I’d have preferred that lowlife scum, like the DNC honchos and their hench-thugs, not try to manipulate our legal system for insidious partisan political reasons.
Well that wasn't my question.
That's speculation, the evidence seems to be that he made a net gain in votes BECAUSE of the trials and the way he used them to garner sympathy from naive voters. So on what basis is he complaining? how has he been materially negatively impacted?
Your faux question offered a false choice. So I answered it, as is appropriate, by getting to the nub. If that bothers you, I’m fine with that outcome.
So you agree? the trial has not had any measurable negative impact in him? claims to the contrary are just whining and sobbing.Your faux question offered a false choice. So I answered it, as is appropriate, by getting to the nub. If that bothers you, I’m fine with that outcome.
Your claims are just fallacious. They are akin to the fallacy of a predetermined outcome. The shit was intended to gut him. He won anyway. He might have won even more handily but-for the Democrap manipulation of the legal system.
The persecution was already done. Sentencing would have still happened if Trump lost the appeal.I know. As I said, what he sought was to deny the persecution and the judge the ability to sentence him. I was clear about my prediction. And I was right.
The legitimacy of the judicial system is more important than any individual.
Don't forget a Jury found him guilty, a jury were all members were approved by the defense.
So you claim it was intended to do X yet it didn't do X so why believe it was ever intended to do X in the first place? It was intended to decide if he has committed fraud that's what the jurors did they decided that he did commit fraud.
The statistics say otherwise, look:
But the trial publicity coupled with his petulant posts and press conferences was PART OF his campaigning.
How would it "gut" him? there was never a serious prospect of a custodial sentence.
Trump says "jump" and you trumpanzees say "how high" with your shameful belief that everything he says is true.
He delayed this and other trials by months and months, the timing of the verdicts and sentencing is due to Trump seeking such delays so they were close to the election, that was one of his goals all along.
The courts do not move quickly in this country, even civil suits typically take a year before the first hearing is held.
There was no evidence in this trial that was newer than 2018. The timing is the fault of the DA for delaying to bring charges when Trump left office in January of 2021.
You hit on the point. The motions that Trump filed, that you called "appropriate" were largely denied as being without merit. There were few delays from "appropriate" motions, it was all the "frivolous" motions that delayed Trumps trial for years.
Sentencing was delayed because Trump requested sentencing be delayed not "due to the election being close" Merchan could have sentenced him then and there, there's nothing in the law that cares about election dates.
It does not matter that Merchan denied the motions- he denied everything. The motions had to be filed to preserve the appeal.
Not fully. A case isn’t complete until the entry of judgment. Absent a sentencing, there can be no entry of judgment. So, the case was still ongoing.
Trump couldn’t appeal at all until entry of judgment. Now that this has been done, he can finally appeal. (The pleading he made to SCOTUS to prevent sentencing was not an appeal of his conviction at all.)
No. His motion was to stay sentencing.
This denial only says that the Court requires a complete record. Substantively, all of Trump’s appellate arguments are going to be in the table. The sentence will fall when the conviction gets vacated.
Ruling don’t believe so.
He still gets to appeal. And he will. And i expect that he will prevail.
You seem to have a short memory. Of the dozens of lawsuits, and appeals where Trump was trying to block the release of his income taxes. Working all the way to the US Supreme Court, who in every case they ruled on, or refused to hear, said that the subpoenas for them were proper.
Yep. Preservation “below” is usually required before an appellate court will address that point on appeal.
Remember, Trump appealed the denial of his motions, only to have the appeals court UPHOLD the motions denial. But of course the appeal process added additional delays to the case. Which I would call "frivolous", as supported by their denial at every appeal stage.
I did not say the case was closed. I said the persecution was already done.
The petition to the SCOTUS was to delay sentencing until the Interlocutory appeal could be heard. That is all it was.
No, he filed a motion to vacate based on immunity, and that motion was denied. That denial is subject to interlocutory appeal, and the appeal had not been heard.
It says no such thing.
Yes, he is likely to prevail on appeal, but that does not undo the fact that an appeal (that he has a right to) was denied him.
Nah, you haven't. No, you didn't outsmart Trump's lawyers or the jury or the court. Sorry.
