Trump found guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records

[stoner]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I said I’ would stand by the Jury’s verdict, and indeed I do.

 

Now I’m sorry for noting that all the people says that Convicted Felon Trump would never be a convicted felon are now saying he’ll never go to prison. 
 

He’s a man of many firsts, I don’t put him above any low point.

 

 

 

he wins the election and does not spend any time in jail. few months to go. 

[herfiehandbag]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Anyone who supports the verdict in this farce of a case and doesnt acknowledge the fact that it will be reversed on appeal is an enemy to me and my family and my country.

 

 

 

 

A post which will strike chill into the heart of someone, sometimes, somewhere, perhaps ...

[frank83628]

34 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

No.

Before his conviction he was making repeated threats against the prosecution, families and by extension the jury. He incited the Jan. 6 Capitol insurrection wherein 5 died and threaten killing the VPOTUS. If not jailed immediately that is the right of the judiciary for a 34-count conviction, Trump will elevate a call for violence to create chaos intended to keep him from incarceration.

thats total MSM nonsense, 5 did not die. only 1 person did, ands she was shot by a cop.

 

 

[FritsSikkink]

3 hours ago, novacova said:

Wouldn’t expect anything less from a fascist leftist 

Read your posts, it’s very cultish 

It’s going to sting for everyone, no one is exempt from tyranny 

It will be thrown out, it’s just a ploy in attempt to impede his election. So relax already.

Of course you would, it’s what was programmed in.

Then stop being a loser and not engage in any of the media 

As stated above, everyone loses. Unfortunately many suffer from trump derangement syndrome and can’t see it.

Propagandized, obviously.

Nice you are able to admit to having the mind plague 

The entire left are nutters, literally mind lost.

 

Anyway, this is what happens when individuals are propagandized. To the point where they can no longer think for themselves. Enjoy and have fun with the silly adolescent rhetoric 

You are the one who can't think for himself, only parrot Trump's words.

[JonnyF]

13 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

 

 

I hope you can accept the result in November. Or will you be calling for another vote if your side lose, like you did with Brexit?

[FritsSikkink]

3 hours ago, riclag said:

Haven’t lost syndrome 

Its a process!

No shock , No Awe 
It was always Dem party politics ,

played out by a dem prosecutor,& dem corrupt judge.

 

 

Sore Loser Syndrom

[Andre0720]

13 hours ago, cdemundo said:

"inciters of an insurrection against Democracy are  a danger to society.  He is a rapist ,a seditionist ,a traitor  and a serial liar (which apparently you don't like liars)"

 

Referring to the above:" Lots of adjectives in there."

Only one: serial.

 

 

 

Don't get above yourself, not much substance in your comment.

Danger, dangerous, serial, so yes, I was writing too quickly, to respond in offering substance to the debate, obviously quite controversial as my comments are.

So your turn to try to offer some substance in a comment.

I will be pleased to read, something less ad hominem from you...

[Galong]

13 hours ago, frank83628 said:

total BS, the Dems are above the law, especially the high ups like Killton & pelosi, you just don't see it because its the side you are on.

Name a law that Hillary broke, please. Why didn't the GOP go after her AND get it to court?  Could it be the same reason that they didn't carry on with their impeachment of Biden, that being, a TOTAL LACK OF EVIDENCE?

PS: remember to send your donations to the self-proclaimed billionaire's legal fund cookie jar. Do it for 'Murica. 

Edited May 31 by stats
personal comment removed

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I hope you can accept the result in November. Or will you be calling for another vote if your side lose, like you did with Brexit?

Yes I will accept the result in November.

 

And I did accept the BREXIT result.

 

So back to you, do you accept the Jury’s verdict of Trump’s guilt?

[Walker88]

1 hour ago, Yagoda said:

Anyone who supports the verdict in this farce of a case and doesnt acknowledge the fact that it will be reversed on appeal is an enemy to me and my family and my country.

 

 

 

 

Funny how we all have our preferences.

 

Anyone who supports a guy who steals highly classified documents that can threaten national security and foreign clandestine intelligence assets is an enemy to me, my family and my country.

 

Anyone who tries to subvert the will of the people in a fair and democratic election is an enemy to me, my family and my country.

 

Anyone who incited an insurrection against the US Capitol in order to stop the official certification of a free and fair election is an enemy to me, my family and my country.

[Hanaguma]

8 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

thats total MSM nonsense, 5 did not die. only 1 person did, ands she was shot by a cop.

 

 

Actually, as far as I remember a couple of the fatter rioters had strokes or heart attacks and died as well. Can't be bothered to check though. No cops were killed, that I do remember.

[Chomper Higgot]

13 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

 

Now back to the topic of discussion and the question I asked you.

 

Do you accept the Jury’s guilty verdict against Trump?

[Hanaguma]

14 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

He used campaign money to cover it up. And falsified accounts to do so. That is the crime 

Interesting that those crimes need not be brought before the court, nor does Trump have to be found guilty of them. I think that may be the basis of why people are finding it hard to follow the trail from crime to conviction. The 34 misdemeanour document falsifying counts would, under normal circumstances, be forgotten due to the statute of limitations. But...if they are associated with an underlying crime then they become felonies and can be acted on. The underlying crime doesn't need to be brought in court or judged. Just mentioned.  So, Trump can be convicted of falsifying documents to cover up a crime that has not been proven or even seen light of day in court.  

 

I think that is what many people find hard to swallow.  It seems a rather convoluted path.

[frank83628]

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You seem to have forgotten how many $millions and time wasted by Republicans investigating these matters that came to zilch.

yes, zilch, just the all the other things they threw at Trump. unfortunately the reps as not as aggressive, nasty and spiteful as the dems, and they don't have 90% of the media behind them.

[HappyExpat57]

6 minutes ago, Galong said:

Name a law that Hillary broke, please. Why didn't the GOP go after her AND get it to court?  Could it be the same reason that they didn't carry on with their impeachment of Biden, that being, a TOTAL LACK OF EVIDENCE? Paying attention does not seem to be your strong suit, my friend. 

PS: remember to send your donations to the self-proclaimed billionaire's legal fund cookie jar. Do it for 'Murica. 

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.

[gravity101]

14 hours ago, bob smith said:

 

 

I find it funny Trump supporters parrot the exact same talking points and phrases as their boss. It's almost as though they are cultists without self thought.

[Chomper Higgot]

21 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

yes, zilch, just the all the other things they threw at Trump. unfortunately the reps as not as aggressive, nasty and spiteful as the dems, and they don't have 90% of the media behind them.

Yet more evidence of how far from reality MAGA have strayed.

Edited May 31 by Chomper Higgot

[Eric Loh]

Judge Juan Merchan will have a most satisfying day at sentencing Trump after weeks of taunting, intimidation, threats and insults at him and his family. He has warned Trump in great lengths and has consider jail sanction when he violated his strict gag order. With the guilty verdicts, Judge will have 34 ways to serve his justice. Trump's bullying finally met his match. Good day for justice.  

[JonnyF]

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yep, that’s democracy.

 

It isn't if you try to oveturn the original vote before it has been implemented.

 

Would it be democratic for Trump to demand another vote in December if he loses in January? Of course not, yet you wanted another vote on Brexit before the result of the first one had been implemented.

 

So asking for people's acceptance of votes/verdicts seems a bit of a stretch for you. The hypocrisy is not surprising though...

[Berkshire]

From the New Yorker, the Return of Tiny Hands.....A Man of Conviction.

 

Edited May 31 by Berkshire

[Danderman123]

28 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

he didn't try to overthrow the election, so gtf with that crap. silenced from being able to speak by being removed from twitter & facebook.

 

if the justice in the us was in fact equal, then Pelosi should have been done for insider trading, clinton would have been done for her server, biden and he documents, he wasn't even president. 

Trump was indicted for his attempt to stop the certification of the vote on January 6.

 

You seem confused about that.

[connda]

Of course he would be.  Lawfare 101 in a progressive liberal city with a DA who campaigned on "getting Trump" and a judge who instructed the jury that they didn't need to come to a consensus regarding Trump's "crimes."

So - this will go to the appeals court for sure based on procedural irregularities.

  "Ha Ha Ha MAGA supporter.  Trump's gonna get jail time."

I'm not a Trump supporter and don't plan on voting for him.  I have huge problems with many of his domestic and foreign policies. 

But - I Detest Lawfare.  It has no place in a functioning First-World Democracy, which basically means to me that the US no longer has a functioning First-World Democracy.  It's what you see here in Thailand.

"Ha Ha Ha We got Trump Ha Ha Ha - your boy is going to prison."
 

He ain't "by boy - and if he 'goes to jail' the entire US has a serious problem in the future.  But progressive ideologues can't grasp that reality as they are simple anchored to their opinions by hatred"

You miss the point that this just galvanizes his base as well as other people who see though the Lawfare and really abhor what they see America turning in to. 

If Trump wins in November, the turnaround is fair play and they'll be Lawfare on Steriods - and then the US descends into the third-world of political Lawfare you see here in Thailand.  And whatever form of government the United States is in 2025, it won't be a Democracy.

Be careful what you cheer for and wish for.  It will turn around a bite you in the derriere.

[Galong]

7 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

yes, zilch, just the all the other things they threw at Trump. unfortunately the reps as not as aggressive, nasty and spiteful as the dems, and they don't have 90% of the media behind them.

Almost all media coverage is about the GOP, so I don't why on earth you'd falsely claim that 90% (a number that obviously came from someone's backside) is dem backed. There are dedicated redneck "news" sites and some of them got in legal trouble for outright lying. I guess that's all besides the point if it doesn't fit someone's personal agenda. 🤷‍♂️🤦‍♂️

[Danderman123]

8 minutes ago, HappyExpat57 said:

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.

Didn't prior Secretaries of State also use private servers for emails?

[frank83628]

2 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump was indicted for his attempt to stop the certification of the vote on January 6.

 

You seem confused about that.

what was the outcome? any charges for insurrection ?

[frank83628]

2 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Didn't prior Secretaries of State also use private servers for emails?

this is the sort of situation when you would type  'whataboutery' .

 

 

Edited May 31 by frank83628

[HappyExpat57]

12 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Interesting that those crimes need not be brought before the court, nor does Trump have to be found guilty of them. I think that may be the basis of why people are finding it hard to follow the trail from crime to conviction. The 34 misdemeanour document falsifying counts would, under normal circumstances, be forgotten due to the statute of limitations. But...if they are associated with an underlying crime then they become felonies and can be acted on. The underlying crime doesn't need to be brought in court or judged. Just mentioned.  So, Trump can be convicted of falsifying documents to cover up a crime that has not been proven or even seen light of day in court.  

 

I think that is what many people find hard to swallow.  It seems a rather convoluted path.

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.

[TroubleandGrumpy]

10 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Interesting that those crimes need not be brought before the court, nor does Trump have to be found guilty of them. I think that may be the basis of why people are finding it hard to follow the trail from crime to conviction. The 34 misdemeanour document falsifying counts would, under normal circumstances, be forgotten due to the statute of limitations. But...if they are associated with an underlying crime then they become felonies and can be acted on. The underlying crime doesn't need to be brought in court or judged. Just mentioned.  So, Trump can be convicted of falsifying documents to cover up a crime that has not been proven or even seen light of day in court.  

 

I think that is what many people find hard to swallow.  It seems a rather convoluted path.

Yep - all done by Dem Prosecution, Judge and Jury - and all designed to try and stop Trump from becomming POTUS again.

The reason they are scared is because they know he will investigate fully the 2020 election, and that he will tear down everything they have built.

Unlike last time, he knows what to do and how to do it - last time they delayed him and then blindsided him - never again.

The convinctions will be removed on Appeal - this is going to the High Court.

Why the DA proceeded with this case will be one of the many criminal investigations to be started under Trump as President in 2025. 

There is not a businessman alive that has not over valued his/her assets in their financial books - me included. 

 

[Srikcir]

19 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Can't be bothered to check though.

Here's the check:

Within 36 hours, five people died: one was shot by Capitol Police, another died of a drug overdose, and three died of natural causes, including a police officer. Many people were injured, including 174 police officers. Four officers who responded to the attack died by suicide within seven months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6_United_States_Capitol_attack

If Trump never incited the attack on the Capitol, would these people still be alive?

[Danderman123]

2 minutes ago, frank83628 said:

what was the outcome? any charges for insurrection ?

You are quibbling about the charges, but not Trump's intent.

 

Interesting.