The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today

[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 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/

[George K]

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

.

[Axtremus]

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

[Mik]

@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.

.

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

[LuFins Dad]

I believe the term is Justice Disadvantaged Person of Color.

[LuFins Dad]

Orange is a color.

[LuFins Dad]

Justice Impacted Person. My bad.

[Jolly]

@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.

[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

[Mik]

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

[LuFins Dad]

@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.

[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 Dad]

@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.

[jon-nyc]

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?

[kluurs]

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).

[89th]

@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.

[Jolly]

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?

[Jolly]

@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?

[Copper]

@jon-nyc said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:

grant cert because of who he is?

It might have the same urgency and importance as something like Bush v. Gore