Should Trump Trial Go Direct To Supreme Court?

[Care4all]

SCOTUS could stay the conviction for the time being.

Nope! They can not do that yet! For goodness sake, Trump has not even applied for an Appeal!

 

[Care4all]

the trial the verdict ect .. has national implications for the election .. so the SC has a powerful reason to rule on it ..

We are a REPUBLIC! The Supreme Court will not intervene in State law. There has to be a Constitutional issue......after it has run its course in the State Courts....

 

[Care4all]

Trump had a 5% chance of getting a fair trail in New York and he lost. (95% voted Biden)

Sure your happy with the verdict and your political bias is gratified .. it makes perfect sense.

The Democrat Party law-fare was a success, enjoy and congratulations..

Jurists DO NOT find a person guilty because of the defendant's political party Lumpy....truly they do NOT. It is solely based on the evidence shown in the trial, as they are sworn to do.

The jurists have nothing to do with a trial being fair or not.....they are doing their required duty, as a citizen. Blame a judge, blame an attorney, blame a prosecutor, blame a state law, but blaming a jury is just plain wrong!! And this day and age, what you are doing by going along with "the jury can't be fair because of a political party" crapola, can end up getting them doxxed, or harassed, or God forbid, physically hurt!!! Does my kind and sweet and fun loving Lumpy, really want to get someone hurt?

 

[braalian]

SCOTUS could stay the conviction for the time being.

What exactly do you think the Supreme Court does?

It’s mind boggling that you speak with such certainty about subjects you obviously know nothing about

 

[Lumpy 1]

Jurists DO NOT find a person guilty because of the defendant's political party Lumpy....truly they do NOT. It is solely based on the evidence shown in the trial, as they are sworn to do.

The jurists have nothing to do with a trial being fair or not.....they are doing their required duty, as a citizen. Blame a judge, blame an attorney, blame a prosecutor, blame a state law, but blaming a jury is just plain wrong!! And this day and age, what you are doing by going along with "the jury can't be fair because of a political party" crapola, can end up getting them doxxed, or harassed, or God forbid, physically hurt!!! Does my kind and sweet and fun loving Lumpy, really want to get someone hurt?

They live in New York, that’s punishment enough I suppose..

 

[Delldude]

Nope! They can not do that yet! For goodness sake, Trump has not even applied for an Appeal!

No kidding........

 

[Delldude]

What exactly do you think the Supreme Court does?

It’s mind boggling that you speak with such certainty about subjects you obviously know nothing about

The hows and whys has already been discussed across media.......try and keep up.

 

[candycorn]

Should Trump Trial Go Direct To Supreme Court?​

no.

There is an appeals process for the State of NY.

 

[candycorn]

so sad to see how far you have fallen since joining the cult.

She didn't fall an inch. That grotesque ***** has always been at zero.

 

[candycorn]

What would be the reasoning for that? SCOTUS can’t just take any case it wants.

I enjoy listening to right wing radio when their idol takes a fall. Mark Levin was high on helium (as always). Anyway, squeaky said that there is something called a "special writ" I think. That may be an option.

 

[JohnDB]

Yup, the trial was a Democrat Party scam.. everyone knows it and the appeals process in New York is likely corrupted as well. The voters need an honest resolution before the election.

What it is:
One of the 50 states decides that they do not like that a particular person is likely to win the next presidential election. So they get a noted liar and thief plus a prostitute to testify as witnesses against the person and lock him up for 100+ years AFTER 2 previous lawsuits aimed at making him too poor to defend himself.

And SCOTUS is not going to step in and fix things?
Only if we are a banana republic.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

NY corruption in their justice system.

As determined by whom?

 

[JohnDB]

 

[Couchpotato]

I enjoy listening to right wing radio when their idol takes a fall. Mark Levin was high on helium (as always). Anyway, squeaky said that there is something called a "special writ" I think. That may be an option.

So I think SCOTUS legally CAN take any case it wants technically so long as they can tie it loosely to their jurisdiction which in this case could probably be done. That said I highly doubt they will take it up. I also don’t think it will survive appeal in NY.

 

[Couchpotato]

Posted ten minutes before ^ this post.

That’s not the case Bragg made though. If it were the judge wouldn’t have had to give the instructions he did.

 

[yidnar]

We are a REPUBLIC! The Supreme Court will not intervene in State law. There has to be a Constitutional issue......after it has run its course in the State Courts....

lol ! with the federal election implications the SC absolutely has the power to to expedite and rule on the appeal before the election ..what are you afraid of commie !

 

[JohnDB]

So I think SCOTUS legally CAN take any case it wants technically so long as they can tie it loosely to their jurisdiction which in this case could probably be done. That said I highly doubt they will take it up. I also don’t think it will survive appeal in NY.

SCOTUS will give the NY State a short opportunity to correct this themselves. They don't want to over reach...but they must first allow the State to pull themselves out of this vast miscarriage of justice which was obviously politically motivated.

 

[Leo123]

As determined by whom?

Any real American that watched the faux trial.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That’s not the case Bragg made though. If it were the judge wouldn’t have had to give the instructions he did.

What about the instructions leads you to believe that?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Any real American that watched the faux trial.

Irrelevant.