Why Do Trump Supporters Have Such A Hard Time Admitting He's A Convicted Felon?

[Luckyone]

LOL. Your "Peers" were anti-Trumpers. And, New York purposely changed their laws so that the lawsuit could be done, evidence of lawfare.

what is it about you that you are so biased that reality and truth get ignored.

Do you understand how choosing peers for a trial occurs?

AI Overview
The number of peers (jurors) each side gets to choose—or more accurately, remove—depends on the type of case and the jurisdiction, typically ranging from 3 to 20 peremptory challenges. In addition to these limited strikes, sides have unlimited challenges "for cause" if a juror cannot be fair.

Here is a breakdown of how many potential jurors each side (defense and prosecution/plaintiff) can typically exclude without providing a reason:

Criminal Cases (Federal)

• Felony Cases (imprisonment > 1 year): The government gets 6, and the defendant/defendants jointly get 10

Civil Cases

• Federal/Many State Courts: Generally, each side (not each party) is allowed 3 peremptory challenges.

Key Factors in Jury Selection

• Challenges for Cause (Unlimited): Attorneys can ask the judge to remove an unlimited number of potential jurors if they can show the juror is biased, has a conflict of interest, or cannot be impartial.
• Peremptory Challenges (Limited): These are strikes used for any reason except discrimination based on race or gender.
• Alternate Jurors: In cases with alternates, each side typically gets one additional strike for every two alternates to be seated.
• Multiple Defendants: In criminal cases with multiple defendants, the court has the discretion to allow additional peremptory challenges.

Total Jury Size:

• Criminal Felony: Typically 12 jurors.

If you can understand the above, this means that each side gets to choose 6 jurors and the attorneys (the ones for Trump) can eliminate an unlimited amount of jurors if they feel that they are biased.

This means that your statement about the jurors being anti-Trumpers is total biased ignorance of how the legal system works.

You have no credibility Thinker. You are as biased as it gets!!!

 

[kyzr]

Declaring a hush money payment as a “legal expense” is illegal yes

Law Professor Turley can explain it for you so when they get overturned you aren't too disappointed.

Buzz Kill: The Trump Conviction Presents a Target-Rich Environment for Appeal

Below is my column in the Hill on the most compelling grounds for an appeal in the Trump case after his conviction on 34 counts in Manhattan. There has been considerable criticism of the defense te…

jonathanturley.org

 

[WEATHER53]

Because he’s not
Just like the incomplete impeachment, this has more rounds in order to become complete and final

 

[Robert W]

by a group of "peers" following the ESTABLISHED laws!

Let's try Obama in any of over a dozen red states and see if he ends up in prison.

 

[Lesh]

Let's try Obama in any of over a dozen red states and see if he ends up in prison.

Hey dope… the SC has ruled that can’t happen

Go take a nap old man

 

[j-mac]

Be specific as to the "people" and as to the "methods". Words are cheap.

To my knowledge, this was a trial of "peers" and the methods used were the "following the established laws", which by the way had been used against 7 other people that were found guilty of breaking those laws (the same way Trump broke them).

So show me (with facts) why you think they were bogus.

Why should he? You ain’t nobody….

 

[j-mac]

Hey dope… the SC has ruled that can’t happen

Go take a nap old man

Why not? I’m sure the queer Obama has some shady shit they could stir up…

 

[Lesh]

Why not? I’m sure the queer Obama has some shady shit they could stir up…

SC ruled… nope

 

[Robert W]

Hey dope… the SC has ruled that can’t happen

Go take a nap old man

Obama was finished as presikdent yhet he commenced to try to overthrow the following presid3e4nt. That was not kosher.

To make it clear to you who uses a dirty bedpan, if Trump commences in his final year to overthrow the Democrat, God forbid one be elected, you will sing a different tune. Obama set into the system the deliberate overthrow of Trump.

 

[Lockback]

by a group of "peers" following the ESTABLISHED laws!

Those weren't his "peers". They were liberal Democrats in a vehemently leftist district.

 

[Independent thinker]

what is it about you that you are so biased that reality and truth get ignored.

Do you understand how choosing peers for a trial occurs?

AI Overview
The number of peers (jurors) each side gets to choose—or more accurately, remove—depends on the type of case and the jurisdiction, typically ranging from 3 to 20 peremptory challenges. In addition to these limited strikes, sides have unlimited challenges "for cause" if a juror cannot be fair.

Here is a breakdown of how many potential jurors each side (defense and prosecution/plaintiff) can typically exclude without providing a reason:

Criminal Cases (Federal)

• Felony Cases (imprisonment > 1 year): The government gets 6, and the defendant/defendants jointly get 10

Civil Cases

• Federal/Many State Courts: Generally, each side (not each party) is allowed 3 peremptory challenges.

Key Factors in Jury Selection

• Challenges for Cause (Unlimited): Attorneys can ask the judge to remove an unlimited number of potential jurors if they can show the juror is biased, has a conflict of interest, or cannot be impartial.
• Peremptory Challenges (Limited): These are strikes used for any reason except discrimination based on race or gender.
• Alternate Jurors: In cases with alternates, each side typically gets one additional strike for every two alternates to be seated.
• Multiple Defendants: In criminal cases with multiple defendants, the court has the discretion to allow additional peremptory challenges.

Total Jury Size:

• Criminal Felony: Typically 12 jurors.

If you can understand the above, this means that each side gets to choose 6 jurors and the attorneys (the ones for Trump) can eliminate an unlimited amount of jurors if they feel that they are biased.

This means that your statement about the jurors being anti-Trumpers is total biased ignorance of how the legal system works.

You have no credibility Thinker. You are as biased as it gets!!!

Do you understand that New York actually changed it's laws on purpose of lawfare so that E Jean Carrol could sue Trump?

 

[Lesh]

Obama was finished as presikdent yhet he commenced to try to overthrow the following presid3e4nt. That was not kosher.

To make it clear to you who uses a dirty bedpan, if Trump commences in his final year to overthrow the Democrat, God forbid one be elected, you will sing a different tune. Obama set into the system the deliberate overthrow of Trump.

Catch up on the SC rulings you old fart

 

[Robert W]

Catch up on the SC rulings you old fart

Ask your handler to come change your diaper.

 

[WorldWatcher]

That's not the same case where the ex FEC guy wasn't allowed to say, based on his knowledge, Trump did nothing wrong?

The FEC guy wasn't allowed to say Trump didn't do anything wrong is because the FEC had nothing to do with the charges. Testimony in a court of law must be relevant to the case before the jury, Trump was not charged under any Federal campaign finance law. He was charged with felonious falsification of business records under New York state law.

WW

 

[Luckyone]

Do you understand that New York actually changed it's laws on purpose of lawfare so that E Jean Carrol could sue Trump?

You are deflecting as the Jean Carroll case has nothing to do with Trump's felony charge case.

The fact is that the laws used to convict Trump of the criminal behavior had been in place for decades. In fact, 7 other cases prior to Trump's conviction were tried and the defendants found guilty (like Trump), years before Trump's case!

The fact that the law was changed with the Jean Carroll case does NOT apply here. Trump broke an ESTABLISHED-for-decades law in his criminal case! The law was not changed specifically to go after him.

 

[Robert W]

The FEC guy wasn't allowed to say Trump didn't do anything wrong is because the FEC had nothing to do with the charges. Testimony in a court of law must be relevant to the case before the jury, Trump was not charged under any Federal campaign finance law. He was charged with felonious falsification of business records under New York state law.

WW

Did you read the law professor, Turleys analyis?

Trump is Convicted: What Comes Next?

This morning, many of us are emerging from the late coverage last night after the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felonies. I was in the courtroom for the verdict, which hit like …

jonathanturley.org

 

[Lesh]

Did you read the law professor, Turleys analyis?

Trump is Convicted: What Comes Next?

This morning, many of us are emerging from the late coverage last night after the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 felonies. I was in the courtroom for the verdict, which hit like …

jonathanturley.org

Turdley? No one needs that

 

[dblack]

There seems to be a lot of self-denial about his convictions. Why can't his supporters admit the truth--that he was convicted on all 34 charges by a DC court?

Because they saw the convictions as politically motivated persecution. Their reaction was completely predictable, and avoidable. But the Dems walked right into it.

 

[Robert W]

Turdley? No one needs that

The Supreme court needs it.

 

[Independent thinker]

You are deflecting as the Jean Carroll case has nothing to do with Trump's felony charge case.

The fact is that the laws used to convict Trump of the criminal behavior had been in place for decades. In fact, 7 other cases prior to Trump's conviction were tried and the defendants found guilty (like Trump), years before Trump's case!

The fact that the law was changed with the Jean Carroll case does NOT apply here. Trump broke an ESTABLISHED-for-decades law in his criminal case! The law was not changed specifically to go after him.

Do you understand that New York actually changed it's laws on purpose of lawfare so that E Jean Carrol could sue Trump?