Maybe because you don't know any more about it, legally, than anyone else here.
Grand jury votes to indict Trump
- Thread starter UncleMark
- Start date
I don’t know anyone IN QAnon. Is it a club with dues, board members, etc.? All I thought I knew about QAnon I learned here and I thought I learned that it was a bunch of anonymous people believing extremely stupid conspiracy theories. Pizzagate (don’t know all the details because what I heard here was stupid and enough) and JFK jr. coming back fro the dead to be Trump’s running mate. Can’t think of anything else, but I’m sure the rest is stupid too.
Apparently I did, and because I listened to experts rather than fools. You should try it.
Here's the text of the Sixth Amendment:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.
What part do you claim to have been violated?For what it's worth, I think it may be difficult to convict Trump of anything, mostly because the polarization of the U.S. makes me think a hung jury may be more likely now than in the past, especially for a trial of Trump..
Let me ask a hypothetical:
If you managed a Wal-Mart and the same guy came in and stole a small item (candy bar, socks, marker etc.) virtually every day until he stole 34 items, wouldn't you call him a criminal and expect him to be prosecuted?
34 misdemeanors ain't a minor thing, if proven. Trump faces these even if the felonies are disregarded.
Sure, you probably listened to 'experts' with their fancy law degrees, years of expertise, intimate knowledge of this area of the law, access to court filings, knowledge of precedent and various other fonts of knowledge uniquely qualifying them to inform on this indictment/charges/case, but did you check in with catturd?
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
Well, I guess you are another vote for Trump then.
Oh wait! You were already a vote for Trump. Never mind. Don't matter.
To be fair, in this case Trump stole one candy bar. The thirty four counts are the thirty four times he lied about it.
Good one. It's OK to have fun but fight the impulse to just be another Lucy.
Last edited:
No ftw -- you actually converted one.Goal achieved from tweets posted. Triggered targets. Sounds like you guys gained a new lefty today. Don't let that sheep's clothes fool ya.
Taylor Swift fan, Trump hater. Congrats to the WC. You actually converted one. And just when I said the WC was insane for the same results. The results changed.
Still -- it sounds like 34 misdemeanors for individual lies plus 34 misdemeanors for the original individual thefts (with chances of enhancement to felonies).
Here's a riddle: What do you call a guy that is convicted of 34 misdemeanors? A career what??
We're talking past each other. Trump committed one "crime" -- paying off Stormy Daniels. The 34 charges are for each ledger entry that was improperly coded in the accounting of the money involved in that single "crime".
You know I don't give a shit how they nail the bastard, but lets not kid ourselves that this is a righteous prosecution. But if they can Capone him, I'm fine with it.
Also not correct per the experts. Paying her in exchange for keeping the affair to herself is not a crime. We could have affairs with women and give them $500 to keep it quiet (might be skanks
), and it’s no crime. The crime is falsifying business records to disguise the payments as something else - in this case legal fees, I believe. Still a misdemeanor. Bragg made them felonies by tying them to illegal campaign expenses of some kind (like Edwards). Could be even if he didn’t use campaign funds. Defense will likely be that it had nothing to do with the campaign and he just wanted to spare Melania from these false and malicious accusations by Daniels and McDougal (he already denies the affairs). This is one reason it’s week and why the feds passed.Also not correct per the experts. Paying her in exchange for keeping the affair to herself is not a crime. We could have affairs with women and give them $500 to keep it quiet (might be skanks
Yeah, yeah, yeah... that's why I wrote "crime" in quotes.
Do they explain why Cohen and Weisselberg both went to prison? Wasn't Trump the "unindicted co-conspirator" that was described in connection with Cohen?
What we know about 'Unindicted Co-conspirator #1' in the indictment against the Trump Organization and its CFO
Donald Trump's family company was charged Thursday in a sprawling tax crime investigation from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
www.businessinsider.com
Aren't falsifying documents also a crime? Sure, one led to the other but that doesn't make it one crime.
It is like robbing a place, shooting someone in the midst of it and then resisting arrest. They all happened from the same event but the person would be charged for multiple different crimes.
Tells me all I need to know about you...................I already knew it but you graciously confirm it on a regular basis.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I don’t recall.Do they explain why Cohen and Weisselberg both went to prison? Wasn't Trump the "unindicted co-conspirator" that was described in connection with Cohen?
What we know about 'Unindicted Co-conspirator #1' in the indictment against the Trump Organization and its CFO
Donald Trump's family company was charged Thursday in a sprawling tax crime investigation from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
The response is: where is that detailed as the crime being covered up in the indictment? The point here by Epstein and Yoo, at least, is that the defendant needs these things to be spelled out so he can defend himself.
Even if detailed , though, that charge will be challenged on constitutional grounds and federal preemption. The feds could have prosecuted him for that but didn’t. Why not?
Yes, but you can't use someone's status as an unindicted co-conspirator as an end-run around the elements of a crime. To prove felony falsification, Bragg is going to have to prove that Trump intended to commit and/or cover up a crime by falsifying those records. He doesn't have to prove the crime actually existed, which is what the feds already did for us. But he does have to prove anew that Trump intended that said crime occur or be hidden.Do they explain why Cohen and Weisselberg both went to prison? Wasn't Trump the "unindicted co-conspirator" that was described in connection with Cohen?
What we know about 'Unindicted Co-conspirator #1' in the indictment against the Trump Organization and its CFO
Donald Trump's family company was charged Thursday in a sprawling tax crime investigation from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office.
Because Barr put the kibosh to it, and Garland didn't think it was a slam dunk.
Literally no one thinks it is anything else.
It’s amazing to me that more people aren’t queasy about what this means for our country moving forward.
Even if the DA is doing solely based on politics, it is still up to the jury. Of course, I am sure you will call the jury biased if they convict Trump. I don't see why anyone would be queasy when Trump appears to have committed the crime, no matter how minor.
Anyway, there is a lot that goes on due to political bias....unless you really think the Tennessee expulsions had nothing to do with politics.
Last edited:
Right, like there is anyway he is going to get a fair jury, let alone in a 93% voting democrat pool.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
I'm unsure on this part. Is that right? They don't have to prove the underlying crime as against Trump? Why not? Cohen took a plea--does that count as res judicata against Trump?
As I have already said a billion times, of course he has to do that eventually.
So by that time damage has already been done. The other thing is just to keep standards up your post is a lie from the start.
You've been on this board a while - are you really amazed?
I would be amazed if they were queasy about it.
He admits he doesn't care and makes him no difference. Anyway as long as I get my way
weakAlso not correct per the experts. Paying her in exchange for keeping the affair to herself is not a crime. We could have affairs with women and give them $500 to keep it quiet (might be skanks
Delusion is not funny. I read about it daily. It's sad.
A
anon_6hv78pr714xta
Guest
House Judiciary Committee is subpoenaing a former NY prosecutor who wrote a book critical of Bragg. Bragg is suing to block it:
As you told another poster, I don't like to see our team look stupid..... lol
Similar threads
