The Trump case in NY sentence date may be moved again

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
65,812
Reaction score
65,807
Points
3,488
Location
Red State! Amen.
First: I put this thread in politics because the case itself, the trial and the pending sentence are all political in nature and have **** all to do with “justice” etc.

Secondly: I am surprised but pleased to see that even Bragg’s special loaned from DOJ persecutor and Bragg recognize that the request to delay sentencing is not properly opposed.

Third: I have no faith in “judge” Merchan’s ability or willingness to abide by Trump’s request even though it’s not opposed by the persecution.

Fourth: Trump’s lawyers noted that proceeding to sentence prior to the election would be “election interference.” I fully agree that it would be.

In a letter of their own made public on Thursday, Trump lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove suggested that sentencing Trump as scheduled on Sept. 18 – about seven weeks before Election Day – would amount to election interference. They requested to delay the Sept. 18 sentencing in New York v. Trump until after the election.
Id.

No matter how “judge” Merchan resolves this motion issue, and no matter what he eventually decides to sentence Trump to, I still believe that Trump won’t serve any time. Instead, given the historic nature of the faux “case,”. Expect him to remain at liberty pending the appeals process. And I am sure that the case will ultimately be reversed and dismissed.
 
First: I put this thread in politics because the case itself, the trial and the pending sentence are all political in nature and have **** all to do with “justice” etc.

R.efc77815efdf4430e595ab5235ac769b
 
Fourth: Trump’s lawyers noted that proceeding to sentence prior to the election would be “election interference.” I fully agree that it would be.
Meaning they've asked for delays to date so the sentencing got pushed back long enough to claim election interference if the sentencing happens in Sept.

The DoJ may have a policy regarding not interfering with elections (the policy Comey broke in 2016) but no court should be expected to hold to that standard. As I recall Judge Chutkan was clear it was not her job to consider the defendant's candidacy in scheduling for the trial. Same for Merchan with respect to sentencing.
 
The sentencing will be delayed until after the election but if Kamala wins then it won't be delayed again. If Trump wins then it will be permanently cancelled.

At least everybody agrees that's how it works with justice in America.
 
If Democrat operative Merchan is allowed to sentence Trump JUST BEFORE THE ELECTION, that is total Banana Republic. Kiss the country goodbye.
The judge presiding over the Justice Department's latest indictment of former President Donald Trump said Friday that Trump's 2024 candidacy will not affect her decision-making in the case.

"I reiterate: the existence of a political campaign is not going to have any bearing on my decision, any more than any other lawyer coming before me saying their client needs to do their job," US District Judge Tanya Chutkan said.


That's what justice looks like in America, cuck.
 
THERE'S yer 2 tiered justice system. tell me how this should make a difference in the timeline of sentencing donny. he was found guilty on all counts by a jury of his peers.
 
The sentencing will be delayed until after the election but if Kamala wins then it won't be delayed again. If Trump wins then it will be permanently cancelled.

At least everybody agrees that's how it works with justice in America.
No. That’s not something anybody agrees upon.
 
15th post
Courts should not adjust their schedules because they interfere with your political aspirations
Courts should obviously factor in the consequences to our republic generated by bullshit partisan political persecutions.
 
Courts should not adjust their schedules because they interfere with your political aspirations
The problem stems from a lack of precedent. There haven't been any convicted felons, awaiting sentencing, on the presidential ballot before.
 
A jail sentence for the nominee of the Republican Party for president of the USA would trigger an emergency docket, or something, from the SCOTUS.
It would be a major train-wreck for the demented LEFT.
 
The problem stems from a lack of precedent. There haven't been any convicted felons, awaiting sentencing, on the presidential ballot before.
Precedent tends to be set by the first instance of something happening.

The issue of precedent is irrelevant here.

The real issue is how quickly the bogus conviction gets vacated.
 
Back
Top Bottom