Trump found Guilty on all charges!

[Anonymous]

The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

He can appeal after he’s criminally sentenced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm nervous about the shifting fundraising advantage.

We raised $51M in April compared to orange man's $76M that month.

Then orange man raised $141M in May. Another $200M in the last three days.

DNC hasn't released May yet. Maybe we'll bounce back. I'm getting a horrible feeling here.

Blanche was incompetent. He let Trump run the case and I will be forever grateful! Blanche can kiss his career goodbye.
eh.. most of that will be going to pay Trump's legal bills rather than actually running the campaign for any R.

How expensive do you think lawyers are?!?

Top shelf corporate lawyers bill out at about $2500-$3000 an hour.

But I doubt Blanche et al will get paid because they lost his case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mr. Trump's convictions have at least a 50% chance of being overturned on appeal.

It's greater than 50%. There were so many irreversible errors that they are hard to count.

As I recall you it another MAGA prognosticator also delete that Trump would be found not guilty. Don't quit your day job!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Trumplican Supreme Court thinks states rights is a crock.

States may not override the Constitution. Requirements to be president are already spelled out in the U.S. Constitution, the highest law in the land.

Stop posting these wet dreams.

PP's post is about the Vermont RNC's rules. The RNC is a private entity, not a government, not a state. This is not a state's rights scenario.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

You can read the law here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10

It doesn't specify that the other crime must be a state crime. It doesn't specify that he has to be convicted or even charged for the crime - there are various reasons this might happen (they decide not to prosecute, statute of limitations expires, etc.)

Trump is very much aware of the crime he was actually charged with: Falsifying business records.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

You can read the law here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10

It doesn't specify that the other crime must be a state crime. It doesn't specify that he has to be convicted or even charged for the crime - there are various reasons this might happen (they decide not to prosecute, statute of limitations expires, etc.)

Trump is very much aware of the crime he was actually charged with: Falsifying business records.

Which, even if he did that, would be a misdemeanor. And, a misdemeanor in which the statute of limitations had expired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

You can read the law here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10

It doesn't specify that the other crime must be a state crime. It doesn't specify that he has to be convicted or even charged for the crime - there are various reasons this might happen (they decide not to prosecute, statute of limitations expires, etc.)

Trump is very much aware of the crime he was actually charged with: Falsifying business records.

Which, even if he did that, would be a misdemeanor. And, a misdemeanor in which the statute of limitations had expired.

Wrong. Stop whining about his conviction. He stupidly did his crimes in NY and NY is not interested in letting Trump get away with criminal activity. He was such a a dummy for breaking the law.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

You still don’t understand anything. He was convicted of 34 state law crimes of fraudulent business documents that were felony counts because they were part of a conspiracy to continue and/or cover up another crime or crimes (federal and/or state campaign finance fraud and/or tax fraud). He was not charged or convicted of those crimes, merely that the business crimes he was charged with were committed to cover up the conspiracy to commit them. The jury verdict is that he committed the 34 counts of business fraud and did so for the purpose of continuing and/or covering up a criminal conspiracy. It isn’t a new interpretation of the law. It’s how the law is used in NY to prosecute criminal conspirators.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

You can read the law here: https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10

It doesn't specify that the other crime must be a state crime. It doesn't specify that he has to be convicted or even charged for the crime - there are various reasons this might happen (they decide not to prosecute, statute of limitations expires, etc.)

Trump is very much aware of the crime he was actually charged with: Falsifying business records.

Which, even if he did that, would be a misdemeanor. And, a misdemeanor in which the statute of limitations had expired.

No, it's not. It says it right there in the link: "Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony."

[Anonymous]

This made my year. I hate him. I'm glad - Im gloating like I personally know him. I love the outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm nervous about the shifting fundraising advantage.

We raised $51M in April compared to orange man's $76M that month.

Then orange man raised $141M in May. Another $200M in the last three days.

DNC hasn't released May yet. Maybe we'll bounce back. I'm getting a horrible feeling here.

Blanche was incompetent. He let Trump run the case and I will be forever grateful! Blanche can kiss his career goodbye.
eh.. most of that will be going to pay Trump's legal bills rather than actually running the campaign for any R.

How expensive do you think lawyers are?!?

Top shelf corporate lawyers bill out at about $2500-$3000 an hour.

But I doubt Blanche et al will get paid because they lost his case.

That's not how lawyers work. Win or lose - they get paid. It's really that simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm nervous about the shifting fundraising advantage.

We raised $51M in April compared to orange man's $76M that month.

Then orange man raised $141M in May. Another $200M in the last three days.

DNC hasn't released May yet. Maybe we'll bounce back. I'm getting a horrible feeling here.

Blanche was incompetent. He let Trump run the case and I will be forever grateful! Blanche can kiss his career goodbye.
eh.. most of that will be going to pay Trump's legal bills rather than actually running the campaign for any R.

How expensive do you think lawyers are?!?

Top shelf corporate lawyers bill out at about $2500-$3000 an hour.

But I doubt Blanche et al will get paid because they lost his case.

That's not how lawyers work. Win or lose - they get paid. It's really that simple.

Lawyers get paid if their clients pay them. Doesn't always happen. Especially not with that client.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This made my year. I hate him. I'm glad - Im gloating like I personally know him. I love the outcome.

Enjoy the win. But you might want to avoid TV news shows in November.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The verdicts have a stronger than normal chance of being reversed.

It is my understanding that all three of the possible crimes (tax evasion, violation of federal election campaign contributions,and violation of New York state election laws) were given in the jury instructions and the trial judge ruled that the jurors did not need to be unanimous as to which of three charged crimes elevated the misdemeanors to felonies. Seems like a critical flaw in a legal system which requires a unanimous jury for a criminal conviction.

This also violates the 6th Amendment to the US Constitution as defendant was unaware of with which crime he was actually charged.

Under what authority does a local district attorney charge one with a federal offense ?

You are 100% incorrect. I believe that is why the jury asked for the re-read of their instructions. It was clear, they had to be unanimous on the three charges, and once they made it that far, they did not have to be unanimous on the how.