Verdict (2 Viewers)

[AccessBlaster]

Democracy is the belief that if all voices are heard,

Unless you're a pesky truck driver who had their bank accounts frozen for peacefully demonstrating.

 

[Steve R.]

My ears perked-up when Biden remarked that the persecution of Trump was a state matter and not a federal matter. This matters significantly since the state prosecutors alleged that Trump's misdemeanor accounting "error" enabled them to use it as a "bridge" for the state to enforce federal election law. The irony is that the Biden administration has been filing lawsuits against states such as Texas, Arizona, Iowa, and Oklahoma for using state law to enforce federal immigration laws. Once again, the Biden administration has demonstrated lawless in its application of the law.

 

[moke123]

My ears perked-up when Biden remarked that the persecution of Trump was a state matter and not a federal matter. This matters significantly since the state prosecutors alleged that Trump's misdemeanor accounting "error" enabled them to use it as a "bridge" for the state to enforce federal election law. The irony is that the Biden administration has been filing lawsuits against states such as Texas, Arizona, Iowa, and Oklahoma for using state law to enforce federal immigration laws. Once again, the Biden administration has demonstrated lawless in its application of the law.

Except NY cannot and is not enforcing federal law. Trump was not charged, nor convicted, of any federal laws.

 

[Steve R.]

Except NY cannot and is not enforcing federal law. Trump was not charged, nor convicted, of any federal laws.

If you want to assert that approach, the states passed their own immigration laws which means that the Biden administration had no basis to file charges against against those states.

 

[Jon]

here's a link to all the documents used at trial

Is that in Trump's handwriting? If so, where does it say these documents are for hush money payments?

When it comes to the bookkeeping entry, has anyone actually said what classification is should be under, if it is not legal expenses? Where is the actual evidence that says Trump asked his bookkeeper to put this under legal expense? It is only Cohen who says this was the scheme.

I would really like to know what the proper classification is for this. It seems that in America, you can make a slight bookkeeping error and you can get 130 years in prison! And I'm not saying Trump's bookkeeper did make an error.

How does falsifying a bookkeeping entry influence an election? I find that mad!

 

[moke123]

where does it say these documents are for hush money payments?

The trump org comptroller testified that's what it was and it's their handwriting.

 

[moke123]

When it comes to the bookkeeping entry, has anyone actually said what classification is should be under

I think your missing the point. The handwritten notes are the CFO and Comptroller figuring out the numbers by doubling the $180,000 Cohen paid out and threw in some extras. they did this because Cohen is in the 50 percent tax bracket so it covers the taxes when they treat it as income rather than a reimbursement. The final figure was $420,000. Then it was decided that it would be paid out over a year at $35,000 a month and that Cohen would submit phony invoices for legal services that were never performed. I think he was also still a trump org employee at that same time.

How do you not know this? It is central to the case.

 

[Jon]

The trump org comptroller testified that's what it was and it's their handwriting.

By their, do you mean the comptroller or Trump's?

 

[moke123]

By their, do you mean the comptroller or Trump's?

The handwriting is the controller McConney, the CFO Weisselberg, and the redfinch part is Cohen. It was the comptroller McConney who testified what it was.

You haven't seen this?

 

[Jon]

I think your missing the point. The handwritten notes are the CFO and Comptroller figuring out the numbers by doubling the $180,000 Cohen paid out and threw in some extras. they did this because Cohen is in the 50 percent tax bracket so it covers the taxes when they treat it as income rather than a reimbursement. The final figure was $420,000. Then it was decided that it would be paid out over a year at $35,000 a month and that Cohen would submit phony invoices for legal services that were never performed. I think he was also still a trump org employee at that same time.

How do you not know this? It is central to the case.

I'm not missing any point. The People are stating that he misclassified business expenses. In other words, he should not have put it down as legal expense. Without that misdemeanour, you cannot tack on an extra crime. So my question is, what should he have put it down as to satisfy the People?

 

[Jon]

The handwriting is the controller McConney, the CFO Weisselberg, and the redfinch part is Cohen. It was the comptroller McConney who testified what it was.

You haven't seen this?

I am not sure why you consider this proof of fraud, considering McConney never said they were hush money payments. There is no evidence, as far as I am aware, that Trump ever saw these documents.

But let us for the sake of argument say this is 100% proof. How does that influence an election when these are private bookkeeping records?

 

[Jon]

@moke123 Do you think Merchan is biased against Trump?

 

[Jon]

Unbelievable! I was asking Microsoft Copilot about what the correct classification should be for hush money payments, and it went into plenty of detail about Trump and the case. However, when I asked about how Hillary Clinton classified her payment to her lawyers for the salacious dossier I get the following response:

Is the system rigged against Trump and the Republicans, from woke AI, to social media companies from the DOJ to state courts and the Whitehouse?

 

[moke123]

THE GRAND JURY OF THE COUNTY OF NEW YORK, by this indictment, accuses the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows:

The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an invoice from Michael Cohen dated February 14, 2017, marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.

SECOND COUNT:
AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further accuses the defendant of the crime of FALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE FIRST DEGREE, in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows:

The defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February 14, 2017, with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, made and caused a false entry in the business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry in the Detail General Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher number 842457, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.

The false records are Cohen's invoices and the ledger entries are based on false records. It could say "Tooth paste" and it would still be fraudulent.

@moke123 Do you think Merchan is biased against Trump?

No I don't. Trial Judges bend over backwards to be fair during trial. I know several Judges and dozens of D.A.'s and Defense Attorneys, as well as defendants. I hear the stories from all sides. I think Merchan showed a lot of restraint. Most defendants would have been locked up for violating a court order. The one thing you don't want to do however is piss off the judge who's going to sentence you. There's a lot of factors that are considered. Trumps gag order violations, his rants during court recesses, his continued denigration of the legal process, is all going to bite him in the ass. I think Merchan is almost obligated to sentence him to prison time, although likely suspended with conditions.

 

[Steve R.]

x.com

x.com

The above is from Twitter, now X. Below is the text.

CNN Senior Legal Analyst Describes How The Trump Conviction Was A Political Hit Job

1. "The judge donated money... in plain violation of a rule prohibiting New York judges from making political donations—to a pro-Biden, anti-Trump political operation."

2. Alvin Bragg boasted on the campaign trail in an overwhelmingly Democrat county, “It is a fact that I have sued Trump over 100 times.”

3. "Most importantly, the DA’s charges against Trump push the outer boundaries of the law and due process."

4. "The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever."

5. The DA inflated misdemeanors past the statute of limitations and "electroshocked them back to life" by alleging the falsification of business records was committed 'with intent to commit another crime.'

6. "Inexcusably, the DA refused to specify what those unlawful means actually were — and the judge declined to force them to pony up — until right before closing arguments. So much for the constitutional obligation to provide notice to the defendant of the accusations against him in advance of trial."

7. "In these key respects, the charges against Trump aren’t just unusual. They’re bespoke, seemingly crafted individually for the former president and nobody else."

8. "The Manhattan DA’s employees reportedly have called this the “Zombie Case” because of various legal infirmities, including its bizarre charging mechanism. But it’s better characterized as the Frankenstein Case, cobbled together with ill-fitting parts into an ugly, awkward, but more-or-less functioning contraption that just might ultimately turn on its creator."

 

[Steve R.]

 

[Jon]

No I don't. Trial Judges bend over backwards to be fair during trial. I know several Judges and dozens of D.A.'s and Defense Attorneys, as well as defendants. I hear the stories from all sides. I think Merchan showed a lot of restraint. Most defendants would have been locked up for violating a court order. The one thing you don't want to do however is piss off the judge who's going to sentence you. There's a lot of factors that are considered. Trumps gag order violations, his rants during court recesses, his continued denigration of the legal process, is all going to bite him in the ass. I think Merchan is almost obligated to sentence him to prison time, although likely suspended with conditions.

I agree that pissing off the judge is probably unwise, but Trump is far smarter than I am so maybe there is some meta strategy about it all. If it were me, I would be saying, "Yes Sir, No Sir, three bags full Sir!"

Let me ask you another question then, a hypothetical one. Imagine there was a trial and the white judge was in the South with an all white jury and there was a black man being accused of a crime. The judge was found to have donated to the Klu Klux Klan. Do you think the judge would be considered fair and unbiased towards the defendant? You have to decide before the trial starts.

 

[AccessBlaster]

 

[Steve R.]

The supposedly unbiased judge aided the prosecution! You can skip the first three and a half minutes.

Judge essentially instructs the jury to convict Trump: will they listen?

Podcast Episode · The Dershow · 05/29/2024 · 30m

podcasts.apple.com

Dershowitz adds one banana to the US becoming a (corrupt) banana republic.

TRUMP FOUND GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS

Podcast Episode · The Dershow · 05/30/2024 · 17m

podcasts.apple.com

Trump is Convicted: What Comes Next?

This morning, many of us are emerging from the late coverage last night after the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felonies. I was in the courtroom for the verdict, which hit like …

jonathanturley.org

However, I previously noted that the jury instructions made conviction much more likely.

Donald Trump's trial had "layers of reversible error"—Legal analyst

A jury convicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records on Thursday, sparking polarizing reactions.

www.newsweek.com

Turley, a George Washington University law professor who testified in the first and second impeachments of Trump, told Watters on Jesse Watters Primetime last night, "I think this case was not based on the law. I think it was a political prosecution. I think it had layers of reversible error. Many will disagree with me. We have a system designed for that. It's a good system and it goes beyond Manhattan. This can go all the way to Washington." (emphasis added)

 

[Jon]

Let me ask you another question then, a hypothetical one. Imagine there was a trial and the white judge was in the South with an all white jury and there was a black man being accused of a crime. The judge was found to have donated to the Klu Klux Klan. Do you think the judge would be considered fair and unbiased towards the defendant? You have to decide before the trial starts.

Let me answer my own question on my post about the judge. The case is about politics, not race. The judge is Merchan. The accused is Trump, not a black man. The jury are all democrats, not whites. Merchan did not donate to the Klu Klux Klan. Instead he donated to - against rules of the bar - a political activist group called, "Stop Republicans." The group is, "dedicated to resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy." Or you can abbreviate that to, "Stop Trump". Essentially, the judge voted with his wallet that he wants to stop Trump. And then he presides over his trial.

And why did a review of this still let him continue with the case? Because all the people doing the reviewing are democrats too and they also want to get Trump!

Source: https://www.turnoutpac.org/stop-republicans/

If the Klu Klux Klan example is so obvious, why can't democrats see how analogous the Trump trial is?