Prosecutors Are Still Hedging on Exactly What 'Crime' Trump Tried To 'Aid' or 'Conceal'

[Curried Goats]

Yeah, that'd be bullshit.

And I've posted threads from Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley, who have both said the same.

They aren't judges. They're pundits. Who gives a shit what they say?

 

[Winco]

It really is so obvious what is going on that I won't be surprised at the response if he is convicted.

 

[BULLDOG]

The judge has been the subject of regular commentary by Dershowitz and by Turley.

They have both been in the courtroom during parts of the trial.

Your ad hominem shows your insecurity and inability to actually think. Oar for the course.

Ad hominem? You're the one who claimed your posting a couple of articles proved you know more than the judge. That kind of stupidity begs for comment.

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

There is no case.

But the corrupt judge says you can still convict even though there is nothing to see.

This is how desperate Democrats are to run the ads 'Trump's a convicted felon'.

And funny how they telegraphed that Biden will "speak" about the verdict (and no, if Trump were acquitted or the jury is hung, Biden isn't speaking about it).

It's almost as if they have had a pipeline to the jurors who are not sequestered and have been at home for nearly a week.

The prosecution disagreed. Under "the standard application of the law," lead prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued, jurors can convict Trump as long as they unanimously agree that he falsified business records with "an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof." In Colangelo's view, jurors do not have to agree on what that underlying crime was. Merchan sided with the prosecution, adding new complications to a case that was already convoluted and confusing.​

Prosecutors are still hedging on exactly what 'crime' Trump tried to 'aid' or 'conceal'

The judge presiding over Trump's trial ruled that jurors do not have to agree on any particular legal theory.

reason.com

Falsification..of..business..records.
A felony in the state of NY.
What about this confuses you?

 

[excalibur]

Alan Dershowitz Reveals ‘Major’ Issue in Trump Criminal Trial

The retired Harvard Law professor weighed in on the New York case.

www.theepochtimes.com

 

[excalibur]

Ad hominem? You're the one who claimed your posting a couple of articles proved you know more than the judge. That kind of stupidity begs for comment.

More BS fromm a board troll.

 

[excalibur]

How Merchan Enabled Prosecutors’ Effort to Convict Trump Based on Improper Evidence | National Review

The principal duty of the judge in a criminal case is to protect the accused from abuse by the state. Here, the judge has made common cause with the state.

www.nationalreview.com

 

[Chillicothe]

I won't be surprised at the response if he is convicted.

Which would be what?
WHAT....won't surprise you?

What would?

 

[struth]

Does the OP not read?

​

Prosecutors say those documents were falsified because they mischaracterized Trump's reimbursement of Cohen. But to justify felony charges, they had to prove that Trump was not merely trying to hide an embarrassing transaction. They had to prove that he was trying to cover up or assist "another crime."​

​

What crime? "The primary crime that we have alleged," Colangelo told Merchan before the jury returned to the courtroom on April 23, "is New York State Election Law Section 17-152″—a provision so obscure that experts say they have never seen a criminal case based on it. That law makes it a misdemeanor for "any two or more persons" to "conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means."​

​

Prosecutors are still hedging on exactly what 'crime' Trump tried to 'aid' or 'conceal'

The judge presiding over Trump's trial ruled that jurors do not have to agree on any particular legal theory.

reason.com

​

What was the unlawful means?

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

More BS fromm a board troll.

Bulldog is right and excalibur is so far beyond wrong.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

What was the unlawful means?

Already explain, so, 'no, you don't get once more.'

 

[justoffal]

It is humorous to continually hear the RWI posters here on USMB cry:

No Crime
Judge is Corrupt

Keep it up.......

Tie me kangaroo down sport, tie me kangaroo down!