Forbes/Harris poll: Majority say verdict rigged...

[Robert W]

Can you show me the convictions please?

Oh, you can't.

This is just another Un-American guilty before proven innocent "lock her up" crowd nonsense.

Can you show where we dropped all those crimes? Your side did this to Trump a number of times and gloated.

 

[Robert W]

No sham.

Trump's a convicted felon.

Convicted by a jury of his peers.

Why say peers when that is not even a requirement? Those were Democrats who wanted many times to convict Trump.

 

[Lastamender]

When did I say they aren't unusual?

Why would I prove your claim?

That's just silly.

How many pages are jury instructions usually for a crime like this. Didn't the media outlets that told you 55 pages is too long mention it?

Jury instructions should ideally be brief, concise, non-repetitive, relevant to the case’s details, understandable to the average juror, and should correctly state the law without misleading the jury or inviting unnecessary speculation.
Merchan did the opposite.

jury instructions

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[Catsnmeters]

Can you show where we dropped all those crimes? Your side did this to Trump a number of times and gloated.

I don't care if the crimes were dropped or not. It doesn't matter.

I'm talking about convictions. Not speculation. Not opinion.

Trump was convicted in a court of law and is a felon. Not to mention found liable in a court of law for sexual assault and fraud.

That's your candidate.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Jury instructions should ideally be brief, concise, non-repetitive, relevant to the case’s details, understandable to the average juror, and should correctly state the law without misleading the jury or inviting unnecessary speculation.
Merchan did the opposite.

jury instructions

www.law.cornell.edu

Cool. Ideally be brief.

Sometimes they are brief.

What is brief?

Just curious. Can you link where you got this info on 55 pages being to long? I'm just curious what their logic is.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Why say peers when that is not even a requirement?

Great question. I didn't know. I just posted it cause that is the term I usually hear.

What Is a Jury of Peers? - FindLaw

While it isn't specifically stated anywhere in the Constitution, defendants generally have the right to be tried by "a jury of peers." But what exactly is a jury of peers? Learn about this and more at FindLaw's Criminal Procedure section.

www.findlaw.com

"The phrase "a jury of peers" dates back to the signing of the Magna Carta in England. At that point, the provision ensured that fellow nobles tried members of the nobility rather than the king judging them. This phrase more accurately means a jury of fellow citizens. It is a crucial aspect of the Sixth Amendment in criminal law."

Those were Democrats who wanted many times to convict Trump.

What are their names?

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

Why do you think it was unfair?

Everything about it was a sham. A biased judge, a biased jury, judge was hostile to the defendant, judge was hostile to defense witnesses, judge refused to allow exculpatory evidence into testimony, made up crimes, made standards of guilt. The judge actually told the jury "if you think the defendant had intent to commit a crime", that's good enough for a guilty verdict. Only a fucking moron would think that "thinking" someone is guilty is an acceptable legal standard.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

No sham.

Trump's a convicted felon.

Convicted by a jury of his peers.

Convicted by a rigged jury in a kangaroo court...lol

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I told you, and you wouldn't listen. You've only energized Trump's base with no upside for Democrats.

I think you've lost the election.

You'll have to download the PDF from RCP but here is the important section...

View attachment 955478

Latest Polls 2024 | RealClearPolling

Stay up to date on all the latest 2024 election and state of the union polls. Gain valuable insights into the evolving political landscape and stay ahead of the latest trends.

www.realclearpolling.com

P.S.- Trump topped Biden in this post-verdict poll 51-49.

Old news.

This just in:


A plurality of Americans, 50%, think former President Donald Trump's guilty verdict on all 34 counts in his hush money trial was correct, a new ABC News/Ipsos poll finds, and almost as many, 49%, think he should end his 2024 presidential campaign over the result. 

Still, following the historic criminal trial that ended this week in a first-ever conviction of a former president, Trump's favorability has remained stable at 31%, according to the latest ABC News/Ipsos poll conducted using Ipsos' KnowledgePanel. Trump was found guilty of 34 counts on Thursday in his trial related to falsifying business records regarding a payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election in order to keep her quiet about their alleged affair.

ABC News/Ipsos poll: Trump Criminal Case in NYC: Americans Support Guilty Verdict

Most Americans ignore or laugh at the way Trump speaks. He uses the phrase "bad people" off and on, and it makes him sound a bit illiterate. Many of us believe his speaking about the criminal conviction that has labelled him as a felon, will end up convincing more people that he doesn't belong...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Catsnmeters]

Everything about it was a sham. A biased judge,

All judges are biased.

a biased jury,

You don't know who the jury members were.

judge was hostile to the defendant

No. The defendant was hostile to the judge and his family.

That's a no no.

The judge was actually lenient because if you or I did that we would be in jail already.

, judge was hostile to defense witnesses

He should not have been disrespectful. Any judge would have done the same thing.

, judge refused to allow exculpatory evidence into testimony

Nope. He denied unnecessary testimony not pertinent to the case.

, made up crimes,

No crimes were made up.

The law spells them out quite clearly.

made standards of guilt.

Beyond a reasonable doubt was the only standard for the primary crime.

The judge actually told the jury "if you think the defendant had intent to commit a crime", that's good enough for a guilty verdict.

Yes. The secondary crimes that made falsifying business records a felony. That is the law.

The judge can not change the law.

Only a fucking moron would think that "thinking" someone is guilty is an acceptable legal standard.

I don't think he is guilty. I know he is guilty as decided by a jury of his peers.

Trump is now a sexual assaulter, fraudster and a convicted felon.

Your echo chamber has rendered you ignorant.

 

[Lastamender]

Cool. Ideally be brief.

Sometimes they are brief.

What is brief?

Just curious. Can you link where you got this info on 55 pages being to long? I'm just curious what their logic is.

You will make any excuse to convince yourself this trial was something more than a political hit. It really shows how stupid you are.

This sounds like the excuses that Biden won the 2020 election. Nothing unusual about batches of 2 to 300,000 votes in the middle of the night and over 95% going to Biden. No one believes the crap you do.

 

[Catsnmeters]

You will make any excuse to convince yourself this trial was something more than a political hit. It really shows how stupid you are.

No. I wouldn't.

I certainly wouldn't post an excuse like 55 pages of jury instructions.

 

[Lastamender]

No. I wouldn't.

I certainly wouldn't post an excuse like 55 pages of jury instructions.

It is not an excuse, it is a fact dumbass.

 

[Catsnmeters]

It is not an excuse, it is a fact dumbass.

Yes, it is a fact that the instructions were 55 pages long. It is not a fact that is too long or illegal.

You need to prove that.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

All judges are biased.

Bullshit

You don't know who the jury members were.

They are all Trump hating Democrats.T

No, the defendant was hostile to the judge and his family.
That's a no no.

No he wasn't. That's a lie.

The judge was actually lenient because if you or I did that we would be in jail already.

Neither you, nor I would have been charged to begin with...lol

He should not have been disrespectful. Any judge would have done the same thing.

The defendant isn't required to kiss the judge's ass...lol

Nope. He denied unnecessary testimony not pertinent to the case.

Exculpatory evidence is always pertinent to a case.

No crimes were made up.

What were the underlying crimes?

Beyond a reasonable doubt was the only standard for the primary crime.

Not in this case

Yes. The secondary crimes that made falsifying business records a felony. That is the law.

What were the underlying crimes and where are they listed in the indictment?

The judge can not change the law.

This one made up his own law.

I don't think he is guilty. I know he is guilty as decided by a jury of his peers.

Trump is now a sexual assaulter, fraudster and a convicted felon.

Your echo chamber has rendered you ignorant.

The trial was a sham. Your echo chamber has rendered you stupid.

 

[BluesLegend]

Everything about it was a sham. A biased judge, a biased jury, judge was hostile to the defendant, judge was hostile to defense witnesses, judge refused to allow exculpatory evidence into testimony, made up crimes, made standards of guilt. The judge actually told the jury "if you think the defendant had intent to commit a crime", that's good enough for a guilty verdict. Only a fucking moron would think that "thinking" someone is guilty is an acceptable legal standard.

OH SHIT....this Dem sham conviction was so over the top rigged that today House Speaker Mike Johnson vowed to retaliate for the guilty verdict against former President Trump. House Republicans would use "everything in our arsenal."

 

[Lastamender]

Yes, it is a fact that the instructions were 55 pages long. It is not a fact that is too long or illegal.

You need to prove that.

I do not need to prove anything to you.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Bullshit

Which judge isn't biased?

They are all Trump hating Democrats.T

Lol, you don't even know who they are.

No he wasn't. That's a lie.

Yes he was.

Neither you, nor I would have been charged to begin with...lol

You think if you were a dependent and you threatened the judge and his family that they wouldn't lock you up? Really?

The defendant isn't required to kiss the judge's ass...lol

Agreed.

Exculpatory evidence is always pertinent to a case.

It wasn't exculpatory.

What were the underlying crimes?

The three crimes listed in the jury instructions. One was tax fraud...can't remember the other two.

Why are you commenting on this if you don't even know?

Not in this case

Yeah it was. It was even in the jury instructions.

What were the underlying crimes and where are they listed in the indictment?

They don't have to be listed in the indictment.

The primary crime was listed....34 times.

This one made up his own law.

What exact exact law do you think was made up so I can educate you?

The trial was a sham. Your echo chamber has rendered you stupid.

I am reading the law. If that is an echo chamber then you are the problem, not me.

 

[Catsnmeters]

I do not need to prove anything to you.

Well if you want to participate in fair debate you do.

I guess you are here to troll?

 

[eagle1462010]

OH SHIT....this Dem sham conviction was so over the top rigged that today House Speaker Mike Johnson vowed to retaliate for the guilty verdict against former President Trump. House Republicans would use "everything in our arsenal."

His VOWS are useless