24 Repub state Attorneys General effectively join the Red Tie Brigade.

[bigrebnc1775]

I think because Dems are held to a different standard. If Biden did 1/100000th of what Trump has done he'd already be disqualified as a candidate.

Operation tit for tat Biden will be found guilty for all the crimes we will find

 

[Billiejeens]

All the lies and propaganda about the indictments spewed by Trump, RWM, and congressional sycophants is preparing the country for that eventuality should Trump be re-elected.

None of the charges survive an appeal.
They are not designed to
They just want the charges so that really ignorant biden sycophants can have something to talk about.

That's it.
No joke.

 

[Billiejeens]

Operation tit for tat Biden will be found guilty for all the crimes we will find

Except that they will actually be crimes that Biden committed.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Except that they will actually be crimes that Biden committed.

Show me the democrat and I'll show you the crime

 

[Catsnmeters]

Except that they will actually be crimes that Biden committed.

Trump committed crimes too.

34 of them.

Now a convicted felon.

 

[Nostra]

Trump committed crimes too.

34 of them.

Now a convicted felon.

They will get overturned once appealed to a real court, Dumbass.

The trial was a joke.

 

[buckeye]

You're the one running Trump. This isn't a debate. Biden is sharp. Trump is drooling.

So what led to the mental degradation we see in almost every Trump cultist? There are multiple possible causes.

1. Senility
2. Substance abuse
3. Childhood lead poisoning
4. Fetal alchohol syndrome (their mamas drank hard)
5. Head injuries
6. Untreated syphilis
7. MSM-Propaganda-induced brain rot
8. Diabetic brain fog
9. COVID brain fog

You are wacked out. Biden is sharp??? What planet do you live on?

And that's a really dumb list you put together. I now know to scroll you.

 

[Catsnmeters]

They will get overturned once appealed to a real court, Dumbass.

The trial was a joke.

In what specific grounds do you think it will be overturned?

 

[buckeye]

compared to what? there are only 2 candidates. one is not a convicted felon

There are about 5 candidates. Do democrats ever follow real news or just democrat talking points?

Want to bet those ridiculous convictions will be overturned? Merchan was a disgrace to our judicial system and everyone with an ounce of legal knowledge and an ability to put bias aside understands that.

 

[Catsnmeters]

There are about 5 candidates. Do democrats ever follow real news or just democrat talking points?

Want to bet those ridiculous convictions will be overturned? Merchan was a disgrace to our judicial system and everyone with an ounce of legal knowledge and an ability to put bias aside understands that.

On what grounds do you think Trump's felonies will be successfully appealed?

Be specific please.

 

[Nostra]

In what specific grounds do you think it will be overturned?

Buzz Kill: The Trump Conviction Presents a Target-Rich Environment for Appeal

Below is my column in the Hill on the most compelling grounds for an appeal in the Trump case after his conviction on 34 counts in Manhattan. There has been considerable criticism of the defense te…

jonathanturley.org

 

[Missouri_Mike]

One wonders, if Trump is innocent, why his defenders put so much energy in to working to allow him to keep spreading inflammatory lies about the case, the prosecutors, the FBI, the DoJ, pretty much anyone involved in the prosecution? Perhaps because propaganda is his best defense.

An intelligent person would say if it was such an airtight case why can’t the prosecution and all involved handle the criticism.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Buzz Kill: The Trump Conviction Presents a Target-Rich Environment for Appeal

Below is my column in the Hill on the most compelling grounds for an appeal in the Trump case after his conviction on 34 counts in Manhattan. There has been considerable criticism of the defense te…

jonathanturley.org

Thanks for sharing someone else's opinion.

That is seriously lazy debate.

I see no reason in that article that will cause the appeal to be successful.

"was handpicked for this case rather than randomly selected."

No, he wasn't. Unless you have proof beyond speculation.

"Merchan’s daughter is also a Democratic organizer who has helped raise millions against Trump and the GOP and for the Democrats."

Irrelevant. Judges don't recuse themselves over who their kids donated too...unless you can show precedent for this?

"The indictment claimed a violation under New York’s election law 17-152 that the falsification of business records were committed to further another crime as an unlawful means to influence the election."

This is false. The indictment says 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. The indictment says nothing about 17.152.

"Merchan also barred the use of a legal expert, former FEC Chair Brad Smith, who was prepared to testify that such payments cannot be viewed as federal election violations and would not affect the election even if they were considered contributions, since they would not even have had to be reported until after the election."

Another lie. He was not barred. The judge restricted his available answers to ones relevant to the case.

"Merchan was equally conflicted in his other orders. For example, he allowed the prosecutors to introduce the plea agreement of Michael Cohen to federal election violations as well as the non-prosecution agreement of David Pecker on such violations. However, it was allowed only for the purposes of credibility and context. He issued an instruction that the jury could not consider the plea or the agreement to establish or impute the guilt of Trump."

So? What's the problem here?

"Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of the three vaguely defined options."

Another lie. The three crimes were not vaguely defined. They had been defined for months.

"Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of the three vaguely defined options. Even on the jury form, they did not have to specify which of the crimes were found. Under Merchan’s instruction, the jury could have split 4-4-4 on what occurred in the case. They could have seen a conspiracy to conceal a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations. We will never know. Worse yet, Trump will never know."

Turley is an idiot. The jury didn't have to agree on the predicate crimes.because he was not charged with those crimes.

"These are just a few of the appellate issues. There are other challenges, including but not limited to due process violations on the lack of specificity in the indictment..."

The indictment was very specific. 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. How could it be simpler?

You should stop listening to paid pundits.

 

[buckeye]

On what grounds do you think Trump's felonies will be successfully appealed?

Be specific please.

There was no underlying crime proven to make misdemeanors felonies, the statue of limitations had run out on the misdeamors and the jury instructions were totally unconstitutional. Merchan is a hack. Not to mention so many of his rulings that were incorrect throughout the trial that opened him up to being overturned.

 

[Catsnmeters]

There was no underlying crime proven to make misdemeanors felonies,

Yes their are. 3 predicate crimes that Trump and his team have known about since at least February.

You were lied to.

the statue of limitations had run out on the misdeamors

Trump wasn't charged with a misdemeanor. He was charged with a felony.

and the jury instructions were totally unconstitutional.

No. They were not.

What do you think was unconstitutional about them?

Merchan is a hack. Not to mention so many of his rulings that were incorrect throughout the trial that opened him up to being overturned.

Thanks for your opinion.

 

[Nostra]

Thanks for sharing someone else's opinion.

That is seriously lazy debate.

I see no reason in that article that will cause the appeal to be successful.

"was handpicked for this case rather than randomly selected."

No, he wasn't. Unless you have proof beyond speculation.

"Merchan’s daughter is also a Democratic organizer who has helped raise millions against Trump and the GOP and for the Democrats."

Irrelevant. Judges don't recuse themselves over who their kids donated too...unless you can show precedent for this?

"The indictment claimed a violation under New York’s election law 17-152 that the falsification of business records were committed to further another crime as an unlawful means to influence the election."

This is false. The indictment says 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. The indictment says nothing about 17.152.

"Merchan also barred the use of a legal expert, former FEC Chair Brad Smith, who was prepared to testify that such payments cannot be viewed as federal election violations and would not affect the election even if they were considered contributions, since they would not even have had to be reported until after the election."

Another lie. He was not barred. The judge restricted his available answers to ones relevant to the case.

"Merchan was equally conflicted in his other orders. For example, he allowed the prosecutors to introduce the plea agreement of Michael Cohen to federal election violations as well as the non-prosecution agreement of David Pecker on such violations. However, it was allowed only for the purposes of credibility and context. He issued an instruction that the jury could not consider the plea or the agreement to establish or impute the guilt of Trump."

So? What's the problem here?

"Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of the three vaguely defined options."

Another lie. The three crimes were not vaguely defined. They had been defined for months.

"Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of the three vaguely defined options. Even on the jury form, they did not have to specify which of the crimes were found. Under Merchan’s instruction, the jury could have split 4-4-4 on what occurred in the case. They could have seen a conspiracy to conceal a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations. We will never know. Worse yet, Trump will never know."

Turley is an idiot. The jury didn't have to agree on the predicate crimes.because he was not charged with those crimes.

"These are just a few of the appellate issues. There are other challenges, including but not limited to due process violations on the lack of specificity in the indictment..."

The indictment was very specific. 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. How could it be simpler?

You should stop listening to paid pundits.

Sorry Moron, I'll take the views of a renowned Constitution attorney and professor over an innerweb troll with a single digit IQ.

 

[Nostra]

Yes their are. 3 predicate crimes that Trump and his team have known about since at least February.

You were lied to.



Trump wasn't charged with a misdemeanor. He was charged with a felony.



No. They were not.

What do you think was unconstitutional about them?


Thanks for your opinion.

What was the underlying crime?

 

[Billiejeens]

Trump committed crimes too.

34 of them.

Now a convicted felon.

No

 

[mamooth]

And that's a really dumb list you put together. I now know to scroll you.

So which list items apply to you? In your case, it's clearly more than one.

 

[buckeye]

Yes their are. 3 predicate crimes that Trump and his team have known about since at least February.

Oh really? Show me the indictment that defined these crimes.

Trump wasn't charged with a misdemeanor. He was charged with a felony.

No shit, sherlock. But they only became felonies because of a NEVER DEFINED UNDERLYING CRIME. You people are ridiculously dumb about this.

What do you think was unconstitutional about them?

I'm not a lawyer but I've heard a whole lot of opinion on this from people who are, including some democrats, like the one below. Try this:

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/4697118-braggs-thrill-kill-in-manhattan-could-prove-short-lived-on-appeal/