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

[WorldWatcher]

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

No and I don't plan on it since he's a trump shill.

I read the court proceedings (filings and transcripts) at the time.

The fact remains that the FEC guy wanted to testify about Trump not violating FEC laws, Trump wasn't charged under Federal Campaign Finance laws so such testimony was irrelevant.

WW

 

[Robert W]

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.

Donald Trump's trial had "layers of reversible error"—Legal analyst

A jury convicted Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records on Thursday, sparking polarizing reactions.

www.newsweek.com

 

[Robert W]

No and I don't plan on it since he's a trump shill.

I read the court proceedings (filings and transcripts) at the time.

The fact remains that the FEC guy wanted to testify about Trump not violating FEC laws, Trump wasn't charged under Federal Campaign Finance laws so such testimony was irrelevant.

WW

I wondered if you are objective or biassed and thanks for laying out what you are.

 

[WorldWatcher]

I wondered if you are objective or biassed and thanks for laying out what you are.

I based my opinions on court proceedings.

Not what some talking head tells me to think.

So I guess there is a difference in how we evaluate information.

Trump wasn't charged with Federal campaign crimes, therefore the FEC telling the jury he did nothing wrong under federal is irrelevant. Trump was charged under State law with Felonious Falsification of Business records.

WW

 

[Robert W]

I based my opinions on court proceedings.

Not what some talking head tells me to think.

So I guess there is a difference in how we evaluate information.

Trump wasn't charged with Federal campaign crimes, therefore the FEC telling the jury he did nothing wrong under federal is irrelevant. Trump was charged under State law with Felonious Falsification of Business records.

WW

The Judge was devoted to putting Trump in prison. Judges are not there as a jury, Judges are there to protect justice and Merchan failed to do that. But you do not like Trump so you are biased. So am I but on the side of the innocence project cases.

Police and prosecutorial misconduct is a leading contributing factor in a significant number of recorded exoneration cases since 1989.​

Official Misconduct - Innocence Project

Police and prosecutorial misconduct is a leading contributing factor in a significant number of recorded exoneration cases since 1989.

innocenceproject.org

 

[WorldWatcher]

The Judge was devoted to putting Trump in prison.

No he wasn't. He followed the law.

Remember this is the same Judge that when Trump was found guilty of 34 felonies, let him off with an "unconditional discharge" - meaning no prison time or fines.

Judges are not there as a jury,

Trump was convicted by a jury, not the judge.

Judges are there to protect justice and Merchan failed to do that.

No, actually Judge Merchan did a fine job. You are just butt hurt because the case proceeded to conviction.

But you do not like Trump so you are biased.

And you think Trump is the second coming, so you are biased.

WW

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I based my opinions on court proceedings.

Not what some talking head tells me to think.

So I guess there is a difference in how we evaluate information.

Trump wasn't charged with Federal campaign crimes, therefore the FEC telling the jury he did nothing wrong under federal is irrelevant. Trump was charged under State law with Felonious Falsification of Business records.

WW

Yeah, that fake upgrade was fake.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Remember this is the same Judge that when Trump was found guilty of 34 felonies, let him off with an "unconditional discharge" - meaning no prison time or fines.

What prison time or fines are fair for fake charges?

 

[dblack]

I was screaming at Democrats to NOT try to prosecute Trump out of the election. They should have waited until after the election to go after Trump. They should have focused producing a decent candidate to replace Biden instead.

And, if Dems take Congress this fall, they're going to turn around and do the same goddamned thing with an impeachment circus.

 

[Rawley]

No, actually Judge Merchan did a fine job.

Really? SO why did he prohibit Trump's witness, the former FEC Commissoner from testifying that there was no violation of FEC election law in this case?

 

[Marener]

Really? SO why did he prohibit Trump's witness, the former FEC Commissoner from testifying that there was no violation of FEC election law in this case?

That’s not what witnesses are for.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Really? SO why did he prohibit Trump's witness, the former FEC Commissoner from testifying that there was no violation of FEC election law in this case?

See posts from today in this thread where I said why.

WW

 

[Robert W]

No he wasn't. He followed the law.

Remember this is the same Judge that when Trump was found guilty of 34 felonies, let him off with an "unconditional discharge" - meaning no prison time or fines.



Trump was convicted by a jury, not the judge.



No, actually Judge Merchan did a fine job. You are just butt hurt because the case proceeded to conviction.



And you think Trump is the second coming, so you are biased.

WW

I am biased but will you admit you are?
I am biased for justice. You seem biased for conviction.
You show up so seldom I hardly can bracket you and be positive.

I read the case analysis that you refused to read proving what side you are on.

Please don't tell me that the innocent never get convicted.

 

[Rawley]

I based my opinions on court proceedings.

Not what some talking head tells me to think.

So I guess there is a difference in how we evaluate information.

Trump wasn't charged with Federal campaign crimes, therefore the FEC telling the jury he did nothing wrong under federal is irrelevant. Trump was charged under State law with Felonious Falsification of Business records.

WW

Dude. He was charged with covering up a campaign crime, that was how scumbag Bragg made it a felony. No campaign crime, no conviction

 

[jc456]

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.
Will this fact also follow the election result deniers path of massive resistance at first and now a comparatively few still hold out that Trump won the 2020 election?

No felony for a fact

 

[WorldWatcher]

I am biased but will you admit you are?
I am biased for justice. You seem biased for conviction.
You show up so seldom I hardly can bracket you and be positive.

I read the case analysis that you refused to read proving what side you are on.

Please don't tell me that the innocent never get convicted.

Am I biased from a political standpoint as a Republican Anti-Trump'er thinking Trump was biggest mistake my party has made? Absolutley.

Does that influence how I evaluate legal arguments based on court documents? Absolutley not.

WW

 

[WorldWatcher]

Dude. He was charged with covering up a campaign crime, that was how scumbag Bragg made it a felony. No campaign crime, no conviction

Fasle. He was charged with felonious falsification of business records under New York State law.

He was not charged under any federal campaign finance law that the FEC would have had purview over.

WW

 

[Rawley]

Fasle. He was charged with felonious falsification of business records under New York State law.

True

He was not charged under any federal campaign finance law that the FEC would have had purview over.

WW

You should learn to think or yourself, not what some talking head tells you what to think.

In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office
by unlawful means, you may consider the following: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/People%20v.%20DJT%20Jury%20Instructions%20and%20Charges%20FINAL%205-23-24.pdf

No violation of FEC law, no conviction. Merchan is a clown and will be reversed.

 

[Delldude]

That cannot be changed.

Trump wins an appeal, the verdict is moot, tossed out.

 

[Delldude]

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

Bragg used federal campaign violations as the basis of the charges.