HappyExpat57

No. If ANY individual had perpetrated these crimes in order to rig an election, this same verdict would be handed down. It won't be reversed, the evidence was obviously too overwhelming.

I hate to admit it but you have a valid point. Hillary SHOULD have been nailed for that email server thingy, but she is deeply embedded in the system. That system protected her. The twice impeached and now convicted felon behaved like a bull in a China (CHInah!) shop and the real powers that be have had it with him. He'll find how quickly his support in D.C dissipates and he'll be nothing but a husk of bad makeup and a man with no family.

His previous staff said they intentionally kept certain sensitive documents away from him cuz he wasn't adult enough handle them. Didn't stop him from stealing boxes and boxes of classified material, though.

This convicted felon (LOVE it now that we can post that) was only impeached for serious reasons. It's the red side of the aisle that keeps drumming up nonsense attempts of impeachment that fall flat cuz they're all based on lies.

There are many jobs that convicted felons can't hold, but civil service is not one of them. Having said that, the matter of obtaining and retaining a SECURITY CLEARANCE is a whole other matter. There is no way on this earth that anyone with this convicted felon's record could EVER EVER EVER get a security clearance the office of the president requires.

Be honest now - has anyone really noticed or missed it?

Well, they SAID they wanted a candidate with conviction. ta da tsssssssssssss

I had to dig that up. Judge Merchan didn't disallow their testimony, he just said the witnesses had to keep to the facts of the trial. Big correction.

You're either not following or conveniently forgetting facts. Typically, there would be no sentence. In THIS case, he greviously broke the gag order 10 times (many many more, but the 10 were overt and blatant attacks). As well, if someone under him in the criminal ladder did time for the same crime (Michael Cohen) then there is a likelihood of him having to serve time as well.

Dear gawd! If he loses his appeals and wins re-election, will he run the country into the ground from a JAIL CELL?!?

Of course, this is a rhetorical post. You and I (as well as ALL people with working brains) know the kind of trash you'd have to wallow through if you did that. 😄

Even more, who is the fool - "uncertains will come over to SUPPORT a convicted criminal?" Nope, that only makes sense to a cultist.

You could look at it that way, yes.

When women were asked why they voted for Bill Clinton, a large number replied they thought he was cute. The electorate rarely votes on facts, they vote from their often ill-informed gut. All they will know now is 45 is a convicted felon, a loser. They couldn't care less about the details, they will just imagine him in a jumpsuit that matches his fake tan.

CNN/MSNBC et al have NOT lost law suits for $787 BILLION for lying. Fox Not News HAS. See the difference?

I am DESPARATELY trying to find a way to argue with you just to keep things neutral but can't get there in my mind. CKUF YEAH it will be icing on the cake!!!

His whole family seems to have deserted him (expect for Eric, but he doesn't count).

No, this is a false equivalency. The convicted felon's over-valuing his property was blatant and overt, NOT a misdemeanor. He was knowingly lying through his teeth strictly for profit. Further, the DOJ and FBI are autonomous under Democratic administrations. The now convicted criminal (I sure like how that phrase sounds!) has openly vowed to personally weaponize these institutions if he ever sets his burgeoning buttocks back behind the resolute desk. Yeah . . . no.

Illegally, yes.

I honestly don't think the judge will take ANY satisfaction in sentencing this convicted felon. He appears to be a level headed, honest guy who got saddled with this terrible task.

99.99% of people (including you and me) have not followed the entire trial, haven't read the transcripts word-for-word. We weren't allowed to watch it due to New York "no cameras in the courtroom" rules. We SHOULD rest easy that, because of the intense detail the prosecution brought forth, this IS a crime worthy of the scrutiny and 45 IS now a convicted felon because the jury did their job. Arguing anything else is mere coffe table dribble.

I'll step in here. At that time, I was a US gubmint IT guy who maintained the exact same type of email server she used as Secretary of State. It was supposed to be kept locked up on a military base with military guards protecting it, ESPECIALLY at her level of security clearance. She knew it, ALL of us IT employees knew it, it was absolutely a coverup. I forget the exact law (I used to be able to recite it, chapter and verse, but it's been a while). This SHOULD have disqualified her for running for dog catcher let alone president.

Sore loser much?

Nice try. Voir dire and peremptory challenges. It's the basis of ensuring a balanced jury. The guy was guilty because his peers found him guilty and because the evidence was irrefutable, nothing to do with who the jurors were. I repeat: Those jurors were not Democrats. They were not politicians. They were not people who had a bias against Trump. They were Americans. Trump’s lawyers allowed them to become jurors because they showed no bias. https://robertreich.substack.com/p/the-convicted-felon?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=365422&post_id=145144771&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=1297hb&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email

Judge Cannon is slow walking and blocking the stolen documents case. She is JUST staying within the limit of legality, but she's obviously in the tank for the convicted felon. The Supreme Court is slow walking the decision of whether or not the convicted felon could legally have his enemies killed by Seal Team 6. This decision puts ALL OTHER cases on hold.