Poll: Should Trump accept a plea deal or risk a trial?

[Skylar]

You have no evidence all you have are lies.

Says you. And you refuse to read the indictment. You refuse to look at any of the pictures, read any of the texts, read any of the transcripts, read any of the testimony.

You've committed to remaining pristinely ignorant.

Good luck with that in court.

 

[miketx]

Says you. And you refuse to read the indictment. You refuse to look at any of the pictures, read any of the texts, read any of the transcripts, read any of the testimony.

You've committed to remaining pristinely ignorant.

Good luck with that in court.

I'm going to court? Damn this monster can't stop lying.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[miketx]

Lying scum, just like you.

 

[Lakhota]

 

[Lakhota]

 

[kyzr]

 

[Aldo Raine]

The Garlandstapo won’t offer a plea deal. They want to throw him in prison so he can’t kick Tater’s ass in 2024.

81,000,000 >74,000,000
MAGA

 

[percysunshine]

The point is your calculus doesn't work. As Trump not getting the nomination breaks the GOP to bits.

So in addition to your claims being profoundly fact free, with you merely assuming that the election calculus is motivating law enforcement decision.....your calculus is predicated on an absurd and nonsensical idea:

That if Trump doesn't win, that MAGA will ignore Trump.

Yeah, history doesn't not support such an assumption.

The easy strategy for team Biden is to have the DOJ convict Trump, and then Biden pardons Trump to run against. Biden being a fair guy and all around good sport about this stuff..

 

[Ordinary Guy]

Every former president has willfully retained classified documents, lied to investigators, compelled their lawyers to lie to investigators, defied a subpoena for those classified docs, conspired to hide them from authorities, and showed classified docs to other people?

Care to back those claims up with some evidence? Because I'm pretty sure you don't know what you're talking about.

it was never an issue until now, Democrats are fucking hypocrites and whiny ass cry babies

 

[Lakhota]

 

[lennypartiv]

Trump might as well go for the trial..

All he needs is one juror on his side.

 

[WorldWatcher]

All he needs is one juror on his side.

Misleading.

In a federal jury it takes unanimous vote to convict or acquit, if a single juror holds out - for either decision, the Judge can refer the jury back to the jury room to continue deliberations.

If the jury fails to arrive at a decision that is called a "hung jury" and the Judge can dismiss the jury. The prosecution can then file for a retrial and seat a new jury and the trial process start over after a new jury is selected.

WW

 

[kyzr]

Misleading.
In a federal jury it takes unanimous vote to convict or acquit, if a single juror holds out - for either decision, the Judge can refer the jury back to the jury room to continue deliberations.
If the jury fails to arrive at a decision that is called a "hung jury" and the Judge can dismiss the jury. The prosecution can then file for a retrial and seat a new jury and the trial process start over after a new jury is selected.
WW

You have a link that says a jury Federal jury must be unanimous to acquit?
I'm only seeing to convict.

 

[WorldWatcher]

You have a link that says a jury Federal jury must be unanimous to acquit?
I'm only seeing to convict.

hung jury

www.law.cornell.edu

It's called a hung jury when the jurors can't come to a decision on guilt or non-guilt.

WW

 

[kyzr]

It's called a hung jury when the jurors can't come to a decision on guilt or non-guilt.
WW

OK, so in Trump's case it could be that Smith (since he has an unlimited budget) could keep re-trying Trump just to keep him from running for president.

Maybe Trump's age is affecting his judgement? He should have just given all the classified docs to the Feds and avoided a long complex trial, or long complex multiple trials, since any dems on the jury will always vote guilty and any republicans would probably vote not guilty. If he's found guilty he is toast, stupid toast.

 

[WorldWatcher]

OK, so in Trump's case it could be that Smith (since he has an unlimited budget) could keep re-trying Trump just to keep him from running for president.

Yes. Until they can get a jury without a mole.

Maybe Trump's age is affecting his judgement? He should have just given all the classified docs to the Feds and avoided a long complex trial, or long complex multiple trials, since any dems on the jury will always vote guilty and any republicans would probably vote not guilty. If he's found guilty he is toast, stupid toast.

Agreed 100%.

The FPOTUS is not the victim here, he should have returned the government property and the classified documents when the government gave him multiple chances to do the right thing.

WW

 

[kyzr]

Yes. Until they can get a jury without a mole.

Agreed 100%. The FPOTUS is not the victim here, he should have returned the government property and the classified documents when the government gave him multiple chances to do the right thing.
WW

1. LOL! You mean until the prosecutor or Trump dies of old age. A not guilty vote could be rational based on the PRA, assuming the defense is competent.
2. We agree that whatever Trump kept those classified docs for was a very bad idea. That poor judgment should disqualify him for primary voters, but it won't.

 

[WorldWatcher]

1. LOL! You mean until the prosecutor or Trump dies of old age. A not guilty vote could be rational based on the PRA, assuming the defense is competent.

No it wouldn't. The charges have nothing to do with the PRA, the PRA deals with Presidential Records.

18 USC 793(e) deals with one aspect of espionage.

Then there are the obstruction, conspiracy, and false statement charges where the PRA doesn't apply at all.

2. We agree that whatever Trump kept those classified docs for was a very bad idea. That poor judgment should disqualify him for primary voters, but it won't.

100%

WW