Trump Election Interference / Falsification of Business Records Criminal Trial (Trump guilty on all 34 Counts) (1 Viewer)

[SteveSBrickNJ]

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?
*

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

 

[Bigdaddysaints]

I'll bet you $1,000.00 that no New York court will overturn all of Trump's convictions.

You truly confident enough to take that bet? Or are you just chest thumping?

thats where he'll back out. because he will try to take victory if ONE of the 34 is overturned..
If anyone actually makes a bet with him, make sure hes clear that any charges that stand, he's still a convicted felon.

 

[DaveXA]

thats where he'll back out. because he will try to take victory if ONE of the 34 is overturned..
If anyone actually makes a bet with him, make sure hes clear that any charges that stand, he's still a convicted felon.

Yeah, it's real simple, those 34 convictions aren't getting overturned on appeal...period.

 

[RebSaint]

thats where he'll back out. because he will try to take victory if ONE of the 34 is overturned..
If anyone actually makes a bet with him, make sure hes clear that any charges that stand, he's still a convicted felon.

I'm just stunned that anybody on this board would even consider making any kind of bet with SFL. It's nothing personal, but I think making a financial bet with a dedicated MAGA, who has shown not one iota of good faith debate or discussion, who has a demonstrable record of posting lies and lies about what others think and post is not a wise decision.

I'll give a simple, demonstrable example through a hypothetical scenario. Let's say some posters made a simple bet: who wins the Election of 2020--

MAGA would not pay on any bet that Biden did win the election of 2020 based on the allegation that the election was rigged and not legally binding. I definitely see this scenario being played out. Then who will decide who resolves the conflict since money is now involved? Anybody going to involve Andrus if and when a conflict arises as to who wins this monetary conflict? Just. Dont. Do. it.

Keep in mind, the gish-galloping Tweets and the refusal to acknowledge any positions or sources besides what he views will perpetuate and make worse the ongoing divorce from reality and truth. SFL perpetuates the ongoing grift and he now wishes to make monetary bets about political outcomes of events? He wants to "own the libs" and now take their money based on his reality and his reality alone.

Yeah, I'd describe it as a grift within a grift. Call it a sub-grift. Anybody makes this bet and then expects to get paid when he loses this bet is delusional.

 

[fooferdoggie]

I'm just stunned that anybody on this board would even consider making any kind of bet with SFL. It's nothing personal, but I think making a financial bet with a dedicated MAGA, who has shown not one iota of good faith debate or discussion, who has a demonstrable record of posting lies and lies about what others think and post is not a wise decision.

you just use trump bucks.

 

[Optimus Prime]

A new poll conducted by Ipsos shows a decrease in trust in the legal system among Republican voters since the verdict was handed down in Donald Trump’s hush money trial.

A sizable number of Americans, including independents, question whether the verdict was the result of a fair and impartial process, Politico reports. However, most respondents rejected the idea that the prosecution was brought to help President Joe Biden.

Overall, a large number either strongly or somewhat agreed that was the rationale for the case, and one in five Americans said they were less likely to support Trump for president in November with the verdict playing an important part in that decision……

Trump to rally in Wisconsin after calling Milwaukee ‘horrible’: Live updates

Presidential candidate back on the campaign trail after being convicted on all counts at his recent New York hush money trial

www.independent.co.uk

 

[fooferdoggie]

Why is it that someone who says they are so innocent keeps trying for immunity?

 

[Optimus Prime]

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has received more than 100 threats and abusive messages in the weeks since his office finished convicting Donald Trump in the former president’s unprecedented hush money case, more than all the threats the prosecutor received in the previous year.

The threats, analyzed by the DA’s New York Police Department security detail and obtained by the New York Daily News, included messages filled with hateful racial slurs, and ominous comments like “Bragg in Trouble” and a messenger who sent an email from an address named ThisMeansWar.

The volume of aggression far outpaces what Bragg has faced previously, according to court filings. There were 89 threats against the DA in 2023, New York prosecutors disclosed as they sought a gag order in the Trump hush money case, up from just one threat prior to when Trump was indicted.

Throughout the prosecution of Donald Trump, which ended in May, Bragg, who is Black, has received a deluge of threats, many of them racist, including a package sent to his campaign mailbox with a cutout of him hung from a noose.……

Alvin Bragg gets more than 100 threats in the three weeks after Trump’s conviction

Manhattan DA faced threats throughout prosecution of Trump which saw former president convicted of 34 felony charges related to hush money payments

www.independent.co.uk

 

[Optimus Prime]

The Missouri attorney general, Andrew Bailey, has confirmed that he is suing the state of New York for election interference and wrongful prosecution for bringing the Stormy Daniels hush-money case to a trial that saw Donald Trump convicted of 34 felonies........

Missouri attorney general to sue New York over Trump prosecutions

Andrew Bailey’s lawsuit targets New York attorney general and Manhattan DA, who both secured Trump convictions

www.theguardian.com

 

[coldseat]

The Missouri attorney general, Andrew Bailey, has confirmed that he is suing the state of New York for election interference and wrongful prosecution for bringing the Stormy Daniels hush-money case to a trial that saw Donald Trump convicted of 34 felonies........

Missouri attorney general to sue New York over Trump prosecutions

Andrew Bailey’s lawsuit targets New York attorney general and Manhattan DA, who both secured Trump convictions

www.theguardian.com

Can his law license be taken away for filing a frivolous lawsuit? Republican AG's are the worst.

 

[Lapaz]

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has received more than 100 threats and abusive messages in the weeks since his office finished convicting Donald Trump in the former president’s unprecedented hush money case, more than all the threats the prosecutor received in the previous year.

The threats, analyzed by the DA’s New York Police Department security detail and obtained by the New York Daily News, included messages filled with hateful racial slurs, and ominous comments like “Bragg in Trouble” and a messenger who sent an email from an address named ThisMeansWar.

The volume of aggression far outpaces what Bragg has faced previously, according to court filings. There were 89 threats against the DA in 2023, New York prosecutors disclosed as they sought a gag order in the Trump hush money case, up from just one threat prior to when Trump was indicted.

Throughout the prosecution of Donald Trump, which ended in May, Bragg, who is Black, has received a deluge of threats, many of them racist, including a package sent to his campaign mailbox with a cutout of him hung from a noose.……

Alvin Bragg gets more than 100 threats in the three weeks after Trump’s conviction

Manhattan DA faced threats throughout prosecution of Trump which saw former president convicted of 34 felony charges related to hush money payments

www.independent.co.uk

I hope most of those people issuing the threats are prosecuted. It is very important to the rule of law to deter such threats.

 

[fooferdoggie]

The Missouri attorney general, Andrew Bailey, has confirmed that he is suing the state of New York for election interference and wrongful prosecution for bringing the Stormy Daniels hush-money case to a trial that saw Donald Trump convicted of 34 felonies........

Missouri attorney general to sue New York over Trump prosecutions

Andrew Bailey’s lawsuit targets New York attorney general and Manhattan DA, who both secured Trump convictions

www.theguardian.com

is this idiot trying for vice president? man talk about being rouge.

 

[Optimus Prime]

Manhattan DA points to chilling bomb threats as he asks to extend Trump gag order

Prosecutors received two bomb threats and dozens of ‘actionable threats’ and harassing messages during the trial

www.independent.co.uk

 

[MT15]

I just cannot express how much I loathe the six members of the Supreme Court.

Trump Moves to Overturn Manhattan Conviction, Citing Immunity Decision

Former President Donald J. Trump took the action hours after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling granted him immunity for official acts committed in office.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Sendai]

I just cannot express how much I loathe the six members of the Supreme Court.

Trump Moves to Overturn Manhattan Conviction, Citing Immunity Decision

Former President Donald J. Trump took the action hours after a U.S. Supreme Court ruling granted him immunity for official acts committed in office.

www.nytimes.com

Yeah, that’s not gonna fly. But Could be an interesting exercise in what is and isn’t an “official act”.

Eventually, though, this case gets reversed on appeal.


Here are some problems with the case.



The falsification requires another crime in order for there to be a felony. A crime requires charges, indictments, trial and conviction. None of that happened. There was no charge/specific statutory citation or identification for either the state election law or federal tax law in the charges. They were not litigated at any point during the prosecution. That’s a bit of a fifth amendment due process issue.



The alleged crimes that were not charged, indicted, tried and convicted were revealed in closing arguments. One was a state election law. Congress has carved out election law for federal campaigns so state election law doesn’t apply. One was a vague undefined reference to federal taxes. The third was the original falsification misdemeanor that the statute of limitations had expired.



The judge did not require a unanimous decision on each of the charges revealed in closing arguments and included in the judges instructions to the jury. A big, big problem.



The sixth amendment requires “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation” which is a problem because the alleged state election law and federal tax law crimes were not in the charges brought by the prosecution and they are clearly nature and cause.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

But Could be an interesting exercise in what is and isn’t an “official act”.

The ONLY thing that is interesting is that you would even consider this an interesting exercise of what is a POTUS official act. The campaign for an office and the actual elected office are separate entities, BY LAW. FULL STOP!

 

[LA - L.A.]

Eventually, though, this case gets reversed on appeal.

No matter how much you wishcast, the 34 convictions of Trump will never all be overturned by any court in the state of New York. It's never going to happen, no matter how much you desperately wish for it to happen.

Also, no one's ever going to believe you when you say it's going to happen.

The falsification requires another crime in order for there to be a felony.

The law Trump was convicted by a jury for violating only requires that the falsification was done to cover up a felony crime of some kind. That is true.

A crime requires charges, indictments, trial and conviction.

This is completely false bullshirt and you know it's completely false, @Sendai.

The New York state law clearly states that the crime that is being hidden by the falsification only has to proven during trial. It doesn't have to be separately charged, indicted tried or convicted.

The New York state law only requires that the prosecution prove during their trial that there was a felony crime of some kind that the falsification was done to cover up. The prosecution showed evidence of a felony crime that Trump falsified the records to cover up.

The jury unanimously agreed that the prosecution proved beyond any reasonable doubt that on all 34 charges Trump falsified documents to hide a felony that he committed. That is all that the law required and none of the charges will overturned because the covered up felony crime was not separately charged and convicted.

They were not litigated at any point during the prosecution. That’s a bit of a fifth amendment due process issue.

More completely false bullshirt. During the trial, the DA cited the felony laws that Trump violated and tried to cover up with falsified documents. That's all the New York state law requires.

The jury unanimously agreed that the DA proved that beyond a reasonable doubt on all 34 counts. There is no fifth amendment due process issue at all.

Hundreds of people have been convicted for the same New York state crimes Trump was convicted for and they were all tried and convicted in the same way Trump was. Not a single one of them have had their conviction overturned on the grounds of violating fifth amendment due process.

The alleged crimes that were not charged, indicted, tried and convicted were revealed in closing arguments.

That is another complete bullshirt lie. The DA cited the felony laws Trump violated and presented evidence while presenting their case.

The did not wait until closing arguments. You've must not have any arse left at the pace you're lying it off.

One was a state election law. Congress has carved out election law for federal campaigns so state election law doesn’t apply.

That's a lie. Every state has their own set of election laws for presidential and Congressional races. Both federal election campaign finance laws do not nullify state election laws and no New York court is going to overturn the case on these grounds, because they don't actually exist. You're just making shirt up and hoping to trick and fool people.

People reading this board aren't going to tricked or fooled by you.

One was a vague undefined reference to federal taxes.

Total lie that it's vague and applied to federal taxes. It was clear and applied to New York state taxes. Nothing here to overturn any of Trump's convictions.

The third was the original falsification misdemeanor that the statute of limitations had expired.

That's a total lie to. No judge would let a case proceed if the statute of limitations expired. That's just Trump's lie that this Trump shill is repeating.

The judge did not require a unanimous decision on each of the charges..

That's true, because the law clearly states that jurors don't have to agree on what felony crime was being covered up. The law only requires that each jury believe it was proven that at least one felony crime was committed and was the reason the documents were falsified.

Each and every juror believed that on all 34 counts it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed a felony crime that he falsified the documents to cover up. There will be no overturning of any of the 34 crimes that Trump committed based on this.

The sixth amendment requires “to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation”...

It's a total lie that Trump wasn't informed properly of what he was being charged for. This dude is just repeating the same lies that Trump's been repeating. There was no 6th amendment violation or overturning of any of the 34 crimes Trump committed and was convicted for.

The only thing to take away from this or anything else @Sendai says is that he is a completed devoted and loyal member to his dear leader Trump and Trump's cult.

@Sendai is only here repeating the same lies that his dear leader Trump is telling him. If he believes those lies, he's been tricked by Trump. If he doesn't believe those lies, then he's not an honest person. Either way, no one should believe anything he says here.

 

[Sendai]

Juries and Verdicts in Criminal Trials​

Most of the concern over unanimity in verdicts arises from criminal trials. A long history of case law and Constitutional interpretation establishes that criminal trials must have 12 jurors. In federal court, juries must reach a unanimous verdict in all criminal proceedings.

State courts have required unanimous verdicts since 2020. Before that year, nearly all states followed the federal criminal trial procedure. Two states—Oregon and Louisiana—allowed non-unanimous jury verdicts. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld these types of verdicts in Apodaca v. Oregon (406 U.S. 404) (1972).

In 2020, the Court overturned Apodaca with Ramos v. Louisiana (140 U.S. 1390). The Court reasoned that a deeper historical examination of the criminal justice system revealed an intentional bias against some jurors. The non-unanimous verdict helped ensure guilty verdicts for African Americans by eliminating one or two African American "not-guilty" votes (Justice Kavanaugh concurrence at 1418).

The current position of federal and state courts is that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments require unanimous verdicts to convict a criminal defendant.

Loading…

www.findlaw.com

 

[DaveXA]

Juries and Verdicts in Criminal Trials​

Most of the concern over unanimity in verdicts arises from criminal trials. A long history of case law and Constitutional interpretation establishes that criminal trials must have 12 jurors. In federal court, juries must reach a unanimous verdict in all criminal proceedings.

State courts have required unanimous verdicts since 2020. Before that year, nearly all states followed the federal criminal trial procedure. Two states—Oregon and Louisiana—allowed non-unanimous jury verdicts. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld these types of verdicts in Apodaca v. Oregon (406 U.S. 404) (1972).

In 2020, the Court overturned Apodaca with Ramos v. Louisiana (140 U.S. 1390). The Court reasoned that a deeper historical examination of the criminal justice system revealed an intentional bias against some jurors. The non-unanimous verdict helped ensure guilty verdicts for African Americans by eliminating one or two African American "not-guilty" votes (Justice Kavanaugh concurrence at 1418).

The current position of federal and state courts is that the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments require unanimous verdicts to convict a criminal defendant.

Loading…

www.findlaw.com

And? Again you're posting things and not explaining how it affects the case we're discussing. This doesn't change a thing.