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

[AlexBailey]

But that's not the law. Nor the facts.

I'll help you out a bit here too. A criminal conspiracy MUST BE an agreement to commit an illegal act.

What unlawful act did the participants agree to perform?

They committed an illegal act. It was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Does it matter that trump was not individually charged with it? It was a proven conspiracy.


You weren’t the judge. The you weren’t on the jury.


BTW, What did Michael Cohen do time for?

 

[ll74]

I'm not sure one source says 171. The law requires they be chosen at random.

And there's no evidence to the contrary.

 

[Rightguide]

The entire thing is so tainted it's impossible to discover the truth because those who were part of it will lie to protect themselves and everyone else involved.

Political animas is on full display in all of these cases. Trump's rights and constitutional protections are being violated wholesale and the Left is choosing to go along with it at all levels of society.

What you see is hate being openly displayed and then contempt for those who point out the Left's bad behavior.

Knowing as well that they can get away with it politically and in the media.

 

[HisArpy]

They committed an illegal act. It was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Does it matter that trump was not individually charged with it? It was a proven conspiracy.


You weren’t the judge. The you weren’t on the jury.


BTW, What did Michael Cohen do time for?

WHAT illegal act?

Can't you answer that simple question?

 

[Rightguide]

They committed an illegal act. It was proven beyond reasonable doubt. Does it matter that trump was not individually charged with it? It was a proven conspiracy.


You weren’t the judge. The you weren’t on the jury.


BTW, What did Michael Cohen do time for?

A guilty verdict in a criminal trial requires unanimity in the jury on all charges if those charges are required to leverage a misdemeanor or misdemeanors into a felony conviction. Harpy can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Lazaran]

WHAT illegal act?

Can't you answer that simple question?

Derpy needs to read this:

https://time.com/6985532/trump-conv... campaign,with Trump's campaign for president.







Derpy



Side note:

Derpy needs to STFU.

 

[AlexBailey]

WHAT illegal act?

Can't you answer that simple question?

Asked and answered, dumb ass.

 

[HisArpy]

A guilty verdict in a criminal trial requires unanimity in the jury on all charges if those charges are required to leverage a misdemeanor or misdemeanors into a felony conviction. Harpy can correct me if I'm wrong.

You're correct.

Further, due process DEMANDS that the accused be told of ALL the charges against him.

Apparently withholding the charges and letting the jury just pick an offense out of the air in order to find someone guilty of committing it is ok to some people.

As long as it's Trump who gets convicted.

 

[Rightguide]

WHAT illegal act?

Can't you answer that simple question?

We've asked them dozens of times and none of them can come up with an answer.

 

[Rightguide]

You're correct.

Further, due process DEMANDS that the accused be told of ALL the charges against him.

Apparently withholding the charges and letting the jury just pick an offense out of the air in order to find someone guilty of committing it is ok to some people.

As long as it's Trump who gets convicted.

And apparently, this secret crime wasn't in the indictment as required by law.

 

[HisArpy]

Asked and answered, dumb ass.

In what post?

Because the ONLY thing you've mentioned is the underlying MISDEMEANORS. You haven't said a thing about the felony offense other than a generic "conspiracy" without any details as to what the participants conspired to unlawfully do.

So, WHAT felony?

If you can't answer that question, one begins to wonder why. Perhaps because there isn't one and you refuse to accept that FACT?

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You're such a simpleton.

The MISDEMEANORS couldn't be prosecuted on their own because the statute of limitations had already run out. The only way those offenses could be "reactivated" was if those offenses were done to cover up a felony.

2 questions:

A. WHAT FELONY?

B. WHAT COVER UP?


A: There is no felony alleged in the indictment. There is NO EVIDENCE of a felony admitted during the trial. Further, THE LAW requires unanimity by the jurors as to EACH AND EVERY ELEMENT of the offense(s). So I ask again, what felony? Which of the 3 possible things for which there is no evidence was THE felony? AND, did the jurors have a unanimous verdict as to which of the 3? AND, how come the judge told the jurors they didn't have to agree unanimously?

Don't those things sort of point to mistakes?

B: Without the attaching felony, there's no cover up. An NDA isn't illegal. Paying for one isn't illegal either. Alleging that the payments should have been recorded as campaign contribution is the misdemeanor offense, not the felony itself. You cannot bootstrap the misdemeanor "wrongful bookkeeping entries' into a felony by re alleging them as an "improper bookkeeping entry" to make it a felony. It's the same offense.

There is NO EVIDENCE which was admitted at trial, or in the indictment, that the bookkeeping entries should have been recorded as campaign contributions. Nor was there any evidence that the NDA is an "in kind" campaign expense.

Without the attaching felony, the verdicts cannot have been unanimous as to EACH AND EVERY element. The jurors had to bring their own thoughts and beliefs into the deliberation and ADD THOSE THINGS to the evidence.

Don't you think that the jurors were supposed to decide based ONLY ON the evidence they were presented? You know, like they were instructed.


Again, you're such a simpleton that you're promoting the verdict as untouchable merely because it's a verdict. That's not the way things work. As you will discover after the appeals court reviews the case.

Speaking of which, I learned the other day that NY has a unique standard when it comes to appeals. Their appellate courts can review not only the law and look for reversible error (of which there are many in this case) but they can also look at the evidence presented and draw their own conclusions from it to reverse a jury's findings.

Basically they can overrule a jury on the facts as well as the law. This isn't the case in most jurisdictions.

Again it’s amazing that Trump’s high charging attorneys didn’t make a motion about any of this.

 

[HisArpy]

And apparently, this secret crime wasn't in the indictment as required by law.

But Trump is guilty of it, whatever it is. The jury said so!!

 

[AlexBailey]

In what post?

Because the ONLY thing you've mentioned is the underlying MISDEMEANORS. You haven't said a thing about the felony offense other than a generic "conspiracy" without any details as to what the participants conspired to unlawfully do.

So, WHAT felony?

If you can't answer that question, one begins to wonder why. Perhaps because there isn't one and you refuse to accept that FACT?

I get it: You don’t get it.

 

[HisArpy]

I get it: You don’t get it.

Then, if you're so smart, there's a simple solution; tell us what underlying felony.

It's not hard.

Unless you can't.

 

[Rightguide]

The jury didn’t buy your bullshit.

What bullshit? I presented nothing to the jury.

 

[AlexBailey]

Then, if you're so smart, there's a simple solution; tell us what underlying felony.

It's not hard.

Unless you can't.

I already quoted the law for you.

It’s not my fault that you’re too stupid to be a lawyer.

 

[AlexBailey]

What bullshit? I presented nothing to the jury.

The jury found him guilty.

 

[HisArpy]

I already quoted the law for you.

It’s not my fault that you’re too stupid to be a lawyer.

And you got it wrong...

 

[HisArpy]

I think the simpleton is running around in circles frantically trying to find a way to justify his opinion of guilt.

Which is why he can't tell us WHAT CRIME Trump committed other than the bookkeeping entries.

 

[Rightguide]

I'm not sure one source says 171. The law requires they be chosen at random.

That 171 number is incorrect. The number of judges on the random list for Trump trials was 24. It's still amazing he managed to get two major Trump trials and the Steve Bannon trial. So having done the math on the basis of just 50 cases spread among 24 judges the odds of one judge getting those three Trump-related cases are 1 in 13,824. So far in 2024 over 42,000 criminal cases have been processed in the NYC court. So the 50 case number I provided for an example is probably multiples of that number per judge.

 

[AlexBailey]

I think the simpleton is running around in circles frantically trying to find a way to justify his opinion of guilt.

Which is why he can't tell us WHAT CRIME Trump committed other than the bookkeeping entries.

Fuck wit, I quoted the NY law for you.

The jury found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[coati]

I would rather defend a pathological liar

Yes, I know. You spend all of your time doing that on the porn board.

 

[HisArpy]

Fuck wit, I quoted the NY law for you.

The jury found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

You go around and around and around but you STILL cannot tell us what felony. Why is that?

The jury returned a guilty verdict as a direct result of the instructions they were given. Those instructions violated the law you so desperately misinterpret in order to hold to your beliefs.

 

[HisArpy]

Yes, I know. You spend all of your time doing that on the porn board.

A single instance of which is a more honorable thing than all of your cheering for antisemitism, hate, and lies.