This gets the largest Mother Fucker Please possible…
Where’s the third rate legal Secretary to jump in and explain how this is all completely on the up and up and not, “cause it’s Trump” and anyone else who did this would be prosecuted this exact same way?Where are, our board Legal guys to come out and tell us ALLLLL ABOUT how this case is beyond reproach?
Trump filed a Motion to Dismiss the case LAST YEAR. Here was Bragg's reply:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24432843/2023-11-09-das-mem-opp-defs-omnibus-motions-redacted.pdf
And here's Judge Merchan's ruling denying Trump's Motion to Dismiss:
http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24432832/2024-02-15-order-denying-motion-to-dismiss-people-v-donaldtrump-2-15-24decision-1.pdf
Of course, if Trump is convicted he can appeal on the ground that Judge Merchan erred in denying the Motion to Dismiss.
Maybe his appeal will cite your TER post along with the "legal opinions" of Byron York and Megyn Kelly. ROFLMAO!!!
Seriously?
And big papa flop proves once again, there’s a reason he’s a third rate legal Secretary at best.
So your fine with the prosecution not revealing what the crime was until the CLOSING FUCKING ARGUMENTS????
GADS!!!
...that he barely got his GED. That's the reason he's a third rate wage slave at best.
YOU started the OP.
YOU replied to your own OP.
I replied to your two posts but you are so obviously uneducated and ignorant you couldn't understand the pleadings linked in my post. So what did you do? YOU changed the subject of your own thread!! That's how dumb you are.
Since you changed the subject of this thread to CLOSING FUCKING ARGUMENTS????, let's discuss that. What do you think of Trump's Truth Social post about CLOSING FUCKING ARGUMENTS????:
"WHY IS THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT ALLOWED TO MAKE THE FINAL ARGUMENT IN THE CASE AGAINST ME? WHY CAN'T THE DEFENSE GO LAST? BIG ADVANTAGE, VERY UNFAIR. WITCH HUNT! DJT"
Why was the government allowed to make the final argument?
Why couldn't the defense go last?
Did the government have a "big advantage?"
Was it "very unfair?"
Can you answer those SIMPLE questions, LostSon, or will you change the subject again?
...that he barely got his GED. That's the reason he's a third rate wage slave at best.
YOU started the OP.
YOU replied to your own OP.
I replied to your two posts but you are so obviously uneducated and ignorant you couldn't understand the pleadings linked in my post. So what did you do? YOU changed the subject of your own thread!! That's how dumb you are.
Since you changed the subject of this thread to CLOSING FUCKING ARGUMENTS????, let's discuss that. What do you think of Trump's Truth Social post about CLOSING FUCKING ARGUMENTS????:
"WHY IS THE CORRUPT GOVERNMENT ALLOWED TO MAKE THE FINAL ARGUMENT IN THE CASE AGAINST ME? WHY CAN'T THE DEFENSE GO LAST? BIG ADVANTAGE, VERY UNFAIR. WITCH HUNT! DJT"
Why was the government allowed to make the final argument?
Why couldn't the defense go last?
Did the government have a "big advantage?"
Was it "very unfair?"
Can you answer those SIMPLE questions, LostSon, or will you change the subject again?
The reason the prosecution closed after the defense is it’s New York State court and that’s how they do it? What’s bullshit is not stating what the crime they are trying to prosecute trump on, till closing arguments. THAT is again bullshit!
Trumps right, this is a witch hunt. If this were being done to you big papa flip you’d be screaming bloody murder!
Now since the target is Trump? Your fine with this travesty of a case aren’t ya?
How can this instruction be right:
"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were."
So 4 jurors could decide Trump violated federal election law; four jurors could decide “no, he didn’t do that but he violated tax laws; and four jurors could say “you are both wrong- he falsified other business records.”
We don’t know what Trump did but it must be something. Tremendous burden on Trump on appeal as he must show no or insufficient evidence on all three other crimes. (no, Trump cannot appeal the denial of the motion to dismiss – the appeal must be based on the evidence presented at trial, not the terms of the indictment. Totally different standard of review etc).
I don’t buy the parking lot argument some talking heads have offered – if the crime is no parking in the lot, jury need not agree whether the offending vehicle was a moped or SUV). This is a "two crime" prosecution.
The judge must have some authority for this instruction but at the very least he has created a Sixth Amendment issue that almost guarantees SCOTUS review years from now.
As the misdemeanor charges are beyond the time frame of the statute of limitations? So, if he is found to be guilty, would he def do jail time, or would it depend on the number of counts he was convicted on? I guess what I am asking is if the average Joe was convicted, would he be given a jail sentence, or would they look at priors and other factors I may not be considering? Thank you.
The judge could even sentence Trump to probation instead of any jail time. The Georgia case, by contrast, has mandatory minimums for the RICO count, so that is the real peril for Trump, although Fani seems to be self- destructing in that case with her deplorable judgment.
If Trump is convicted, the pressure on the judge to give him probation will be tremendous from all the right wingers. This would really fit into his witch hunt political motivation narrative as well.
Of course, if re-elected, Trump will just pardon himself. Yes, the talking heads all say Trump can’t pardon for state crimes. But they are all wrong. Of course he can self pardon. The question is – would a self pardon be enforceable? Trump will argue this was a de facto federal prosecution in state court. And who would litigate that? The Department of Justice – the Trump Department of Justice. By the time SCOTUS gets around to saying “no he can’t do that,” Trump will probably have died by old age.
Appalling judgment by Bragg – hiring a former DOJ guy to be one of the prosecutors and open the door to that argument.
What would make it "a de facto federal prosecution?" It was brought by the state. What is the rationale behind your argument? Thanks for your thoughts.
What would make it "a de facto federal prosecution?" It was brought by the state. What is the rationale behind your argument? Thanks for your thoughts.
it would be more accurate to summarize it as: "We DO know what Trump did and you can choose any of these reasons but you don't all need to pick the same one."