Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today

The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
253 Posts 13 Posters 6.3k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nycJ Online
    jon-nyc
    wrote on last edited by
    #179

    IMG_5879.jpeg

    You were warned.

    1 Reply Last reply
    • taiwan_girlT Offline
      taiwan_girlT Offline
      taiwan_girl
      wrote on last edited by
      #180

      So, yes this was a political trial. But taking that away, and soley looking at the evidence and what the jury was told to rule on, do you guys think they made the correct decision?

      My understanding is
      President Trump had an affair with a porn actor
      President Trump paid the porn actor to keep quiet about the affair
      President Trump used his business funds to pay the porn actor
      President Trump classified these "expenses" as something other than "keep quiet payments"
      President Trump was charged with making false business statements

      Is the above correct? If so, then I think that the jury was correct in finding him guilty. Again, they were not looking at if the laws were correct or if the trail was political or if the judge was bias, etc. They were presented with the law and asked if President Trump broke that law. Just like any other trial.

      George KG 1 Reply Last reply
      • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

        So, yes this was a political trial. But taking that away, and soley looking at the evidence and what the jury was told to rule on, do you guys think they made the correct decision?

        My understanding is
        President Trump had an affair with a porn actor
        President Trump paid the porn actor to keep quiet about the affair
        President Trump used his business funds to pay the porn actor
        President Trump classified these "expenses" as something other than "keep quiet payments"
        President Trump was charged with making false business statements

        Is the above correct? If so, then I think that the jury was correct in finding him guilty. Again, they were not looking at if the laws were correct or if the trail was political or if the judge was bias, etc. They were presented with the law and asked if President Trump broke that law. Just like any other trial.

        George KG Offline
        George KG Offline
        George K
        wrote on last edited by
        #181

        @taiwan_girl said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

        So, yes this was a political trial. But taking that away, and soley looking at the evidence and what the jury was told to rule on, do you guys think they made the correct decision?

        My understanding is
        President Trump had an affair with a porn actor
        President Trump paid the porn actor to keep quiet about the affair
        President Trump used his business funds to pay the porn actor
        President Trump classified these "expenses" as something other than "keep quiet payments"
        President Trump was charged with making false business statements

        Is the above correct? If so, then I think that the jury was correct in finding him guilty. Again, they were not looking at if the laws were correct or if the trail was political or if the judge was bias, etc. They were presented with the law and asked if President Trump broke that law. Just like any other trial.

        Yes, I believe most of those are correct, though it's unclear whether these expenses were classified as "business." Assuming they were, the statute of limitations for all of these expired in 2019. They are all misdemeanors, I might add.

        The only way they could resurrect these charges is to make them part of an attempt to commit another, unspecified, crime, making it a felony, and within the statute of limitations.

        A summary of the charges and the prosecution at NRO. Granted, it's right-leaning, but this editorial lays out the landscape pretty well.

        https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/05/the-horrendous-trump-verdict/

        "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

        The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

        JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
        • George KG Offline
          George KG Offline
          George K
          wrote on last edited by
          #182

          By the way, in San Francisco, if you refer to Trump as a felon, you're denying his humanity.

          image.jpeg image.jpeg .

          "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

          The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

          MikM 1 Reply Last reply
          • AxtremusA Away
            AxtremusA Away
            Axtremus
            wrote on last edited by
            #183

            People first language, eh? Let’s see …

            • person who has given birth to a child
            • person who has a child who has in turn given birth to a child
            • person who has a sibling
            • person who has a sibling who has a child
            • perspn who has separated from a spouse
            • person who has played a role in a TV or movie production
            1 Reply Last reply
            • George KG George K

              By the way, in San Francisco, if you refer to Trump as a felon, you're denying his humanity.

              image.jpeg image.jpeg .

              MikM Away
              MikM Away
              Mik
              wrote on last edited by
              #184

              @George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

              By the way, in San Francisco, if you refer to Trump as a felon, you're denying his humanity.

              image.jpeg image.jpeg .

              This shit could only be deemed important by someone who grew up in the every child gets a trophy generation.

              “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

              1 Reply Last reply
              • LuFins DadL Offline
                LuFins DadL Offline
                LuFins Dad
                wrote on last edited by
                #185

                I believe the term is Justice Disadvantaged Person of Color.

                The Brad

                1 Reply Last reply
                • LuFins DadL Offline
                  LuFins DadL Offline
                  LuFins Dad
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #186

                  Orange is a color.

                  The Brad

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • LuFins DadL Offline
                    LuFins DadL Offline
                    LuFins Dad
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #187

                    Justice Impacted Person. My bad.

                    The Brad

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    • George KG George K

                      @taiwan_girl said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

                      So, yes this was a political trial. But taking that away, and soley looking at the evidence and what the jury was told to rule on, do you guys think they made the correct decision?

                      My understanding is
                      President Trump had an affair with a porn actor
                      President Trump paid the porn actor to keep quiet about the affair
                      President Trump used his business funds to pay the porn actor
                      President Trump classified these "expenses" as something other than "keep quiet payments"
                      President Trump was charged with making false business statements

                      Is the above correct? If so, then I think that the jury was correct in finding him guilty. Again, they were not looking at if the laws were correct or if the trail was political or if the judge was bias, etc. They were presented with the law and asked if President Trump broke that law. Just like any other trial.

                      Yes, I believe most of those are correct, though it's unclear whether these expenses were classified as "business." Assuming they were, the statute of limitations for all of these expired in 2019. They are all misdemeanors, I might add.

                      The only way they could resurrect these charges is to make them part of an attempt to commit another, unspecified, crime, making it a felony, and within the statute of limitations.

                      A summary of the charges and the prosecution at NRO. Granted, it's right-leaning, but this editorial lays out the landscape pretty well.

                      https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/05/the-horrendous-trump-verdict/

                      JollyJ Offline
                      JollyJ Offline
                      Jolly
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #188

                      @George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

                      But taking that away, and soley looking at the evidence and what the jury was told to rule on, do you guys think they made the correct decision?

                      There were two lawyers on the jury. Even in NYC, I can't believe an attorney can convict anybody of anything based on GLOAT Cohen's testimony.

                      I can only hope that the judge's instructions allowed the jury no leeway in interpretation.

                      “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                      Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      • LuFins DadL Offline
                        LuFins DadL Offline
                        LuFins Dad
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #189

                        6 point bump - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13480491/donald-trump-verdict-guilty-poll-positive.html

                        $1,000,000 per count, and 1/3 of the donors were new donors.

                        https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/31/trump-campaign-donations-record.html

                        The Brad

                        89th8 JollyJ 2 Replies Last reply
                        • MikM Away
                          MikM Away
                          Mik
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #190

                          That was the result I expected, that he would grow more popular.

                          “I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.” ~Winston S. Churchill

                          LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
                          • MikM Mik

                            That was the result I expected, that he would grow more popular.

                            LuFins DadL Offline
                            LuFins DadL Offline
                            LuFins Dad
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #191

                            @Mik said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

                            That was the result I expected, that he would grow more popular.

                            The new donor number is what everyone should pay attention to.

                            The Brad

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • kluursK Offline
                              kluursK Offline
                              kluurs
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #192

                              Yup - expected. It also would not be a surprise if the verdict is overturned by the Supreme Court. Vox did a decent review of this a year ago.

                              IF the Supreme Court were to overrule the current conviction AND if it were a 6-3 vote, one can be certain that left leaning voters will feel as outraged as right leaning voters are feeling today.

                              I suspect that is what DJT will be urging today - that the Supreme Court review the appropriateness of the prosecution. Whatever happens - and I'd bet for the overturning - one can be sure that everyone will be even more energized for the November election.

                              LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
                              • kluursK kluurs

                                Yup - expected. It also would not be a surprise if the verdict is overturned by the Supreme Court. Vox did a decent review of this a year ago.

                                IF the Supreme Court were to overrule the current conviction AND if it were a 6-3 vote, one can be certain that left leaning voters will feel as outraged as right leaning voters are feeling today.

                                I suspect that is what DJT will be urging today - that the Supreme Court review the appropriateness of the prosecution. Whatever happens - and I'd bet for the overturning - one can be sure that everyone will be even more energized for the November election.

                                LuFins DadL Offline
                                LuFins DadL Offline
                                LuFins Dad
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #193

                                @kluurs said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

                                Yup - expected. It also would not be a surprise if the verdict is overturned by the Supreme Court. Vox did a decent review of this a year ago.

                                IF the Supreme Court were to overrule the current conviction AND if it were a 6-3 vote, one can be certain that left leaning voters will feel as outraged as right leaning voters are feeling today.

                                I suspect that is what DJT will be urging today - that the Supreme Court review the appropriateness of the prosecution. Whatever happens - and I'd bet for the overturning - one can be sure that everyone will be even more energized for the November election.

                                I think DJT will want to slow down the appeal process. Go through the NY Appellate Court first. He wants to go into November as a Justice Impacted Individual.

                                The Brad

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                • jon-nycJ Online
                                  jon-nycJ Online
                                  jon-nyc
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #194

                                  Ken - this is a NY criminal case. It would be very hard for him to get it to SCOTUS on the merits. You really think they’d grant cert because of who he is?

                                  You were warned.

                                  CopperC 1 Reply Last reply
                                  • kluursK Offline
                                    kluursK Offline
                                    kluurs
                                    wrote on last edited by kluurs
                                    #195

                                    The Supreme Court has long held, under a doctrine known as the “rule of lenity,” that “fair warning should be given to the world, in language that the common world will understand, of what the law intends to do if a certain line is passed.” Thus, when the meaning of a criminal statute is unclear, the Constitution sometimes requires that statute to be read narrowly because an unclear criminal law did not give potential defendants “fair warning” that their conduct was illegal.

                                    The current Court is divided about when this rule of lenity should apply, and whether it provides much protection at all to criminal defendants.

                                    David French wrote on this [issue](lenity trump conviction).

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                                      6 point bump - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13480491/donald-trump-verdict-guilty-poll-positive.html

                                      $1,000,000 per count, and 1/3 of the donors were new donors.

                                      https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/31/trump-campaign-donations-record.html

                                      89th8 Offline
                                      89th8 Offline
                                      89th
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #196

                                      @LuFins-Dad said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

                                      6 point bump - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13480491/donald-trump-verdict-guilty-poll-positive.html

                                      $1,000,000 per count, and 1/3 of the donors were new donors.

                                      https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/31/trump-campaign-donations-record.html

                                      Trump is playing 4D... dare I say, 5D chess right now.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • JollyJ Offline
                                        JollyJ Offline
                                        Jolly
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #197

                                        I'd like to see Trump take 40 states. Or more.

                                        I think this is the best way, along with a couple of favorable SCOTUS rulings, to prevent further lawfare and to bring some sanity back to the judiciary.

                                        Merchan, you slimy toad, what hast thou wrought?

                                        “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                        Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                                          6 point bump - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13480491/donald-trump-verdict-guilty-poll-positive.html

                                          $1,000,000 per count, and 1/3 of the donors were new donors.

                                          https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/31/trump-campaign-donations-record.html

                                          JollyJ Offline
                                          JollyJ Offline
                                          Jolly
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #198

                                          @LuFins-Dad said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

                                          6 point bump - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13480491/donald-trump-verdict-guilty-poll-positive.html

                                          $1,000,000 per count, and 1/3 of the donors were new donors.

                                          https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/31/trump-campaign-donations-record.html

                                          The website crashed.

                                          Wonder what the actual figures would be if that had not happened?

                                          “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                                          Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups