- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 1/29/26 at 7:38 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Certain rulings on legal issues and the jury instruction issues are.
Ok.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 7:50 am to FLTech
If Donald Trump had remained “celebrity businessman” only and still on friendly terms with Bill, Hilldawg, Oprah, etc…..he could’ve been guilty of all those things (he’s not of course) and to them he would still have just been good, ol’ brash “celebrity Donald Trump” and still being invited to the very best parties and loved by Joe and Mika and probably hosting some prime time TV show.
When he decided to officially enter politics, actually had a chance to win, then won, and started seriously messing around in their sandbox of power, THATS when he officially became “Convicted Felon” and “Hitler” and all these other horrible things.
He’s messing with THEIR power and control. He’s been a threat to THEM.
That’s all this has ever really been or will be about.
When he decided to officially enter politics, actually had a chance to win, then won, and started seriously messing around in their sandbox of power, THATS when he officially became “Convicted Felon” and “Hitler” and all these other horrible things.
He’s messing with THEIR power and control. He’s been a threat to THEM.
That’s all this has ever really been or will be about.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 7:51 am to Trevaylin
quote:That would take the media’s help.
Republicans ought to treat that comment just like the democrates treat the n word. Uttering it is a life time banishment
MSM and social media set what’s ok and not ok. If they don’t help, then that won’t work.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 7:55 am to FLTech
No one cares. He got elected President.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 8:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The predicate offense to enhance it to a felony only requires a crime.
But at some point wouldn’t the predicate offense have to be proven also? Thats the part that has never made any sense in this case. How can you bump a misdemeanor up to a felony by saying the misdemeanor was used to cover up another more serious crime but then the person was never convicted of the predicate crime and never got a chance to defend their self from that crime? Seems like a massive violation of someone's constitutional rights if the state gets to assume they are automatically guilty of a prior crime and use that to lay the ground work for bumping up the misdemeanor they are being tried for.
It would be like if you got a speeding ticket but then the DA bumped it up to a felony by saying you were fleeing the scene of a murder but they never have to prove anything about the murder and get to assume it happened for the purpose of your speeding ticket case. Why wouldn't you have a right to defend yourself from the fleeing the scene of a murder charge that was used to enhance your speeding ticket?
This post was edited on 1/29/26 at 8:07 am
Posted on 1/29/26 at 8:35 am to BuckeyeGoon
quote:
But at some point wouldn’t the predicate offense have to be proven also?
In a normal world.
Liberals aren’t normals.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 10:54 am to SallysHuman
quote:
I *think* it's the trumped up bookkeeping charges.
If any of y'all ever read that... it was a sight to behold. Iirc, it concerned I think 11 or 12 actual "deeds", but counted separate charges for each separate entry of the thing- something retarded like that anyway- adding up to what was it? 31 felonies or something?
I figure they are also trying to lump in the E. Jean Carroll bullshite as well.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 10:56 am to Bard
quote:
I figure they are also trying to lump in the E. Jean Carroll bullshite as well.
I can't believe that one worked, either... Miss "Rape-is-Sexy".
Posted on 1/29/26 at 10:57 am to BuckeyeGoon
quote:
But at some point wouldn’t the predicate offense have to be proven also?
Likely, and, on that same wavelength, is going to be part of the appellate ruling remanding this back for retrial.
The jury instructions had some issues related to this topic, all around, as I said in real time during that phase of the trial.
quote:
How can you bump a misdemeanor up to a felony by saying the misdemeanor was used to cover up another more serious crime but then the person was never convicted of the predicate crime and never got a chance to defend their self from that crime?
Well, to more specifically answer your question, he won't have to be convicted of that predicate crime. But it would probably require unanimity of the jury and a finding beyond a reasonable doubt.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 10:59 am to SallysHuman
quote:
concerned I think 11 or 12 actual "deeds", but counted separate charges for each separate entry of the thing- something retarded like that anyway- adding up to what was it? 31 felonies or something?
I'm not speaking to the actual absurdity of what they are claiming are falsified records, but felony count thing is fairly normal for financial crimes. When you falsify a financial record, that record flows into multiple other financial documents that also flow over multiple years. So, each different financial document that gets impacted is a different count. That's normal.
The absurdity of claiming that classifying an invoice from your attorney as legal expense instead of a campaign expense though as falsifying business records and violating campaign finance laws, is just ridiculous. Not only are the business records bottom line unchanged, but in order for it to be a felony there has to be an underlying crime, which was never proven. Also, I'm a little fuzzy on it now but was it ever actually even proven that Cohen paid that money to Daniels? I know she came out originally and said she was never paid, twice I think, and then changed her story. I don't ever remember concrete evidence that those payments to Cohen's firm actually ever made it to her, just the claims from Cohen and her when she changed her story.
This post was edited on 1/29/26 at 11:06 am
Posted on 1/29/26 at 11:04 am to SallysHuman
quote:
I *think* it's the trumped up bookkeeping charges.
If any of y'all ever read that... it was a sight to behold. Iirc, it concerned I think 11 or 12 actual "deeds", but counted separate charges for each separate entry of the thing- something retarded like that anyway- adding up to what was it? 31 felonies or something?
I think the charges were misdemeanors, but then the State of NY made those charges felonies and then charged him so they could scream "felon"
Posted on 1/29/26 at 11:14 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Well, to more specifically answer your question, he won't have to be convicted of that predicate crime. But it would probably require unanimity of the jury and a finding beyond a reasonable doubt.
Does Trump have the right to defend himself against the underlying crimes?
The state of new york said no, he doesn't.
This post was edited on 1/29/26 at 11:16 am
Posted on 1/29/26 at 11:32 am to SallysHuman
quote:
I can't believe that one worked, either... Miss "Rape-is-Sexy".
Zero evidence, just riding the #MeToo wave.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 11:33 am to BuckeyeGoon
quote:
Does Trump have the right to defend himself against the underlying crimes?
The state of new york said no, he doesn't.
Again, likely why the conviction will be overturned and remanded back for another trial.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 12:27 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
remanded back for another trial
How do you think a retrial would go? I'm thinking if Trump was afforded his constitutional rights to defend himself against the underlying crimes, it nukes the entire thing. The FEC already said there were no election related crimes committed during the whole stormy daniels thing. Without an underlying crime, the statute of limitations kicks in and there's nothing left.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 12:29 pm to BuckeyeGoon
quote:
The FEC already said there were no election related crimes
That's only partially relevant. There can be other crimes, like NY election crimes, federal/state tax crimes, or other state business fraud crimes, etc.
I would imagine the retrial would focus on the tax and/or records/business fraud angles more than the election angles.
This post was edited on 1/29/26 at 12:30 pm
Posted on 1/29/26 at 12:33 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Naw he was sentenced.
No he wasn't.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 12:36 pm to TGIFLSU
quote:
No he wasn't.
quote:
New York Judge Juan Merchan allowed media organizations to record the audio from inside the courtroom as he sentenced President-elect Donald Trump on Friday to an “unconditional discharge” in the hush money case in which he was found guilty by a jury last year of 34 counts of falsifying business records.
Posted on 1/29/26 at 12:36 pm to FLTech
If the punishment fits the crime, and the leftist judge sentenced Trump to, well, nothing, then does that mean the crime is nothing? Seems logical.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News