For you idiots, the alleged crimes!

Into the Night said:
False equivalence fallacy. Breaking the law is not following the law. The judge has now broken the law several times. So has the prosecutor. The instructions are themselves illegal.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call the instructions "illegal" but rather disingenuous. They are designed to try to force a particular conclusion rather than give the jury a clear understanding of the elements of the crime to weigh the evidence against.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
I never said you were my friend.

What Merchan did is right out of a third world banana republic that has no rule of law. It is repugnant and contrary to 240 years of jurisprudence and a thousand years of common law.
Click to expand...
What are you claiming he did wrong?
 
Uncensored2008 said:
That is precisely what he posted and what you third world, banana republic thugs support.

The only law in the savage world of you Stalinist extremists is "obey the party without question."

Tell me, do you support loyalty oaths and summary executions? Party monitors patrolling the streets demanding oaths of loyalty by passers by, and shooting them if they resist in anyway?

You know, just like those exactly like you did in Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia, Maoist China, the Khmer Rouge, etc.
Click to expand...
Nope. That’s not what he posted, but, then again, you’re stupid.
 
Yakuda said:
What was the supposed intent?
Click to expand...
Hiding a campaign expense as a business expense.

You realize trump could have paid out of his own money, and probably had a good defense. he just wanted that business expense tax deduction so much that he was willing to commit a felony for it.

Did you see how he stole $7 for his son's Boy Scouts membership. It is just the type of person he is.
 
QP! said:
Why is that. ^^^

Why does the Prosecutor not need to say 'he was there to murder' or 'there to rob', 'there to rape or kidnap', to get the more serious felony charge?

The answer to that is because then the Defense would ALWAYS be able to create doubt. If the Prosecutor says 'he was there to rob' the defense would say 'they do not know that... he may have been their to murder... and he was not charged with that so he is not guilty'.

And it would give the criminal the ultimate defense. So the law INSTEAD says a jury can infer, if they believe it beyond a reasonable doubt, that he was there to do one of those serious crimes and thus elevate the Trespass to a felony.

You magats do not have to like that is how the law works (now because Trump is caught with it) but it is how it has ALWAYS worked.
Click to expand...

More uneducated word salad. You should remind yourself of an old adage: better to keep silent and thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
 
Walt said:
Hiding a campaign expense as a business expense.

You realize trump could have paid out of his own money, and probably had a good defense. he just wanted that business expense tax deduction so much that he was willing to commit a felony for it.

Did you see how he stole $7 for his son's Boy Scouts membership. It is just the type of person he is.
Click to expand...
You mean paying lying cohen for legal services?
 
Jarod said:
The Prosecutor needs to say just what they did in this case... During closing explain how the evidence shows intent to commit or conceal other crimes. The other crime does not have to be proven because it is simply intent, it can be any other crime, and the other crimes do not even need to be named (but doing so would help)

The attempt to conceal or commit the other crime becomes an element of the charged crime.
Click to expand...

Yet Bragg failed to do this. In fact, they didn't even try. Merchan ran cover for them and even gave the jury a list of "possible" crimes that "may have" been committed and that they didn't need to all agree on what crimes they "felt" "might have" been committed as long as they all agreed something had been committed.

It's the dumbest thing ever to occur in a court. It will be laughed out and perhaps Merchan will be censured for his unconstitutional and corrupted rulings.
 
Jarod said:
You are part of the crew who fails to understand that Trump is only being charged with NY Statutes as indicted.
Click to expand...

That is a dumb lie. Apparently, you know nothing about how Bragg is trying to rig this into a felony over a FEDERAL election crime. One that the FEC stated did not happen.
 
Walt said:
The crime is an action. The action in this case is falsifying business records. In another case it might be shooting someone.
Click to expand...

How were they falsified? The prosecution didn't even bother to tell anyone what the "correct" accounting entry should have been.

How does one account for LEGAL FEES in a business?

Secondly, how did it have anything to do with Trump. No evidence was provided showing Trump intervening with his accountant saying "no, no, no we have to hide this as legal expenses"! In fact, just the opposite was proven in court: his accountant stated that it had been his decision alone.

How do you reconcile that with the idiotic claim records were falsified in some criminal conspiracy? It's lunacy.

Lastly, paying off Daniels was not a crime. The NDA was not a crime. Stating that it is a crime to influence the public in a campaign is a moronic statement in that is exactly what ALL campaigns do in order to convince voters to vote for them.

If what Bragg said was reality, then we have to arrest all those who declared the Biden laptop as being Russian disinformation for the massive influence that had. Not to mention the efforts to censure any reference of it in social media accounts.

Be smarter, assuming that is even possible.
 
Jarod said:
No, you do not have to have committed the underlying crime, you have to have attempted to commit or attempted to conceal the underlying crime.
Click to expand...

Yet, there was no crime, they never proved with evidence there was a crime and they never attempted to prove there was intent.

What they had was a convicted perjurer who had a vendetta with Trump because he was butt hurt and even lied under oath in this case.

Look up suborned perjury. That is the crime Bragg committed by putting a liar on the stand KNOWING they had been lied to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top