Trump and Allies Assail Conviction With Faulty Claims

[Hume]

WHAT WAS SAID

“We weren’t allowed to use our election expert under any circumstances.”
— Mr. Trump in the news conference on Friday

False. Justice Merchan did not bar the election expert in question — Bradley A. Smith, the former chairman of the Federal Election Commission — from testifying, but did limit what he could say. Ultimately, Mr. Trump’s lawyers did not call upon Mr. Smith.

Trump and Allies Assail Conviction With Faulty Claims

After former President Donald J. Trump was found guilty, he and a number of conservative figures in the news media and lawmakers on the right have spread false and misleading claims about the Manhattan case.

www.nytimes.com

 

[Hume]

WHAT WAS SAID

“I’m supposed to go to jail for 187 years.”
— Mr. Trump in the news conference on Friday

This lacks evidence. It is unclear how Mr. Trump arrived at his figure. The exact punishment he faces, and whether it includes jail time, will be determined by Justice Merchan at sentencing on July 11.

Each of the 34 counts carries a maximum prison sentence of four years, or a total of 136 years. But Mr. Trump would likely serve the sentence concurrently for a maximum of four years total, if he were to be jailed at all. It’s also possible that Justice Merchan could order probation, with no prison time.

 

[Hume]

WHAT WAS SAID

“The gag order, all of it, was — in my view — an unconstitutional restriction on his free speech.”
— Mike Johnson, the House speaker, in an interview on Friday on Fox News

This needs context. Mr. Johnson stated his opinion, but it is worth noting that an appeals court has rejected his view. Justice Merchan did impose a gag order on Mr. Trump, and an appeals court upheld that order, rejecting Mr. Trump’s argument that it had violated his First Amendment rights.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

WHAT WAS SAID

“We weren’t allowed to use our election expert under any circumstances.”
— Mr. Trump in the news conference on Friday

False. Justice Merchan did not bar the election expert in question — Bradley A. Smith, the former chairman of the Federal Election Commission — from testifying, but did limit what he could say. Ultimately, Mr. Trump’s lawyers did not call upon Mr. Smith.

Trump and Allies Assail Conviction With Faulty Claims

After former President Donald J. Trump was found guilty, he and a number of conservative figures in the news media and lawmakers on the right have spread false and misleading claims about the Manhattan case.

www.nytimes.com

And those limits included not being able to weigh in at all on what federal law says is election fraud or tampering. The judge in his ruling didn't want any expert to make claims that would later invalidate his jury instructions or weaken the prosecutions shaky case.

 

[Hume]

And those limits included not being able to weigh in at all on what federal law says is election fraud or tampering. The judge in his ruling didn't want any expert to make claims that would later invalidate his jury instructions or weaken the prosecutions shaky case.

34 felony convictions

 

[Hume]

In a pretrial motion, Justice Merchan ruled that Mr. Smith could testify generally about the Federal Election Commission and define terms that relate to the case, like “campaign contribution.” During proceedings in May, Justice Merchan noted that allowing Mr. Smith to testify would invite testimony from an election expert chosen by prosecutors, resulting in a “battle of the experts.”

Mr. Smith said on social media that Mr. Trump’s lawyers had decided not to call him, but criticized Justice Merchan.

Trump and Allies Assail Conviction With Faulty Claims

After former President Donald J. Trump was found guilty, he and a number of conservative figures in the news media and lawmakers on the right have spread false and misleading claims about the Manhattan case.

www.nytimes.com

 

[T. A. Gardner]

In a pretrial motion, Justice Merchan ruled that Mr. Smith could testify generally about the Federal Election Commission and define terms that relate to the case, like “campaign contribution.” During proceedings in May, Justice Merchan noted that allowing Mr. Smith to testify would invite testimony from an election expert chosen by prosecutors, resulting in a “battle of the experts.”

Mr. Smith said on social media that Mr. Trump’s lawyers had decided not to call him, but criticized Justice Merchan.

Trump and Allies Assail Conviction With Faulty Claims

After former President Donald J. Trump was found guilty, he and a number of conservative figures in the news media and lawmakers on the right have spread false and misleading claims about the Manhattan case.

www.nytimes.com

So? Both sides can present expert witnesses. The defense if they called their expert would be hamstrung in questioning. The judge stated in not so many words that the defense's expert might contradict the prosecution's and their case and that he found that unacceptable. One more proof of the overwhelming bias the court had in this case.

 

[Hume]

So? Both sides can present expert witnesses. The defense if they called their expert would be hamstrung in questioning. The judge stated in not so many words that the defense's expert might contradict the prosecution's and their case and that he found that unacceptable. One more proof of the overwhelming bias the court had in this case.

Bottom line, Trump has been a lying crook his whole life. He is lucky to be alive.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

Bottom line, Trump has been a lying crook his whole life. He is lucky to be alive.

Spoken like a true Leftist. Just kill all who oppose you or send them to the gulag to be worked to death...