Only one spiteful group wants to see Trump sentenced before inauguration

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
23,409
46,150
2,290
Spiteful at the minimum.

Lawfare is what it really has been, all these cases against Trump have been lawfare and nothing more.



In what appears to be a bid to ensure that President-elect Trump enters office as a formally convicted felon, Judge Juan Merchan has denied Trump’s post-trial motions and proposes to sentence him next Friday, January 10.

The bait for Trump to agree to this is that Judge Merchan is signaling that the sentence will be a conditional discharge – meaning the president-elect would face no prison time and no post-sentence monitoring (such as probation). Moreover, because the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment would end the proceedings in the trial court, Trump would be free to commence his appeal of what would be 34 felony convictions on the charge of business-records falsification.

I do not believe Trump will agree to this; instead, I suspect he will seek an immediate appeal on the immunity claims that Merchan conclusively rejected in today’s 18-page opinion and order. It is not surprising that Merchan denied Trump’s immunity claims; he had already ruled against Trump on this point in an opinion issued on December 16.

In prior proceedings, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, appeared to acknowledge that Trump would likely have a right to appeal an immunity ruling against him prior to being sentenced. That is no doubt why, rather than push for a sentencing date, Bragg’s prosecutors proposed that the case be frozen – held in abeyance while Trump served his four-year presidential term. In that scenario, the case would theoretically to resume in 2029 (when Trump would be 82-years-old) with final presentencing rulings, the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment of conviction, and the appeal.

In Friday afternoon’s ruling, Merchan rejected that proposal, claiming that he had a responsibility to sentence Trump prior to inauguration, lest what the judge frames as an important public interest in getting the sentencing done were undermined.

It is not clear to me that there is any such public interest. There seems, instead, to be the interest of Merchan – an activist Democrat who contributed to Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign against Trump in violation of state judicial ethics rules – to ensure that Trump is branded a convicted felon while there is still opportunity, pre-inauguration, to make that happen.

Nevertheless, Merchan appears to acknowledge that Trump still has cards to play. The opinion states, for example:

"This Court must sentence Defendant within a reasonable time following verdict; and Defendant must be permitted to avail himself of every available appeal, a path he has made clear he intends to pursue but which only becomes fully available upon sentencing. [Emphasis added.]"

Put aside how precious it is for this demonstrably hostile judge to express his deeply held concerns about the vindication of Trump’s appellate rights. Merchan must interject the word "fully" because, while Trump can only bring his complete appeal based on all claims of error arising out of the proceedings only after sentencing, he should be able to bring a partial appeal now targeted solely at Merchan’s immunity ruling.

...


 
Spiteful at the minimum.

Lawfare is what it really has been, all these cases against Trump have been lawfare and nothing more.


In what appears to be a bid to ensure that President-elect Trump enters office as a formally convicted felon, Judge Juan Merchan has denied Trump’s post-trial motions and proposes to sentence him next Friday, January 10.
The bait for Trump to agree to this is that Judge Merchan is signaling that the sentence will be a conditional discharge – meaning the president-elect would face no prison time and no post-sentence monitoring (such as probation). Moreover, because the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment would end the proceedings in the trial court, Trump would be free to commence his appeal of what would be 34 felony convictions on the charge of business-records falsification.
I do not believe Trump will agree to this; instead, I suspect he will seek an immediate appeal on the immunity claims that Merchan conclusively rejected in today’s 18-page opinion and order. It is not surprising that Merchan denied Trump’s immunity claims; he had already ruled against Trump on this point in an opinion issued on December 16.
In prior proceedings, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, appeared to acknowledge that Trump would likely have a right to appeal an immunity ruling against him prior to being sentenced. That is no doubt why, rather than push for a sentencing date, Bragg’s prosecutors proposed that the case be frozen – held in abeyance while Trump served his four-year presidential term. In that scenario, the case would theoretically to resume in 2029 (when Trump would be 82-years-old) with final presentencing rulings, the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment of conviction, and the appeal.
In Friday afternoon’s ruling, Merchan rejected that proposal, claiming that he had a responsibility to sentence Trump prior to inauguration, lest what the judge frames as an important public interest in getting the sentencing done were undermined.
It is not clear to me that there is any such public interest. There seems, instead, to be the interest of Merchan – an activist Democrat who contributed to Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign against Trump in violation of state judicial ethics rules – to ensure that Trump is branded a convicted felon while there is still opportunity, pre-inauguration, to make that happen.
Nevertheless, Merchan appears to acknowledge that Trump still has cards to play. The opinion states, for example:
"This Court must sentence Defendant within a reasonable time following verdict; and Defendant must be permitted to avail himself of every available appeal, a path he has made clear he intends to pursue but which only becomes fully available upon sentencing. [Emphasis added.]"
Put aside how precious it is for this demonstrably hostile judge to express his deeply held concerns about the vindication of Trump’s appellate rights. Merchan must interject the word "fully" because, while Trump can only bring his complete appeal based on all claims of error arising out of the proceedings only after sentencing, he should be able to bring a partial appeal now targeted solely at Merchan’s immunity ruling.
...


Donald Trump*

* convicted felon
 
Spiteful at the minimum.

Lawfare is what it really has been, all these cases against Trump have been lawfare and nothing more.


In what appears to be a bid to ensure that President-elect Trump enters office as a formally convicted felon, Judge Juan Merchan has denied Trump’s post-trial motions and proposes to sentence him next Friday, January 10.
The bait for Trump to agree to this is that Judge Merchan is signaling that the sentence will be a conditional discharge – meaning the president-elect would face no prison time and no post-sentence monitoring (such as probation). Moreover, because the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment would end the proceedings in the trial court, Trump would be free to commence his appeal of what would be 34 felony convictions on the charge of business-records falsification.
I do not believe Trump will agree to this; instead, I suspect he will seek an immediate appeal on the immunity claims that Merchan conclusively rejected in today’s 18-page opinion and order. It is not surprising that Merchan denied Trump’s immunity claims; he had already ruled against Trump on this point in an opinion issued on December 16.
In prior proceedings, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, appeared to acknowledge that Trump would likely have a right to appeal an immunity ruling against him prior to being sentenced. That is no doubt why, rather than push for a sentencing date, Bragg’s prosecutors proposed that the case be frozen – held in abeyance while Trump served his four-year presidential term. In that scenario, the case would theoretically to resume in 2029 (when Trump would be 82-years-old) with final presentencing rulings, the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment of conviction, and the appeal.
In Friday afternoon’s ruling, Merchan rejected that proposal, claiming that he had a responsibility to sentence Trump prior to inauguration, lest what the judge frames as an important public interest in getting the sentencing done were undermined.
It is not clear to me that there is any such public interest. There seems, instead, to be the interest of Merchan – an activist Democrat who contributed to Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign against Trump in violation of state judicial ethics rules – to ensure that Trump is branded a convicted felon while there is still opportunity, pre-inauguration, to make that happen.
Nevertheless, Merchan appears to acknowledge that Trump still has cards to play. The opinion states, for example:
"This Court must sentence Defendant within a reasonable time following verdict; and Defendant must be permitted to avail himself of every available appeal, a path he has made clear he intends to pursue but which only becomes fully available upon sentencing. [Emphasis added.]"
Put aside how precious it is for this demonstrably hostile judge to express his deeply held concerns about the vindication of Trump’s appellate rights. Merchan must interject the word "fully" because, while Trump can only bring his complete appeal based on all claims of error arising out of the proceedings only after sentencing, he should be able to bring a partial appeal now targeted solely at Merchan’s immunity ruling.
...


You think FOX NEWS can sway the court? Heck, they could not even win their own $787 Million Dollar case and in another case, said the pronouncement of their news staff are not to be taken seriously. That is why people refer to them as Faux News.
 
Bi bi calls Trump one minute before the "sentencing" so Trump is a no show.

Judge martian blows his stack & orders Trump to be arrested.

Trump can prove the call with a world leader & martian is locked away forever for interfering with global affairs concerning the president elect!

TrumpMugShot1.jpg
 
Bi bi calls Trump one minute before the "sentencing" so Trump is a no show.

Judge martian blows his stack & orders Trump to be arrested.

Trump can prove the call with a world leader & martian is locked away forever for interfering with global affairs concerning the president elect!

View attachment 1061773
^^ thunking again
 
Yeah, trolling is all you've got.
Is it really that big of a deal? People were not ignorant of his criminal history when they voted for him. Are you gonna feel differently about your Trumpy after the 10th? No. And me neither.
 
Spiteful at the minimum.

Lawfare is what it really has been, all these cases against Trump have been lawfare and nothing more.


In what appears to be a bid to ensure that President-elect Trump enters office as a formally convicted felon, Judge Juan Merchan has denied Trump’s post-trial motions and proposes to sentence him next Friday, January 10.
The bait for Trump to agree to this is that Judge Merchan is signaling that the sentence will be a conditional discharge – meaning the president-elect would face no prison time and no post-sentence monitoring (such as probation). Moreover, because the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment would end the proceedings in the trial court, Trump would be free to commence his appeal of what would be 34 felony convictions on the charge of business-records falsification.
I do not believe Trump will agree to this; instead, I suspect he will seek an immediate appeal on the immunity claims that Merchan conclusively rejected in today’s 18-page opinion and order. It is not surprising that Merchan denied Trump’s immunity claims; he had already ruled against Trump on this point in an opinion issued on December 16.
In prior proceedings, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, appeared to acknowledge that Trump would likely have a right to appeal an immunity ruling against him prior to being sentenced. That is no doubt why, rather than push for a sentencing date, Bragg’s prosecutors proposed that the case be frozen – held in abeyance while Trump served his four-year presidential term. In that scenario, the case would theoretically to resume in 2029 (when Trump would be 82-years-old) with final presentencing rulings, the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment of conviction, and the appeal.
In Friday afternoon’s ruling, Merchan rejected that proposal, claiming that he had a responsibility to sentence Trump prior to inauguration, lest what the judge frames as an important public interest in getting the sentencing done were undermined.
It is not clear to me that there is any such public interest. There seems, instead, to be the interest of Merchan – an activist Democrat who contributed to Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign against Trump in violation of state judicial ethics rules – to ensure that Trump is branded a convicted felon while there is still opportunity, pre-inauguration, to make that happen.
Nevertheless, Merchan appears to acknowledge that Trump still has cards to play. The opinion states, for example:
"This Court must sentence Defendant within a reasonable time following verdict; and Defendant must be permitted to avail himself of every available appeal, a path he has made clear he intends to pursue but which only becomes fully available upon sentencing. [Emphasis added.]"
Put aside how precious it is for this demonstrably hostile judge to express his deeply held concerns about the vindication of Trump’s appellate rights. Merchan must interject the word "fully" because, while Trump can only bring his complete appeal based on all claims of error arising out of the proceedings only after sentencing, he should be able to bring a partial appeal now targeted solely at Merchan’s immunity ruling.
...


Yes, that group is the majority of the country.
 
Spiteful at the minimum.

Lawfare is what it really has been, all these cases against Trump have been lawfare and nothing more.


In what appears to be a bid to ensure that President-elect Trump enters office as a formally convicted felon, Judge Juan Merchan has denied Trump’s post-trial motions and proposes to sentence him next Friday, January 10.
The bait for Trump to agree to this is that Judge Merchan is signaling that the sentence will be a conditional discharge – meaning the president-elect would face no prison time and no post-sentence monitoring (such as probation). Moreover, because the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment would end the proceedings in the trial court, Trump would be free to commence his appeal of what would be 34 felony convictions on the charge of business-records falsification.
I do not believe Trump will agree to this; instead, I suspect he will seek an immediate appeal on the immunity claims that Merchan conclusively rejected in today’s 18-page opinion and order. It is not surprising that Merchan denied Trump’s immunity claims; he had already ruled against Trump on this point in an opinion issued on December 16.
In prior proceedings, Manhattan’s elected progressive Democratic district attorney, Alvin Bragg, appeared to acknowledge that Trump would likely have a right to appeal an immunity ruling against him prior to being sentenced. That is no doubt why, rather than push for a sentencing date, Bragg’s prosecutors proposed that the case be frozen – held in abeyance while Trump served his four-year presidential term. In that scenario, the case would theoretically to resume in 2029 (when Trump would be 82-years-old) with final presentencing rulings, the imposition of sentence and entry of the judgment of conviction, and the appeal.
In Friday afternoon’s ruling, Merchan rejected that proposal, claiming that he had a responsibility to sentence Trump prior to inauguration, lest what the judge frames as an important public interest in getting the sentencing done were undermined.
It is not clear to me that there is any such public interest. There seems, instead, to be the interest of Merchan – an activist Democrat who contributed to Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign against Trump in violation of state judicial ethics rules – to ensure that Trump is branded a convicted felon while there is still opportunity, pre-inauguration, to make that happen.
Nevertheless, Merchan appears to acknowledge that Trump still has cards to play. The opinion states, for example:
"This Court must sentence Defendant within a reasonable time following verdict; and Defendant must be permitted to avail himself of every available appeal, a path he has made clear he intends to pursue but which only becomes fully available upon sentencing. [Emphasis added.]"
Put aside how precious it is for this demonstrably hostile judge to express his deeply held concerns about the vindication of Trump’s appellate rights. Merchan must interject the word "fully" because, while Trump can only bring his complete appeal based on all claims of error arising out of the proceedings only after sentencing, he should be able to bring a partial appeal now targeted solely at Merchan’s immunity ruling.
...


Would that be law-abiding citizens?
 
It's amazing how these Kangaroo Courts didn't show up until your Orange God got elected, before that folk like you claimed that we had the BEST Justice System in the world.
Not me charlie.*

I've been aware of short comings in the USA justice system for years/decades; but also aware that such varies per city and state. Some places are better than most, others are worse. The USA has had no shortage of kangaroo courts at various times and locations through out this country, throughout our history.

I find it "very interesting" that Trump and only Trump seems to have been charged, tried, and convicted in court of "crimes" that many others could also have been charged and convicted on, yet he is the only one this "law and order" has been applied to.

*BTW, you don't know squat about me it would seem, but your prejudice has been clear for some time now.
 

Forum List

Back
Top