Trump Election Interference / Falsification of Business Records Criminal Trial (Trump guilty on all 34 Counts) (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    What will happen now that former President Donald Trump was found guilty (in 34 counts) by the jury?
    *
    Speculation on the judge relating to sentencing?
    *
    Appeals?
    *
    Political Damage?
    *
    www.yahoo.com

    Trump found guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records. Here's a breakdown.

    A New York jury unanimously found Donald Trump guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, a stunning conclusion to the historic trial of the former president.
    www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
     
    IMG_8529.jpeg
     
    FullMonte said:
    Just for clarification on this topic. The president does not have a "security clearance." The president, vice president, and members of congress are granted access to classified information as a result of their elected position. They retain such access for the duration of their service. Former presidents and vice presidents (and I would assume members of congress) MAY be granted access to classified information at the pleasure of the sitting president.
    Click to expand...
    Thank you for the clarification. I couldn't recall exactly how it works with the executive and legislative branches. I knew they have access to secure documents and SCIFs as part of their work, but I wasn't recalling the mechanism for being able to have proper access. I thought they had to submit to background checks and such similar to the process for applying for clearance. I work for a federal agency and have a good understanding of security clearances and the rules surrounding that, but just had a brain fart about the executive being slightly different for access to classified intel.
     
    MT15 said:
    Why platform him? He’s just going to lie, isn’t he? Let us know…
    Click to expand...
    I watched most of it. He talked like a lawyer. It was actually a decent interview even if I didn't agree with a bit of what he said, but he's representing his client, so most of what he said wasn't surprising. I will say he didn't go out of his way to disparage anyone. He's not that dumb. He seemed competent enough, but most of what he said pretty much was standard lawyer speak.
     
    Optimus Prime said:
    Click to expand...


    What an absurd non-answer.

    He chose to go on CNN. His client said there were witnesses that could have helped the defense - it’s absolutely fair to ask why they were not called. The answer, after your client has been found guilty, isn’t “they had the burden of proof.”

    Yeah, and the jury was convinced they carried it!
     
    Article about the jury
    ===============
    For six weeks, 100 Centre St. — Manhattan’s criminal courthouse — has been the center of the country’s political and media maelstrom.

    But the storied downtown building has also been a workplace for 12 New Yorkers deciding the fate of former president Donald Trump.


    Having delivered their verdict, finding Trump guilty on 34 felony charges of falsifying records to conceal a sex scandal, the jurors were loosed on Thursday to their homes in Harlem, Hell’s Kitchen and other locations around the city.

    After dispensing with a civic obligation at once routine and historic — in the first criminal trial of a former president — members of the panel now return to their day jobs in sales, finance, education and health care.


    The transition is likely to be a disorienting one, said Marc J. Whiten, a retired New York criminal court judge in Manhattan and the Bronx.
“It’s a surreal experience under ordinary circumstances,” Whiten said. “Most days, you go to work and do your job, then you get home at night and go to bed. Suddenly, you have the power to decide whether someone’s freedom is taken away. Here that someone is a former president. That’s big. That’s surreal. And it’s difficult to put behind you.”……

    After delivering the verdict, the jurors will be free to decide how much to say about their closed-door decision-making — and what it was like to sit in judgment of Trump, an opportunity available to most Americans only at the ballot box.


    After they rendered their verdict, Merchan told jurors they could decide whether to discuss the case and their role in it.
“No one can make you do anything you don’t want to do,” the judge said. “The choice is yours.”

    In past high-profile trials, individual jurors have often opted to pull back the curtain on the private discussions.
The jury foreman in the 1970-1971 trial of the century’s most infamous murderer, Charles Manson, held a news conference within months of the guilty verdict to air his views on the case.

    Just days after O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murdering his former wife and her friend by a Los Angeles jury in 1995, a member of the panel went on ABC’s “Nightline” to reveal that only two of the jurors required persuading to find the former football player not guilty……

     
    superchuck500 said:
    Guarantee those sycophant hypocrites in Florida will change that law for him.
    Click to expand...
    Somebody on Twitter already looked it up. According to the FL statute for out of state convictions they go by the state where the conviction took place. And since NY allows felons to vote unless they are incarcerated, he can vote in FL.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom