GUILTY NY - Ex-President Donald Trump, charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023, Trial 25 Mar 2024 #4

[Cedars]

This is only the first salvo from President Biden where he will use this conviction as a campaign tool. JMO.

I do not agree it was a 'salvo'. He specifically addressed the claim that the trial was "rigged", and said that was an untrue and reckless claim. He didn't say anything about who people should vote for.

JMO

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Color me shocked. Not.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/31/politics/fact-check-trump-post-conviction-speech/index.html

 

[tlcya]

Color me shocked. Not.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/31/politics/fact-check-trump-post-conviction-speech/index.html

I would be surprised if anyone was. Just more of the same bloviation we are all accustomed to at this point.

 

[RANCH]

I do not agree it was a 'salvo'. He specifically addressed the claim that the trial was "rigged", and said that was an untrue and reckless claim. He didn't say anything about who people should vote for.

JMO

Probably a poor choice of words by me.

My point is that this is not the last time we will hear from President Biden on this conviction. JMO.

 

[tlcya]

Probably a poor choice of words by me.

My point is that this is not the last time we will hear from President Biden on this conviction. JMO.

I think we can all agree that this is not the last time we will hear from either candidate about this conviction. By election time we will all be sick to death of hearing about it. I am exhausted just from "watching" this trial, now I have to hear about it from both sides of the aisle for the next - forever - sigh.

Thanks to all my fellow Websleuths, no matter your viewpoints, for helping to keep this thread open by being civil as we watched this one play out.

 

[MollyHarps]

I just think Trumps comments are such a dangerous precedent.

Whose going to put themselves forward to be jury members on these big court cases when a former president can come out calling you corrupt.

Donald has never once come out and flatly denied the charges against him which IMO says a lot.

Even In his press conference he quickly diverted the subject to immigration

 

[Izzylizzy]

bolded
i mean this respectively, but this is why it’s hard to have discourse about an already inflammatory figure and litigation. people generally don’t understand the nuance between state and federal scopes of action.

the judge in trump’s trial did include potential violations of federal election law as part of the jury instructions. this was to provide context on why the falsified business records could be seen as attempts to conceal another crime. HOWEVER!!! the conviction was primarily based on new york state laws concerning falsifying business records, which required proving intent to defraud, not necessarily proving a specific violation of federal election law. think of it as a motivation, not a violation.

including the FEC law context in the instructions aimed to help jurors understand the potential motivations and implications behind the falsification. it’s to explain why the falsification may have happened. the jury's task was to decide if the falsifications were made with fraudulent intent, regardless of the FEC's stance on the legality of the payments themselves.

you may still think to argue — won’t it prejudice the jurors to give that information?

jury instructions often cover a range of potential legal violations to ensure the jury understands all possible legal contexts. this does not imply a predetermined outcome but encompasses comprehensive consideration of the case's nuances. it works in both the favor of both sides. the judge makes it very clear to only consider these crimes if there is substantial proof of the allegations. no different than any other instruction haha. the inclusion of federal election law context helps the jury understand the possible motivations behind the falsification but does not directly depend on a federal determination of legality.

Since the jury's conviction was based on a state law and not a federal law then there's no way Trump can eventually appeal his conviction to the SCOTUS?

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Since the jury's conviction was based on a state law and not a federal law then there's no way Trump can eventually appeal his conviction to the SCOTUS?

Sure he can. SCOTUS weighs in on state-level matters all the time. He was able to appeal his removal from the ballot in Colorado to SCOTUS.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Good question. From my quick internet search, it appears that sequestering juries has become rare because of practicalities like the extra expense and more disruption of jurors' lives. However, I too would expect that the jury would have been sequestered in such a big case, so I don't know either.

Pros and Cons of sequestering a jury.

Jury Sequestration: What is it and What's the Purpose? [2022]

Jury sequestration is rare, but judges may order it in sensational, high-profile criminal trials. Find out why.

versustexas.com

 

[Arkay]

Lucky for him, the felonies he's been convicted of rarely end up with jail time. His sentence may involve community service which usually has to be somewhat related to the charges. Although I'd love to see him cleaning toilets in Central Park, I think finally paying all the trades Trump stiffed during his reign of error would be a perfect starting point. My opinion as a bystander watching this trainwreck.

I have mixed emotions. I want him to have to pay for his crimes, but I fear the consequences to our nation should he be imprisoned, due to the violence of some of his supporters.

I agree with you that it is very unlikely that Trump will be incarcerated. All the pundits have been saying that it’s his first conviction and falsifying documents is a non-violent crime, so prison is very improbable, no matter who it is.

Yes to community service! If only!

Even if it’s not scrubbing toilets or raking leaves in Central Park. Handing out sandwiches to the needy would be fine. You have a good point though that it should be something that correlates to his crime.

JMO

 

[CrimeDawg123]

I have mixed emotions. I want him to have to pay for his crimes, but I fear the consequences to our nation should he be imprisoned.

I agree with you that it is very unlikely that Trump will be incarcerated. All the pundits have been saying that it’s his first conviction and falsifying documents is a non-violent crime, so prison is very improbable, no matter who it is.

Yes to community service! If only!

Even if it’s not scrubbing toilets or raking leaves in Central Park. Handing out sandwiches to the needy would be good. You have a good point though that it should be something that correlates to his crime.

JMO

He's got form for handing things out to those in need

Puerto Rico: Trump paper towel-throwing 'abominable'

Puerto Rico mayor says the visiting president was "insulting" to the island's hurricane-hit people.

www.bbc.com

 

[JennieM]

He's got form for handing things out to those in need

View attachment 507183

Puerto Rico: Trump paper towel-throwing 'abominable'

Puerto Rico mayor says the visiting president was "insulting" to the island's hurricane-hit people.

www.bbc.com

The mayor of Puerto Rico's capital called him "miscommunicator-in-chief”.

 

[Izzylizzy]

News conference where he took no questions lol. Fascist state because he has been tried and found guilty by a jury of his peers. His son calling the US a **** hole, because his father has been convicted. It's all ridiculous and dangerous.
He came very close to violating that gag order again, too.
He's fortunate if he is being offered a plea bargain.
IMO.

BBM:

Trump said a plea deal was offered before the trial ?
Because I've never heard of being offered a plea deal after you're convicted.



Trump's lawyer offered A.G.James a settlement before his 250 million financial fraud trial and James refused.
Fascinating how someone who claimed to be innocent and called/calls A.G. James every name in the book and it was all a "witch hunt" and politically motivated blah,blah wanted a plea deal, eh?

9-21-22

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/21/trump-company-and-family-members-sued-by-ny-ag-over-alleged-fraud-scheme-00058011

 

[maamager]

Sure he can. SCOTUS weighs in on state-level matters all the time. He was able to appeal his removal from the ballot in Colorado to SCOTUS.

Yes IzzyBlanche agreed! While it's generally true that a case like this would not naturally proceed SCOTUS but there's nothing typical about this man or this case... so I'm sure he'll fight like hell.

 

[Izzylizzy]

I have mixed emotions. I want him to have to pay for his crimes, but I fear the consequences to our nation should he be imprisoned, due to the violence of some of his supporters.

I agree with you that it is very unlikely that Trump will be incarcerated. All the pundits have been saying that it’s his first conviction and falsifying documents is a non-violent crime, so prison is very improbable, no matter who it is.

Yes to community service! If only!

Even if it’s not scrubbing toilets or raking leaves in Central Park. Handing out sandwiches to the needy would be fine. You have a good point though that it should be something that correlates to his crime.

JMO

It's sure going to be interesting seeing what the state asks Judge Merchan for.

My question is can most of his past civil suits be used against him by the state .?


Maybe not the E.J. Carroll but NY A.G James 250 million financial fraud case, the recent NY Trump Organization case and maybe even the "Trump University" fraud case where he settled for 25 million oh, and the NY 2.5 million fine for self-dealing from his charity ? lol

Definitely his gag order violations

Trump never apologies or shows remorse so if he speaks to Merchan God only knows what he'd spew.

 

[Izzylizzy]

Sure he can. SCOTUS weighs in on state-level matters all the time. He was able to appeal his removal from the ballot in Colorado to SCOTUS.

Thank you!

 

[acutename]

Since the jury's conviction was based on a state law and not a federal law then there's no way Trump can eventually appeal his conviction to the SCOTUS?

my guess is he would need to say his constitutional rights were violated- life, liberty pursuit of happiness; civil rights; due process, some constitutional right....some one in his camp has probably been working on this for awhile, IMO (guess). SCOTUS decides what cases they hear too, so they would need to decide to hear the case....

 

[Lilibet]

Probably a poor choice of words by me.

My point is that this is not the last time we will hear from President Biden on this conviction. JMO.

It will be interesting to see what questions are asked if the debate takes place as scheduled in June. Will the conviction be avoided by the moderator or faced head on? Will President Biden bring it up? Actually, I will be surprised if this debate takes place.
JMO

 

[Izzylizzy]

my guess is he would need to say his constitutional rights were violated- life, liberty pursuit of happiness; civil rights; due process, some constitutional right....some one in his camp has probably been working on this for awhile, IMO (guess). SCOTUS decides what cases they hear too, so they would need to decide to hear the case....

Looks like the "it's unconstitutional" Dershowitz or Turley could be getting themselves more cha-ching from Trump.

I find it fascinating yet extremely frightening how constitutional scholars and SCOTUS justices come to their opposing conclusions on what is constitutional or unconstitutional and Americans have to live with their decisions, until they don't.

 

[Lilibet]

Sure he can. SCOTUS weighs in on state-level matters all the time. He was able to appeal his removal from the ballot in Colorado to SCOTUS.

SCOTUS even weighs in on city issues. They recently heard a case regarding ticketing the homeless for sleeping outside in Grants Pass, in my part of Southern Oregon.

Johnson v. Grants Pass

The most important Supreme Court case about homelessness in 40+ years.

johnsonvgrantspass.com