LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Monday, April 15th: First Ever Criminal Trial for a Former US President

SmokingFap said:
I couldn't have made myself plainer than a Quaker on his day off. I've never hidden my true feelings on here. I despise all of you MAGAt retards. The world would be a better place if Covid had been genetically engineered to only kill conservative conspiracy theorist Trump ball-gargling pieces of shit like you, harpy, vietater, and RG. Not sorry if I've hurt your fee-fees.
Click to expand...
And you leftists call those on the Right 'deplorables'. 😄

You are a text book example of how Nazis come into power. Good job! 👍
 
A decrepit Harvey Weinstein was just wheeled into the same courthouse.

Fitting.
 
TastySuckToy said:
You're definitely a democrat/leftist, that's for sure.
Click to expand...

He's realized that his entire reason for being is evaporating before his hate filled eyes. He can't deal with it so he's impotently lashing out at the world.
 
jomar said:
So I’m assuming this is standard procedure, but it does seem weird to get a unanimous vote on a mix and match thing.
Click to expand...
The three underlying charges were not available to the defense till after the final summation by the prosecution. The defense cannot properly cross examine the charges if the charges are kept from the defense. Another reverse error, another reason for a directed verdict and another reason reason the appellate court will overturn the trial on a violation of the sixth amendment . This judge is making shit up as he goes.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. IMHO
 
icanhelp1 said:
The three underlying charges were not available to the defense till after the final summation by the prosecution. The defense cannot properly cross examine the charges if the charges are kept from the defense. Another reverse error, another reason for a directed verdict and another reason reason the appellate court will overturn the trial on a violation of the sixth amendment . This judge is making shit up as he goes.

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. IMHO
Click to expand...


A defendant also has a right to unanimous verdict on all elements of the offenses he is charged with.

One of the elements is that Trump engaged in the alleged conduct "in order to commit another felony offense." The specifics for that offense are not part of the indictment, there is no evidence to indicate what it is, and the judge told the jury they don't have have a unanimous decision as to that element. 3 reversible errors in one.
 
TastySuckToy said:
Might end up with a hung jury if they fear leftist/democrat reprisal if they find Trump not guilty.
Click to expand...
You're intimating a juror would be afraid to render a guilty decision for fear of being harmed in return. You must finish that conjecture to be fair and unbiased in your statement.
  • A wacko leftist/Democrat might be so pissed at not finding Trump guilty he/she/they act out of rage.
  • A wacko rightist/Republican feels he/she/they or Trump didn't get a fair trial and might do the same to jurists.
  • A wacko, self-motivated, attention-seeking lone wolf might take Trump out for self-glory.
  • None of these things might happen is more likely.
  • The jury might render an appropriate decision based on the evidence it hears.
Your 'might' is pure conjecture, is an inappropriate response, and doesn't contribute anything noteworthy or relevant.

It is also quite possible that the following might happen:
  • Trump is found guilty on some charges.
  • He is found guilty on all charges.
  • Trump is found not guilty on any charges.
  • The jury is 'hung up on a legitimate decision' and cannot reach a decision - not influenced by personal harm.
Possible conjecture as to the outcomes:
If convicted, Trump will still run for President anyway, probably under some house arrest rules.
  • His base surges, claiming victory over Biden as a corrupt President out to 'assassinate' him.
  • With a hung jury decision, he continues to run, claiming victory–the same diatribe as currently espoused.
  • An innocent rendering, he runs and gloats over every opponent with more vitriol than usual.
  • Trump becomes President.
  • Biden becomes President.
  • Biden lies about Trump, and Trump continues to lie about Biden.
  • Both get struck by lightning, and Harris becomes President.
  • They get Presidential funerals with equal honors.
  • You piss and moan about it not being fair. It's a biased funeral since the current President gets the first position at the funeral procession.
  • Melania remarries, sells Mar-a-Lago, and moves out of the country.
  • Don Jr., Jared, or Eric run in Donnie's place as Repub presidential candidate.
  • Add some more implosible actions at your whim here. None of those will be relevant as well.
 
icanhelp1 said:
When someone like Mallord insist he's morally superior to anyone who votes for Trump doesn't deserve a response. I acknowledged his service and moved on.

I provided a podcast consisting of Megan Kelley, Andy McCarthy and Phil Houston, reputable lawyers who demonstrated with legal expertise how the Bragg case was flawed and explained in detail how Judge Merchan bastardized the case to include letting the jury off for a whole week, left to their own devices during a very busy holiday weekend. Like these jurors will not interact with prejudicial citizens and not be influenced by Trump haters. I hope I'm wrong!
Click to expand...
You are allowed to be wrong. Such is the case here in your statements.

By the way, I've not insisted on or even claimed to be morally superior to anyone who votes for Trump. It's wrong of you to claim that. Nowhere in these threads is your claim that I've stated that assertion.

Judge Merchan made those decisions, considered the jury's ability to retain the details over that period, and reasonably believed they would abide by those rules. Megan, Andy, and Phil can speculate but never know for certain if those individual jurors did not follow Merchan's instructions. They are entitled to their beliefs that this is some bastardized case – that doesn't affect what twelve jurors will do as they do no have access to your sources during the trial.

Reputable lawyers with legal expertise on the other side of this case have proffered alternate scenarios. It's important to acknowledge that these perspectives hold weight and are as valid as your sources. That allows this thread to be a reasonable, balanced debate on Trump's guilt or innocence in this matter.

What is crystal clear and of utmost importance is that twelve jurors, excluding you and me, will play a pivotal role in determining the trial's outcome.

Patience.
 
Rightguide said:
Show me another warrant issued against a former President to compare it with.
Click to expand...
A former President has no precedence to have a warrant issued against him. This was a first in the history of the USA.

This happened - without a warrant. It could easily have happened at Mar-a-Lago, but Trump lied several times about his having the documents, declassified them and other obstructive tactics to reclaim those documents in his possession. Trump forced the issue with his recalcitrant behaviorism. Believe what you will, the search at Mar=a-Lago found documents of a graver nature than the six documents at Biden's residence.

CNN —
The FBI’s unprecedented search of President Joe Biden’s home in Wilmington, Delaware, resulted from high-stakes discussions between the Justice Department and Biden attorneys over when and how it would take place, sources familiar with the matter tell CNN.

Biden’s team stresses that it was cooperative in the lead-up to Friday’s search and even expressed an eagerness for the search to happen as expeditiously as possible to move the investigation along – and to try to put the matter behind them.

For its part, the Justice Department had decided it would conduct the latest search – and any subsequent searches – after Biden’s team handled earlier searches themselves. Federal investigators also were prepared to seek a warrant if they did not get consent to search the Wilmington property, according to multiple sources.

https://media.cnn.com/api/v1/images/stellar/prod/230123123338-file-bob-bauer.jpg?c=16x9&q=h_144,w_256,c_fill

Bob Bauer: The man behind Biden's classified documents strategy
The Justice Department, however, never raised the possibility of a warrant during the recent discussions, according to a law enforcement source, even though the possibility loomed if Biden’s team didn’t cooperate.

“You want to have people looking at things, know what to look for. Attorneys don’t collect evidence – that would be FBI. Whoever’s getting this info would have to have clearance,” one source familiar with the investigation told CNN, referring to previous searches by Biden’s lawyers.

In the end, both sides reached an agreement that allowed the FBI to do the search, and investigators spent nearly 13 hours combing through all of the working, living and storage spaces. They found six items relevant to the probe, including documents with classified markings and material from Biden’s time in the Senate.
 
icanhelp1 said:
Again, without testimony from Weisselberg kind of hard to prove.
Click to expand...
Why didn't Trump call Weisselberg or the others to testify? Didn't he whine about them this afternoon out front of the courthouse? He had a right to call them in his defense.

So...?
 
jaF0 said:
The documents case and related information is off topic for this thread about the New York state fraud case.
Click to expand...
It answered a question. Regardless, the answer stands. Strike it from the post, your honor, but then you'd show your prejudice against free speech. 😘
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

fgarvb1
Separation Of Powers Between President And Congress
Replies
7
Views
979
Gunner70
Gunner70
Peregrinator
Transcript of Fitzgerald's Press Conference
Replies
3
Views
399
Mr Noone
Mr Noone
Back
Top