Well that's just factually incorrect. He was allowed to testify, he was just (correctly) restricted to speaking about facts and not allowed to speak on matters that were merely his opinion.
Trump now a convicted felon
- Thread starter SHUSA
- Start date
So there was an expert that was going to testify as to the ultimate issue that is before the jury? Come on. Of course he can’t testify as his opinion as to whether Trump is guilty or not. That’s ridiculous. That is strictly a jury call.
Listen, we all knew Trump paid the hush money. We all know it’s true that he had an affair with the two women. The payoff were written off as a business expense. This is all wrong doing. You want to argue about a possible Edwards defense or that it should not be brought in State court, I get it. But these arguments that he had an unfair trial or he did nothing wrong is asinine. He won’t even admit he had the affairs with these two women.
No.... the witness who was going to testify about election laws was not allowed to testify. Check it out. It was the Judge's call.
What are you talking about? It was an expert supposedly who was going to talk about election law as I understand it.
Look neither the payoff or any liaison with Stormy Daniel's is not illegal by the way and that wasn't even what he was being charged with.
What was the charge that brought this whole mess to a felony? No one seems to know. I'm not sure what it was that he did wrong. Not saying he was totally clean in this whole thing but there are a lot of questions about the case, Starting with the selection of the judge who was clearly not impartial. He was targeted because he challenges the Dems hold on power....
it's as simple as that.
The judge limited the expert to facts and not to give his opinion as to whether the election law was violated. The judge would not let the expert testify to what is in the jury’s power. That is what the judge limited the expert to. Because of that, Trump decided not to call him. He was not barred.
Second, stop with the judge was being unfair garbage. If you want to argue that the prosecution stretched the law to bring the filing of a false business record to a felony due to the election law, then that is a reasonable and rational argument. All the other arguments that you are parroting Donald Trump is complete nonsense.
whats to celebrate? my republican peers all got a trump homer from this. nothing unusual , just proof that our country is half filled with terrible people
if republicans were in the best interest of americans they would can trump and put up a real candidate.
we are dealing with mass population who are supporting trump MORE now that he's a convicted felon.
full stop.
this is the state we are in. and a lot of them are right here on this board
absolutely pathetic. deathbed regret could only be so kind.
But if his poll numbers go up this week, doesn’t that mean that there were people that weren’t Trump supporters than are now going to vote for him?
I think you need to look beyond Trump. There is a segment of the electorate that sees this trial as a weaponization of the justice system and lost faith in the Republic.
Exactly, Joe Biden has a long history of going after people. 50 years in political office lying and running at the mouth has a way of breeding this behavior just ask Jill Biden’s Ex husband who was Joe’s friend. He’s failed miserably at bringing the country together which is why he was elected. The guy is a loser who makes a mess of things, the world is a hotbed of conflict under his watch, he made a mess of the Southern border and the economy could not be worse for low income and even the middle class. The election will be won when the less fortunate have a chance to vote. I actually voted for Joe Biden in the 1990’s in the primary vs. Bill Clinton before the Democratic Party called him out for lying and then had him removed from the race.
Barack Obama said it best, never under estimate Joe Biden’s ability to F things up.
Minutes after my last post this story popped up on my screen, must have been reading my mind.
Biden's big weakness vs Trump: Voters without college degrees, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bi...college-degrees-reutersipsos-poll-2024-06-01/
Minutes after my last post this story popped up on my screen, must have been reading my mind.
Biden's big weakness vs Trump: Voters without college degrees, Reuters/Ipsos poll finds
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bi...college-degrees-reutersipsos-poll-2024-06-01/
Direct quote from the Judge's response:
"However, Smith will be permitted to testify generally as to the following: general background as to what the Federal Campaign Commission ("FEC") is, background as to who
makes up the FEC, what thc FEC's function is, what laws, if any, thc FEC is responsible for enforcing, and general definitions and terms thal relate directly to this case, such as for example "campaign
contribution""
He basically just wasn't allowed to give his personal opinion on whether or not Trump broke the law, which is all the defense wanted from him, so they didn't bother to call him.
He wasn't allowed to give his "expert" opinion..... not his personal opinion as you characterize it. Big difference.
A debatable point about the expert witness.
Pleeeeze.... with the "parroting Donald Trump"....... who are you parroting? Sonny Hosten? Rachel Maddow? Joe Biden? They all sing from the same songbook.
My point of view is that the judge was patently unfair and biased. He favored the prosecution at every turn. You will deny that.... fine. We'll see how things turn out on appeal.
Then why do we have a trial system for anything? For all criminal matters we just ask a singular self anointed "expert" what his opinion is and go with that, right?
The point is he was allowed to testify and he's not on the jury so his opinion as to whether the law was violated (the very thing the trial exists to determine) was correctly deemed irrelevant.
what if, now this is crazy, what if he's simply guilty of these crimes?
wow trump caters to uneducated people?? who woulda thought!!
You’re missing the point. He has been found guilty. He can run even if convicted. “Convicted Felon” is a nice talking point, but if his poll numbers go up, that means more people don’t care. Personally, I think his numbers are going to go down but in the 24 hours since he’s taking in millions in donations.
We as a country should be embarrassed that we have no better choices for President than a man whose best days are behind him and a convicted felon.
We should be, but 130 million people will vote for one or the other and “justify” their choice. America needs to look in the mirror and stop it.
That's because nobody smart enough to do the job effectively is dumb enough to want it.
Still a big difference consciously voting for a felon……
the point is the situation you just mentioned. being a convicted felon is a bad thing. and a large portion of the country now likes him more for it. its a wrong reaction but it doesn't matter to them.
and they are BAD humans because of it. objectively. its a sad state for america that somebodies conviction makes them more popular. the country is filled with these loud brainwashed idiots. they were in numbers on my intersection with flags and just yelling with signs today. based on their behavior and what their clothes were saying they are low class, trashy, angry people who also happen to look overweight and in poor health. all of them. its just wild.
The educated really smart people elected Joe Biden to represent them. I guess smart people are entitled to make poor choices as well. Bottom line is democrats use to represent the working class but all those trillion dollar budgets have changed things. Both parties have bad representatives, comes down to who is worst which is sad.
A lot more idiots are being let in at our southern border you better get use to it. Loud brainwashed idiots are on both sides, your own posts are filled with hatred. Turn off the news and try to spread some love in the world.
We’ve had the same in our town. They’re white trash. The underbelly of society. It’s sad to see.
Because they question whether the charges were a political stunt by Bragg to begin with. I get you’re point about using the term “convicted felon” over and over again, but you also keep missing the point.
You sound like Hilary…lol. Using stereotypes shows more ignorance on your part than the people you are criticizing.
Last edited:
I am giving my legal perspective. Not parroting The View.
Your point of view was that the judge was unfair and biased. Ok give the examples. Otherwise, you are making statements out of ur butt or parroting the orange man.
Now, the reason that Trump has an appealable issue is based upon the law. Can the State use federal laws of upgrading a state charge of misdemeanor false business filings to a felony. That is the issue that has a chance on appeal.
Again, the facts of what Trump did are not in any dispute. He paid off the women, he filed false business reports and he wrote them off as a business expense which is cheating on your taxes as President of the US. In a normal world, no voter would ever consider this type of person to elect as President.
What? That's not a debatable point at all, it's literally what the judge ruled. Look it up. He denied the protection's request to prevent him from testifying at all but granted the request to not allow opinion testimony.
You have to be a stone cold narcissist to want the office… that or your family committs elder abuse by forcing you to run despite obvious cognitive decline.
Hey Pirate, is the Judge in the Hunter Biden case patently unfair and biased for barring the defense expert? https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/02/politics/judge-blocks-evidence-hunter-biden-gun-trial/index.html
Must admit good point. I believe you are a lawyer, are jury instructions also typical in most cases?
There must be jury instructions given to the jury in all trials. There are model jury instructions that most crimes have. The attorneys will review with the judge which instructions should or should not be given and at times request additional instructions.
My prediction is that Hunter will be found not guilty. I think that the fact that it had been found unconstitutional (after Hunter's crime) to prevent addicts from getting gun licenses will sway the jury in Hunter's favor. Plus the venue is favorable to him.
Biden's judge's actions vs. Trump judge's actions comparison, a little early to figure out. Ask me after the trial.
These were not typical jury instructions. Trump's defense objected to much in Marchon's jury instructions but were reportedly overruled, as they were overruled in their objections repeatedly throughout the trial. All the while prosecution witnesses were given latitude to discuss all sorts of things that were not pertinent to the charges. Did the judge even describe what the overarching federal crime was that supposedly made these misdemeanors felonies? Sounded like very confusing instructions. Can you describe the federal crime that was allegedly violated? Jurors got to pick from a laundry list of 3... and they didn't have to be unanimous about which one was chosen.... they had to be unanimous that a federal crime was committed but not unanimous on which one. I did not see specifics about any of them. Keep in mind that the defense had NO OPPORTUNITY to put up a defense against what I call the "phantom federal crime" Legal scholars have been making a cottage industry out of picking apart the way that Judge Marchon ran this trial..... starting with the way he was picked to be judge. The conviction will be overturned but not before irreparable harm and continued interference in the current election has taken place.
So let’s talk about this unanimous verdict. The jury was instructed that they had to be unanimous of whether Trump was guilty. I did not read the instructions. What you call phantom federal charges are real charges. Remember Michael Cohen was convicted of federal charges for this exact scheme. The federal charges are violations of election law which John E dwards was similarly prosecuted on and tax fraud. IMO, Trump should have been charged federally for these crimes. You charge the accomplice but not the principle defendant? That’s the mistake as I see it.
Now, The jury did not have to agree as to which federal law was violated whether it was Election law violation or tax fraud. As long as they found one. This was the corrupt act. This is similar to accomplice liability in state court. If two people are charged as accomplice and principal of a murder, the jury does not have to be unanimous that one person was the shooter and the other the accomplice. As long as they shared the same intent to murder someone, then they are both guilty of murder even if the jury did not agree on who was the shooter.
So lots of people that you are listening to don’t know the law or are purposely spinning it. Now, I have been consistent in saying the facts are not disputed. The question is whether the legal theory that the DA used here is the question. Why don’t you read the judge’s charge for yourself and stop taking the word or some talking head.
theyre going to have to wait until tomorrow mornings fox news cycle to find a new topic to deflect to.
criminal committed crime. jury unanimously found him guilty.
its as simple as that.
Believe what you will...... thank God for outlets like Fox News.... here's just a simple example.... once again a Biden lie is exposed. Not deflecting... just making a point. That trial continues to be the poster child for political revenge.... he beat Hilary and they'll never let go.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/john-roberts-biden-campaign-insulin?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20240605ActiveTrending&utm_term=ACTIVE LIST - 7 Day Engagement&tpcc=email-breaking
Last edited:
Similar threads
