quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

sombear said:

---

FLBear5630 said:

---

Have you heard the recent Trump interview? It is very good. His talk on migrants was good. He needs more reasonable interviews. He also seems to have learned to laugh at some of the comments. Maybe he has grown a bit as a politician.

---

I have not, but I'm not optimistic . . . .

He was a swindler his entire career, I thought he'd be different when he ran for President.

After watching him act like a child in the 2016 primary, I thought he'd change as President.

After he lost in 2020, I thought he'd be a changed man.

After reflecting on his post-2020 mistakes, I thought he'd enter the 2024 primary a different man.

Trump is who he is and always had been, a despicable human being. I truly hope he finds God.

---

I thought his latest interviews showed hope. Talking about how you can't play Little League games because of tent cities was really showing where he is coming from. I agreed

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

Better flush after that post, that much crap would stink up any house.

Bragg based his case on lies, distortions and hatred.

You better understand that sooner or later this will have a price you don't see coming.

drahthaar said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

---

One can - and I do - say this about most politicians.

The difference is that politicos like Biden have no cult following. His voters tolerate him, not adore him.

And, let's face, we all have moral failings, politicians more than most, but Trump may just be in a class of his own.

Edit: Forgot to respond on the trial. I'm not defending it. I've mostly just pointed out that prosecutors and judges play politics and reach on cases every day. Parties and gov agencies have gone after political opponents since the beginning of politics and government, including here in the U.S. Trump just happens to be a far easier and more despised target.

sombear said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

---

One can - and I do - say this about most politicians.

The difference is that politicos like Biden have no cult following. His voters tolerate him, not adore him.

And, let's face, we all have moral failings, politicians more than most, but Trump may just be in a class of his own.

Edit: Forgot to respond on the trial. I'm not defending it. I've mostly just pointed out that prosecutors and hi judges play politics and reach on cases every day. Parties and gov agencies have gone after political opponents since the beginning of politics and government, including here in the U.S. Trump just happens to be a far easier and more despised target.

---

Incorrect

Not about Trump.

This is about an unprecedented amount of political ruthlessness by a increasingly radicalized Democrat Party.

And such ruthlessness is a direct threat to all of us.

Thank you

Oldbear83 said:

---

Better flush after that post, that much crap would stink up any house.

Bragg based his case on lies, distortions and hatred.

You better understand that sooner or later this will have a price you don't see coming.

---

Why didn't you or Trump point out the obvious lies, distortion and hatred to Blanche and Necheles? After all, Blanche got Manafort's case thrown out against the same DA. Could it be for lack of evidence for the defense? No, no, it has to be part of some complicated conspiracy theory that Trump's attorneys are a part. No attorney worth their salt could lose this case, right? Has to be a conspiracy. Poor philandering, @#$!% grabbing, sexual predator and peeping Tom, fake university con, six time bankrupt Trump.

We get it. The Bill of Rights only applies to people you approve of.

Oldbear83 said:

---

We get it. The Bill of Rights only applies to people you approve of.

---

It applies to everyone, even Trump, in spite of his contempt.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

We get it. The Bill of Rights only applies to people you approve of.

---

It applies to everyone, even Trump, in spite of his my contempt.

---

Corrected, you should never imply someone's image dilutes their rights.

Have we had any burning, looting, and murdering yet?

I was told Ultramagafascisitrons and Christian nationalists were the biggest terrorist threat. Where are they hiding?

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

---

One can - and I do - say this about most politicians.

The difference is that politicos like Biden have no cult following. His voters tolerate him, not adore him.

And, let's face, we all have moral failings, politicians more than most, but Trump may just be in a class of his own.

Edit: Forgot to respond on the trial. I'm not defending it. I've mostly just pointed out that prosecutors and hi judges play politics and reach on cases every day. Parties and gov agencies have gone after political opponents since the beginning of politics and government, including here in the U.S. Trump just happens to be a far easier and more despised target.

---

Incorrect

Not about Trump.

This is about an unprecedented amount of political ruthlessness by a increasingly radicalized Democrat Party.

And such ruthlessness is a direct threat to all of us.

---

Complete bull*****

President Trump has degraded our civic institutions and convinced the gullible that the Constitutional protection he received in his trial were actually unconstitutional, that the defense he chose not to raise was denied him, that he was denied a jury in his previous trial when he chose a bench trial, that a gag order he ignored at least ten times prevented him from testifying, and that he can deny in public what he said in deposition and the gullible believe it all and buy his shoes and his surrender suit pieces and his yard signs.

At this point I'm willing to give him one more term just so he can't run again and make y'all embarrass yourselves anymore.

quash said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

---

One can - and I do - say this about most politicians.

The difference is that politicos like Biden have no cult following. His voters tolerate him, not adore him.

And, let's face, we all have moral failings, politicians more than most, but Trump may just be in a class of his own.

Edit: Forgot to respond on the trial. I'm not defending it. I've mostly just pointed out that prosecutors and hi judges play politics and reach on cases every day. Parties and gov agencies have gone after political opponents since the beginning of politics and government, including here in the U.S. Trump just happens to be a far easier and more despised target.

---

Incorrect

Not about Trump.

This is about an unprecedented amount of political ruthlessness by a increasingly radicalized Democrat Party.

And such ruthlessness is a direct threat to all of us.

---

Complete bull*****

President Trump has degraded our civic institutions and convinced the gullible that the Constitutional protection he received in his trial were actually unconstitutional, that the defense he chose not to raise was denied him, that he was denied a jury in his previous trial when he chose a bench trial, that a gag order he ignored at least ten times prevented him from testifying, and that he can deny in public what he said in deposition and the gullible believe it all and buy his shoes and his surrender suit pieces and his yard signs.

At this point I'm willing to give him one more term just so he can't run again and make y'all embarrass yourselves anymore.

---

Don't like Trump anymore than you do.

But the obvious political persecution he is undergoing sets a precedence that is a danger to us all.

That you claim not to see it is no surprise at all.
As the end justifies the means for the short sighted .

KaiBear said:

---

quash said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

---

One can - and I do - say this about most politicians.

The difference is that politicos like Biden have no cult following. His voters tolerate him, not adore him.

And, let's face, we all have moral failings, politicians more than most, but Trump may just be in a class of his own.

Edit: Forgot to respond on the trial. I'm not defending it. I've mostly just pointed out that prosecutors and hi judges play politics and reach on cases every day. Parties and gov agencies have gone after political opponents since the beginning of politics and government, including here in the U.S. Trump just happens to be a far easier and more despised target.

---

Incorrect

Not about Trump.

This is about an unprecedented amount of political ruthlessness by a increasingly radicalized Democrat Party.

And such ruthlessness is a direct threat to all of us.

---

Complete bull*****

President Trump has degraded our civic institutions and convinced the gullible that the Constitutional protection he received in his trial were actually unconstitutional, that the defense he chose not to raise was denied him, that he was denied a jury in his previous trial when he chose a bench trial, that a gag order he ignored at least ten times prevented him from testifying, and that he can deny in public what he said in deposition and the gullible believe it all and buy his shoes and his surrender suit pieces and his yard signs.

At this point I'm willing to give him one more term just so he can't run again and make y'all embarrass yourselves anymore.

---

Don't like Trump anymore than you do.

But the obvious political persecution he is undergoing sets a precedence that is a danger to us all.

That you claim not to see it is no surprise at all.
As the end justifies the means for the short sighted .

---

You misspelled prosecution

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

---

FWBear - a fellow lawyer - posted a nice analysis of the issues with this case, that you continue to seem to miss. I will repost if here for discussion.

Let's just assume there were false entries into records (and that is debatable). The aggravating predicate intent was to commit/conceal a crime under a particular NY Election Law involving a conspiracy to promote Trump's election by "unlawful means." We shouldn't even have to go any further without shaking our heads. But we will.

It became even more absurd as to Judge Merchan's instructions on "unlawful means":

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."

Setting aside how this almost reads like an instruction to convict (due to Merchan being sloppy), the jury did not even have to agree on part of the offense. There's plenty of SCOTUS law (especially in recent years) that this is improper. Even if not technically improper, not court or officer of the court would pursue this approach in good faith. It's shameful, but it happens.

The several options identified for "unlawful means" are headscratchers:
(1) FECA [the whole idea that settling with an NDA over alleged consensual sex is a campaign violation],
(2) the circular bootstrapping of falsifying business records [some of which arguably were not even applicable business records], and
(3) filing a tax return containing a materially false matter.

All three are problematic, but the second ground for "unlawful means" is the worst in my view. Falsifying business records to commit/conceal the promotion of Trump's election by the unlawful means of falsifying business records. That's really weak and sounds like the kind of logic you'd encounter at the DMV after standing in line for an hour.

The reason charges like these have never been brought until this political hit job is because these are eye-rollers. The statutes were not designed for this, which is evident by all the round holes and square pegs in this case. I won't hold my breath to see how many other political candidates DA Bragg pursues on these theories (I don't think he mentioned any other targets besides Trump during his own political campaign).

They did this same sloppy leftist "by any means necessary" crap with Weinstein and the NYC COA reversed his conviction because of it. On top of all of the above, were there any unnecessary prejudicial witnesses in this case? I can think of one, maybe even two.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

We get it. The Bill of Rights only applies to people you approve of.

---

It applies to everyone, even Trump, in spite of his my contempt.

---

Corrected, you should never imply someone's image dilutes their rights.

---

Go back to English class, and learn how read and interpret a sentence.

quash said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

quash said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

drahthaar said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

Funny, cause that's my view of Biden.

And when lawyers of different stripes are critical of the Brag/Merchan management of due process, one shouldn't take a defensive posture toward the trial. Everyone should be embarrassed and angry about that trial. And that is in no way a defense of the sleazball Trump.

---

One can - and I do - say this about most politicians.

The difference is that politicos like Biden have no cult following. His voters tolerate him, not adore him.

And, let's face, we all have moral failings, politicians more than most, but Trump may just be in a class of his own.

Edit: Forgot to respond on the trial. I'm not defending it. I've mostly just pointed out that prosecutors and hi judges play politics and reach on cases every day. Parties and gov agencies have gone after political opponents since the beginning of politics and government, including here in the U.S. Trump just happens to be a far easier and more despised target.

---

Incorrect

Not about Trump.

This is about an unprecedented amount of political ruthlessness by a increasingly radicalized Democrat Party.

And such ruthlessness is a direct threat to all of us.

---

Complete bull*****

President Trump has degraded our civic institutions and convinced the gullible that the Constitutional protection he received in his trial were actually unconstitutional, that the defense he chose not to raise was denied him, that he was denied a jury in his previous trial when he chose a bench trial, that a gag order he ignored at least ten times prevented him from testifying, and that he can deny in public what he said in deposition and the gullible believe it all and buy his shoes and his surrender suit pieces and his yard signs.

At this point I'm willing to give him one more term just so he can't run again and make y'all embarrass yourselves anymore.

---

Don't like Trump anymore than you do.

But the obvious political persecution he is undergoing sets a precedence that is a danger to us all.

That you claim not to see it is no surprise at all.
As the end justifies the means for the short sighted .

---

You misspelled prosecution

---

That's the least of your worries.

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

---

FWBear - a fellow lawyer - posted a nice analysis of the issues with this case, that you continue to seem to miss. I will repost if here for discussion.

Let's just assume there were false entries into records (and that is debatable). The aggravating predicate intent was to commit/conceal a crime under a particular NY Election Law involving a conspiracy to promote Trump's election by "unlawful means." We shouldn't even have to go any further without shaking our heads. But we will.

It became even more absurd as to Judge Merchan's instructions on "unlawful means":

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."

Setting aside how this almost reads like an instruction to convict (due to Merchan being sloppy), the jury did not even have to agree on part of the offense. There's plenty of SCOTUS law (especially in recent years) that this is improper. Even if not technically improper, not court or officer of the court would pursue this approach in good faith. It's shameful, but it happens.

The several options identified for "unlawful means" are headscratchers:
(1) FECA [the whole idea that settling with an NDA over alleged consensual sex is a campaign violation],
(2) the circular bootstrapping of falsifying business records [some of which arguably were not even applicable business records], and
(3) filing a tax return containing a materially false matter.

All three are problematic, but the second ground for "unlawful means" is the worst in my view. Falsifying business records to commit/conceal the promotion of Trump's election by the unlawful means of falsifying business records. That's really weak and sounds like the kind of logic you'd encounter at the DMV after standing in line for an hour.

The reason charges like these have never been brought until this political hit job is because these are eye-rollers. The statutes were not designed for this, which is evident by all the round holes and square pegs in this case. I won't hold my breath to see how many other political candidates DA Bragg pursues on these theories (I don't think he mentioned any other targets besides Trump during his own political campaign).

They did this same sloppy leftist "by any means necessary" crap with Weinstein and the NYC COA reversed his conviction because of it. On top of all of the above, were there any unnecessary prejudicial witnesses in this case? I can think of one, maybe even two.

---

Funny not one of the two lawyers on the jury bought this "sloppy" logic.

TexasScientist said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

---

FWBear - a fellow lawyer - posted a nice analysis of the issues with this case, that you continue to seem to miss. I will repost if here for discussion.

Let's just assume there were false entries into records (and that is debatable). The aggravating predicate intent was to commit/conceal a crime under a particular NY Election Law involving a conspiracy to promote Trump's election by "unlawful means." We shouldn't even have to go any further without shaking our heads. But we will.

It became even more absurd as to Judge Merchan's instructions on "unlawful means":

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."

Setting aside how this almost reads like an instruction to convict (due to Merchan being sloppy), the jury did not even have to agree on part of the offense. There's plenty of SCOTUS law (especially in recent years) that this is improper. Even if not technically improper, not court or officer of the court would pursue this approach in good faith. It's shameful, but it happens.

The several options identified for "unlawful means" are headscratchers:
(1) FECA [the whole idea that settling with an NDA over alleged consensual sex is a campaign violation],
(2) the circular bootstrapping of falsifying business records [some of which arguably were not even applicable business records], and
(3) filing a tax return containing a materially false matter.

All three are problematic, but the second ground for "unlawful means" is the worst in my view. Falsifying business records to commit/conceal the promotion of Trump's election by the unlawful means of falsifying business records. That's really weak and sounds like the kind of logic you'd encounter at the DMV after standing in line for an hour.

The reason charges like these have never been brought until this political hit job is because these are eye-rollers. The statutes were not designed for this, which is evident by all the round holes and square pegs in this case. I won't hold my breath to see how many other political candidates DA Bragg pursues on these theories (I don't think he mentioned any other targets besides Trump during his own political campaign).

They did this same sloppy leftist "by any means necessary" crap with Weinstein and the NYC COA reversed his conviction because of it. On top of all of the above, were there any unnecessary prejudicial witnesses in this case? I can think of one, maybe even two.

---

Funny not one of the two lawyers on the jury bought this "sloppy" logic.

---

Is that really a surprise to you, given the political leanings of the jury pool?

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

sombear said:

---

KaiBear said:

---

sombear said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

After J6, folks are no longer willing to go to jail for Trump.

---

True

The intentional impact of months in solidarity confinement before the accused ever saw a day in court.

Try imaging AOC getting treated in such a manner under any circumstances.



Your friends have successfully established a dual interpretation of our judicial system.
One for leftists and the other for conservatives.


So be proud.

While you watch our country's standard of living continue to crumble. Of course the decay won't impact you or your family.

Perish the thought.

---

Our Country, our movement, and the judicial system are about a lot more than Donald Trump. He's a charlatan who wants all his groupies to think it's about him. He could care less about you or anyone else. It's always been about Trump, his entire life.

---

So please enlighten us, genius. If it's only about Trump as you assert, exactly what is he personally benefitting from as he continues to go through unrelenting viscious attacks and persecution from the left and the establishment deep state as he has now done for the last 9 years? It sure isn't using/abusing elective office to enrich himself and his family like the Bidens, the Clintons, and the Obamas have done.

All of you TDS'ers are exactly like the hard left in that all you do is engage in constant emotional name calling and ad hominem attacks without facts to back it up.

---

Like many politicians, it's all about ego.

He can't go out a "loser."

Plus, he hopes a win keeps him out of prison.

No facts?

Serial adulterer.

Serial liar.

Serial crooked businessman, with history of screwing over workers and small contractors.

Fake Christian

No lifelong friends. He screws them all over.

That's just a sampling . . . .

---

The Trump brand.

TexasScientist said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

---

FWBear - a fellow lawyer - posted a nice analysis of the issues with this case, that you continue to seem to miss. I will repost if here for discussion.

Let's just assume there were false entries into records (and that is debatable). The aggravating predicate intent was to commit/conceal a crime under a particular NY Election Law involving a conspiracy to promote Trump's election by "unlawful means." We shouldn't even have to go any further without shaking our heads. But we will.

It became even more absurd as to Judge Merchan's instructions on "unlawful means":

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."

Setting aside how this almost reads like an instruction to convict (due to Merchan being sloppy), the jury did not even have to agree on part of the offense. There's plenty of SCOTUS law (especially in recent years) that this is improper. Even if not technically improper, not court or officer of the court would pursue this approach in good faith. It's shameful, but it happens.

The several options identified for "unlawful means" are headscratchers:
(1) FECA [the whole idea that settling with an NDA over alleged consensual sex is a campaign violation],
(2) the circular bootstrapping of falsifying business records [some of which arguably were not even applicable business records], and
(3) filing a tax return containing a materially false matter.

All three are problematic, but the second ground for "unlawful means" is the worst in my view. Falsifying business records to commit/conceal the promotion of Trump's election by the unlawful means of falsifying business records. That's really weak and sounds like the kind of logic you'd encounter at the DMV after standing in line for an hour.

The reason charges like these have never been brought until this political hit job is because these are eye-rollers. The statutes were not designed for this, which is evident by all the round holes and square pegs in this case. I won't hold my breath to see how many other political candidates DA Bragg pursues on these theories (I don't think he mentioned any other targets besides Trump during his own political campaign).

They did this same sloppy leftist "by any means necessary" crap with Weinstein and the NYC COA reversed his conviction because of it. On top of all of the above, were there any unnecessary prejudicial witnesses in this case? I can think of one, maybe even two.

---

Funny not one of the two lawyers on the jury bought this "sloppy" logic.

---

Funny how a jury selected from an area that is 90% anti-Trump given ridiculous instructions would definitely not make a political decision. Also funny how no marginally intelligent attorney without TDS does not think it is silly.

Your hatred of Trump is basically the hatred of Jews in the Weimar Republic. Who cares if we burn down the country and long as it GETS TRUMP!

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

We get it. The Bill of Rights only applies to people you approve of.

---

It applies to everyone, even Trump, in spite of his my contempt.

---

Corrected, you should never imply someone's image dilutes their rights.

---

Go back to English class, and learn how read and interpret a sentence.

---

Ah. the fake Scientist now imagines himself an expert on Grammar.

He's saving his ammo for a conviction that has some teeth. Don't worry, they'll riot when he's ready for them to riot.

I found it finally!

https://www.newsnationnow.com/world/israel-palestine/protesters-deface-washington-dc-buildings/

... every accusation is a confession

Sam Lowry said:

---

He's saving his ammo for a conviction that has some teeth. Don't worry, they'll riot when he's ready for them to riot.

---

LOL!!!!!

Gotta hand it to you TDS'ers. You might be completely delusional, but you never give up.

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

Ot is common knowledge that the far far right is always the biggest threat to a cou try there are 100s of examples however Hitler is the best one...and anyone who thinks they are bring this country down with their super tiny minority is just stupid.

joseywales said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

Ot is common knowledge that the far far right is always the biggest threat to a cou try there are 100s of examples however Hitler is the best one...and anyone who thinks they are bring this country down with their super tiny minority is just stupid.

---

Chinese bot?

joseywales said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

Ot is common knowledge that the far far right is always the biggest threat to a cou try there are 100s of examples however Hitler is the best one...and anyone who thinks they are bring this country down with their super tiny minority is just stupid.

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

joseywales said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

Ot is common knowledge that the far far right is always the biggest threat to a cou try there are 100s of examples however Hitler is the best one...and anyone who thinks they are bring this country down with their super tiny minority is just stupid.

---

Chinese bot?

---

I don't know, but that post is so incoherent it reads like it could've been written by dementia Joe without the help of his handlers.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

joseywales said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

Ot is common knowledge that the far far right is always the biggest threat to a cou try there are 100s of examples however Hitler is the best one...and anyone who thinks they are bring this country down with their super tiny minority is just stupid.

---

Chinese bot?

---

That national socialist, Hitler, liked char"cou ty"? I didn't know that. I do know that Lenin liked Russian beer and Stalin liked brandy over vodka. Mao is said to have liked mangos so much, a dentist was executed for comparing them to sweet potatoes. Ho Chi Minh liked fish. Tito tried to farm, but wasn't good at it, so I don't know what he liked. We all know Fidel Castro liked cigars. Hugo Chavez loves his coffee.

joseywales said:

---

Johnny Bear said:

---

How about all the violent trashing, burning, and looting going on out there by all those hordes of MAGA crazies supported by pallets of bricks, fireworks, frozen water bottles, and Molotov cocktails supplied by the Trump campaign?!!?

Oh wait…….there hasn't been any of that or even the hint of a threat of it. What gives? I thought the greatest existential threat to America was MAGA inspired white nationalism because there is a red capped right wing extremist behind every other bush ready to leap out and spread insurrection or at least assault a person of color for no good reason.

Surely if the death of a drug addicted street thug who lost his life while resisting arrest can inspire ("mostly peaceful") mass riots supported by the left resulting in over $1BB in damages and 19 deaths 4 years ago, you'd think a clear cut case of rigged kangaroo court political persecution of the leading candidate for POTUS would at least trigger a similar response on the right (especially given the fantastic excuse to go loot your local Wal-Mart)…..but obviously not so. Just a lot of outraged people of all races, colors and creeds vowing to respond in November……you know - pretty much along the lines of how our system is actually supposed to work. Really stark difference in reactions don't you think?

---

Ot is common knowledge that the far far right is always the biggest threat to a cou try there are 100s of examples however Hitler is the best one...and anyone who thinks they are bring this country down with their super tiny minority is just stupid.

---

Hitler was far left, not far right. Death is always on the left.

TexasScientist said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

---

FWBear - a fellow lawyer - posted a nice analysis of the issues with this case, that you continue to seem to miss. I will repost if here for discussion.

Let's just assume there were false entries into records (and that is debatable). The aggravating predicate intent was to commit/conceal a crime under a particular NY Election Law involving a conspiracy to promote Trump's election by "unlawful means." We shouldn't even have to go any further without shaking our heads. But we will.

It became even more absurd as to Judge Merchan's instructions on "unlawful means":

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."

Setting aside how this almost reads like an instruction to convict (due to Merchan being sloppy), the jury did not even have to agree on part of the offense. There's plenty of SCOTUS law (especially in recent years) that this is improper. Even if not technically improper, not court or officer of the court would pursue this approach in good faith. It's shameful, but it happens.

The several options identified for "unlawful means" are headscratchers:
(1) FECA [the whole idea that settling with an NDA over alleged consensual sex is a campaign violation],
(2) the circular bootstrapping of falsifying business records [some of which arguably were not even applicable business records], and
(3) filing a tax return containing a materially false matter.

All three are problematic, but the second ground for "unlawful means" is the worst in my view. Falsifying business records to commit/conceal the promotion of Trump's election by the unlawful means of falsifying business records. That's really weak and sounds like the kind of logic you'd encounter at the DMV after standing in line for an hour.

The reason charges like these have never been brought until this political hit job is because these are eye-rollers. The statutes were not designed for this, which is evident by all the round holes and square pegs in this case. I won't hold my breath to see how many other political candidates DA Bragg pursues on these theories (I don't think he mentioned any other targets besides Trump during his own political campaign).

They did this same sloppy leftist "by any means necessary" crap with Weinstein and the NYC COA reversed his conviction because of it. On top of all of the above, were there any unnecessary prejudicial witnesses in this case? I can think of one, maybe even two.

---

Funny not one of the two lawyers on the jury bought this "sloppy" logic.

---

I wouldn't look at leftist lawyers as being paragons of logic. We have a leftist Supreme Court justice whose "logic" was that she can't define what a woman is because she's not a biologist. Instead of using logic objectively to shape one's beliefs, too often for them it's the other way around - they believe what they want to believe, and then "find" the logic to support it. It's very similar to what you do with atheism.

TexasScientist said:

---

Mothra said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

quash said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

No, it is about DT breaking the 'law' ... the made-up contrived version we came up with in order to 'get Trump'.

---

Corrected for accuracy.

---

New York Election Law 17-152. Can you tell me what portion was made up/contrived, and in what manner?

---

Aside from ignoring statute of limitations, claiming a violation of federal election law in state court, blowing up a single misdemeanor charge into 34 'felonies'?

Come on, we've been over this, you're not going to fool anyone not already lobotomized.

---

SOL will not avail him on appeal, nor will the misguided claim that this SHOULD have been a federal charge, it simply COULD have been.

As a former prosecutor I have seen multiple acts combined into one charged offense; I have also seen each act charged. The latter is risky because if it looks like a bunch of similar charges and you fail to prove one or more the jury will se it as a failure of the whole. NY took the risk and went 34 for 34. Dayam. Blanche should be embarrassed.

---

FWBear - a fellow lawyer - posted a nice analysis of the issues with this case, that you continue to seem to miss. I will repost if here for discussion.

Let's just assume there were false entries into records (and that is debatable). The aggravating predicate intent was to commit/conceal a crime under a particular NY Election Law involving a conspiracy to promote Trump's election by "unlawful means." We shouldn't even have to go any further without shaking our heads. But we will.

It became even more absurd as to Judge Merchan's instructions on "unlawful means":

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."

Setting aside how this almost reads like an instruction to convict (due to Merchan being sloppy), the jury did not even have to agree on part of the offense. There's plenty of SCOTUS law (especially in recent years) that this is improper. Even if not technically improper, not court or officer of the court would pursue this approach in good faith. It's shameful, but it happens.

The several options identified for "unlawful means" are headscratchers:
(1) FECA [the whole idea that settling with an NDA over alleged consensual sex is a campaign violation],
(2) the circular bootstrapping of falsifying business records [some of which arguably were not even applicable business records], and
(3) filing a tax return containing a materially false matter.

All three are problematic, but the second ground for "unlawful means" is the worst in my view. Falsifying business records to commit/conceal the promotion of Trump's election by the unlawful means of falsifying business records. That's really weak and sounds like the kind of logic you'd encounter at the DMV after standing in line for an hour.

The reason charges like these have never been brought until this political hit job is because these are eye-rollers. The statutes were not designed for this, which is evident by all the round holes and square pegs in this case. I won't hold my breath to see how many other political candidates DA Bragg pursues on these theories (I don't think he mentioned any other targets besides Trump during his own political campaign).

They did this same sloppy leftist "by any means necessary" crap with Weinstein and the NYC COA reversed his conviction because of it. On top of all of the above, were there any unnecessary prejudicial witnesses in this case? I can think of one, maybe even two.

---

Funny not one of the two lawyers on the jury bought this "sloppy" logic.

---

On a jury, lawyers are no different than a baker or candlestick maker. The jury has to follow the Court's instructions. It is not free to ponder about why a law is being bent against the accused. It is told what the law is and it weighs the evidence.