|
Post by tonyroma on May 17, 2024 18:54:02 GMT -5
Sorry but this is bullshit. This is the biggest sham trial that ever occurred. Dem judge with a daughter making big $$$ off of the trial? DA not disclosing exculpatory evidence to the grand jury and then hiding the same evidence from the jury. Not disclosing a witness list in advance to the defense. And finally not disclosing to anyone what the magic “second crime” was that they are trying him for. Only a KoolAid drinking Dem cultist would actually believe this crap. In the words of Lying Joe Biden: “Come on man!” So, a judge's daughter can't be a democrat fundraiser if it is a Trump trial, but a Supreme Court Judges wife can be a conservative fundraiser if it is a Trump case and that is just fine. The DA is not the defense lawyer. If the emails in question can prove Trump's innocence, it it the job of his attorneys to present it. The DA is hiding nothing since if you know about the defense knows about it and can present it. The defense had the witness list long before the trial started, the witness schedule was withheld for the security of the witnesses. The DA has stated two crimes the falsification of business records covered up. One was to conceal state and federal campaign finance violations and the other was to conceal a tax crime. He does not have to charge Trump with those crimes, just convince the jury that was the other crimes. Only a Kool-Aid drinking Trump supporter would not know the facts of the case and only the bullshit Trump spews form his mouth. Conservative talk radio doesn’t help the cause. It’s wall to wall court case coverage and damage control.
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on May 17, 2024 20:15:04 GMT -5
Wrong you stated the same crime twice. It would have to be proven that he wrote the check to cover up for an election. If he did it for a multitude of other reasons than it is not a crime! Only person to testify to that is a convicted perjurer who lied in front of this jury. The judge has embarrassed himself and the case is a guaranteed appeal win. I know you corrupt dems only care to paint him as a felon before the trial. The defense did withhold a large amount of evidence. Only a kool aide drinking Trump hating dem could think this case is above board and not ripe for appeal!
Yeah that Dershowitz is a real Trump zealot!
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on May 17, 2024 20:19:24 GMT -5
OK Cad $1000 If convicted it will be overturned on appeal. Do we have a bet?
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on May 17, 2024 20:22:04 GMT -5
So, a judge's daughter can't be a democrat fundraiser if it is a Trump trial, but a Supreme Court Judges wife can be a conservative fundraiser if it is a Trump case and that is just fine. The DA is not the defense lawyer. If the emails in question can prove Trump's innocence, it it the job of his attorneys to present it. The DA is hiding nothing since if you know about the defense knows about it and can present it. The defense had the witness list long before the trial started, the witness schedule was withheld for the security of the witnesses. The DA has stated two crimes the falsification of business records covered up. One was to conceal state and federal campaign finance violations and the other was to conceal a t So Mr lawyer did the FEC which had jurisdiction over this choose to press charges Hmm Hmm HMMM?
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on May 17, 2024 20:25:56 GMT -5
Exactly what other than a proven liars word do they have that the check was only to cover this up for the election. If Trump did it to hide/keep from embarrassing himself his wife his business his reputation his kids then it is NOT a crime.
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on May 17, 2024 20:31:40 GMT -5
Oh yeah and in America the prosecution has to prove the crime. The defense is under no obligation whatsoever. So you are basically wrong on it all. Cad do we have a bet?
|
|
|
Post by osprey11 on May 17, 2024 20:38:17 GMT -5
I am sure all of Hillary's checks to Perkins Coie had "for frauduent Steele documents" written on the check
|
|
|
Post by luapnor on May 17, 2024 21:45:16 GMT -5
It seems the only crime was committed by the extortionist.
|
|
|
Post by tonyroma on May 17, 2024 22:05:58 GMT -5
Wrong you stated the same crime twice. It would have to be proven that he wrote the check to cover up for an election. If he did it for a multitude of other reasons then it is not a crime! Only person to testify to that is a convicted perjurer who lied in front of this jury. The judge has embarrassed himself and the case is a guaranteed appeal win. I know you corrupt dems only care to paint him as a felon before the trial. The defense did withhold a large amount of evidence. Only a kool aide drinking Trump hating dem could think this case is above board and not ripe for appeal! Yeah that Dershowitz is a real Trump zealot! Dershowitz is to fox as is Michael steel is to MSNBC. Look, we have an opposing view who we pay that agrees with us and our echo chamber audience.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 18, 2024 2:45:51 GMT -5
OK Cad $1000 If convicted it will be overturned on appeal. Do we have a bet? I already said I don't know which way this jury will go. I think it is 50/50 Trump gets convicted. The appeals court's job is to verify the trial was conducted fairly and the verdict was within the bounds of law. They can't just overturn a verdict because they disagree with it.The appeals court only looks at the trial evidence and can not hear new testimony or evidence. There is a good chance the appeals court may overturn the decision on several issues including Stormy's testimony. I think Trump has a basis for appeal based on her testimony. But that would not mean Trump was innocent or off the hook. Bragg could refile charges the next day after the appeals court decision and start this all over.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 18, 2024 3:41:17 GMT -5
Wrong you stated the same crime twice. It would have to be proven that he wrote the check to cover up for an election. If he did it for a multitude of other reasons than it is not a crime! Only person to testify to that is a convicted perjurer who lied in front of this jury. The judge has embarrassed himself and the case is a guaranteed appeal win. I know you corrupt dems only care to paint him as a felon before the trial. The defense did withhold a large amount of evidence. Only a kool aide drinking Trump hating dem could think this case is above board and not ripe for appeal! Yeah that Dershowitz is a real Trump zealot! Actually, I listed three other crimes. The federal crime of violating election campaign finance laws. The second was federal tax evasion The third was State tax evasion. IF the jury finds he falsified business records by listing the Stormy payments as legal expenses, then the jury will have to decide if they agree it also facilitated one of the other crimes. If so, it will be a felony conviction. Most likely the tax evasion. I am a Republican, BTW. Why would the defense withhold evidence? This is their only chance to present it.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 18, 2024 3:46:22 GMT -5
So Mr lawyer did the FEC which had jurisdiction over this choose to press charges Hmm Hmm HMMM? Nothing says Trump had to be convicted of the other charges. Could be the FEC had no evidence he falsified his business records. If he is convicted in this case of falsifying business records, the FEC could take a another look at the case. Also, The state of New York could go after Trump for tax crimes if he is convicted in this case and use this case as the evidence he commited fraud on his taxes. The IRS is already after him for cheating on his taxes, so this won't matter to them. And I am not a lawyer.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 18, 2024 4:01:35 GMT -5
Exactly what other than a proven liars word do they have that the check was only to cover this up for the election. If Trump did it to hide/keep from embarrassing himself his wife his business his reputation his kids then it is NOT a crime. It doesn't matter why he did it, falsification of business records is a crime. The reason to link it to the election is to make it a felony instead of a misdemeanor. Depending on the judge's instructions and whether or not defense wants the jury to consider “lesser included offenses”, Trump could be convicted of the misdemeanor. If the defense thinks Trump will be found guilty, they can ask for it. It would be important for them in the appeals process, if the jury came back with a misdemeanor conviction and then Trump wins on appeal, all Bragg could do would be to retry him for the misdemeanor charges and that would be doubtful. Trump is a proven liar and you believe him. The jury may believe Cohen's testimpony was factual.
|
|
|
Post by illinoisfisherman on May 18, 2024 4:08:30 GMT -5
Excuse me sir but I believe you are wrong. The statute of limitations had run out on any misdemeanor. If they can not get a felony conviction they are done.
The “Trump Haters” are so evident in this thread it is simply ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by cadman on May 18, 2024 4:24:53 GMT -5
Excuse me sir but I believe you are wrong. The statute of limitations had run out on any misdemeanor. If they can not get a felony conviction they are done. The “Trump Haters” are so evident in this thread it is simply ridiculous. I was half wrong and fixed my post to be correct. Due to the statute of limitations, only the defense can ask the judge to have the jury consider lesser charges. Thank you pointing that out.
|
|