Trump found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records

[BobBKK]

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

CDC reference number?

It's a psychological/emotional condition outside of CDCs remit. Those who suffer will never know but react at the mention of Trump's name. 

[BarraMarra]

I can see him wave boarding with the Russian draft dodgers in Patong. He was convicted on all charges by 12 jurors who were not blackmailed or threatened by Trumps goon squad. Found guilty only 1 punishment fits.

[HappyExpat57]

22 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

You think a bookkeeping error constitutes rigging an election? Wow, just wow. It will be reversed and is, in itself, trying to rig the next election. Watch this space. 

And if you honestly think that's all this was - a "bookkeeping error" - then Wow, just wow. The cult is strong in you.

[Peabody]

27 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Talking points for Dems

Only 1, and it contains the words "convicted felon".

[BobBKK]

1 minute ago, Peabody said:

Only 1, and it contains the words "convicted felon".

 

Convicted by Dems jurors in a Dem court, led by a Dem judge and prosecuted by a Dem - that sounds fair!

[HappyExpat57]

15 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Really? There was no evidence presented that these acts were committed to rig an election. The prosecution was very careful to NOT say what the underlying offence was that elevated 34 minor misdemeanours to the level of felonies. The judge in his instructions said the same.  

 

If you think that the 'revelation' that Trump slept with a porn star would have scuppered his election chances, you don't know the American people very well. It may well have had the opposite effect...

Well, the convicted felon was sure stupid enough to think it would have scuppered his election chances. Witnesses confirmed he thought that.

Next?

[Moncul]

39 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Even if you hate Trump, you cannot say that this is not political. Even Anderson Cooper on your beloved CNN admitted if his name were not Trump the case would not be brought.

It will be reversed; the judge knows that, but he just wanted to damage Trump's election chances. It will backfire eventually. 

It's not political.

It would have been political to NOT treat him like any other crooked elected official.

[Presto]

20 minutes ago, charleskerins said:

Predictions are especially difficult when you don't understand the US Constitution Biden can't change the Electoral College.

Of course the electoral college can be abolished, it just needs political will. But there isn't, on both sides.

So you're stuck with a load of archaic, ambiguous rules, and maybe you think that that is beneficial to your idea of democracy. 

Where presidents are elected by c. 100.000 votes in swing states, while having millions less in the popular vote.

[Moncul]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

The jury deliberated for less than 12 hours. Almost like they had already made their minds up. 

 

Or perhaps it's almost like the evidence was as clear as day and incontrovertible.

 

[herfiehandbag]

31 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

You think a bookkeeping error constitutes rigging an election? Wow, just wow. It will be reversed and is, in itself, trying to rig the next election. Watch this space. 

Having seen (as has everyone, including the Jury) the amount of discussion, meetings, arrangements and financial shenanigans which went into the whole business, describing it as a " bookkeeping error " is remarkably disingenuous!

 

To overturn it on appeal will mean proving  judicial misdirection or the false application of the law. The judges daughter being politically active is not grounds for appeal, nor is that the judge may have a Latin American background.

 

The prosecution had to prove to the jury that the defendant had deliberately broken the law. They did so.

 

 

 

[Moncul]

4 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 

Convicted by Dems jurors in a Dem court, led by a Dem judge and prosecuted by a Dem - that sounds fair!

Obviously you don't know much about how the US legal system works.

Both sides get to choose or deny jurors.

He wasn't convicted by 12 "Dem jurors" he was convicted by 12 jurors.

[BobBKK]

3 minutes ago, Moncul said:

It's not political.

It would have been political to NOT treat him like any other crooked elected official.

 I'm really embarrassed for you if you cannot see it. The choice of judge?  the area it was tried?  the jurors?  the discredited witnesses? the TIMING? 

 

[Hanaguma]

Just now, Presto said:

Of course the electoral college can be abolished, it just needs political will. But there isn't, on both sides.

So you're stuck with a load of archaic, ambiguous rules, and maybe you think that that is beneficial to your idea of democracy. 

It is similar to the parliamentary system that is used in a great many countries as well. Take Canada, for example. The Liberal party came in 2nd in the popular vote, but has been the government party in the last 2 elections. Pure popular vote style elections are rather rare in the G7.  

[Peabody]

6 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Convicted by Dems jurors in a Dem court, led by a Dem judge and prosecuted by a Dem - that sounds fair!

Convicted felon. 

[HappyExpat57]

Just now, Moncul said:

6 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

Convicted by Dems jurors in a Dem court, led by a Dem judge and prosecuted by a Dem - that sounds fair!

Obviously you don't know much about how the US legal system works.

Both sides get to choose or deny jurors.

He wasn't convicted by 12 "Dem jurors" he was convicted by 12 jurors.

 

I am getting tired of posting this, but it doesn't seem to be sinking in to thick cult skulls:

 

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

[BobBKK]

1 minute ago, Moncul said:

Obviously you don't know much about how the US legal system works.

Both sides get to choose or deny jurors.

He wasn't convicted by 12 "Dem jurors" he was convicted by 12 jurors.

 That's a lie - Manhattan votes 90% for Dems, and you know it. There is a limit to how many Jurors can be rejected, and you know it. You know all of this but you chose to be blind.

[Presto]

2 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

It is similar to the parliamentary system that is used in a great many countries as well. Take Canada, for example. The Liberal party came in 2nd in the popular vote, but has been the government party in the last 2 elections. Pure popular vote style elections are rather rare in the G7.  

The difference being that America has an almost pure two party system.

[BobBKK]

1 minute ago, HappyExpat57 said:

 

I am getting tired of posting this, but it doesn't seem to be sinking in to thick cult skulls:

 

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

 Not true - to move the case away from Manhattan would have been fairer. Trump's lawyers moved for this, and it was DENIED.

[paddypower]

7 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Yea ... I think he's done as a political opponent.   Which in itself is scary for the USA.   If biden gets the nod from Dems, it's even scarier thinking harris will finish out his term.

 

 

 

not quite. he has single-handed destroyed whatever moral high ground the GOP used to occupy.

[Peabody]

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

That's a lie - Manhattan votes 90% for Dems, and you know it. There is a limit to how many Jurors can be rejected, and you know it. You know all of this but you chose to be blind.

Your words mean nothing.

Convicted felon.

[BobBKK]

1 minute ago, Peabody said:

Your words mean nothing.

Convicted felon.

 Appealed - watch this space

[Moncul]

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

 I'm really embarrassed for you if you cannot see it. The choice of judge?  the area it was tried?  the jurors?  the discredited witnesses? the TIMING? 

 

The judge didn't find him guilty. A jury did.

The area makes no difference as both defence and prosecution have a say in who is on the jury.

Discrediting witnesses is the job of opposing counsel.

The timing was down to preceding cases that needed to be finished, and we can now see that deliberate attempts to delay are a standard part of any Trump criminal trial.

I find it embarrassing you're still sticking up for the crook.

[HappyExpat57]

6 hours ago, BobBKK said:

 AD HOMINEM is always used by the ignorant and uneducated  

Not at all when is used in tandem with exposing said <deleted>. And I ask again, isn't the taste of <deleted> getting tiresome in your mouth?

[paddypower]

6 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 I'm really embarrassed for you if you cannot see it. The choice of judge?  the area it was tried?  the jurors?  the discredited witnesses? the TIMING? 

 

pity then, that Trump chose to base his corporate empire in NY which made him extremely wealthy, then he went and screwed it up by screwing a porn star, lying about it and brazenly deduct the pay off for NY tax purposes. that's called shooting your self in both feet.  if he had a 3rd foot, he'd have shot that off too, by raping a NY celebrity. I like Trump, but I don't like what he does.

[BobBKK]

3 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

Not at all when is used in tandem with exposing said bullsh!t. And I ask again, isn't the taste of bullsh!t getting tiresome in your mouth?

 

• Please be polite and respectful to others

[herfiehandbag]

13 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 

Convicted by Dems jurors in a Dem court, led by a Dem judge and prosecuted by a Dem - that sounds fair!

Well, how about a crime committed in New York, prosecuted by a New York District Attorney, found proven by a New York Jury, and tried before a New York Judge!

 

Or do you think that the prosecution, jury and judge should all have been found from Alabama?

[HappyExpat57]

1 minute ago, BobBKK said:

 
Misdemeanours outside the statute of limitations and bumped UP for political reasons. Your argument is truly infantile. He will win on appeal - maybe not in NY but certainly at the SC.

When a person continues to fill their thick heads with Fox Not News lies, there is nothing more anyone can do.

 

This will not be overturned on appeal, and the SC has nothing to do with this matter. That's how the justice system works. And when this convicted felon loses in November, the rest of the cases will be brought forth in SPITE of his sycophants' efforts.

 

But keep walking in the mist of lies if it makes you feel better, sunshine.

[BobBKK]

1 minute ago, herfiehandbag said:

Well, how about a crime committed in New York, prosecuted by a New York District Attorney, found proven by a New York Jury, and tried before a New York Judge!

 

Or do you think that the prosecution, jury and judge should all have been found from Alabama?

 I understand that but how about misdemeanours not prosecuted, many years old, and outside statute of limitations? 

 

[HappyExpat57]

2 minutes ago, BobBKK said:

 

• Please be polite and respectful to others

Keep deflecting and obfuscating.

[Jack100]

9 hours ago, theshu25 said:

This has made my day for the filthy scamming rapist grifter to finally get whats coming to the animal. Yet he will not do 5 minutes jail,thats the sad part for me.

theshu I get the  impression you don't like the man ?