We Finally Know the Case Against Trump, and It Is Strong

[pomchop]

9 hours ago, BTB1977 said:

Smoke and mirrors from the democrats.  Total BS

see no evil hear no evil....smoke and mirrors or jugs of kool aide?

[ozimoron]

6 minutes ago, Adumbration said:

All these lawyers are going to look kind of stupid when Trump wins the next election.

Where is he going to find 3 million voters from who didn't vote for him last time?

[pomchop]

19 minutes ago, Furioso said:

It's a weak case:

1. Trump has been charged with falsifying business records, a misdemeanor in New York State. 

2. This allegedly happened 6 years ago, so the statute of limitations expired 4 years ago, thus the case should have been thrown out. 

3. However, Bragg claims there's a higher crime that the falsifying enabled, but won't say what this higher crime is. 

4. Most judges would have thrown out this case because Bragg basically says "I don't have to tell you what the higher crime is".

5. As it stands right now, the case is a misdemeanor where the statute of limitations have long since expired.  

6. Bragg insinuates Trump deceived the voters but New York Congressman Santos lied about EVERYTHING, yet not one single charge against Santos has been filed. 

7. The next hearing is Dec 4th, the case should get throw out before then, but New York judges are pretty corrupt so the case could continue..

8..and if the case continues it'll go Federal and then definitely get thrown out by the Feds. 

And your law degree is from ? 

 

Just be patient.  Wait til the other shoes all drop for docs, for georgia, for Jan 6.  Stormy is the least of trumps problems. 

[eisfeld]

2 hours ago, Furioso said:

It's a weak case:

1. Trump has been charged with falsifying business records, a misdemeanor in New York State. 

2. This allegedly happened 6 years ago, so the statute of limitations expired 4 years ago, thus the case should have been thrown out. 

3. However, Bragg claims there's a higher crime that the falsifying enabled, but won't say what this higher crime is. 

4. Most judges would have thrown out this case because Bragg basically says "I don't have to tell you what the higher crime is".

5. As it stands right now, the case is a misdemeanor where the statute of limitations have long since expired.  

6. Bragg insinuates Trump deceived the voters but New York Congressman Santos lied about EVERYTHING, yet not one single charge against Santos has been filed. 

7. The next hearing is Dec 4th, the case should get throw out before then, but New York judges are pretty corrupt so the case could continue..

8..and if the case continues it'll go Federal and then definitely get thrown out by the Feds. 

1. It can be a felony as you seem to be aware

2. Do you honestly believe the District Attorney doesn't know how statute of limitations work?

3. Yes he will tell the judge, obviously. The court is not a kindergarten.

4. Because that's not what will happen. See 3.

5. Why are you repeating the same points just worded differently again? See 1. and 2.

6. Whataboutism. Someone else doing something does not make or break Trump having commited a crime.

7. Any source for this outrageous allegation?

8. Your reasoning for that being? Why would it go federal if he broke New York state laws? And if so why would it get thrown out by a federal court?

 

If what you said were true then Trump and supporters were not so angry about it all.

[ozimoron]

Alvin Bragg fires back after House GOP issues first subpoena in probe of Trump indictment

 

“The House GOP continues to attempt to undermine an active investigation and ongoing New York criminal case with an unprecedented campaign of harassment and intimidation,” Bragg’s statement said.

 

“Repeated efforts to weaken state and local law enforcement actions are an abuse of power and will not deter us from our duty to uphold the law. These elected officials would better serve their constituents and the country, and fulfill their oath of office, by doing their jobs in Congress and not intruding on the sovereignty of the state of New York by interfering in an ongoing criminal matter in state court.”

 

https://www.rawstory.com/alvin-bragg-fires-back-after-house-gop-issues-first-subpoena-in-probe-of-trump-indictment/?traffic_source=Connatix

[ozimoron]

Fulton County DA responds to Trump after he smears her as a 'racist'

 

The known targets include Trump's former attorney Rudy Giuliani and 16 Republican activists who posed as presidential "electors" to sign certificates falsely claiming the 76-year-old Republican had won the Peach State.

 

Kohrs would not reveal if Trump -- who has announced a third run at the White House for 2024 -- was among those recommended for indictment.

But she told The New York Times it was "not going to be shocked" by the jury's finding.

 

"It's not rocket science," she said.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/fulton-county-da-says-trump-accusing-her-of-being-racist-is-ridiculous/

[thaibeachlovers]

14 hours ago, eisfeld said:

If one person was to not go with the rest of the jury in deciding guilty on a charge resulting in no unanimity then these charges would cause what is called a "hung jury". Trump would not win the case if that were to happen. It would result in a mistrial at least for these charges and given that there's about 0% chance that the prosecution would drop them a new trial with a new jury would begin until there is either an acquittal or conviction or plea bargain.

As I see it, it's going to be rather hard to find an unbiased juror, which always leaves the possibility of an appeal succeeding.

 

If it makes it to the Supreme Court, IMO Trump will be hoping for some gratitude from those he nominated.

 

This case could be providing entertainment for years to come, which I guess will make CNN happy.

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, eisfeld said:

If what you said were true then Trump and supporters were not so angry about it all.

I think you meant  "Trump and supporters would not be so angry about it all". If that's what you meant, it's not just about this specific case they are PO about. It's the continual persecution using the law to try and prevent him running again ( with no success so far ).

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I think you meant  "Trump and supporters would not be so angry about it all". If that's what you meant, it's not just about this specific case they are PO about. It's the continual persecution using the law to try and prevent him running again ( with no success so far ).

It’s more about the continual criminality of your boy.

 

He’s the defendant in 34 indictments and the subject of three criminal investigations, in chronological order:

 

1. Georgia Election Rigging - we’ve seen and heard evidence supportive of the investigation.

 

2. His part in the J6 insurrection - we’ve seen and heard evidence supportive of the investigation.

 

3. Retention and concealment of Classified Documents.- we’ve seen and heard evidence supportive of the investigation.

Since the crimes preceded the investigations, I look forward to you providing evidence that these crimes were committed to keep Trump out of office.

 

 

[pomchop]

If nothing else trump has proven if you tell enough lies, make them outrageous enough ,and repeat them ad nauseum about 25% of Americans will believe whatever you say regardless of evidence that most often proves beyond any reasonable doubt that it is total BS.  Hear no evil See no evil use head for hack rack only.  Do not question trump...no matter how absurd the claims.

[ThailandRyan]

9 hours ago, Adumbration said:

All these lawyers are going to look kind of stupid when Trump wins the next election.

Winning it from where, the jail cell he will be in on not just these but the multitude of other cases...

[Adumbration]

9 hours ago, ozimoron said:

Where is he going to find 3 million voters from who didn't vote for him last time?

That problem is already solved for him by the free publicity he is getting from the bogus law suits.

[ozimoron]

Just now, Adumbration said:

That problem is already solved for him by the free publicity he is getting from the bogus law suits.

Logic would suggest that uncommitted voters are repelled by criminal behavior. Only fools consider these charges are politically motivated. The pending charges against Nixon were widely considered to be politically motivated as well until irrefutable evidence was produced. His chances for re-election were then trashed. Expect the same outcome.

[Adumbration]

13 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Logic would suggest that uncommitted voters are repelled by criminal behavior. 

They are also compelled by false accusations.  

[ozimoron]

Just now, Adumbration said:

They are also compelled by false accusations.  

1. Don't clip posts, it's against the rules.

 

2. Where's any evidence the accusations are false? The rest of us are waiting for the court case before passing judgment. You sound like Marjory Taylor Greene.

[pomchop]

33 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

1. Don't clip posts, it's against the rules.

 

2. Where's any evidence the accusations are false? The rest of us are waiting for the court case before passing judgment. You sound like Marjory Taylor Greene.

"false accusations"....really?  So a grand jury of 23 people picked at random look at the actual evidence and then vote to indict just for fun I guess....."false accusations" backed up by an avalanche of evidence much of it provided directly by trump and his big mouth, backed up further by documents and testimony of a wide variety of people who were actually in the rooms or participants.....ultimately a variety of jurors will decide which accusations are backed by hard evidence and will convict or refuse to convict on a wide variety of trumps "witch hunts"....poor little donnie is always getting picked on is not going to like the outcome of several coming trials no matter how much he and his cult scream and whine....must be sad to be a cult member and under such a spell that you become incapable of rational thought.

[onthedarkside]

Troll post removed

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, Adumbration said:

They are also compelled by false accusations.  

Vetted by the jury who compelled to lay charges due to the sheer volume of documentary and testimonial evidences. Trump is toast. 

[candide]

1 hour ago, Adumbration said:

That problem is already solved for him by the free publicity he is getting from the bogus law suits.

Really? Only 23% think he did nothing wrong!

When asked about the criminal probe, 46% said they think Trump has done something illegal. About 29% of Americans believe it was unethical, but not illegal, while 23% don't think he did anything wrong.

https://news.yahoo.com/six-10-americans-dont-want-133502391.html

 

[Adumbration]

20 minutes ago, candide said:

Really? Only 23% think he did nothing wrong!

When asked about the criminal probe, 46% said they think Trump has done something illegal. About 29% of Americans believe it was unethical, but not illegal, while 23% don't think he did anything wrong.

https://news.yahoo.com/six-10-americans-dont-want-133502391.html

 

Totally irrelevant.  US elections turn on just 10 percent of swing voters.  Interesting that so many posters are posting here giving their misguided opinions but they have no idea how the voting mandate in America actually works.

 

@ozimoronis a classic example.  An Australian OAP that thinks he knows how the US political landscape functions.  Sad really...

 

But what is even more depressing than the ill informed opinions of Aseannow wannabe geopolitical analysts is that, regardless of whether Biden or Trump wins the next election, America will be left with the oldest president to ever assume office. 

 

So don't get too invested on whether Biden or Trump will win.  Fact is, either, or both, could well die before the election results are in.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Adumbration

[The Snark]

17 hours ago, Jingthing said:

34 felony charges. No smoke. No mirrors.

 

12 hours ago, Furioso said:

It's a weak case:

 

As a former LEO I'm having a private chuckle here. Just ask any veteran cop.

It's not A weak case.

It is also up to the prosecuting attorneyS and the judge to determine whether the charges are misdemeanors or felonies, based solely upon the weight of their assessmentS and the court admissible evidence that has been very thoroughly examined and vetted.

As for 34 charges, come on! Each charge has to be  separately successfully challenged and defeated. Again, ask any veteran cop what that spells out in any courtroom.

 

And do keep in mind, very similar charges have already been successfully prosecuted against various Trump business practices. Part of the defense must involve entirely divorcing the person from the businesses and business practices of his company's.

 

(As an aside, the onus placed upon the defendants attorneys in one aspect is quite significant: his veracity must never be employed in his defense.)

Edited April 7, 2023 by The Snark

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Adumbration said:

That problem is already solved for him by the free publicity he is getting from the bogus law suits.

Trump is not facing a ‘Law Suit’ he’s the Defendant under criminal indictment.

[ozimoron]

17 minutes ago, Adumbration said:

Totally irrelevant.  US elections turn on just 10 percent of swing voters.  Interesting that so many posters are posting here giving their misguided opinions but they have no idea how the voting mandate in America actually works.

 

@ozimoronis a classic example.  An Australian OAP that thinks he knows how the US political landscape functions.  Sad really...

 

But what is even more depressing than the ill informed opinions of Aseannow wannabe geopolitical analysts is that, regardless of whether Biden or Trump wins the next election, America will be left with the oldest president to ever assume office. 

 

So don't get too invested on whether Biden or Trump will win.  Fact is, either, or both, could well die before the election results are in.

Does it require American citizenship to be well read?

 

Swing voters aren't going to be compelled by unsupported grievance in any country.

 

If you're going to mention me, have the decency to quote what I wrote and reply to me directly.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Adumbration said:

They are also compelled by false accusations.  

ie ‘The election was stolen’. 

 

 

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

ie ‘The election was stolen’.

The police are still looking for it. If you have any information please call crime stoppers.

[candide]

20 minutes ago, Adumbration said:

Totally irrelevant.  US elections turn on just 10 percent of swing voters.  Interesting that so many posters are posting here giving their misguided opinions but they have no idea how the voting mandate in America actually works.

 

@ozimoronis a classic example.  An Australian OAP that thinks he knows how the US political landscape functions.  Sad really...

 

But what is even more depressing than the ill informed opinions of Aseannow wannabe geopolitical analysts is that, regardless of whether Biden or Trump wins the next election, America will be left with the oldest president to ever assume office. 

 

So don't get too invested on whether Biden or Trump will win.  Fact is, either, or both, could well die before the election results are in.

So what's your evidence that swing voters are among the 23% who think he did nothing wrong? I would tend to think they are all Republican.

 

About the age issue, I don't disagree with you, but It's out of topic.

[stoner]

2 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

Winning it from where, the jail cell he will be in on not just these but the multitude of other cases...

ill take that jail cell bet. 

 

donald trump will not spend time in jail. guilty or not. 

[CrunchWrapSupreme]

19 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Trump will pay bigly

Huge, beautiful payments. Believe me folks. Many such cases.

[Fat is a type of crazy]

2 hours ago, Adumbration said:

That problem is already solved for him by the free publicity he is getting from the bogus law suits.

I think one way of looking at it, is that Trump has never been that smart but he has had good instincts to keep himself either within the law, or outside the law in a way that is hard to prove based on evidence, giving him the reputation as Teflon Don.

But his instincts appear to have let him down in his desire to be or stay as President and now he has to face the consequences. 

Being an Australian by the way doesn't stop you having a valid opinion on American politics. It can help as you are outside the craziness and can in some way see things a bit more objectively. 

[The Snark]

By the way. The bribery of a person is not the issue here. That act may very well fall under the statute of limitations. The bulk of the criminal charges fall under the umbrella of illegal misappropriation of funds. (For which his company has already been found guilty.)

Edited April 7, 2023 by The Snark