Verdict reached in Trump hush money trial

[Valcazar]

If there is a constitutional infringement, it can go there. But there appear to be no constitutional issues involved at all.

It can also get there if it involves federal law.
I can see an argument where you say the underlying crime involves federal election law.
I don't think it is a strong argument, but SCOTUS is more than willing these days to find bullshit excuses to exercise their power.

 

[mandrill]

It can also get there if it involves federal law.
I can see an argument where you say the underlying crime involves federal election law.
I don't think it is a strong argument, but SCOTUS is more than willing these days to find bullshit excuses to exercise their power.

I don't think it does involve federal election law. The payments were obscured to give candidate Trump a better chance in an election which happened to be for a federal position. But that's not an interface with federal law. That's just Turnipface's motivation to falsify his records.

 

[mitchell76]

I believe they did.
They filed for a change of venue and I am sure they challenged a number of jurors for cause and won at least a few of those.

They also challenged Merchan's jury questionnaire as well!!

 

[Knuckle Ball]

It will go to the NY State supreme court first, and if they dont throw the verdict out there it will go all the way to SCOTUS.
And if/when it goes there that court is dominated by republicans who will most likely throw it out completely

I’ve wondered about this too…along with the fact that they are seriously considering Trump’s appeal regarding presidential immunity. SCOTUS could very well throw all of these cases out…but as I understand it that does not mean Trump is Not Guilty…it would mean the prosecutors would need to decide whether or not re-try the case?

And if it is re-tried, can that even be done with a sitting POTUS (if Trump were re-elected)?

So…as Trump says, I’m sure this is far from over and Trump’s fate will largely depend on whether he wins in November.

 

[mitchell76]

Which proves that the system worked for them.

It's hard to change venue from Manhattan. Change of venue usually occurs with stuff like a small town scam that affected every family and where no objective juror can be found. The most notorious change of venue case locally was the Demeter murder trial which was moved from Brampton to London because the Demeters were the local big shots of the time in Brampton and the community was polarized about the case.

Manhattan is so large and cosmopolitan that no single accused could impact the community in that way.

I am guessing that what Trump wanted to do is move it to some retirement community in the Adirondacks with a 90% GOP voting population.

This case shouldn't have been brought in the first place!!

 

[Valcazar]

Which proves that the system worked for them.

Yes.
Of course, to that crew, anything short of getting everything you want is proof something is rigged.

 

[Valcazar]

I don't think it does involve federal election law. The payments were obscured to give candidate Trump a better chance in an election which happened to be for a federal position. But that's not an interface with federal law. That's just Turnipface's motivation to falsify his records.

Like I said, I don't think it is a strong argument.
But if SCOTUS is looking to interfere, they might buy it.
We've seen them recently flat out lie about the facts of a case in decisions, so who know how far they are willing to go on any given thing.

 

[Valcazar]

They also challenged Merchan's jury questionnaire as well!!

See!
They had full access to all kinds of legal tools!

That's reassuring.
Thanks for pointing out again how fairly Trump was treated, Mitch.

 

[mitchell76]

See!
They had full access to all kinds of legal tools!

That's reassuring.
Thanks for pointing out again how fairly Trump was treated, Mitch.

Trump wasn't treated fairly at all. MerCON kept overruling all the defence arguments, and kept letting all the prosecution garbage in......LMAO

 

[Valcazar]

I’ve wondered about this too…along with the fact that they are seriously considering Trump’s appeal regarding presidential immunity. SCOTUS could very well throw all of these cases out…but as I understand it that does not mean Trump is Not Guilty…it would mean the prosecutors would need to decide whether or not re-try the case?

I think what happens if SCOTUS decides he has immunity will depend a lot on what things they decide he has immunity for.

And if it is re-tried, can that even be done with a sitting POTUS (if Trump were re-elected)?

DOJ has a memo guiding internal procedure that says a sitting President can't be tried.
That's not legally binding, it is just policy.

But if Trump is President, he has already said he intends to weaponize the DOJ and staff it with loyalists who will go after who he wants gone after.
So there is no chance DOJ pursues the cases in your scenario.

 

[Knuckle Ball]

…So there is no chance DOJ pursues the cases in your scenario.

As I understand it, that would apply to the federal charges. The porn star/hush money case involves state charges…as does Fani Willis’ Jan 6 case in Georgia (which I believe is on hold awaiting the outcome of the presidential immunity case).

Ironically, it may be “States’ Rights” that protect the integrity of the Union?

 

[mandrill]

I think what happens if SCOTUS decides he has immunity will depend a lot on what things they decide he has immunity for.



DOJ has a memo guiding internal procedure that says a sitting President can't be tried.
That's not legally binding, it is just policy.

But if Trump is President, he has already said he intends to weaponize the DOJ and staff it with loyalists who will go after who he wants gone after.
So there is no chance DOJ pursues the cases in your scenario.

But of course, the hush money crime was committed by the felon in question BEFORE he was elected president. And he was charged and tried after he had been turfed from office.

So how does immunity apply?

Does every person who announces he will run for president acquire immunity magically. How about fringe candidates like Cornel West or RFK Jr or even more obscure posers??!!

 

[Valcazar]

As I understand it, that would apply to the federal charges. The porn star/hush money case involves state charges…as does Fani Willis’ Jan 6 case in Georgia (which I believe is on hold awaiting the outcome of the presidential immunity case).

Ironically, it may be “States’ Rights” that protect the integrity of the Union?

SCOTUS could rule that the immunity applies to state charges.

But you are correct in that states could still pursue.
But a Trump win means it is likely the GOP does well in Georgia, so the state could slap that case down as well.

 

[Valcazar]

But of course, the hush money crime was committed by the felon in question BEFORE he was elected president. And he was charged and tried after he had been turfed from office.

So how does immunity apply?

Does every person who announces he will run for president acquire immunity magically. How about fringe candidates like Cornel West or RFK Jr or even more obscure posers??!!

Like I said, it would depend on what the actual decision is.
Some of SCOTUS is likely to try to find a way to word things so that Trump has immunity but it won't apply to other presidents (especially Democratic ones).

 

[Knuckle Ball]

…
Some of SCOTUS is likely to try to find a way to word things so that Trump has immunity but it won't apply to other presidents (especially Democratic ones).

Indeed. They can’t wait for the chance to get their hands on the “Biden Crime Family.” smh

 

[Butler1000]

But this case wasn't about voluntary sex with a porn star.

Sure. Isn't it amazing how what Congress did was legal? Who made the laws up? Who voted to fund the office?

Do you think sexual harassment suits by Congressional interns would have an effect on reelection? And paying them off should be a campaign expense?

 

[Burldude]

Trump's defence filed all these motions, before trial, and Merchan ignored all of them!! Trump's defence tried to get Merchan to recuse himself from the case, and he wouldn't recuse himself!!

The judge did not ignore them. He rejected them.

 

[Burldude]

This case shouldn't have been brought in the first place!!

Why? Trump is above the law while everybody else is below?

 

[mandrill]

Like I said, it would depend on what the actual decision is.
Some of SCOTUS is likely to try to find a way to word things so that Trump has immunity but it won't apply to other presidents (especially Democratic ones).

I think they like the Republican conservative agenda and Christian fundamentalism. I don't think they give a shit about Trump.

 

[bver_hunter]

Is the part where I provide you proof and then you'll just change the subject? And then refuse to apologize for accusing me of lying?
Ok...let's see if you live up to my expectations...


President Joe Biden has been dogged for months by pro-Palestinian protesters calling him “Genocide Joe”
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/...s-columbia-university-funding-donors-00156135

“To issue a red line that you knew you weren’t going to follow through on not only means he will continue to be Genocide Joe, but it also just shows he’s weak politically.”
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024...-rafah-advocates-ask-where-is-bidens-red-line

Biden tries to shake off 'Genocide Joe' epithet, but it could be the issue that sinks him
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...genocide-democrats-2024-election/72480021007/

Listen has Biden been convicted in any Court of Law of "Genocide" like you claim? These are just protesters who are protesting against The USA's support of Israel who are conducting the killing of the Palestinian women and children. At least Biden has called for a ceasefire, unlike the Republicans who want Israel to pursue it till the very end even if it involves the annihilation of all those in Gaza if that is the only way to "Eliminate" Gaza!!

Trump on the other hand is a Criminal. Once again you are lying!!