Trump found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records

[earlinclaifornia]

10 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

There are  multiples queries on here as to whether one can accept the verdict as guilty.

 

I don't know exactly what 'accept' means. At the begonning of the trial Judge Merchan advised Trump and his attorneys that if Trump does not show up every day the court is in session, the judge will issue a warrant for his immediate arrest. So this I accept as the real thing.

 

Do I 'agree' with the verdict? No.

 

"The jurors reached a verdict in the late afternoon, after less than 12 hours of deliberation in the hush money criminal case."

 

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4685007-jury-reaches-verdict-trump-hush-money-trial/

 

The Jury instructions were 48 pages before getting to the standard every trial-type instructions.

 

I don't see how the jury could have read and commented on points raised in 12 hours. And as even left-leaning legal pros have commented, there are issues in Judge Merchan's pre-trial rulings that are fodder for appeal.

 

So your doubting is that time it took to discuss the facts and vote was too short for your liking.

I don't believe that is true. 

We all have our opinions but I felt the jurors were concerned and carefull in deliberations.

 

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

You're rationalizing the outcome.

 

It's one of the seven stages of grief.

 

Grieving? 😄 For a start, I am no fan of Trump (although I prefer him to Biden) but I am less of a fan of kangaroo courts and politically motivated trials. 

 

Secondly, Trump has lost the battle but not the war. If this were a football game he's conceded a free kick in the opponents half in the 15th minute. Hardly worth grieving over, even for Trump fans. 

 

I predict he will still win in November. In fact I believe it is more likely after this debacle. 

[Moncul]

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

Grieving? 😄 For a start, I am no fan of Trump (although I prefer him to Biden) but I am less of a fan of kangaroo courts and politically motivated trials. 

 

Secondly, Trump has lost the battle but not the war. If this were a football game he's conceded a free kick in the opponents half in the 15th minute. Hardly worth grieving over, even for Trump fans. 

 

I predict he will still win in November. In fact I believe it is more likely after this debacle. 

He has far more serious charges to face, which have been continually pushed back until after the election.

It is fair to say that he needs to get elected to avoid jail.

That's a compelling reason not to quit.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Grieving? 😄 For a start, I am no fan of Trump (although I prefer him to Biden) but I am less of a fan of kangaroo courts and politically motivated trials. 

 

Secondly, Trump has lost the battle but not the war. If this were a football game he's conceded a free kick in the opponents half in the 15th minute. Hardly worth grieving over, even for Trump fans. 

 

I predict he will still win in November. In fact I believe it is more likely after this debacle. 

I must go back and check your predictions for Convicted Felon Trump being indicted, prosecuted, tried and convicted.

 

[TroubleandGrumpy]

12 hours ago, Moncul said:

Yeah, built that wall, didn't he. Came up with the Infrastructure bill, didn't he. Produced that Health Care reform, didn't he.
Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is?
The one thing he did do is line the pockets of himself and his family. 

Man oh man - where to start...

 

1.   He tried - your lot stopped him.

2.  Yes.

3.  No - his wealth decreased (look it up).

 

Edited May 31 by stats
trolling reference removed

[gravity101]

6 minutes ago, Moncul said:

Yeah, built that wall, didn't he. Came up with the Infrastructure bill, didn't he. Produced that Health Care reform, didn't he.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous that is?

The one thing he did do is line the pockets of himself and his family. 

Didn't he say he'd never play golf cause he wouldn't have the time?

[jerrymahoney]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

OK so you didn’t get the verdict you wanted.

 

But Jury saw the evidence, sat through the testimonies and passed their verdict.

 

Guilty on 34 counts is a fact.

 

That you play semantics with ‘accept’ does not alter that fact.

I don't know that I am challenging that he was found guilty. As I've said multiple times my concern is that Trump is not again President. And there are plenty enough legal minds that are saying the same thing. That the only reasons the statutory charges fit the crime is that Judge Merchan said that they fit the crime. 

Edited May 31 by jerrymahoney

[Walker88]

He might have been acquitted, or at least won a hung jury, if he had taken an entirely different approach. He should have admitted to the tryst with Stormy, and then claimed he was worried how it would affect his 3rd wife. Yes, if even 1% of the reason was fear how it would impact voters, the jury might have been more sympathetic if he played the contrite husband, thusly ignoring the election impact.

 

He chose not to present that defense, and it certainly seems the jury believed everything Stormy said, despite the crime not being the affair, but the fraudulent accounting of the payoff. He lost credibility by denying something that even his 3rd wife likely believes happened.

 

I had thought Karen McDougal would have been an important witness, since she alleges a year long affair plus a payoff, and she has messages and phone records that corroborate her claims. The prosecution knew better, and knew they did not need McDougal. They had documents detailing the fraud, so had no need for additional sordid details. The prosecution really did not even need Michael Cohen, and defense made a huge mistake trying to pin everything on him. The documents, along with Pecker and Hope Hicks, were enough to prove the case.

 

I suspect defense had to go along with what the convicted felon wanted, ignoring their own better judgement regarding what would be more likely to lead to acquittal or a hung jury.

 

No doubt his cult will dig in their heels, but they are a minority, and even were in 2016. It's swing voters and independents who will now be faced with voting for, or voting against, a convicted felon. If the guy was smart---unlikely---he would refrain from his usual whining on social media, as that is only singing to the choir. If he could somehow grow up 75 years in a few minutes, he might not alienate the undecideds. He cannot and he will not.

 

Interesting to see the first (R) who sees the writing on the wall and hangs him out to dry. Those still squatting on Veepstakes Island will stay with him until he makes a choice for running/cell mate.

[KhunLA]

13 hours ago, HappyExpat57 said:

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

Jail cell ... seriously.   For simple business ledger improprieties.   Just a big fine.

Edited May 31 by stats
trolling reference removed

[Jingthing]

18 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

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

Most likely this conviction won't involve jail. They are felonies but of the lowest severity level. Punishment phase is in July.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

12 hours ago, Walker88 said:

He might have been acquitted, or at least won a hung jury, if he had taken an entirely different approach. He should have admitted to the tryst with Stormy, and then claimed he was worried how it would affect his 3rd wife. Yes, if even 1% of the reason was fear how it would impact voters, the jury might have been more sympathetic if he played the contrite husband, thusly ignoring the election impact.

 

He chose not to present that defense, and it certainly seems the jury believed everything Stormy said, despite the crime not being the affair, but the fraudulent accounting of the payoff. He lost credibility by denying something that even his 3rd wife likely believes happened.

 

I had thought Karen McDougal would have been an important witness, since she alleges a year long affair plus a payoff, and she has messages and phone records that corroborate her claims. The prosecution knew better, and knew they did not need McDougal. They had documents detailing the fraud, so had no need for additional sordid details. The prosecution really did not even need Michael Cohen, and defense made a huge mistake trying to pin everything on him. The documents, along with Pecker and Hope Hicks, were enough to prove the case.

 

I suspect defense had to go along with what the convicted felon wanted, ignoring their own better judgement regarding what would be more likely to lead to acquittal or a hung jury.

 

No doubt his cult will dig in their heels, but they are a minority, and even were in 2016. It's swing voters and independents who will now be faced with voting for, or voting against, a convicted felon. If the guy was smart---unlikely---he would refrain from his usual whining on social media, as that is only singing to the choir. If he could somehow grow up 75 years in a few minutes, he might not alienate the undecideds. He cannot and he will not.

 

Interesting to see the first (R) who sees the writing on the wall and hangs him out to dry. Those still squatting on Veepstakes Island will stay with him until he makes a choice for running/cell mate.

Too much to respond to...

BUt - WTF does a prostitute's testimoney (and the others) have to do with a charge of booking errors. 

Edited May 31 by stats
trolling comment removed

[TroubleandGrumpy]

2 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Why are you still here? Go away like a bad smell.

NO

[HappyExpat57]

12 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Jail cell ... seriously.   For simple business ledger improprieties.   Just a big fine. 

 

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.

[jvs]

34 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Interesting timing to reach such a conclusion.

 

Purely coincidental I'm sure 😃.

No just long over due,from time to time laws need to be amended.

Nobody has foreseen a thing like this would ever happen but it has to be dealt with,just to keep up with the times.

Don't you agree?

[riclag]

13 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

No.  The existing supporters are even more strong, and there are now many uncertains that have and will come over the support Trump. And there will be a lot more of the Biden voters that will not vote Trump, but they will not vote. The ones that see this partican political trial as just that - a low point in US politics.

 

You love this event - not because a criminal has been founfd guilty of a serious crime - but because Trump might have been stopped from being POTUS again. You are totally ignorant of the downstream iompacts this will have - like a young silly Uni Hamas supporter deciding to go over there and 'help'.   The blowback is going to be extreme - and remember you asked for and started it and got it.

 

I admire your confidence in Trump and

understand were your coming from.

The left on here and on many other sites have nursed this hate for many many years. They finally have their cream in their jeans moment  . A dem convicted former Potus . But like Trumps mug shot thats about all the jizz they’re gonna get! Fizzle Fizzle!

All the other election interference dem trials are dead in the water.Fizzle Fizzles 

 

[pomchop]

No i would not hire a hooker if i were married and my beautiful wife was home with our new baby.

Some people actually have morals and don't break laws to try and get elected POTUS.

 

 

[candide]

12 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

Man oh man - where to start...

 

1.   He tried - your lot stopped him.

2.  Yes.

3.  No - his wealth decreased (look it up).

 

 

1. If I remember well, there was a kind of infrastructure bill  voted with the support of Democrats under Trump.. Republicans tended to oppose it.

3. Real estate and hotel value decreased because of Covid. What would be his wealth at today's prices?

[impulse]

9 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Dotard! That was the job of YOUR attorneys. WHAT a LOSER!

 

Small correction here.  It was the judge who disallowed their testimony.  Like he should have disallowed the hooker's testimony, but didn't.

 

[KhunLA]

1 minute ago, HappyExpat57 said:

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.

Cohen crimes were a wee bit more serious ... apples & oranges.

[HappyExpat57]

2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Small correction here.  It was the judge who disallowed their testimony.  Like he should have disallowed the hooker's testimony, but didn't.

 

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.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

2 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

Small correction here.  It was the judge who disallowed their testimony.  Like he should have disallowed the hooker's testimony, but didn't.

 

I have read a few legal opinions and they all state that there are grounds for an Appeal - including the Judge's conduct of the trial.

The Appeal will win, the Judge will be admonished, and Trump will win the election, and the Judge will then be subjected to impreachment and found guilty and dismissed/charged.  Some Dems will support it becauser there are some rational Dems and they know is was a partisan legal sham, and they dont want the GOP doing the same thing to them in the future when they have political control.

[paddypower]

13 hours ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

But I guarantee that even when this is over-turned on Appeal, the loony lefties will be stating that Trump is a 'convicted impeached felon'.

Somewhow, they think the partisan people in their biased justice system have given them what they need - another insult against Trump.

Truly delusional - Delusional comes from a Latin word meaning "deceiving." So delusional thinking is kind of like deceiving yourself by believing outrageous things.

But of course a delusional person, will turn that back on you and say that you are the delusional one - their own cognitive bias will never allow them to think for a moment that they could be wrong.

 

Here is something for them to 'think' about.  Trump is an arrogant bullying person with clear personal tendancies towards narcissism.  Exactly the same as Obama and Bill Clinton - but not as good looking as either of them. But as a POTUS he did (or tried to do) what he said he was going to do - and he will do that again when he is the next POTUS. 

 

i love your obsession with ''lefties''. even my right wing friends (American and English) say, 'don't use the terms left wing and right wing' . it's displays a lack of imagination.

[riclag]

16 minutes ago, stoner said:

 

Do you accept the guilty verdict or not ? 

I don’t , because it was political .

That jurisdiction , Manhattan voted 95% dem in 2020  .Dershowitz said he couldn’t get a fair trial  .

[impulse]

5 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

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.

 

True.  He limited the testimony to stuff that would help the prosecution and wouldn't allow lines of questioning that would help the defense.  That being the case, the defense would have been stoopid to call them.  And they're not stoopid.

He gave both of the prostitutes wide range, that far exceeded facts pertinent to the case.

 

 

Edited May 31 by impulse

[TroubleandGrumpy]

Just now, paddypower said:

i love your obsession with ''lefties''. even my right wing friends (American and English) say, 'don't use the terms left wing and right wing' . it's displays a lack of imagination.

Now it is about using the 'correct words' ??  Meh.

[stoner]

Just now, riclag said:

I don’t , because it was political .

That jurisdiction , Manhattan voted 95% dem in 2020  .Dershowitz said he couldn’t get a fair trial  .

 

I was being sarcastic. 

[malibukid]

even if her where to go to prison he would probably get a helicopter ride to a VIP hospital suite within hours.

[Roo Island]

1 hour ago, Moncul said:

I wouldn't get too excited.

There is a high probability that the sentence won't involve incarceration.

Obviously he's going to use this verdict to raise lots more campaign funds to pay off any other hookers he was shagging.

Agreed. But I never thought this would result in jail time.

 

Justice prevails. A criminal is convicted by a jury of his peers.

[Walker88]

The convicted felon will likely be calling on his cult members to rise up and commit violence on his behalf, just as he did on 6 January 2021.

 

Being his goober has already landed around 480 of his cult in prison, with more to follow.

 

One wonders if any of his non-incarcerated cult recognizes that reality, and will now say, "after you, oh messiah".

 

It takes very little imagination to think that right now there are folks trying to find the names and addresses of the 12 jurors in order to make that info public and encourage violence by the convicted felon's supporters.

 

There is even a Forum member who posted a puffed up warning, saying his side has the guns, and those who oppose the felon should be afraid. Violence or its threat is what they think gives them power, when they are just becoming increasingly impotent.

[Danderman123]

1 hour ago, TroubleandGrumpy said:

LOL - Unbelievable. Lefties just cannot let the TDS fade away.

I was answering a question - and I stated I do not think the elction was stolen - that implies a 'planned act' - to steal.

 

No - it was a lot of invalid votes pumped into a system that could not handle it - just like the Dems always want.

To prove there under the burden of proof legal system, means recounting and examining every single one - names and address etc.

That cannot be done because the votes themselves are 'private' and they cannot be checked again once accepted.

The system that accepted many proven invalid votes could not be legally proven to be corrupted enough to have accepted enough invalid votes to change the outcome - that is all that happened legally.

You make a lot of assertions, and provide no proof.

 

If you truly believe there was widespread voter fraud but have no proof, then you are operating on a religious belief. Which is why your fellow Trumpers aren't backing you up.

Most of them know that the fake voter fraud claims of 2020 were trash, and have forgotten them.

 

As Rudy said "We have a lot of theories, just no evidence".