Verdict Wednesday!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that this charge is the most that Bragg could find on Trump proves just how squeaky clean he is. Bragg campaigned on a promise to get Trump, and used all the resources of the NY DA's office to find something, and this is the best he could find? Think about this - Trump has been operating for many decades in three industries (construction, media, and politics) where corruption runs rampant. Many in the construction business in NY are Mafia connected, for heavens' sake. But all Bragg could find is a bookkeeping charge, that the federal government already looked at and declined to prosecute, and which has never been prosecuted before, against anybody. They couldn't get him on real charges like insider trading, bribery, tax evasion, etc, etc, etc., and Lord knows they looked high and low.

Ha ha. I don't think ANYONE believes the phrase "squeaky clean" and "Trump" belong in the same sentence. LOL. Thanks for the laugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It will go until Friday. Free meals and the judge will keep sending them back trying to get a unanimous decision. In the end hung jury. Either 9-3 or 8-4.

Seriously, free meals? When I was on a jury I had to provide my own food like a sucker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The jury is sending notes to acting Justice Merchan that are giving observers the impression they're not going to be able to convict. Merchan is very pissed. So pissed, in fact, he sent the jury home for the day.

Um, the jury goes home at the end of the day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The jury is sending notes to acting Justice Merchan that are giving observers the impression they're not going to be able to convict. Merchan is very pissed. So pissed, in fact, he sent the jury home for the day.

Um, the jury goes home at the end of the day.

Hmmm...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

Yeah, the media does the American public a HUGE disservice by calling it the "hush money" trial. It's the CAMPAIGN FINANCE trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The jury is sending notes to acting Justice Merchan that are giving observers the impression they're not going to be able to convict. Merchan is very pissed. So pissed, in fact, he sent the jury home for the day.

Um, the jury goes home at the end of the day.

Hmmm...

Little Marco who is vying to be Veep?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The jury is sending notes to acting Justice Merchan that are giving observers the impression they're not going to be able to convict. Merchan is very pissed. So pissed, in fact, he sent the jury home for the day.

Um, the jury goes home at the end of the day.

Hmmm...

Ok, and?

[Anonymous]

The police have to prepare for protests.

[Anonymous]

My humble, non-expert thought is that the obscurity of the relevant state law is not a reason not to apply it to Trump. Since he has been charged, and the law exists, doesn't it need to be applied? Looking at the evidence, it's obvious that he's guilty. Whether or not the law should exist as it's currently worded is another matter.

Second non-expert thought: it would be fair, since in the eyes of the law he's a first offender, and historically this law is not often used in cases such as his, that the judge not sentence him to anything too harsh.

If anyone is worried about the outcome on the election... I don't think this trial has much influence any which way. People have already made up their minds about Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact that this charge is the most that Bragg could find on Trump proves just how squeaky clean he is. Bragg campaigned on a promise to get Trump, and used all the resources of the NY DA's office to find something, and this is the best he could find? Think about this - Trump has been operating for many decades in three industries (construction, media, and politics) where corruption runs rampant. Many in the construction business in NY are Mafia connected, for heavens' sake. But all Bragg could find is a bookkeeping charge, that the federal government already looked at and declined to prosecute, and which has never been prosecuted before, against anybody. They couldn't get him on real charges like insider trading, bribery, tax evasion, etc, etc, etc., and Lord knows they looked high and low.

I guess you forgot about Trump University and the Trump Foundation.

And, there are federal and state cases against Trump and other conspirators underway.

But sure, he is squeaky clean.

Also, he's legally barred from operating a charity in NY because his charity was just a personal ATM. Yeah, real choir boy.

And both his CFO and his actual company were convicted of fraud already.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

What law was broken?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

What law was broken?

Campaign finance.
He had an entire media outlet contributing to his campaign with a contribution that is near impossible to calculate in its value.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I predict not guilty.

Based on what facts exactly?

Well, the charges require that Trump intended to falsify records in furtherance of another crime, but the prosecutors literally didn't say what that crime was (and somehow the judge didn't require them to name it either). So I wouldn't be convinced that they even stated a crime here...

You need to find better news sources.

Do you want to tell me what the underlying crime was?

Dear god. Are we back to this? Go back to the “Indictment on Monday?” thread and re-read the dozen or so answers you were given.

People have no idea in that thread. The people commenting (maybe you?) are the same people who think the judge is personally going to slap cuffs on Trump after a guilty verdict comes in after 30 minutes of deliberations. The underlying "crime" (a misdemeanor) he's relying on is an obscure state campaign violation in New York state. But as a juror I would not be willing to convict on that based on what I have heard.

That said, I think there is close to a 100% chance of a conviction here because of how the jury instructions were written, and the likely makeup of the jury.

Here is the makeup of the jury: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/18/nyregion/trump-trial-jury-hush-money.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The fact that the judge gave the jury the ability to select from any of three underlying "crimes" that have just been articulated at the conclusion of the trial and not unanimously agree on one - ridiculous.

Issues with this:
- The defense went to trial without knowing the underlying crime the prosecution was charging - very unconstitutional.
- The instruction that the jury does not have to agree on what happened and can choose from a menu of options - ridiculous.
- The fact that one of the crimes is a federal election crime is egregious. Bragg has no authority here. If it were a Democrat being prosecuted, you know damn well that Garland would jump on this and prevent them from prosecuting a federal law. Just look at how they have treated Texas and OK when it comes to immigration law.

This has been a sham case with an apparently corrupt judge and a corrupt DA.
Hopefully the jury will see this trial for what it is.... an attempt to eliminate a presidential nominee from election.

All of this.

The idea that the jury doesn’t have to agree on the underlying “crime” is absolutely preposterous. The idea that one of the them is a federal crime for which he was never charged is also outrageous. The idea that no co conspirator is named - the idiocy here goes on and on. And you don’t have to be a Trump voter to acknowledge it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

What law was broken?

Campaign finance.
He had an entire media outlet contributing to his campaign with a contribution that is near impossible to calculate in its value.

Not NY’s jurisdiction. The election was federal not state.