Yakuda
Verified User
Not as dumb as you. That's count one asshole.
You asked if the words were there and I showed that they were. You can lick my ass now dipshit.
There is no First Amendment right to overturn an election
- Thread starter Guno צְבִי
- Start date
Not as dumb as you. That's count one asshole.
You asked if the words were there and I showed that they were. You can lick my ass now dipshit.
Tinkerpeach
New member
Not quite sure he will be acquitted in his trial but I am pretty sure that even if convicted it will be overturned on appeal or eventually by the Supreme Court.
It all depends on the jury Trump ends up with and the judges in his multiple cases.
You know as well as I do that justice is not evenly distributed across America.
That is why we have the appeal process after all.
My guess would be that Trump walks on the hush money New York case, that's not really illegal.
He walks on Washington case involving the espionage act because it doesn't really apply here although the six charges of keeping documents could go either way.
He may get nailed on those depending on how they frame their argument and whether Trump had a right and how he exercised that right to declassify them and whether or not they are considered his property. If he is convicted of those six charges that definitely goes to the Supreme Court for clarification.
I think he gets nailed on the Florida case of trying to delete evidence after a subpoena.
The upcoming Georgia case will be up to what type of jury Trump gets. While his words can seem damning to him they are not illegal, they haven't filed the case yet so I don't know what the exact charges are.
The Florida case more than likely won't result in any jail time since the records were never actually deleted. The worse case scenario there for Trump would be a massive fine.
Still though, that case is a he said she said type of thing.
Last edited:
Ill try to make this simple for even the likes of you.
When I was a new beginner prosecutor, when I charged someone with DUI, the document only read...
"John Smith, On (Date) did operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or other controlled substances to the extent that his normal facilities were impaired or with a Blood Alcohol level of 0.08 or higher."
I could have written, that "John Smith, on (date) went to a bar with his mistress and drank 12 shots of Wild Turkey, then danced with a different woman for 15 min's and proceeded to operate a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or other controlled substances to the extent that his normal facilities were impaired or with a Blood Alcohol level of 0.08 or higher."
In court I would not have to prove anything about the mistress or how many shots he took or if he danced or not.
Sometimes Prosecutors add the information because they want the charges better explained early on, but it does not mean those things must be proven for a conviction.
Look at the crimes listed and show me where lied knowingly is an element? Dumbshit.
THey are not elements of a crime, but I guess that is too complex for MAGA. Thats why you are MAGA, you do not understand complex things.
Your certainly betrays your simplicity.
No, its one of the crimes Trump is accused of violating, what a Prosecutor is required to prove.
Yakuda
Verified User
Count one: 18 U.S.C. § 371
(Conspiracy to Defraud the United States)
Do you have any fucking clue what defraud means you donkey fucking idiot.
I asked if it was an element of the crime, we were discussing if Smith had to prove Trump knew he was lying... You said he did, I pointed out how wrong you were.
Tinkerpeach
New member
It means a group of activities that can include lying, deceit, trickery. In the law of conspiracy, it can mean telling someone to or planning with someone to deceive, trick or lie.
It does not require a knowing lie.
hey mcTard - the term "knowingly false claims" is used dozens of times in the indictment
can't you fucking read?
So what?
Yakuda
Verified User
However count one says trump knowingly did.
There are three crimes, I notice you did not post the wording or elements of the crime, like I did. The crime does not include a requirement of knowingly lying,
Ok, and I explained about the difference between what is said in the indictment and what has to be proven for a guilty verdict.
derp derp
I can see why you are MAGA, you can understand anything but very simple concepts.