OMFG, as they say: the news just came down that Trump was convicted on all 34 felony counts in his New York hush-money trial. That’s 34 out of 34, and each conviction required unanimity among the jurors. They deliberated for less than two days.
He will appeal, of course, but will he go to jail eventually?
He’s now a convicted felon. I can’t say I’m unhappy. Here are the details from yahoo! news:
Donald Trump was convicted of falsifying business records to influence the 2016 presidential campaign Thursday in a historic trial that saw a former U.S. president face criminal charges for the first time.
A New York jury found Trump guilty of 34 counts, related to a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. The prosecution had alleged Daniels was paid to keep secret a 2006 tryst she had with Trump in order to influence the results of the 2016 election, which Trump ultimately won.
The trial lasted a month and a half and was plenty eventful. In addition to the fiery testimonies of Daniels and Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen, Trump was held in contempt of court 10 times and fined $10,000 for violating a gag order against attacking people involved with the trial. Many Republican leaders, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, traveled to New York to speak out in support of the 2024 Republican presidential candidate.
Trump, who did not testify in his defense, has yet to be sentenced in the case and is likely to appeal the verdict. The result may have an impact on Trump’s chances to reclaim the White House, however. Recent Yahoo News/YouGov polling suggested a conviction would hurt Trump in head-to-head polling against President Joe Biden.
Since it’s a state crime, he can’t pardon himself, either, even if he does get reelected.
Well, if conviction on 34 felony counts HELPS him win, then something is badly wrong with America.
And there are several more trials to go. .
Looks like your readers were correct in their prediction, 112-83.
Each several key witness for the prosecution corroborated the case against him.
The defense had nothing but the fact that one of those witnesses was a
thug. Easy call.
The juror who smiled warmly at the Trump team making them believe he was ‘rogue’ for them deserves the Brent Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch medal for ‘hinting at one thing then doing the opposite’!
🙂
I predict no jail time, but a large fine. I also think this will have motivated his base to ensure he wins the election. I’d love a sneak preview of how future historians will regard this episode.
But to find something funny in it: I understand being a felon in the USA disqualifies you from owning firearms. So he can’t own a gun, but he can have the “nuclear football” under his control….
I predict the judge will throw the book at him.
Sentencing isn’t until July 11. Creating a lot of uncertainty.
I think there is no disqualification.
Politico: the general view among legal scholars is that the need for a duly elected president to fulfill the duties of office would override a criminal conviction and require the sentence to at least be put on hold.
I predict lengthy appeals and if those fail, a fine and maybe a touch of community service. Zero time behind bars.
“Well, if conviction on 34 felony counts HELPS him win, then something is badly wrong with America.”–We already knew that since he was elected despite bragging about grabbing women by their genitalia, running a chaotic administration, and being the GOP’s candidate again.
Community service would be weird. The poor secret service agents assigned as him!
I don’t want him providing community service. That’s punishing the rest of us for his crimes! 🙂
My thought exactly! He would provide a disservice to whatever organization he was assigned to🤢
Reminds me of some Terry Pratchett’s novel where mortified old ladies watched thugs sentenced to community service glue feet-thick layers of wallpaper onto their walls.
I understand you don’t like Trump. Neither do I. But do you have any concerns at all with the justice system being weaponize like this. I don’t know how much you know about this case, but lot’s of egregious stuff. Not to mention, it’s totally clear the prodecution would not have happened but for it being Trump.
I guess we should just ignore the business records, the recorded conversations, and the sworn testimony from his colleagues and inner circle?
The sworn testimony of Michael Cohen was essential to the conviction — a liar and perjurer who admitted stealing from Trump.
To say nothing of whether the alleged facts constituted a crime in the first place.
The “alleged facts” were corroborated by several witnesses. Do they constitute a crime? I mean, the conviction by jury suggests…yes?
So Trump’s line of defense was “everyone he hired to work for him with was a liar and a crook, how can you trust these people”, and you want him elected again?
If it’s that bad, why did they wait so long to charge him?
They charged him a long time ago. IIRC it was soon after he left office as president.
OK thanks.
Trump’s standard practice is to drag his feet legally until he eventually exhausts his opponents. He’s done this his entire life. He is a life-long fraud. It’s finally catching up to him, at long last.
Yes I’m gathering that as more is being written about this. I didn’t follow him closely before (not being an American).
Will you provide a list of the “egregious stuff” you mention?
Since he was charged with attempting to illegally influence the results of an election, who else might have been charged?
I don’t think it’s being weaponized. There is an idea that no one is above the law. He is being held accountable for his illegal actions.
I think the insinuation is that regular people would not have to face such a trial.
It is very hard to show any damage was done to society by disguising what money you use to pay off your affair.
Well yeah, regular people are not likely to be charged with falsifying documents to suppress scandals that could ruin their chances to be elected president.
Regular people also don’t spend decades running a corporate empire that is suspected of tax fraud, money laundering and defrauding contractors.
Trump has made complete disregard for the rules that bind regular people his MO. (That’s part of the problem.) An unusual challenge requires unusual responses.
Yet nobody (except Trump) is interested what the good-for-nothing, drug-addicted Biden’s son was doing in the board of directors of a major oil company in Ukraine.
When that same son later forgot a laptop with incriminating information at a repair shop, it was the shop’s owner who was attacked for revealing this information.
Prof. Ceiling Cat wrote about the Bidens years ago:
https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2021/10/21/matt-taibbi-on-the-nefarious-acquisitive-bidens/
I don’t like Trump and find the fact that he is so popular a constant check on my desire to think well of humanity. That being said, I agree that this was a bad case. Yes, he falsified business records, which is a misdemeanor absent the association with another crime. The other crime, unfortunately, is one he was not charged with.
This makes it easy for Trump and his supporters to claim that this case was politically motivated (and it may well have been). I wish that the election interference or classified documents cases had come to trial first. This won’t be enough for him to lose the GOP nomination.
He broke the law. I dont know a lot about the weaponization that caused it, and all Americans should be treated equally under the law, but no way should he not be brought to trial if theres enough evidence to indict him.
Which law did he break?
There are 34 guilty verdicts, all of which are predicated on the intent to conceal a crime. Which crime?
Of course, this all also ignores that the guilty verdicts all relate to falsification of business records. The prosecution witness himself stated that the business records state that payments were made for legal services, in response to invoices for legal services, and that Trump was not involved in coding those records. How is correctly coding business records falsifying them?
If all Americans should be treated equally under the law, why is this case breaking so many precedents and why has nobody else ever been brought to court on such grounds?
Here are the two statutes he was convicted of violating:
§ 175.10: Falsifying business records in the first degree.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof. Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony.
§ 17-152: influencing an election through unlawful means.
There was no weaponization, the evidence showed that he violated these laws, and the jury agreed. You may disagree with the fairness of these laws, but that is not something for the jury to consider.
thank you
So, is this a circular thing – the election influence became a crime because it was done by falsifying business records, which turned the falsification from a misdemeanor to a felony? Ot was the election interference unlawful to begin with, due to some other factor?
Steve, I agree. And I don’t like Trump either.
This is lawfare. The only reason this case was brought is because the defendant’s name is Trump.
Play this one all the way out, and if Trump is “sent” to jail, and whether Trump wins or loses the election, there will be terrible price to pay.
This is bad for the country. Bad for America. We’ve crossed a rubicon.
It’s bad for the country to convict people who have broken the law?
What evidence do you have that the case would not have been brought against somebody not named Trump?
Interestingly Nellie Bowles (no cheerleader for Trump) in TGIF is largely in agreement with you Rosemary. She cites a couple of articles
https://www.compactmag.com/article/alvin-braggs-anti-democracy-verdict/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
and
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/05/yes-it-was-rigged/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email
+1. What is worse for the country, one 77+ year old man who was prevented by the system from implementing his worst instincts during his first administration and can serve, at most one term or an entire system of lawfare that has successfully financially and legally ruined someone who dared to challenge the system they value? Once weaponized as it has been for political gain, can the legal system regain its value as a system of objective judgement? Questions worth pondering.
Huh?
Makes sense to me. She’s asking whether it was worth w**ring out the justice system just to get Trump.
Wearing out? Warring out?
🙂
The answer is always a firm no. Pervert the justice system just once, and it can easily happen again, and again, and again. This is a bigger hit to the American way of life than anything Trump ever managed to pull, yes including your January 6th. Take it from someone living in an ex-communist country. People having doubts on the justice system is the last thing you want, and this gave at least 50% of your country major if not complete distrust in yours. This is something I would expect from a country falling down towards an authoritarian dictatorship, not one defending itself from one.
Trump has made a career out of weaponizing the legal system, to weasel out of legitimate charges against him and to sue people he doesn’t like into oblivion for absurd reasons (search for the Politico article “Donald Trump’s 50-Year Mission to Discredit the Justice System” for details), and he’s still doing it, only with the added clout of being a cult leader, and having planted his own judges (I mean, the classified documents case should be a slam dunk, but the judge is dragging it out to an absurd extent, and we’re not even talking about Jan 6). Meanwhile, he’s been running his company like a mafia boss, racking up shady dealings left and right, and it’s the duty of the judicial system to see which ones they can indict him for. It’s not like they’re pulling something out of thin air to put an innocent behind bars.
Seeing how that “old man” has already announced that he would be out for revenge against his political opponents, and his lawyers have argued that he shouldn’t even be prosecuted if he sends an assassination team against a political opponent, and representatives from his party have spent months trying to drum up an impeachment against Biden without being able to name a single thing he’s done wrong – are you sure you’re blaming the right side of wanting to ruin the legal system?
“Lawfare” sounds like it came from a right-wing meme factory.
Can you be more concrete? What constitutes the “egregious stuff”, apart from Trump doing his best to make this a circus show?
Or, to put it the other way, assume that Trump really IS a shady businessman who conducts a mob-style organization with no concern for the law, and has done everything the prosecution claimed. How would this trial have looked any different, apart from his being handled with kid gloves because of his political influence?
What is your evidence that the justice system has been “weaponised”? Why is it clear that the prosecution wouldn’t have happened for another presidential candidate?
I agree. I have shared before my impression that members of the Trump team were arrested, one by one, and slapped with charges that seemed made up, until they agreed to testify against him.
Also, I was horrified by the nationwide manhunt after Jan. 6, and how people were given long prison sentences over a riot. Especially after the liberal attitude to the “mostly peaceful” protests in which whole districts were burned.
I think they are already motivated – and i also think there aren’t nearly as many who will now vote for him as will vote against him.
Nah. Trump voters won’t much care because he’s always had a persecution complex. Those few that can’t bring themselves to vote for former Prez Cheetoh will not vote for Biden, they’ll just abstain or be no-shows.
I read some lawyer analysis. Most feel jail time is unlikely however the way he has flaunted the law during the trial will not help him in this regard and it will be especially bad if he keeps denying his guilt during further court processes.
I think you mean ‘flouted’?
Yes flouted.
NYC defense atty here, retired.
Cases like his are rarely brought in NY, his name is the reason here. Which is a terrible way to do justice.
Jail time for non-violent “first offenders” (as he is legally) is pretty much unheard of.
It pains me the D.A. went to the wall after Trump’s lifetime of various crimes… for THESE ridiculous things he did. It all reminds me of Monica Lewinsky.
And I loathe Trump.
D.A., J.D.
NYC
They got Capone on tax charges, not the murder charges he so richly deserved.
NY fraud case–Trump loses.
First E. Jean Carroll case–Trump loses.
Second E. Jean Carroll case–Trump loses.
Hush money election interference case–Trump loses.
I am sensing a pattern here. I read somewhere his legal fees are about $90,000 per day, with much of that paid by assorted political PACs and donations.
An interesting aside. Trump is a resident of Florida, and Florida bans convicted felons from voting. That’s one vote he wont get, but I’m not at all sure that this will change the election results, which seem to be favoring the orange one.
only if banned in the jurisdiction where they were convicted, as I understand it.
NY doesn’t ban convicted felons from voting other than while incarcerated, so unlikely it will affect him.
He’s registered to vote in, votes in and resides in Florida though.
Now I speculate: the Florida-only crimes they bar felons for is probably b/c they don’t know about other jurisdictions and criminals. Not the case here.
Either way, he won’t be voting unless he changes his residence. Or FL changing the law which they utterly, absolutely won’t do.
Interesting fact – a few countries (Israel, Finland and another place in Europe I can’t remember) allow voting from jail!
D.A.
NYC
Yikes!
I dislike how the media gobbled this up, but good it’s over.
In what world would the felony conviction of a former president and “celebrity” (“reality” TV “star”) not draw massive media coverage?
I know. Doesn’t mean I dislike trials becoming a circus.
OMFG indeed! I did not expect a quick unanimous verdict on all charges.
I have been watching a number of lawyers opine on this since the indictment was announced.
Legal Eagle (Devon Stone) said himself right after the paperwork was released, that unless Trumps team can get the charges dismissed before trial, that the defense could not contest the merits of the case. It was already then THAT strong.
The MSM has largely done a really bad job of reporting on this, generally agreeing with Fox and other sources claiming the case was weak and Trump will be innocent and more.
I called all 34 counts guilty based on what lawyers were saying from day 1, and I was proven right. Wish i could say it was due to my expertise, but it was me parroting expert opinion lol. We just didnt see much of that in the MSM which made this case look a lot weaker than it actually was.
They had Trump 100 ways from Sunday. And it came true.
And yeah those same opinions say its a low level series of felonies, and his first time. Parole and perhaps home detention.
The CONTEMPT crimes though, I wonder if he’ll see time for those? He certainly deserves it.
+1
My understanding is that the record falsification was a misdemeanor charge and the statute of limitations has passed. The legal theory used is that the misdemeanor was part of underlying felony. Alvin Bragg has refused to state the underlying crime. I believe the judge instructed the jury that they didn’t need need to agree on what the underlying crime was. I think when the defendant is charged with a felony, the prosecution needs to name the felony. Election interference is too broad, what specific election law did Trump break? Election law is complex, but there was no testimony from experts in election law to ensure the jurors knew about the laws the defendant was charged with. I don’t think citizens should be charged the crime being named.
The crime was falsification of documents in furtherance (the low end crime fine only) of a second crime (which makes it a felony).
The second crime was said to be election interference, but it didnt matter. It was the falsification in furtherance of a ‘second crime’, and that could be anything.
The prosecution did their diligence in exactly tying those together, and I think showed it was absolutely for election interference.
Its a legit conviction.
Common sense dictates that the second crime needs to be specified, otherwise how can the prosecution prove the defendant committed the second crime. If you take Trump out of the equation, does this theory make sense? Can anyone have a misdemeanor charge elevated to a felony because it was thought to be part of carrying out of another unspecified crime? Is this setting a good precedent? I am not interested in Trump, I am questioning whether this is a valid legal theory.
“Common sense dictates that the second crime needs to be specified”
Sure but we are talking about the law here. That specific law states that “A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when with intent to defraud, which includes the intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof, he makes or causes a false entry in the records of a business enterprise”. Trump did exactly that 34x.
The second crime, whatever it actually IS, is ancillary. It is the furtherance of another crime that raises this to a felony and also knocks off the statute issue. A few years ago i think NY extended statutes for several crimes as well, but I am not clear on that.
Its not only setting ‘good precedent’ its settled law in NY. Braggs office and others have prosecuted many dozens of such similar cases with others over the last several years. Lots of white collar crimes in NY every year it seems.
Dont falsify records. And dont do it to cover up other crimes. You wont have to worry after that, i bet.
If it is settled law, then the law is unconstitutional . There can be no due process when the defendant doesn’t know what crime they are being prosecuted for and thus, cannot defend themselves. The idea of being charrged with an unnamed crime is Kafkaesque.
So if I get get a speeding ticket and I have extra money I can’t account for, can the speeding ticket be upgraded to a felony if the prosecution isn’t sure whether I robbed a convenience store, sold fentanyl, or blackmailed someone? I obviously committed a crime.
I dont know. Does NY traffic laws state thats a thing? 😀
Cause falsifying records with intent to commit another crime is an actual law and has been for a long time.
But if the cops pull you over to give you a ticket and see a gun on the seat and bags of money and theres reports on the radio a store was just robbed….
Tell me: What do you think they might do?
They still need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt which store I robbed and how I did it. They can’t just infer I am guilty without proof.
“They still need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt which store I robbed and how I did it. They can’t just infer I am guilty without proof.”
Well then they would see if there was evidence like video, fingerprints, and more. But at the least in such a scenario you would be arrested on suspicion at least till they dug and saw what could be gathered.
The evidence against Trump was multi-pronged, and many times with him actually in voice recording conspiring, and his closest associates saying he did what he is accused of, and why.
Not to mention the major paper trial, almost al of which he signed off on.
Found the law btw.
“SECTION 175.10
Falsifying business records in the first degree
Penal (PEN) CHAPTER 40, PART 3, TITLE K, ARTICLE 175
§ 175.10 Falsifying business records in the first degree.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree
when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second
degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.
Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony”
They didnt make this law up. its been on the books for years and others have been charged by it.
Your inability to follow this doesnt render it moot.
I don’t like Trump.
But. This is lawfare. The only reason this case was brought is because the defendant’s name is Trump.
Play this one all the way out, and if Trump is “sent” to jail, and whether Trump wins or loses the election, there will be a terrible price to pay – in the long run.
This is bad for the country. Bad for America. We’ve crossed a rubicon.
The guy committed crimes and has been delaying from day 1 on this and on many others. Delay, defray, lawsuit, appeal, delay more for decades. Lawfare my butt lol. He did the crime, and July 11 he’ll find out the time.
Braggs dept showed over the last few years they have prosecuted dozens of similar such cases. This case was brought because he is a criminal. And now?
He is no longer Teflon Don. He is Felon Don 😀
Your glee will be short lived. To say nothing of your butt.
Think about the nation, not momentary satisfaction.
And no, the case is exceptional, in that the statute of limitations had run out on what should be a flimsy federal case contrived to be state case. If the same case was brought in FL? Hung jury, in Atlanta? Guilty, in Texas? Innocent. This has become a game. This is what our justice system has become – a charge looking for a forum.
And it’s deeply saddening for America. Lady justice no longer wears a blindfold.
When Trump wins in November (and this verdict will consolidate that win), the republicans will engage in lawfare ad nauseam. It will not be so pleasant to witness.
“Think about the nation, not momentary satisfaction”
What would it say to the nation when a man clearly commits crimes and then gets let off anyways? Trust in the legal system just got restored at least in NYC.
And no, the case is not exceptional. And NY I think extended the statutes on several crimes anyways some years ago, which if I understand right, allowed this to go forward, not to mention it was 34 felonies, not misdemeanours.
“Lady justice no longer wears a blindfold”
Oh lay off the sad act lol. He got judged by a jury of his peers that his team had half the responsibility in picking, including someone who apparently was a major Trump supporter.
“When Trump wins in November (and this verdict will consolidate that win), the republicans will engage in lawfare ad nauseam. It will not be so pleasant to witness.”
Maybe he wins, maybe not. But hes a felon now. Republicans are trying to erode election integrity at every turn already ad nauseam. Its been disgusting to witness.
And if he was innocent, why try to run the clock out on every case thats brought up before him?
Why didnt he take the stand? All he had to do, if he was innocent, was tell the truth under oath 😀
And yes, glee is short lived. He has run the clock out on the other three cases against him till after Nov 4. You should be wondering why doesnt he come in to court with strong evidence and by dint of that evidence, prove his innocence? He would be cheering to the ends of the workd with the badge of reputation that would give him.
Instead he runs the clock out of the hundreds, if not thousands of cases brought against him.
He finally failed just once to run the clock out and had to stand on the merits.
34 guilty charges.
It won’t be a pleasure for me to witness because it’s wrong whoever does it.
Whether lawfare or not, any other President (current or previous) should feel exposed by this prosecution.
Anyone who makes the argument than no ex-President is above the law should consider how their President might be treated over existing accusations.
Something doesn’t add up in your comment. If the case was so flimsy and the legal ground so shaky why on earth:
1) were his hotshot lawyers not able to do anything about that shakiness? It should have been trivial for them to demonstrate, but they got nowhere close to doing so. What legal technicalities were you aware of that his expensive legal team were unable to articulate?
2) Did the jury return 34 unanimous guilty verdicts? Do they ALL hate Trump and want to unfairly convict him? Were they all bought by the prosecution? Or was it because the evidence against Cheeto In Chief was so copious, overwhelming and damning that they had to convict.
William of Occam and his razor might be worth consulting here.
Also, what’s the point of predicting the verdicts in various other locations? It’s completely irrelevant – he committed crimes in New York, so that’s where he was tried. It’s weird that you seem upset by this. It would have been easy for him to arrange a trial elsewhere, e.g. if he wanted a trial in Florida he should have broken the law there instead.
You make a good point though. In fact, the next time I falsify business records to hide hush money that I paid a porn star during a presidential election in order to hide my sordid, unsatisfactorily executed and selfishly adulterous activities, I’ll do it in Texas.
By the way, I for one am not gleeful, but I am satisfied and encouraged by the verdict. Finally, this vile and odious individual has been nailed for some of his many crimes. I hope they lock the scumbag up, but they won’t of course.
I’m actually going to be in NYC on 11th July, I’m tempted to go to the courthouse and join the celebrations.
I just saw Felonius Trump somewhere😹
Ask yourself why Trump did not take the stand under oath to refute the testimony of Cohen, Pecker, and Daniels, or the authorization and trail of the business records.
‘lawfare’? *cringe*
It’s bad for the country/America because…why?
What is the Terrible Price to be Paid if we play it all the way out?
Republican ‘lawfare’? You forgot the part where they have to find actual crimes committed.
But if they can, then perpetrators should be held accountable whatever their names or political allegiances.
You seem to be suggesting otherwise, that certain individuals’ criminal activity should be ignored for the Good of the Country.
Also: you posted the identical verbatim comment twice in this thread.
If it is “lawfare” I would not be in favor of the prosecution/verdict.
However…
That being said, has everyone already forgotten about how Der Pumpkinführer’s mindless drones were running around screaming “lock her up” before the 2020 election? So, among other things, if this were lawfare, it would be a serious case of “hoist on his own petard.”
And before that, there was the fishing expedition against HC’s husband.
When Trump wins in November, Camp David will have to be replaced by a presidential suite at a New York state penitentiary. Attica and Sing Sing are much too gritty, and Bedford Hills in tony Westchester is, unfortunately, a female prison. (If Westchester were a county in Scotland, this would of course not be a problem.) Perhaps the Queensboro Correctional Facility would serve best, being within commuting distance of Trump Tower in NYC. [But I
forgot, Trump Tower will be in the hands of New York state receivers by then, due to the business fraud conviction.]
What if he gets jail time? I read he could get up to four years. How could he run for President from jail?
Sentencing isn’t until July 11.
Donald Trump could get four years on each of the 34 convictions. If this were a surreptitious political ploy that could be a reality. But for a set of crimes like this the judge would usually have the sentences served concurrently. I bet that is what will happen. The cases will be appealed by Donald Trump so the courtroom drama could play out for years. He will not serve time unless he loses his appeals all the way to the New York Supreme Court.
In the mean time should we believe the case against Hunter Biden is a political weaponizing of the legal system?
Ha! Once I saw the news this afternoon I knew that you’d post a report. I am not surprised at a conviction, but I am surprised that he was found guilty on all 34 counts. Unanimous agreement in all 34 counts is astounding!
Whoohoo! I never expected this to actually happen!
I’m pretty sure Trump cultists will say the jury was “woke,” or something like that.
I am not a Trump cultist but I don’t think the jury was objective.
As an outsider (British/Australian) looking in, it did seem to have been a trial motivated by politics. Which is bad, in my opinion. That said some of the comments here have challenged that narrative. I try to receive a balanced newsfeed, of MSM and independent (e.g. Free Press), but what can you trust?
But I do think this will open floodgates to a degree. I forget the state (apologies), that’s threatening to not let Joe Biden on the ballot because his official Dems nomination isn’t until after their deadline. I don’t think this would even have been an issue if certain states hadn’t tried to keep Trump off their ballots. Gloves are off.
I’m a huge fan of America and think your country is best placed to continue being the example that the rest of the world follows….but only if you get your politics in order.
The state is Ohio, and the issue is an existing statutory deadline for listing party nominees. This is not an unusual problem and has always been solved by the state legislature, as it is being solved in Ohio. Given the fact, and it is a fact, that prosecutions under the NY statute are numerous, and the conviction, it is hard to see a legitimate claim that the case is political. There is no case for selective prosecution here.
“Gloves are off.”
The gloves were off long ago and has largely been Republicans who have weaponized courts all the way up to SCOTUS.
The talk of Trump’s trial being political is absurd. The guy runs for president and doesn’t expect his life to be examined – as Republicans have done to Democrats, makes Trump a moron. Especially since Trump has a history of engaging in fraudulent businesses and falsifying records in his own business.
This isn’t political. Trump made his lawlessness and lack of ethics plain for everyone to see. At least anyone who pays the least amount of attention.
The real politics would be to not charge him for his crimes. The real politics would be for him to have a judge he appointed who appears to be giving Trump every advantage in a case where Trump stole secret documents, obstructed justice again and again, this is just the latest example, see the Mueller Report. Lied to the FBI. Tried cover up his crimes. Tried to destroy evidence. Showed classified documents to people without clearance. Lucky for him he has a pet judge on his case.
No, this is Trump finally seeing at least a small measure justice.
I am not Amercian but have followed American politics attentively for quite some time.
People who are used to the Law not applying to them usually protest when it is (witch-hunt! Lawfare!).
What if, simply, Trump really is a f***ing criminal? As I understand, it only takes 1 jury (ONE!) to hang. And not a single one of them has. On 34 counts.
What I have seen from afar is a constant willingness to make this particular person immune to everything that would be routinely applied to everyone else. If the law has not been applied equally to him it is not precisely because it has been exceptionally applied to him, but because he has gotten away with much for much too long just because the American system (and understandably so) seems to have a kind of reverential view of Presidents.
I understand personality cults, but there are much better people to become cultist about.
I for one am very happy when entitled vicious criminals with public power are made to pay for their crimes.
“What if, simply, Trump really is a f***ing criminal?”
Wait, you think the New York real estate businessman who has long been rumored to have dealings with the mob and to have been bailed out by Russian organized crime, who has been held liable for fraud on the scale of hundreds of millions of dollars, who once bragged that his only experience in politics was bribing politicians, could in fact be a massive crook? Mind blown…
Wilfred Reilly says :
“As someone who went to law school, did well enough, and teaches the subject at a state U from time to time: the “34 felony counts” line from the Trump case just is a complete joke.
Essentially all of them spring from what would normally be charged as a single misdemeanor at a different level.of government (state v. federal)…against which the statute of limitations had already run.”
x.com/wil_da_beast630/status/1796373456818242041?s=46
I’m not saying this proves or denies anything – the only thing is this sense that the number “34” will never be the same.
Some of the commentators here seem to think that this conviction will ensure Trump’s election in November. It is in fact the only thing that may–just may–prevent it.
No, an acquittal that would have sealed his victory. His supporters would have been angry and vindictive no matter the result, but there are some for whom this guilty verdict may make them think twice. Will it be enough? I guess we’ll see.
As for the “weaponizing” canard, I think other comments have already adequately debunked this histrionic accusation. Are politics involved? At some level, sure. But despite the novelty of a former president being convicted of a felony, there’s nothing truly unique here. Republicans have played the hardest of hardball for many years. So while the irony of the “lock her up” chants coming home to roost is an amusing bit of black humor, our justice system has not been “corrupted” and this process has not debased our country. A private citizen was tried for crimes and was convicted. That’s all. Or should be anyway.
As another outsider (from the UK) I’m saddened by the toxic division that is so apparent in the States at the moment, and shocked at the way this odious individual has managed to acquire such a massive cult-like following. Whether Trump believes it or not the trial appears to have been run properly, and I’ve seen no evidence of political interference.
The most encouraging thing, for me, is that at least the precedent has been set. In his future trials the juries will know that he has already been convicted once, and they won’t feel that they’ll have to let him off because of the fear of his supporters destabilising the country, or provoking a civil war.
I agree with #14 Rosemary that this case would not have been made except for the defendant being Trump. It looks Stalinist or Putinist to prosecute the leading member of the opposition for a crime that wouldn’t have occurred to anyone except they needed a crime to prosecute. If Trump had just gone back to private life after 2020 election it seems to me this would have been ignored.
This was a consequential crime. It was committed to change the results of the 2016 election, which it did. It was a crime to defraud the people of the United States, all the time some of you couldn’t stop talking about Clinton’s emails.
+1
Will Trump serve jail time? Highly unlikely.
Was this a politically motivated prosecution? Almost certainly.
Is that a bad thing? Not as far as I can tell.
Will Democrats come to find out that Republicans can play this game too? Possibly, there is certainly enough corruption on both sides of the aisle to fill the courts for decades to come. Though I think there are a lot of Republican politicians that secretly (and some not so secretly) wish Trump would just disappear and aren’t bothered by his legal woes in the slightest if it can help get him out of politics.
Will a conviction hurt his chances in the upcoming election? A little, but not much. A lot of his supporters think the whole trial is a witch hunt by the Democrats and remember how Hunter Biden’s misdeeds got shoved under the carpet to see a double standard here.
I really wish this would result in the RNC putting up a different candidate but that seems beyond unlikely.
Hunter Biden’s misdeeds being shoved under the carpet? Then why is he going to trial next month in Delaware for a gun crime that is rarely charged? And especially since the law he’s being charged under may well be unconditional. Then he’s going to be charged with tax crimes that most people aren’t charged with if they pay the unpaid taxes and penalties–which he did. Is this “lawfare” perpetuated by Republicans or is this justice?
Why is he going to trial? For the same reason Trump is in court, politically motivated law enforcement. Is that “lawfare”? Maybe, though I wouldn’t make a hard distinction between using the judicial system to hurt your political enemies and justice. If you follow the letter and intent of the law while doing so you could have your cake and eat it too.
Just to clarify, I’m not a Trump supporter. But Biden’s no peach either. It’s a choice between and pompous ass and a geriatric puppet. There is no good choice among them. It’s a sad state of affairs when these are the best choices the political establishment can come up with.
I personally believe Joe Biden is a decent person, unlike Trump. I am proud to have him as my president. I don’t think he’s a “puppet” of anyone. Unlike Trump, who will prostitute himself to any foreign government or billionaire who will give him money.
Hunter Biden’s going to trial because he screwed up while abusing drugs. He should indeed pay for his crimes. I have no real issue with that and it’s not been swept under the rug. His trial starts Monday. However, the rabid way that the Republicans in Congress have gone after him is simply because he’s Joe Biden’s son. They used him to try to smear Joe Biden because they know how filthy Trump is and if they could just smear any of Hunter’s dirt onto Joe, they could point and say they’re both the same. But there’s absolutely no comparison between the two.
This undermining and abuse of our judicial system by Trump and his lickspittles is beyond the pale. They’re shrieking so loudly because our system of justice finally worked against Trump. The infiltration of unashamed partisan hacks in the Supreme Court is horrific. If we lose confidence in the judicial system, we will lose the last bastion of our democracy.
Biden has sold Ukraine down the river. His policy is determined by people who fear Russia, admire it or have been bought by it – Jake Sullivan and William Burns. Biden wants mostly to prevent “escalation”, which means that his No. 1 concern is not to anger Putin too much. The destruction of Ukraine and the wholesale slaughter of Ukrainians, followed by the same fate of other Europeans, is no “escalaton”.
What “same” game are you talking about. Republicans in congress have been trying to invent a crime involving Joe Biden for three years, have yet to come up with anything, and have made fools of themselves in the process.
Overall fellow WEITers, I’ve been impressed by the legal arguments above. (as a lawyer myself). Proving my happy theory that the readers (or at least commenters) trend pretty intelligent in these parts.
🙂
D.A.
NYC
😍