Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Polls suggest otherwise. Most see this as a miscarriage of justice and a witch hunt
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-polls-biden-hush-money-trial-1907837

I know it's anecdotal evidence, listening to a radio show in NY and the callers who called in - mostly Black American callers as it was a hip hop station - all said they don't trust what happened and know it's a sham trial.

Then Biden going to a "cook out" was a slap in the face.

Trump will win.

I think his chances just got smaller. I wouldn't say he can't possibly win - who would have such hubris after 2016 - but. You know. He's a rapist convicted felon who overturned Roe and people are starting to remember the chaos of his presidency.

It’s almost like Trump sets the trap for the wild eyed radicals and they just step right in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Polls suggest otherwise. Most see this as a miscarriage of justice and a witch hunt
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-polls-biden-hush-money-trial-1907837

I know it's anecdotal evidence, listening to a radio show in NY and the callers who called in - mostly Black American callers as it was a hip hop station - all said they don't trust what happened and know it's a sham trial.

Then Biden going to a "cook out" was a slap in the face.

Trump will win.

That calling in is no different than Trump paying to rig online polls.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Polls suggest otherwise. Most see this as a miscarriage of justice and a witch hunt
https://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-polls-biden-hush-money-trial-1907837

I know it's anecdotal evidence, listening to a radio show in NY and the callers who called in - mostly Black American callers as it was a hip hop station - all said they don't trust what happened and know it's a sham trial.

Then Biden going to a "cook out" was a slap in the face.

Trump will win.

Anonymous wrote:Please specifically name the federal crime he violated and the evidence produced in court to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

It can't be mythical "hush money" law. There is a widely reported $17M slush fund for congressional NDA's.

Also, misappropriation...Hillary plead that for the Steel dossier and paid a fine.

https://ww2.nycourts.gov/people-v-donald-j-trump-criminal-37026

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Let them swim in their delusions. They'll wake up when Biden is reelected and their dear leader is shuttling between court and a jail cell while begging for pardons.

Trump is way up in betting odds .

Very exciting !!

Oh boy betting odds.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Andrew McCarthy is sometimes right. And sometimes wrong.

McCarthy missed Schad v Arizona, a 1991 SCOTUS decision.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Let them swim in their delusions. They'll wake up when Biden is reelected and their dear leader is shuttling between court and a jail cell while begging for pardons.

Trump is way up in betting odds .

Very exciting !!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Let them swim in their delusions. They'll wake up when Biden is reelected and their dear leader is shuttling between court and a jail cell while begging for pardons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We shouldn't get too exited about this. The precedent is set now and this kind of thing could be used against progressive candidates like Bernie or those who defend Israel. You may not like the new "rules".

This is not a precedent or a new rule. The precedent was the ridiculous assertion that this a$$hole was above the law and could commit any crimes he wanted.

Nobody has ever been convicted of [insert underlying federal crime] in our 248 year history, let alone leading presidential candidate.

The closest precedent was 2008 John Edwards case re: love child. Dropped of course.

I'd call it a new rule.

Hundreds of people every year are convicted of the same crime that Trump was convicted of (Falsifying Business Records in the First Degree). It is a very very common charge in NY.

Anonymous wrote:Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Fantasy. He’s going to lose. Most normal people do not want a convicted felon for president.

Breaking news !!!

Trump Sentenced To Four Years Of Confinement In Small Oval Room In Washington D.C.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We shouldn't get too exited about this. The precedent is set now and this kind of thing could be used against progressive candidates like Bernie or those who defend Israel. You may not like the new "rules".

This is not a precedent or a new rule. The precedent was the ridiculous assertion that this a$$hole was above the law and could commit any crimes he wanted.

Nobody has ever been convicted of [insert underlying federal crime] in our 248 year history, let alone leading presidential candidate.

The closest precedent was 2008 John Edwards case re: love child. Dropped of course.

I'd call it a new rule.

There are over 30 people who have been tried on this, just in 2024.

This is not an uncommon crime in NY State.

The problem we have is all of these newly minted legal experts in the right wing ecosystem who are spouting off lies and half truths to get a portion of the populace riled up.

Here is a sample of others who were prosecuted for as little as $3K worth of insurance benefits fraud. All of these were prosecuted as felony falsification of business records, the same charge that Trump made. These are for fraud ranging form $3K to $60K. So Trump's fraud of at least $175K of payments to Stormy Daniels that were documented as legal fees, is nearly 3 times the size of the maximum in the other prosecuted cases.

https://www.justsecurity.org/85605/survey-of-past-new-york-felony-prosecutions-for-falsifying-business-records/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We shouldn't get too exited about this. The precedent is set now and this kind of thing could be used against progressive candidates like Bernie or those who defend Israel. You may not like the new "rules".

This is not a precedent or a new rule. The precedent was the ridiculous assertion that this a$$hole was above the law and could commit any crimes he wanted.

Nobody has ever been convicted of [insert underlying federal crime] in our 248 year history, let alone leading presidential candidate.

The closest precedent was 2008 John Edwards case re: love child. Dropped of course.

I'd call it a new rule.

Context and facts are important. Do a little research before you spout off. Regarding the Edwards case, "a North Carolina jury found Edwards not guilty of one count of receiving illegal campaign donations but deadlocked on five other charges, leading to a mistrial. The Justice Department ultimately dropped the charges." As a reminder, the DOJ official who indicted John Edwards, US Attorney George Holding, was a Republican appointed by Bush. The prosecutor was also a Republican. At the time, some Dems said that the whole case was "political." I hope you're not implying that the DOJ dropped the charges because they were influenced by Dems because Dems were not in charge. Bush was president at that time.

"When Republican U.S. Attorney George Holding indicted former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards in June for campaign finance law violations relating to gifts to his mistress, many North Carolina Democrats suspected politics were at play. Weeks later, when the prosecutor, a former Jesse Helms aide, resigned and announced he was running for Congress as a Republican, they were all but sure of it."
https://www.politico.com/story/2011/10/politics-hovers-over-edwards-case-066864

Anonymous wrote:Please specifically name the federal crime he violated and the evidence produced in court to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

It can't be mythical "hush money" law. There is a widely reported $17M slush fund for congressional NDA's.

Also, misappropriation...Hillary plead that for the Steel dossier and paid a fine.

The indictment is public record. You could do a search and read it. It has all the answers you are looking for, and has for quite some time.

You know, do your own research with primary sources.