May 30, 20241 yr 18 hours ago, Diehardfan said: I appreciate you posting the link. I could have missed it but I didn't see that. WTF was she reading then? Holy crap that is incendiary. I expect that from Elon and Fox but NPR as well? It's on pg.31 Quote 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 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.
May 30, 20241 yr Author 17 minutes ago, vikas83 said: isn't there supposed to be a recording of him saying sheet like this on the set of the apprentice?
May 30, 20241 yr There are three prongs. Unlawful means is not a crime he is being charged with. It's clear that the media is misleading the public on this.
May 30, 20241 yr 1 minute ago, mr_hunt said: isn't there supposed to be a recording of him saying sheet like this on the set of the apprentice? Trump uses the N word. Gee there's a surprise. I'm sure there is a recording.
May 30, 20241 yr 6 minutes ago, The_Omega said: It's on pg.31 I finally got a chance to look at this last night. Basically, there are 3 steps -- they must find that he falsified business records (a NY state misdemeanor) in furtherance of another crime (impacting the election) by unlawful means. There are 3 potential ways to see unlawful means -- what the judge was saying is not all 12 have to see the same unlawful means. If 4 of them see option A, 4 see option B and 4 see option C, then all 12 still see unlawful means and therefore can convict. The disingenuous and ridiculous spin on this by Fox and others has been pathetic, but hardly surprising.
May 30, 20241 yr 23 minutes ago, vikas83 said: Donald Trump allegedly said the n word 20 years ago pretty much perfectly encapsulates how pathetic soyboys and never trumpers (I repeat myself) have become.
May 30, 20241 yr 1 minute ago, Kz! said: Donald Trump allegedly said the n word 20 years ago pretty much perfectly encapsulates how pathetic soyboys and never trumpers (I repeat myself) have become. Oh, does it being 20 years ago (would make it closer to 10 years before he became president) make it insignificant? Just curious what the cutoff is here.
May 30, 20241 yr 2 minutes ago, Paul852 said: Oh, does it being 20 years ago (would make it closer to 10 years before he became president) make it insignificant? Just curious what the cutoff is here. Assuming it is true, it won't matter at all. If you haven't concluded that Trump is a boob by now, no amount of evidence will matter. There may be no other person on the planet for whom people's perceptions are completely settled and immutable -- people either love him or hate him. There's basically no one left without an opinion on Trump.
May 30, 20241 yr 8 minutes ago, vikas83 said: I finally got a chance to look at this last night. Basically, there are 3 steps -- they must find that he falsified business records (a NY state misdemeanor) in furtherance of another crime (impacting the election) by unlawful means. There are 3 potential ways to see unlawful means -- what the judge was saying is not all 12 have to see the same unlawful means. If 4 of them see option A, 4 see option B and 4 see option C, then all 12 still see unlawful means and therefore can convict. The disingenuous and ridiculous spin on this by Fox and others has been pathetic, but hardly surprising. So the jury can use crimes he's never even been charged with to convict him of a different crime, and they don't even have to agree on the crime he hasn't even been charged with. Yeah, that's pathetic Fox spin.
May 30, 20241 yr 7 minutes ago, Kz! said: Donald Trump allegedly said the n word 20 years ago pretty much perfectly encapsulates how pathetic soyboys and never trumpers (I repeat myself) have become. We're all incredibly surprised that you find nothing wrong with your candidate saying the N-word in a deragatory fashion.
May 30, 20241 yr 3 minutes ago, Kz! said: No kidding. Yeah because no one has ever been caught trying to rig a US presidential election before
May 30, 20241 yr Just now, The_Omega said: So the jury can use crimes he's never even been charged with to convict him of a different crime, and they don't even have to agree on the crime he hasn't even been charged with. Yeah, that's pathetic Fox spin. Who zips up your pants every morning?
May 30, 20241 yr 1 minute ago, vikas83 said: Assuming it is true, it won't matter at all. If you haven't concluded that Trump is a boob by now, no amount of evidence will matter. There may be no other person on the planet for whom people's perceptions are completely settled and immutable -- people either love him or hate him. There's basically no one left without an opinion on Trump. Oh, I'm fully aware. If anything a story like this would help him.
May 30, 20241 yr 2 minutes ago, The_Omega said: So the jury can use crimes he's never even been charged with to convict him of a different crime, and they don't even have to agree on the crime he hasn't even been charged with. Yeah, that's pathetic Fox spin. This is the epic level of butt hurt I'm here for
May 30, 20241 yr 4 minutes ago, The_Omega said: So the jury can use crimes he's never even been charged with to convict him of a different crime, and they don't even have to agree on the crime he hasn't even been charged with. Yeah, that's pathetic Fox spin. Hahahaha, you need a nap worse than Trump does, Slappy.
May 30, 20241 yr 6 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: We're all incredibly surprised that you find nothing wrong with your candidate saying the N-word in a deragatory fashion. No one actually cares. Biden doesn't want his kids in a racial jungle and says repubs will re-enslave blacks. Imagine actually caring about someone saying the n word 20 years ago. Fing soyboys.
May 30, 20241 yr 2 minutes ago, Kz! said: No one actually cares. Biden doesn't want his kids in a racial jungle and says repubs will re-enslave blacks. Imagine actually caring about someone saying the n word 20 years ago. Fing soyboys. Oh cool, then I encourage you to say it out loud in public as often as you can. Let us know how it works for you.
May 30, 20241 yr 14 minutes ago, vikas83 said: I finally got a chance to look at this last night. Basically, there are 3 steps -- they must find that he falsified business records (a NY state misdemeanor) in furtherance of another crime (impacting the election) by unlawful means. There are 3 potential ways to see unlawful means -- what the judge was saying is not all 12 have to see the same unlawful means. If 4 of them see option A, 4 see option B and 4 see option C, then all 12 still see unlawful means and therefore can convict. The disingenuous and ridiculous spin on this by Fox and others has been pathetic, but hardly surprising. Correct. The jury must be unanimous that Trump falsified business records in an attempt to unlawfully disrupt the election. This is the trial. Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor in NY but it becomes felony if Trump did it to subvert an election. Prosecution has given the jury 3 means to which Trump could have illegally impacted the election. The jury can each decide if he did 1, 2, or all 3; and they don't have to agree to which of 3 means. As long as they all agree Trump illegally impacted the election in one way or another.
Create an account or sign in to comment