• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Final jurors seated for Trump’s hush money case, with opening statements set for Monday

I suspect some of these instances are intentional ignorance.
Even the left cringed when this (supposed) case was brought and then really cringed when they found out it would be the first to make it to trial. But as the left ALWAYS does, they shifted those goal posts in unison.
 
So when we look at that ruling by Judge Merchan (and on the pages referenced), he cites a litany of cases in which the accused had either pled guilty to, or had been convicted of, "another crime."

Trump never was convicted of, not even charged with, "another crime."

Merchan argues that the conviction of Cohen is sufficient to show that Trump intended to either to commit or conceal that other crime.

The ruling is not even on point for New York law.

And federal campaign finance law works differently whether one is a candidate or a donor. Cohen's conviction is irrelevant.
Actually, the cases are on point.

BUT, let me, for the sake of argument only, concede that Judge Merchan has the law wrong on the federal election campaign issue....nevertheless his order is still the controlling order in this case. His ruling will be the basis for the final jury instructions - thus, the jury will be told that a federal campaign violation CAN support a Section 175.10 conviction. As such, Trump's only chance to reverse it is by appeal....first through the NY court system and, if they dont change it, to TRY to appeal to the SCOTUS. So....if convicted....Trump is looking at 2 to 3 years of appeals. Meanwhile his conviction stands.

MOREOVER, you seem to forget that in addition to the federal election campaign violation, there are two OTHER "other crimes":

(1) Violation of NY campaign laws; and
(2) Violation of NY income tax law.

Again, the prosecutors don't have to prove that Trump actually violated NY campaign laws OR violated NY income tax law....they just have to prove that Trump INTENDED to violate NY campaign laws OR INTENDED to violate NY income tax laws.

Based on the opening arguments that were reported on the news, prosecutors are still pursuing those as well --- especially (2) the NY income tax law angle.
 
Last edited:
Even the left cringed when this (supposed) case was brought and then really cringed when they found out it would be the first to make it to trial. But as the left ALWAYS does, they shifted those goal posts in unison.
Getting desperate? Sounded like Trump was pretty damn worried on Truth Social yesterday. 🤣
 
Use the legal system to attack him. That's what Bragg ran on. And Fani Willis too.
And more blatantly and openly than anyone even or ever dreamed - Colangelo. If it wasn't so incredibly disturbing, it would be hysterical.
 
And more blatantly and openly than anyone even or ever dreamed - Colangelo. If it wasn't so incredibly disturbing, it would be hysterical.
Was it more or less blatant than Trump running in 2016 to "Lock Her Up!!"

Just want to know so I can adjust my blatant-o-meter.
 
@Captian Mars posted this on another thread. Perhaps it will help clarify the case for those who are unsure what it's about......of course they would have to actually read it.

Manhattan Election Interference

STATEMENT OF FACTS IND-71543-23
1. The defendant DONALD J. TRUMP repeatedly and fraudulently falsified New York business records to conceal criminal conduct that hid damaging information from the voting public during the 2016 presidential election.
2. From August 2015 to December 2017, the Defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress its publication and benefit the Defendant’s electoral prospects. In order to execute the unlawful scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of various entities in New York. The participants also took steps that mischaracterized, for tax purposes, the true nature of the payments made in furtherance of the scheme.
3. One component of this scheme was that, at the Defendant’s request, a lawyer who then worked for the Trump Organization as Special Counsel to Defendant (“Lawyer A”), covertly paid $130,000 to an adult film actress shortly before the election to prevent her from publicizing a sexual encounter with the Defendant. Lawyer A made the $130,000 payment through a shell corporation he set up and funded at a bank in Manhattan. This payment was illegal, and Lawyer A has since pleaded guilty to making an illegal campaign contribution and served time in prison. Further, false entries were made in New York business records to effectuate this payment, separate and apart from the New York business records used to conceal the payment
 
And more blatantly and openly than anyone even or ever dreamed - Colangelo. If it wasn't so incredibly disturbing, it would be hysterical.
You poo poo this trial but when the fat lady sings there will be several felony convictions and Trump will be sentenced to prison.
 
Damn. I wish this was not the first case. This is chicken feed compared to the others.

This one is more like "sleazy asshole gets sleazy asshole lawyer to make sure that sleazy tabloid story and fine upstanding porn star STFU"

I do believe crimes were committed by aforementioned sleazy asshole in this case- but I am so much more concerned about the other cases. .
 
You poo poo this trial but when the fat lady sings there will be several felony convictions and Trump will be sentenced to prison.
It's absolutely possible Trump will be found guilty in this New York trial. No one doubts that possibility! If so, it will be appealed but of course, that will be a quiet story long after the election - unless Trump wins the election.
 
Damn. I wish this was not the first case. This is chicken feed compared to the others.

This one is more like "sleazy asshole gets sleazy asshole lawyer to make sure that sleazy tabloid story and fine upstanding porn star STFU"

I do believe crimes were committed by aforementioned sleazy asshole in this case- but I am so much more concerned about the other cases. .

This NY case wouldn't be "chicken feed" if brought against anyone else. I mean, imagine if YOU were charged with these crimes. Do you think they'd be "chicken feed" then?

I'd guess not....but, I assume you're a "normal" generally law abiding citizen.

So, you're hit the nail on the head....they are "chicken feed" ONLY IN COMPARISON to the other charges against Trump.

But what is that really saying??

It says, I think, Trump is not "normal." He has a distain for law generally and he's not just willing to step over lines you and I would not step over....but to STRIDE over them by a large margin and often.

He does so in a way that suggests that he doesn't even acknowledge or recognize ANY lines - as a business person, as a candidate, or as an office holder. To him, it seems, laws are for other people, not him.

That's very reminiscent of the "divine right" of kings/queens and dictators -- something I thought was rejected in 1776 or,, at a minimum, when the US Constitution was ratified in 1788 (taking effect in 1789).

Is that who we want in the WH??
 
Last edited:
It's absolutely possible Trump will be found guilty in this New York trial. No one doubts that possibility! If so, it will be appealed but of course, that will be a quiet story long after the election - unless Trump wins the election.
Trump's election cannot undo a NY state law conviction. The pardon power does not extend to state convictions.
 
Trump's election cannot undo a NY state law conviction. The pardon power does not extend to state convictions.
That's not what I was referring to. I meant if Trump wins the election, the (potential) appeal will be a big story rather than a quiet story.
 
That's not what I was referring to. I meant if Trump wins the election, the (potential) appeal will be a big story rather than a quiet story.
Thanks for clarifying.

But, if - as you concede - Trump might be convicted in this NY case.

And he still wins the election.

Do you want a POTUS being "distracted" by his appeal of state felony charges?

As you note, it won't be "quiet" --

And what if he LOSES the appeal and, therefore, is subject to the execution of his sentence....whatever it may be?
 
That's not what I was referring to. I meant if Trump wins the election, the (potential) appeal will be a big story rather than a quiet story.
The appeal will be a big story regardless.
 
Actually, the cases are on point.

Don't see how a prosecutions that relate to other convictions are on point to a prosecution which lacks such a conviction.

But so be it.
BUT, let me, for the sake of argument only, concede that Judge Merchan has the law wrong on the federal election campaign issue....nevertheless his order is still the controlling order in this case. His ruling will be the basis for the final jury instructions - thus, the jury will be told that a federal campaign violation CAN support a Section 175.10 conviction.
As such, Trump's only chance to reverse it is by appeal....first through the NY court system and, if they dont change it, to TRY to appeal to the SCOTUS. So....if convicted....Trump is looking at 2 to 3 years of appeals. Meanwhile his conviction stands.

MOREOVER, you seem to forget that in addition to the federal election campaign violation, there are two OTHER "other crimes":

(1) Violation of NY campaign laws; and
(2) Violation of NY income tax law.

Again, the prosecutors don't have to prove that Trump actually violated NY campaign laws OR violated NY income tax law....they just have to prove that Trump INTENDED to violate NY campaign laws OR INTENDED to violate NY income tax laws.

Based on the opening arguments that were reported on the news, prosecutors are still pursuing those as well --- especially (2) the NY income tax law angle.

Trump is not charged with either NY state election law or tax crimes.

I guess Bragg can just make it all up as he goes along.

I have no real doubt that Trump will be convicted.
I also have no doubt that the conviction will be thrown out after an appeal that will last take a couple of years.

I also have no doubt that when it is thrown out, the present cheerleaders will not be particularly upset about it.

After all, the political issue here is to what extent the trial influences the 2024 election.
 
That's not what I was referring to. I meant if Trump wins the election, the (potential) appeal will be a big story rather than a quiet story.

If he wins the election, it will be a big story because he is thr president and so it will be a story.

As Note 839 suggests, the response by his political opponents will seek to make political hay of it.

If he loses and is convicted? Idle curiosity because, again, the prosecution is about influencing the 2924 election/ his presidency.
 
@Captian Mars posted this on another thread. Perhaps it will help clarify the case for those who are unsure what it's about......of course they would have to actually read it.

Manhattan Election Interference

STATEMENT OF FACTS IND-71543-23

Perhaps Mr. Bragg should have let the Grand Jury consider these "Statement of Facts..."
 
I also have no doubt that the conviction will be thrown out after an appeal that will last take a couple of years.

I also have no doubt that when it is thrown out, the present cheerleaders will not be particularly upset about it.

After all, the political issue here is to what extent the trial influences the 2024 election.
Seems a theme here this AM. Must have been the story line on Fox last night.
 
Is that a requirement in order for the elevation to felony status to be valid?

It has to be another crime.
People are arguing here that there is no need to charge somebody with at least intending to commit the other crime.


Which is nonsense.
 
Seems a theme here this AM. Must have been the story line on Fox last night.

Shrug.
I said the guy would get convicted.
Don't know why you wouldn't accept 'yes' for an answer.
 
Don't see how a prosecutions that relate to other convictions are on point to a prosecution which lacks such a conviction.

But so be it.



Trump is not charged with either NY state election law or tax crimes.

I guess Bragg can just make it all up as he goes along.

I have no real doubt that Trump will be convicted.
I also have no doubt that the conviction will be thrown out after an appeal that will last take a couple of years.

I also have no doubt that when it is thrown out, the present cheerleaders will not be particularly upset about it.

After all, the political issue here is to what extent the trial influences the 2024 election.
He doesn't HAVE to separately charge or prove that Trump *actually* committed the NY state election law violation OR the NY state income tax violation.

Once again, it does not matter whether Trump was actually able to violate NY state election laws OR NY state income tax laws.

It only matters - for purposes of 175.10 - whether TRUMP INTENDED to violate those other state laws or - and get this - OR that Trump aided or concealed such crimes....and, your mind will be blown - OR aided or concealed such other crimes when committed by other people.

It's a trifecta of horror for Trump.

You really, really should read MORE of Judge Merchan's order denying Trump's motion to dismiss.

And you should read 175.10.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom