The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today
-
So, the other interesting question is this.
Will Merchan restrict Trump's travel?
The appeal will take years (see Weinstein). So will Trump wear an ankle bracelet until it's done?
"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.
-
@George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Jesus was convicted for telling people to love their neighbors, to be forgiving, and to ask for forgiveness. He was convicted for suggesting that the Pharisees were misinterpreting the law. He was convicted for pronouncing that he was the messiah and salvation could be found through him.
Trump was convicted for paying an aging porn actress to sign an NDA for a sexual encounter that totally never happened, so as to not embarrass himself, his kids from his 3 different marriages, and his soft core porn model wife.
Totally the same thing.
-
So, the other interesting question is this.
Will Merchan restrict Trump's travel?
The appeal will take years (see Weinstein). So will Trump wear an ankle bracelet until it's done?
@George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
So, the other interesting question is this.
Will Merchan restrict Trump's travel?
The appeal will take years (see Weinstein). So will Trump wear an ankle bracelet until it's done?
When Trump wins will he be restricted from overseas travel?
-
@George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Misleading. His instructions make sense. He’s charged with falsifying business records to cover up a crime. He’s saying the jury doesn’t have to agree what the underlying crime was, as long as they believe he kniew about it and falsified records because of it. The jury does have to be unanimous that he falsified records with the motivation of covering up a crime.
(In fact, under the law, Trump doesn’t even have to be the one who committed the crime being covered up.)
@jon-nyc said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
@George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Misleading. His instructions make sense. He’s charged with falsifying business records to cover up a crime. He’s saying the jury doesn’t have to agree what the underlying crime was, as long as they believe he kniew about it and falsified records because of it. The jury does have to be unanimous that he falsified records with the motivation of covering up a crime.
(In fact, under the law, Trump doesn’t even have to be the one who committed the crime being covered up.)
By the way, John Roberts issued a correction to this tweet. He must read TNCR.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
@George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Is that Michael Cohen behind him?
Nah. A different Jewish guy.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
@George-K said in The Trump "Hush Money" Trial starts today:
Is that Michael Cohen behind him?
Nah. A different Jewish guy.
-
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 statementsIs 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.
-
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 statementsIs 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.
@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 statementsIs 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.
-
By the way, in San Francisco, if you refer to Trump as a felon, you're denying his humanity.
."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.
-
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
-
By the way, in San Francisco, if you refer to Trump as a felon, you're denying his humanity.
.@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.
-
I believe the term is Justice Disadvantaged Person of Color.
-
Orange is a color.
-
Justice Impacted Person. My bad.
-
@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 statementsIs 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 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.
