Yale Law Professor EXPOSES the UNCONSTITUTIONAL Trial Against TRUMP....

[Hollie]

I'm still not clear on how a misdemeanor can become a felony

~S~

It's the alternate reality of leftist ideology where Soros backed, DIE hire DA's can ignore the statute of limitations for misdemeanors.

 

[Lisa558]

Begging the question

Begging the question

Again, begging the question.

Making assertions is not the same thing as supporting those assertions.

I've taken the time to explain my reasoning to you. I've supported that reasoning both by giving links and appealing to actual logic.

If you're only comeback is "because I said so", that's fine by me. It just tells me you don't have a real comeback.

We will circle back to this after the verdict is reversed for:

1. Prosecutorial misconduct
2. Unconstitutional gag order
3. Biased judge actively seeking a conviction
4. Underlying crime(s) not identified until jury instructions
5. Novel “Chinese menu approach” definition of “unanimous”
6. Failure to provide defendant with impartial jury

ANY one of these is grounds for an appeal, and reversal.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Your referring case precedent? To whom?

Anyway, you seem to assume that your recent about other crimes somehow immunizes this charade from judicial review.

It doesn’t. That’s not how the law works, dumbo.

The “other” crime doesn’t have to be proved (meaning the intent to commit another crime) in a burglary case. Gee. You seem to imagine this is translate babble to the intent to commit or conceal some “other” crime in a falsification of business records case.

Your ignorance is astounding.

It will absolutely be one of the bigger points on the appeals.

Be that as it may, someday the truth is likely to be crammed down your dumbass throat.

No. Of course it will be subject to appeal.

No. This is the precedent, not your strawman.

People v. Taveras, 12 N.Y.3d 21 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read People v. Taveras, 12 N.Y.3d 21, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

"We also reject defendant's contention that a separate crime automatically becomes a material element of falsifying business records in the first degree whenever the People rely on the "intent to conceal" prong of that statute on the theory that concealment, as opposed to an intent to commit another crime or aid in the commission thereof, presupposes a prior completed crime. Read as a whole, it is clear that falsifying business records in the second degree is elevated to a first-degree offense on the basis of an enhanced intent requirement — "an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof" — not any additional actus reus element"

 

[BackAgain]

No. Of course it will be subject to appeal.

No. This is the precedent, not your strawman.

People v. Taveras, 12 N.Y.3d 21 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read People v. Taveras, 12 N.Y.3d 21, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

"We also reject defendant's contention that a separate crime automatically becomes a material element of falsifying business records in the first degree whenever the People rely on the "intent to conceal" prong of that statute on the theory that concealment, as opposed to an intent to commit another crime or aid in the commission thereof, presupposes a prior completed crime. Read as a whole, it is clear that falsifying business records in the second degree is elevated to a first-degree offense on the basis of an enhanced intent requirement — "an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof" — not any additional actus reus element"

That’s not clear. And it is also more than questionable.

 

[Catsnmeters]

That’s not clear. And it is also more than questionable.

How the hell can judicial precedent be questionable? It's what judges are compelled to follow.

You do realize Merchan can't create or change law, right? He can only follow the law. He was bound to follow precedents like the one I linked.

If you want to change the law, then you will need to turn to the legislature.

The precedent itself? It's been used several times over many years. It's established.

It is clear.

What part don't you understand?

I will explain it.

 

[hadit]

When it is based on predicate crimes.

It isn't a secret. It's in the law.

Had you thought to maybe check it out instead of proclaiming your not sure how it works?

My position on this the whole time has been that what they were attempting to do may be legal, may satisfy a law nerd's examining of the law, BUT to the lay person who doesn't have an irrational, visceral hatred for TRUMP! and doesn't care what happens as long as they get him on something, this whole thing just looks like political persecution and weaponizing the law to go after the opposition candidate, and that's most likely why TRUMP! is still doing so well in the polls.

 

[BackAgain]

How the hell can judicial precedent be questionable?

What a moronic question. Seriously, you’re a moron.

Think (possibly for the first time in your life). Consider Roe v. Wade. Long standing PRECEDENT and yet it’s been reversed.

Consider Plessy v. Ferguson. Also a long standing precedent. Gratifyingly, it, too, was overturned on appeal.

It's what judges are compelled to follow.

Until and unless the precedent gets overruled, you moron.

You do realize Merchan can't create or change law, right?

I don’t recall saying he could. But that doesn’t mean that the conviction can’t fall.

He can only follow the law.

If only that were true.

He was bound to follow precedents like the one I linked.

So what? That doesn’t mean that the case cannot be reversed based on the invalidity of that case law.

If you want to change the law, then you will need to turn to the legislature.

Also false. The Court of Appeals in NY can overturn the “precedent” and on that basis vacate this bullshit conviction. Also, so can SCOTUS. And since the precedent defies logic when it comes to due process, I expect that the SCOTUS would easily be able to reach it on a number of grounds.

The precedent itself? It's been used several times over many years. It's established.

Irrelevant to this discussion. See the foregoing responses.

It is clear.

It is established. But that doesn’t make it right. No more than was Plessy v. Ferguson.

What part don't you understand?

I’m the one between the two of us who does understand. Maybe you need a map?

I will explain it.

I just explained it to you.

Now sit down child.

 

[San Souci]

This Yale law professor walks you though the supposed "crime" that Liberals say he committed. He says it was "unconstitutional" and lays out his case. Listen to the professor, hear what he has to say.

Watched the whole thing. Just clarified what I already knew. This was a Political Hit Job. Fatass Pig Bragg and Punk PencilNeck Merchon should be in prison.

 

[Catsnmeters]

What a moronic question. Seriously, you’re a moron.

Think (possibly for the first time in your life). Consider Roe v. Wade. Long standing PRECEDENT and yet it’s been reversed.

Consider Plessy v. Ferguson. Also a long standing precedent. Gratifyingly, it, too, was overturned on appeal.

Yet Merchan has to base his ruling in judicial precedent. These precedents were discussed with Trump's team. They knew the precedents going in.

I suppose SCOTUS could overturn it but why? Why now? This is an old law. Been used numerous times. Why is Trump special?

Until and unless the precedent gets overruled, you moron.

Sure, maybe it will but on what grounds?

I don’t recall saying he could. But that doesn’t mean that the conviction can’t fall.

I didn't mean to imply it couldn't fail.

My point is nothing Merchan did was in appropriate. If it gets overturned then I guess a lot of people who falsified business records to cover other crimes will be happy.

If only that were true.

If it you knew a judges role in these types of cases.

So what? That doesn’t mean that the case cannot be reversed based on the invalidity of that case law.

Sure it can. I just don't see why it would.

You have a reason? List it.

Also false. The Court of Appeals in NY can overturn the “precedent” and on that basis vacate this bullshit conviction. Also, so can SCOTUS. And since the precedent defies logic when it comes to due process, I expect that the SCOTUS would easily be able to reach it on a number of grounds.

I still do not remember claiming it could not be overturned.

Can you show me that?

Irrelevant to this discussion. See the foregoing responses.

It is established. But that doesn’t make it right. No more than was Plessy v. Ferguson.

Correct. Maybe SCOTUS will overturn it.

Maybe SCOTUS will overturn any case of a convicted felon.

So what?

I’m the one between the two of us who does understand. Maybe you need a map?

I just explained it to you.

Now sit down child.

Your responses do nothing to negate the precedent used.

I suspect you will be disappointed but who knows? If it is overturned I will accept that decision.

In the interim, Trump is a sexual assaulter, fraudster and convicted felon.

 

[BackAgain]

Yet Merchan has to base his ruling in judicial precedent. These precedents were discussed with Trump's team. They knew the precedents going in.

I suppose SCOTUS could overturn it but why? Why now? This is an old law. Been used numerous times. Why is Trump special?

Because maybe the U.S. Supreme Court values justice more than the NY Court of Appeals. ((Gasp!))

Hey. Keep on the lookout. Time will.

Tell.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Because maybe the U.S. Supreme Court values justice more than the NY Court of Appeals. ((Gasp!))

Hey. Keep on the lookout. Time will.

Tell.

What's the injustice?

 

[Lisa558]

Yet Merchan has to base his ruling in judicial precedent. These precedents were discussed with Trump's team. They knew the precedents going in.

I suppose SCOTUS could overturn it but why? Why now? This is an old law. Been used numerous times. Why is Trump special?



Sure, maybe it will but on what grounds?



I didn't mean to imply it couldn't fail.

My point is nothing Merchan did was in appropriate. If it gets overturned then I guess a lot of people who falsified business records to cover other crimes will be happy.



If it you knew a judges role in these types of cases.



Sure it can. I just don't see why it would.

You have a reason? List it.



I still do not remember claiming it could not be overturned.

Can you show me that?



Correct. Maybe SCOTUS will overturn it.

Maybe SCOTUS will overturn any case of a convicted felon.

So what?


Your responses do nothing to negate the precedent used.

I suspect you will be disappointed but who knows? If it is overturned I will accept that decision.

In the interim, Trump is a sexual assaulter, fraudster and convicted felon.

What precedent? When has a misdemeanor long expired (which wasn’t even a misdemeanor, since paying hush money is not illegal) ever been turned into 34 felony accounts due to an intent to commit “an underlying crime” - never even named in the indictment, and then presented as a possibility of “options” to the jury - and then allowing the jury to pick and choose which option they think he did?

I’ll wait.

 

[Lisa558]

What's the injustice?

1) Prosecutorial misconduct in the effort to interfere with an election, 2) robbing Trump of his constituional right to know what he’s being charged with, 3) a violation of his first amendment rights, 4) and failing to provide Trump with an impartial jury (and judge).

 

[surada]

We will circle back to this after the verdict is reversed for:

1. Prosecutorial misconduct
2. Unconstitutional gag order
3. Biased judge actively seeking a conviction
4. Underlying crime(s) not identified until jury instructions
5. Novel “Chinese menu approach” definition of “unanimous”
6. Failure to provide defendant with impartial jury

ANY one of these is grounds for an appeal, and reversal.

The gag order is appropriate. Trump was trying to incite mob violence and disrupt court proceedings.

 

[surada]

Trump and his lawyers chose half the jurors.

 

[Catsnmeters]

What precedent?

Their are several precedents in this article.

The Broad Scope of “Intent to Defraud” in the New York Crime of Falsifying Business Records

"While there are other legal hurdles for the Manhattan DA to cross in the indictment of the former president, this element of the relevant offenses poses no obstacle..."

www.justsecurity.org

When has a misdemeanor long expired (which wasn’t even a misdemeanor, since paying hush money is not illegal)

He wasn't charged with a misdemeanor, he was charged with a felony, so the statute of limitations isn't applicable as a misdemeanor.

You are correct. Paying hush money is not illegal. Thankfully Trump was not charged with paying hush money.

ever been turned into 34 felony accounts due to an intent to commit “an underlying crime” -

New York law 175.1 has been used many times to escalate falsifying business records from a misdemeanor to a felony based on predicate crimes. See above and below case example(s).

never even named in the indictment,

He wasn't under indictment for the predicate crimes, why would they be in the indictment?

Trump lied to you when he stated he didn't know the crimes.

Trump's team has known the predicate crimes since at least February.

and then presented as a possibility of “options” to the jury - and then allowing the jury to pick and choose which option they think he did?

Yes. That precedent is the People vs Taveras.

People v. Taveras, 12 N.Y.3d 21 | Casetext Search + Citator

Read People v. Taveras, 12 N.Y.3d 21, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database

casetext.com

"We...reject defendant's contention that a separate crime automatically becomes a material element of falsifying business records in the first degree whenever the People rely on the “intent to conceal” prong of that statute on the theory that concealment, as opposed to an intent to commit another crime or aid in the commission thereof, presupposes a prior completed crime. Read as a whole, it is clear that falsifying business records in the second degree is elevated to a first-degree offense on the basis of an enhanced intent requirement—“an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof”—not any additional actus reus element.

I’ll wait.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

 

[Catsnmeters]

1) Prosecutorial misconduct in the effort to interfere with an election,

What misconduct?

2) robbing Trump of his constituional right to know what he’s being charged with,

He knew what he was being charged with. It's in the charging documents. It's in the indictment. He has known for months before the trial started.

34 counts of falsifying business records.

3) a violation of his first amendment rights,

Gag orders have used by the courts for decades. They are not unconstitutional.

4) and failing to provide Trump with an impartial jury (and judge).

Trump got the same process everyone else does. How did they fail?

 

[Lisa558]

What misconduct?

Going after Trump for an expired misdemeanor in order to hurt his campaign.

He knew what he was being charged with. It's in the charging documents. It's in the indictment. He has known for months before the trial started.

34 counts of falsifying business records.

Nope. Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor. And besides, it’s questionable if what he did was falsifying in the first place: It was classed as Legal Expenses, which is what it was.

Gag orders have used by the courts for decades. They are not unconstitutional.

They are if they are used to silence the defendant and his attorneys, and allow the convicted perjurer who’s out to “get Trump” and the prosecution attorneys to blab whenever and wherever they want.

Trump got the same process everyone else does. How did they fail?

I just outlined why he did NOT. Who else had a misdemeanor lomg expired resurrected by claiming “underlying crime” and never naming the mysterious “underlying crime” in the indictment?

 

[BackAgain]

What's the injustice?

You’re very slow.

Were you bounced like a basketball at birth?

It is an injustice to be accused of a crime that doesn’t even exist.

 

[Catsnmeters]

Going after Trump for an expired misdemeanor in order to hurt his campaign.

Trump broke the law.

It wasn't expired.

It was a felony.

Nope. Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor. And besides, it’s questionable if what he did was falsifying in the first place: It was classed as Legal Expenses, which is what it was.

No. It was escalated to felony. I linked the the precedent.

Did you not understand it?

They are if they are used to silence the defendant and his attorneys, and allow the convicted perjurer who’s out to “get Trump” and the prosecution attorneys to blab whenever and wherever they want.

Nobody was silenced who had relevant testimony.

I just outlined why he did NOT. Who else had a misdemeanor lomg expired resurrected by claiming “underlying crime” and never naming the mysterious “underlying crime” in the indictment?

He wasn't charged with the underlying crimes. Why would they be in the indictment.

Do you know what the indictment is for?

It is to show what Trump was indicted for, not predicate crimes.

Trump and his team knew about the predicate crimes as far back as February.

Trump lied to when he said he didn't know them.

How can you duped by Trump so easily?