've been told umpteen times and have made zero attempt to verify anything. As has been said, you are being intentionally obtuse. Try typing 'Trump trial' into Google.

 

[Pommer]

Cohen admitted to skimming from the top and that Trump did not know.

I don't think Trump is personally involved with every decision made.

Well, we’ll see how Trump plays this lie*, won’t we?

*golf

What lie? And why can't he play golf if he so chose?

The verdict is in, and Trump will appeal it, (as he should); but he’s likely, (given his history), of opening his mouth to his own detriment and then blame other people for the consequences.
I wish I didn’t have to hear about how poor Donald Trump got indicted, that’s rough on anybody. But he been found guilty in a jury trial.
He’s not a victim. He doesn’t need our help, he’s the “only I” President, he’ll be fine no matter what happens.

 

[BPPLEE]

I consider that someone who expresses a belief that Trump did nothing wrong would be expected to know exactly what he was accused of in the first instance. 'He will appeal then SCOTUS will overturn...whatever it was they said he did' (the first phrase is a direct quote) doesn't cut much ice with me.

It really has me beat that you are convinced that whatever it was he's been charged with will get to the Supreme Court and will be overturned. Even though you have no real idea of what it is.

You've been told umpteen times and have made zero attempt to verify anything. As has been said, you are being intentionally obtuse. Try typing 'Trump trial' into Google.

For one thing, among many reversible errors, the crime tha Trump allegedly concealed with his shady bookkeeping was never elaborated. The jury was given a choice of three and they didn’t have to agree on which one. The 6th amendment protects against such vague charges . The judge knows that this will be overturned. He gave those instructions to ensure a conviction for political purposes.

 

[A2SG]

For one thing, among many reversible errors, the crime tha Trump allegedly concealed with his shady bookkeeping was never elaborated. The jury was given a choice of three and they didn’t have to agree on which one.

Because those were predicate charges, not the crime Trump was charged with. 175.10 states: "A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof." What crime was concealed isn't the charge, but a component of it. It could be any one of the three mentioned, all would prove his guilt.

The 6th amendment protects against such vague charges . The judge knows that this will be overturned. He gave those instructions to ensure a conviction for political purposes.

Whether or not that's a sufficient basis for reversing the decision remains to be seen. I'm curious, though, if the appeals court doesn't find the charges as vague as you do, will you accept their ruling?

-- A2SG, the appeals court justices probably have more experience in NY law than most MAGA folks do...call it a hunch.....

 

[BPPLEE]

Because those were predicate charges, not the crime Trump was charged with. 175.10 states: "A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof." What crime was concealed isn't the charge, but a component of it. It could be any one of the three mentioned, all would prove his guilt.


Whether or not that's a sufficient basis for reversing the decision remains to be seen. I'm curious, though, if the appeals court doesn't find the charges as vague as you do, will you accept their ruling?

-- A2SG, the appeals court justices probably have more experience in NY law than most MAGA folks do...call it a hunch.....

Why is it so important that I accept a ruling? If tt goes through the appeals unsuccessfully it will go to the Supreme Court where it will be overturned.
And I’m not a MAGA folk, I call that a flame