When should Trump be sentenced?

[Kilroy2]

Most people outside of the “Get Trump by any means necessary” Democrat bubble don’t view those “felonies” as in any way legitimate.

You’ve made him a martyr

Yeah Trump is a convicted felon so whether it is legit is irrelevant and his supporters have to deal with it.

But hey he is the "Don" and you can't go against the family

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Yeah Trump is a convicted felon so whether it is legit is irrelevant and his supporters have to deal with it.

But hey he is the "Don" and you can't go against the family

So you're in the bubble it seems. You should try this thing called "objectivity", or just attempt to explain how anything in the trial was normal or of legal precedent.

 

[meaner gene]

this part never happened, yet the radical prosecutor and judge gave up ethics to get Trump.

Let me remind you of a few facts people seem to forget.
Trump was entitled to get a complete statement and explanation of the charges against him, what is called a "bill of particulars"

a Bill of Particulars is “a list of written questions from one party to another asking for details (particulars) about a claim or defense.”

If Trump wanted to know what the aggravating crime was, all he had to do was ask.

 

[Blaster]

What felony was he convicted of?

Nobody knows.

 

[Mr. Friscus]

Let me remind you of a few facts people seem to forget.
Trump was entitled to get a complete statement and explanation of the charges against him, what is called a "bill of particulars"

a Bill of Particulars is “a list of written questions from one party to another asking for details (particulars) about a claim or defense.”

If Trump wanted to know what the aggravating crime was, all he had to do was ask.

He would have asked, and there wouldn't have been an answer.

In order to oddly elevate his "crimes" to a felony, there HAS to be a second crime listed. Bragg did this without one, and the judge ignored this breech and pushed the trial anyways. That's why this is a clear setup. It's pretty much against the rules, but as you know, judges can pretty much do whatever they want in their courtrooms at the moment.. they just face the consequences later. Given Merchand's pro-Democrat background, I'd imagine he'd take a hit in order to get the guy he opposes.

 

[meaner gene]

So you're in the bubble it seems. You should try this thing called "objectivity", or just attempt to explain how anything in the trial was normal or of legal precedent.

The trial wasn't normal from the standpoint of the parties involved. But the law was followed, as it would have been had it involved the lowest, or highest of crimes.
The gag order was no different than the one in the John Gotti case, where the defendant had followers who would act on certain public statements, and do harm to the witnesses, intimidate the jury, or otherwise interfere with the proceedings of the court, and the administration of justice.

 

[Captain Caveman]

When should Trump be sentenced?

After when he gets a fair trial, so he wouldn't have to be sentenced.

 

[meaner gene]

He would have asked, and there wouldn't have been an answer.

That's absolutely wrong. If a bill of particulars isn't answered, that's a violation that would, just like a discovery violation, would delay the trial, until it was answered.

What Happens If the Prosecutor Fails to Disclose Required Information and Evidence?

If a prosecutor fails to provide the defendant with required discovery, the consequences will depend on the nature of the violation and the extent of the violation.
In other cases, the defendant may be entitled to a new trial or an adjournment of the trial if the violation is discovered before the scheduled trial date.

 

[meaner gene]

After when he gets a fair trial, so he wouldn't have to be sentenced.

You may think the trial wasn't fair, but it was carried out under the rules set by the US Constitution, 6th amendment.

 

[Captain Caveman]

You may think the trial wasn't fair, but it was carried out under the rules set by the US Constitution, 6th amendment.

You may think it was carried out under the rules set by the US Constitution, 6th amendment, but even a blind man on a galloping horse would disagree.

And now there's a thread about some juror and friend discussing the trial in advance saying Trump is going to be guilty. I think you should buy a horse and poke your eyes out.

 

[meaner gene]

And now there's a thread about some juror and friend discussing the trial in advance saying Trump is going to be guilty. I think you should buy a horse and poke your eyes out.

The problem with that story is, it didn't come out until well after the jury reached their verdict, which they did quite quickly. Therefore there was no influence upon the jury because of it.

 

[Kilroy2]

Try not to cry too hard when the SCOTUS overturns them, kid.

This is a felony conviction in a court proceeding in New York with a jury.

This is a blow for justice and shows that anyone who commits a crime will face trial and can be found guilty.


No man is above the law

yet the republicans want to push that Trump is above the law

SCOTUS will duck and hide. They do not want to put Trump above the law.
It was a jury verdict. Also this gets rid of Trump.

Yeah they can appeal but it will take forever.


political appointees of Trump should recluse themselves.

 

[Rambunctious]

convicted of 34 felonies. If your curious about what they are then look it up.

Donald Trumpâs felony conviction means he canât hold office in Utah â but can still run for president

Convicted felons can't hold elected office in Utah, but that likely won't impact Donald Trump's place on the November ballot. Last week, a jury convicted the former president on 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to cover up his affair with an adult film actress.

www.sltrib.com

Just tell us one of the 34...

 

[GLASNOST]

When should Trump be sentenced?

"When"? The day after Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld have been tried, convicted, and served 75 years of prison time for their crimes in Irak.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

So you're in the bubble it seems. You should try this thing called "objectivity", or just attempt to explain how anything in the trial was normal or of legal precedent.

You can spell the word, even if you don't really understand its meaning. The trial was factual, error free, a jury found Trump guilty, which means he is now a felon.

 

[Orangecat]

political appointees of Trump should recluse themselves.

Like this brown recluse spider?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

The trial wasn't normal from the standpoint of the parties involved. But the law was followed,

There’s no precedent of Trumps 2016-17 issues being elevated to a felony without a second crime identified. That’s just a fact

 

[Mr. Friscus]

You can spell the word, even if you don't really understand its meaning. The trial was factual, error free, a jury found Trump guilty, which means he is now a felon.

Hope you get out of that bubble you’re in. Most outside of it see it as a political trial

 

[Mr. Friscus]

No man is above the law

What law did he even break?

Don’t just recite what he was charged with, explain it. There was no hush money.

 

[meaner gene]

There’s no precedent of Trumps 2016-17 issues being elevated to a felony without a second crime identified. That’s just a fact

The secondary crimes were identified, and given to the defense. There was a federal, and two state crimes that were violated.

with the requirement: when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit
another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof