Day One Trump 2nd Presidency

[Concerned American]

The democrats who didn't want him to run brought this on him.

And the American electorate proved overwhelmingly that they aren't buying what the democrats are selling.

 

[Luckyone]

A grand jury doesn't determine if a law was broken, that's what the trial does. The grand jury determines if there is probable cause to move forward. Probable cause doesn't mean any crime has been committed, it means there is sufficient evidence to move forward to a trial. Probable cause basically means, something MAY have been done to warrant an investigation and a trial.

Trump didn't bring this on himself. The democrats who didn't want him to run brought this on him. Look at it like this, had trump not ran for president in 2016, NONE of this would be happening. This is 100% political, by those who wanted to keep trump out of the white house.

If there are no laws broken, how can a grand jury even consider indicting someone. In order to indict someone, an action of breaking an existing law needs to occur.

 

[Luckyone]

Dude get over it. Americans can care less about his personal life or his attitude. Americans want financial security, controlled immigration, quality of life, etc. Democrats failed and failed to even get the message to voters that change is on the way. Instead, Democrats bet everything on celebrities endorsement.

I see, so using your way of thinking if a person gets financial security, controlled immigration and quality of life etc., it does not matter how it was achieved right? If you get what you want, it is fine that others may have suffered greatly to give you that?

So morals, ethics, principles and humanity mean nothing? Money is the only important thing?

 

[ThisIsMe]

If there are no laws broken, how can a grand jury even consider indicting someone. In order to indict someone, an action of breaking an existing law needs to occur.

If a grand jury could determine someone broke a law, then there would be no reason for a trial. The prosecution presents the evidence of why they think this case should go to trial. The grand jury weighs that evidence and determines that what is presented is sufficient to move to a trial, where that evidence will be presented to a trial jury for them to decide on guilt. A prosecutor may have evidence to prove a law was broken, but they still have to have a trial to determine if they actually DID break the law (guilt). The defense gets to cross examine the evidence and refute it.


Nothing is set in stone until the trial jury weighs in, and then there is the appeals process etc....

In order to indict someone, an action of breaking an existing law needs to occur.

In order to indict someone, the ACCUSATION of someone breaking the law has to exist. The proving part of that is in the trial.

But all of that is neither here nor there.in reference to HOW this all came about. It was because trump came down the escalator that day. Had he stayed up there, none of this would be happening.

 

[Luckyone]

If a grand jury could determine someone broke a law, then there would be no reason for a trial. The prosecution presents the evidence of why they think this case should go to trial. The grand jury weighs that evidence and determines that what is presented is sufficient to move to a trial, where that evidence will be presented to a trial jury for them to decide on guilt. A prosecutor may have evidence to prove a law was broken, but they still have to have a trial to determine if they actually DID break the law (guilt). The defense gets to cross examine the evidence and refute it.


Nothing is set in stone until the trial jury weighs in, and then there is the appeals process etc....



In order to indict someone, the ACCUSATION of someone breaking the law has to exist. The proving part of that is in the trial.

But all of that is neither here nor there.in reference to HOW this all came about. It was because trump came down the escalator that day. Had he stayed up there, none of this would be happening.

I made a mistake by not putting in links to the explanation of what a grand Jury does and how they do it. I thought that it was something that was so much common sense that putting links was unnecessary. Evidently I was wrong as you do require links to understand how it all works

After police conduct an investigation, they hand over evidence to a prosecutor. The prosecutor then signals that a grand jury is needed and that they want to seek an indictment. They are then instructed on how to do their job. They will listen to all the evidence, read all the evidence, and absorb all the evidence that the police have collected and given to the prosecutor. Then, they will determine whether there are reasonable grounds that a crime has been committed, and that the person or persons who are the subject of the grand jury committed those crimes.

 

[jotathought]

​

This latter is the most important thing for Trump. Getting HIMSELF out of problems and getting revenge on those that were doing their job but since it was against Trump, he cannot accept that!

Jack Smith plans to resign before inauguration day and has limited time to wind down the two cases against Trump. No need for Trump to fire him. These two cases were clearly a lawfare attempt to disqualify Trump from becoming president.

I wouldn't have much hope in the Bragg shenanigan, either. The prosecutors requested the sentencing be delayed, and Colangelo appears to be offering a way out for everyone with the constitutional issue. In the end, Merchan will have to decide on Colangelo's insights or Bragg will have to decide to drop the case -- a Catch 22 for both of them to save face from harsher consequences -- like an overturned conviction or public criticism for pursuing a weak case.

Looking forward to the outcomes ..

 

[Concerned American]

I made a mistake by not putting in links to the explanation of what a grand Jury does and how they do it. I thought that it was something that was so much common sense that putting links was unnecessary. Evidently I was wrong as you do require links to understand how it all works

After police conduct an investigation, they hand over evidence to a prosecutor. The prosecutor then signals that a grand jury is needed and that they want to seek an indictment. They are then instructed on how to do their job. They will listen to all the evidence, read all the evidence, and absorb all the evidence that the police have collected and given to the prosecutor. Then, they will determine whether there are reasonable grounds that a crime has been committed, and that the person or persons who are the subject of the grand jury committed those crimes.

Do you know what an indictment is? Clearly not. An indictment is nothing but a FORMAL ACCUSATION/CHARGE. SMFH

 

[toomuchtime_]

If you were smarter, you would realize that what you call "nonsense", is basically human nature. Some people are good and some are bad and a "few" are evil and a few are angels. That is humanity and as long as you fail to understand that, you will keep voting for an incompetent narcissist who only cares about himself.

The Dems floated this bullshit all through the campaign and voters chose Trump over this nonsense.

 

[drudge X]

I see, so using your way of thinking if a person gets financial security, controlled immigration and quality of life etc., it does not matter how it was achieved right? If you get what you want, it is fine that others may have suffered greatly to give you that?

So morals, ethics, principles and humanity mean nothing? Money is the only important thing?

You mean the horror of asking these illegal aliens to come here legally like everyone else who wants to immigrate here? I don’t care what leftists say about the cost of food going up or the cost of mowing the lawn is going up. Get over it. The same old propaganda is tiring. Other countries don’t need open border and those countries are doing fine.

Money is important because this country doesn’t have universal healthcare. We would if this country has an ounce of common sense or two. Leftists flooded this country with illegals and encouraged single mom to breed uncontrollably which strained the healthcare system. That leaves no room for Americans to receive free services despite being taxed to kingdom come. We are paying for illegal aliens and irresponsible breeders while struggling to put food on the table, pay rent/mortgage, and other services. So yes, money is important.

Why should illegal aliens get free food, free housing, free healthcare, free schooling, etc whereas Americans have to pay through the roof for these services?

 

[lennypartiv]

This has nothing to do with Jack Smith. He is a confirmed felon for the case in New York where he was found guilty

Trump's trial in NY was rigged, just like the 2020 election.

 

[FA_Q2]

One problem with your way of thinking.

The charges first went through a grand jury (How many people are on a grand jury in New York? 23 citizens. In New York, the grand jury is an arm of a superior court. In Orange County, the superior court is Orange County Court. A grand jury consists of 23 citizens, who the court selects at random, and who are intended to reflect a fair cross-section of the community) and they are the ones that determine whether existing laws were broken and whether thre is enough evidence to take it to trial. A majority is needed for an indictment to occur. Then, there were 12 jurors (half of which are picked by the defense) that decide the fate of the accused based on the evidence presented. All 12 need to agree for a guilty verdict to be given.

As such, how it came to be is unimportant. Laws needed to be broken and all 12 of the peers had to agree to give the guilty verdict.

This is simply another excuse given by the Trumpers to explain his criminal behavior not being criminal.

Having to repeat this a thousand times for blind-by-choice people like yourself to understand that this is NOT what you believe it is, is getting tiresome. This is common knowledge that anyone with half a brain can research and understand.

Oh, to be so naive.

These people do not live in fact, they live in fantasy. No matter how many times you point out he was guilty, no matter how many times incontrovertible evidence is brought up, hell you can even play audio of trump directly admitting he was committing a crime while in the very act of committing the crime they will ignore it all.

The right is gone. They stand for nothing other than Trump.

 

[Lastamender]

Your comment means you support injustice and aristocracy.

Your comment about anything anyone supports are irrelevant.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

​

This latter is the most important thing for Trump. Getting HIMSELF out of problems and getting revenge on those that were doing their job but since it was against Trump, he cannot accept that!

 

[westwall]

Fire Jack Smith.

Prosecute the ******.

 

[westwall]

What a freak

 

[ThisIsMe]

I made a mistake by not putting in links to the explanation of what a grand Jury does and how they do it. I thought that it was something that was so much common sense that putting links was unnecessary. Evidently I was wrong as you do require links to understand how it all works

After police conduct an investigation, they hand over evidence to a prosecutor. The prosecutor then signals that a grand jury is needed and that they want to seek an indictment. They are then instructed on how to do their job. They will listen to all the evidence, read all the evidence, and absorb all the evidence that the police have collected and given to the prosecutor. Then, they will determine whether there are reasonable grounds that a crime has been committed, and that the person or persons who are the subject of the grand jury committed those crimes.

OK, I got a link of my own:

A grand jury focuses on preliminary criminal matters only and assesses evidence presented by a prosecutor to determine whether there is “probable cause” to believe an individual committed a crime and should be put on trial.

Types of Juries

There are two types of juries serving different functions in the federal trial courts.

www.uscourts.gov

probable cause

www.law.cornell.edu

Probable cause refers to a reasonable basis for believing that a crime may have been committed (for an arrest) or that evidence of a crime is present in the place to be searched (for a search).

They are not determining that the person is guilty of a crime, they are determining whether there is probable cause and sufficient evidence to believe a crime MAY have been committed and should move to trial.

I just reject your idea that grand jury determines guilt.

What is the difference between a petit jury and a grand jury? | District of Connecticut | United States District Court

www.ctd.uscourts.gov

• The grand jury does not determine guilt or innocence, but whether probable cause exists that a crime was committed. Generally, the evidence is presented by an attorney for the government. The grand jury determines from this evidence whether the government files formal charges against one or more individuals. If probable cause exists, the grand jury will return a written statement of the charges called an "indictment."

So, they look at the evidence, you are correct. And they determine that the evidence shows that there is probable cause that the subject of the investigation may have committed a crime, and they return an indictment so the defendant can be put on trial to determine guilt.

 

[Luckyone]

OK, I got a link of my own:

Types of Juries

There are two types of juries serving different functions in the federal trial courts.

www.uscourts.gov

probable cause

www.law.cornell.edu

They are not determining that the person is guilty of a crime, they are determining whether there is probable cause and sufficient evidence to believe a crime MAY have been committed and should move to trial.

I just reject your idea that grand jury determines guilt.

What is the difference between a petit jury and a grand jury? | District of Connecticut | United States District Court

www.ctd.uscourts.gov

So, they look at the evidence, you are correct. And they determine that the evidence shows that there is probable cause that the subject of the investigation may have committed a crime, and they return an indictment so the defendant can be put on trial to determine guilt.

I have never said that a grand jury determines guilt. They are shown the existing laws and probable cause to indict someone for breaking that law.

For them to be able to do that is to be shown the law broken and be shown enough evidence to determine who should be indicted for it.

 

[ThisIsMe]

I have never said that a grand jury determines guilt. They are shown the existing laws and probable cause to indict someone for breaking that law.

For them to be able to do that is to be shown the law broken and be shown enough evidence to determine who should be indicted for it.

You posted in big ole black letters:

a crime has been committed, and that the person or persons who are the subject of the grand jury committed those crimes.

you are correct in this:

They are shown the existing laws and probable cause to indict someone for breaking that law.

If i misunderstood what you were saying, then me apologies. But no, the grand jury doesn't decide if a person committed a crime, the determine there is sufficient evidence that a person may have committed a crime and needs to be put in trial.

Still, we are getting into the weeds here. My point was that, this is all political, and only happening because trump ran for president

 

[Mac-7]

I hope you are right, or at least partially right. Nonetheless, knowing who Trump is and what he has done all his life (fail, use others and con them), I think you are wrong and Trump will destroy this nation

Do you admit to being on the fringe, or do you think most libs agree with you?

 

[Luckyone]

Do you admit to being on the fringe, or do you think most libs agree with you?

How you can think that is beyond my ability to understand. I am about as much of a centrist as can be. I am total enemy of extremes (Right or left). What are you?