jerrymahoney

I also hope the (as you said) never gets to be President again and, to me, that is paramount to the disposition of any of these criminal trials.

I have voted in every US Presidential election since 1972. I cannot register again to vote in 2024 due to Patriot Act concerns so Trump if the nominee gets a free ride from me.

Because I am amused that at times I am referred to as a Trump sympathizer when I cast 2 votes against him by persons who didn't.

Well OK it was not explained why people who said they didn't know what Trump showed them now know what Trump showed them.

Yes Count 32 refers to an undated month-day-year document. So I guess those in the meetings musta changed their story.

And you are certain that's what happened in the Bedminster incident or are you suggesting there are others? "On the recording, according to two people familiar with its contents, Mr. Trump can be heard flipping through papers as he talks to a publisher and writer working on a book by his final White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows. Mr. Trump and the people in the meeting do not explicitly say what document the former president is holding." https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/19/us/politics/trump-classified-document-fox-news.html

Whether the original charges are frivolous or not, they were properly executed by a grand jury. The results of the trial can be challenged if there was one or more constitutional rights denied. And the jury instructions in a federal conspiracy case can be quite complex and can be challenged if not properly met by the jury.

So in a nutshell: The appeal cannot be for frivolous reasons.

Federal law allows bail pending appeal for certain convictions if the judge is clearly convinced the defendant won't flee or harm someone and the appeal has a good chance of being successful. (18 U.S.C. § 3143.) https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/can-i-bail-while-i-appeal-conviction.html and from that statute: (B) that the appeal is not for the purpose of delay and raises a substantial question of law or fact likely to result in— (i)reversal, (ii)an order for a new trial, (iii)a sentence that does not include a term of imprisonment, or (iv)a reduced sentence to a term of imprisonment less than the total of the time already served plus the expected duration of the appeal process.

That is attorney Weiss's opinion based upon his experience as a Espionage Act Prosecutor and defense attorney. You don't have to agree with it.

REDUX Opinion Trying Trump under the Espionage Act will be trickier than you think June 21, 2023 at 7:15 a.m. EDT Baruch Weiss, a former federal prosecutor in the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York, is a partner at Arnold & Porter and a criminal defense lawyer who handles Espionage Act cases. The charges in the indictment against Donald Trump might seem simple: Trump finished his term as president, became an ordinary citizen, yet retained 31 classified documents that, under the Espionage Act, he should have returned to the government upon demand. He compounded his wrongdoing by lying and obstructing. But as a former federal prosecutor and a defense attorney who has handled Espionage Act cases, I can tell you that prosecutions under that law are tricky. And Trump’s will be extraordinarily so. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/06/21/trump-prosecution-espionage-act-tricky/ https://archive.is/UJhXJ

Flor- ee- DAH

The Standard Statute of Limitations for Federal Crimes In accordance with federal law, the statute of limitations for most non-capital crimes is five years. More specifically, in accordance with 18 USC 3282, the statute states: “Except as otherwise expressly provided by law, no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense, not capital, unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted within five years next after such offense shall have been committed.” https://www.capitalcriminaldefense.com/blog/2022/august/what-is-the-statute-of-limitations-on-federal-crimes/

Then there is this one for perspective -- BTW this was my analysis when the Trump - Raffensberger call transcript first became available. DJT: I've heard that people are saying that 200,000 Martians landed in Georgia and voted illegally. Respnse: Nonsense. DJT: But that's what people are saying. And if only 10% of it is true, then that's 20,000 disqualified votes and that's all we need.

From NY Times: The most striking example is detailed in Act 113 of the indictment, which charges Trump with making a series of false statements to Georgia’s secretary of state, Brad Raffensperger, and his deputies in Trump’s notorious Jan. 2, 2021, telephone call. Most legal commentators, myself included, focused on that call because it contained a not-so-veiled threat against Raffensperger and his counsel. In recorded comments, Trump told them they faced a “big risk” of criminal prosecution because he claimed they knew about election fraud and were taking no action to stop it. Willis’s focus, by contrast, is not on the threats but rather on the lies. And when you read the list of Trump’s purported lies, they are absolutely incredible. His claims aren’t just false; they’re transparently, incandescently stupid. This was not a sophisticated effort to overturn the election. It was a shotgun blast of obvious falsehoods. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/15/opinion/georgia-donald-trump-indictment-case.html

As President, I sure hope not. I voted against him twice. Can't register truthfully again. As far as prison goes, would be no tears shedded from me.

Great. so think what more he could do as President.

Well OK but if you read many of the quotes on here, you certainly would not consider that, even given all the evidence, procedural issues are still part of the legal process.

So seeing justice is done means he is convicted. OK. The damage the guy could do in the US and world even on a daily basis is more than I care to contemplate.

I am just following the cases as best I can also on the legal docket. And I'll say it again: The outcome of any of these criminal trials to me pales against the notion of whether Trump will again be elected President in 2024

What I have mostly have said -- and mostly in quoting the Post and th NY Times -- is don't be overly optimistic. and I have lived in Florida Counties that went 80-90% for Trump

There won't be any.

There are likely other former federal court judges who think otherwise on the timing. At least one of Trump's Georgia co-defendants wants the trial sooner rather than later. But some on here want to talk about Trump's prison attire. I remember on the eve of the 2016 election one of the conversation topics was whether the newly elected President should be addressed as Madame President. As to whether Trump will 'get away with it' I really don't care so long as he is not elected President in 2024.

And a former federal court judge and attorney general said it is unlikely in his opinion that any of these trials will commence before the 2024 election.