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

[Rawley]

Kindly show the federal law which says that's not a crime?

It's called the "irrespective test"

Personal use - FEC.gov

Using campaign funds for personal use is prohibited. FEC guidance on which expenses are considered to be personal use and which expenses are considered on a case-by-case basis, including charitable donations, gifts, candidate salary, meals, vehicles, travel and legal expenses

www.fec.gov

 

[Rawley]

You're right, I got the wrong acronym. It's FECA. Still, the "F" stands for "federal."

Federal Employees' Compensation Act?

 

[Rawley]

He pled guilty to several charges. One was making an illegal campaign contribution.

And the last speeding ticket I got, I pleaded it down to "Parking on the Parkway." That's not evidence I ever parked on the parkway.

 

[WEATHER53]

Cohen didn't falsify the records in the Trump Organization. Trump and his employees falsified the records, the planned for the submission of the fraudulant invoice.

The plan was even submitted in court in the personal handwriting of the Trump Organization CFO.

WW

No records nor accounts were of a falsified nature. That’s a label lib loons snd their loving media concicted . They could not get Trump for his legal act so they intertwined Cohens acts as illegal in the completion of a fully legal act
Unprecedented

 

[j-mac]

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

Why is this so important to the left?

 

[WorldWatcher]

It's called the "irrespective test"

Personal use - FEC.gov

Using campaign funds for personal use is prohibited. FEC guidance on which expenses are considered to be personal use and which expenses are considered on a case-by-case basis, including charitable donations, gifts, candidate salary, meals, vehicles, travel and legal expenses

www.fec.gov

Yes, there is an "irrespective test".

But testimony at trail was that Trump attempted to delay payment to Daniels so that once the election was held he could stiff her (pun intended) and not pay her since the votes would have already been cast.

So under the application of the "irrespective test" paying a porn star to be silent to protect the spouse and family is a valid reason outside the campign. However Trump trying to delay payment, then withhold payment so that the story came out after election day and he was fine with that fails the irrespective test. Well it fails the test for reasonable people.

Again, there was testimony at trial from Trump's own staff as to intent.

WW

 

[Rawley]

Yes, there is an "irrespective test".

But testimony at trail was that Trump attempted to delay payment to Daniels so that once the election was held he could stiff her (pun intended) and not pay her since the votes would have already been cast.

So under the application of the "irrespective test" paying a porn star to be silent to protect the spouse and family is a valid reason outside the campign. However Trump trying to delay payment, then withhold payment so that the story came out after election day and he was fine with that fails the irrespective test. Well it fails the test for reasonable people.

Again, there was testimony at trial from Trump's own staff as to intent.

WW

And there was testimony that Trump dick was mushroom shaped.

Neither is an issue as to his conviction, as you well know.

Your Monday morning quarterbacking does not cure scumbag Marchan's order prohibiting critical testimony from the former FEC commissioner.

 

[AZrailwhale]

Are you ignorant of how our elections work in this country? Let me enlighten you. Trump did indeed crack 50%, so you are wrong. Trump won 312 electoral votes to 226 electoral votes for Harris. That was an even larger result than Biden had in 2020 or what he got in 2016. Now, I know you are talking about the national popular vote. We don’t have a national popular vote election so no one runs a popular vote campaign. The point is Trump won. He’s the President. That conviction didn’t stop him. #fail

She's Canadian.

 

[WorldWatcher]

And there was testimony that Trump dick was mushroom shaped.

Neither is an issue as to his conviction, as you well know.

Your Monday morning quarterbacking does not cure scumbag Marchan's order prohibiting critical testimony from the former FEC commissioner.

The FEC Ex-commissioner was irrelevant to the State charges of felonious falsification of business records under New York State law.

The FEC Ex-commissoner was not an expert on New York State business law and Trump was not charged with any FEC violations.

So it testimony was not "critical" it wasn't even relevant.

What the Trump team was trying to do was relitigate Cohen's convicted for campaign fraud and that was not allowed because you can't relitigate a conviction in another court. To overturn a conviction you appeal it in the proper court of jurisdiction.

WW

 

[AZrailwhale]

But Trump didn't get a majority of the voters to vote for him. Most voted for someone other than him.

Politicians are almost never elected by a majority of the vote. It's almost always a plurality.

 

[Rawley]

The FEC Ex-commissioner was irrelevant to the State charges of felonious falsification of business records under New York State law.

The FEC Ex-commissoner was not an expert on New York State business law and Trump was not charged with any FEC violations.

So it testimony was not "critical" it wasn't even relevant.

What the Trump team was trying to do was relitigate Cohen's convicted for campaign fraud and that was not allowed because you can't relitigate a conviction in another court. To overturn a conviction you appeal it in the proper court of jurisdiction.

WW

LOL So the "another crime" was not Cohen's campaign finance guilty plea? Marchan fucked that up too?

Speaking of pretzels.

 

[Robert W]

No, but Cohen was. And in direct contradiction to Trump's initial claims he had no knowledge of any of that taking place, prosecutors presented evidence in the trial of Trump and Cohen conspiring how to pay Pecker for his catch and kill. Lending Cohen a modicum of credibility.

Both of the women should have been prosecuted.

 

[Robert W]

LOL So the "other crime" was not Cohen's campaign finance guilty plea? Marchan fucked that up too?

Speaking of pretzels.

Marchan was a Trump hater.

 

[Robert W]

Sure he was. But so was Trump. The difference between them in terms of this case was the existence of an audio tape which proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, that in regard to the claim of was Trump involved with hush money being paid out, that Cohen was the one telling the truth while Trump was the one lying about it.

In fact, when Trump was asked about it, he denied any knowledge of it and even told reporters they'd have to speak to Cohen about the matter. Cohen eventually spoke up about it.

Embellish us with proof.

 

[Mick2]

They did.

1. Prosecutors presented evidence that Trump conspired with Cohen to make an illegal campaign contribution to Trump's campaign in order to unlawfully influence the election.

2. Prosecutors presented evidence to show Cohen made an illegal campaign contribution to Trump's campaign.

3. Prosecutors presented evidence that the Trump Organization reimbursed Michael Cohen by essentially doubling his payout (calling it "income" rather than a reimbursement) so that he would be left whole after taxes, thereby mischaracterizing the transaction for tax purposes.

The trial judge told the jury that they didn't need to be unanimous in finding Trump guilty of any of these. He told them they each had find gim guilty of one of them in order to achieve conviction. That's where the judge ran afoul of the Constitution.

They did.

1. Prosecutors presented evidence that Trump conspired with Cohen to make an illegal campaign contribution to Trump's campaign in order to unlawfully influence the election.

2. Prosecutors presented evidence to show Cohen made an illegal campaign contribution to Trump's campaign.

3. Prosecutors presented evidence that the Trump Organization reimbursed Michael Cohen by essentially doubling his payout (calling it "income" rather than a reimbursement) so that he would be left whole after taxes, thereby mischaracterizing the transaction for tax purposes.

Which one did they find Trump guilty by unanimous decision? The trial judge's jury instruction:

"Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to 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."

----------------
"you need not be unanimous"


The jurors were specifically told by the judge that they didn't need to agree unanimously on the unlawful means. Without unanimity none of those 3 claims were proven in court. That's a violation of the 5th and 6th amendments. Therefore, they don't exist for charging and sentencing purposes. The charge reverts back to misdemeanor. That misdemeanor had run its statute of limitations, though. That dismisses the case entirely.

 

[playtime]

I don't read a felony conviction in any of it... besides the case was dismissed before sentencing.... conviction overturned.... sorry boys....

D.A. Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Trial Conviction of Donald J. Trump

DISMISSED.... look the word up....

CONVICTED ... look that up, SB.

 

[Mick2]

It was proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Especially in terms of Cohen's illegal campaign contribution. Which he was indicted for, convicted and sentenced over. There is no beyond a reasonable doubt bigger than that, from what I can tell.

Meaningless. The trial judge directed the jury that they could not consider Cohen's plea agreement as evidence of guilt of the defendant who was never accused of wrongdoing in the Cohen case. This case had to stand on its own merits against the defendant. Cohen's personal legal problems are Cohen's only. You are getting exposed and increasingly desperate now.

 

[Mick2]

CONVICTED ... look that up, SB.

Like when Colorado threw Trump off the ballot? Or Leticia James fined Trump $500 million?

You guys keep losing on appeal.

 

[playtime]

OMG!
34 misdemeanors beyond the statute of limitations.
Like 34 jaywalking tickets, one for each step it takes to cross the street.

not misdemeanors. fel-o-nies.

34 felonies.

There are a total of five felony classes: Class A felony, Class B felony, Class C felony, Class D felony, and Class E felony, with A being the most serious (potentially leading to life imprisonment) and E being the least. However, this does not mean that a Class E felony charge should be taken at all lightly – New York State penal code describes a Class E felony as ‘an offense for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one year may be imposed’.
What is a New York Class E Felony?

Class “E” felonies are the least serious felonies. However, they are still felonies, still need to be taken seriously and can result in a prison sentence of up to 4 years in state prison. However, there are no minimums for first time felony offenders and a person convicted of a class “E” felony can even receive a sentence of probation or a conditional discharge. Most class “E” felonies are non-violent. The only violent class “E” felonies are attempts to commit violent class “D” felonies such as Attempted Assault in the Second Degree or Attempted Criminal Possession of a Weapon in the Third Degree. N0n-violent class “E” felonies can run the gamut from Criminally Negligent Homicide, Grand Larceny in the Fourth Degree or Criminal Mischief in the Third Degree. A person who is a predicate felon is required to go to prison even on a “E” felony.
D.A. Bragg Announces 34-Count Felony Trial Conviction of Donald J. Trump

 

[playtime]

Like when Colorado threw Trump off the ballot? Or Leticia James fined Trump $500 million?

fined him for what exactly?

You guys keep losing on appeal.

nice try.