james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 1,250
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 11:24:30 GMT
Ace likes this
Post by james100 on Jun 3, 2024 11:24:30 GMT
Good luck... Not quite sure what that image is meant to represent... <snip> It's the Kool-Aid kid. Meme shorthand for 'you drank the kool aid' which is generally used to suggest you've been brainwashed into accepting illogical ideology by a charismatic leader. Derived from the events of Jonestown. I'm not sure it's been applied correctly here given that was characterised by the cultists being spoon-fed soviet propaganda, violence against a Democratic senator, accusations of a conspiracy by the US government, and calls to rebellion/revolution...nonetheless the sequence of events was fascinating albeit ultimately horrific and artificially grape-flavoured. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,599
Likes: 5,020
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 11:27:22 GMT
Post by adrianc on Jun 3, 2024 11:27:22 GMT
Not quite sure what that image is meant to represent... <snip> It's the Kool-Aid kid. Oh. I mean, what with never having lived in a country in which Kool-Aid was sold... I am aware of the misidentification of the product in Jonestown.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 11:32:05 GMT
Post by registerme on Jun 3, 2024 11:32:05 GMT
I've just re-listened to parts of Trump's post conviction speech. He actually said... "by a Soros backed DA".
|
|
james100
Member of DD Central
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 1,250
|
Post by james100 on Jun 3, 2024 11:39:53 GMT
<snip> I am aware of the misidentification of the product in Jonestown. <snip> Oh yes, misinformation is par for the course Fun fact: many years ago, when I first heard the term 'you drank the kool aid' I actually thought it was a mild compliment about liberally minded lovers of bohemian lifestyles who were open to thinking outside the box. Purely because my favourite author of the time was Tom Wolfe who wrote the Electric Kool Aid Acid Test. Life was so much simpler before the internet!
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,599
Likes: 5,020
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 12:09:34 GMT
Post by adrianc on Jun 3, 2024 12:09:34 GMT
I've just re-listened to parts of Trump's post conviction speech. He actually said... "by a Soros backed DA". He just can't help himself throwing in an antisemitic conspiracy theory, can he?
|
|
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 17:16:07 GMT
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 3, 2024 17:16:07 GMT
If Donald Trump (or anyone else who is not part of the above the law deep state elite) had been accused of a fraction of what Bill Clinton has been accused of by a large number of people he very likely would be behind bars for decades. If you look at the extent of the allegations against Bill Clinton it is actually staggering, see if you can find the interview with the Arkansas police chief . The fact the only thing they could get him on was some questionable accounting suggests to me he is pretty clean.Anyone who knows history knows the only thing they ever pinned on Al Capone one of the worst gangsters in American history was tax evasion. he took a plea on tax evasion on 5000 other law breaches for 2.5 years . things that worry me with the Trump case :- despite what the Judge and prosecutors say multiple misdemeanours do not add up to felony - that's like saying 10 thefts of mars bars from corner shop is the same as robbing a bank The prosecutors have kept banging on about illegal acts without specifying what laws he broke, I think the defence didn't bring this up as they will use it in the appeal to have all the charges dismissed. While I've already said that I'm a little bit dubious about the stretch to a 1st degree, what you've said above is, as I understand, wrong on both counts (maybe even 34....). On the first one. That is not the case that they made. As I understand it, all charges - are all counts - are on the same charge: falsification of business records, in the 1st degree. It could equally have been a single charge and it would still have been a felony: Its the fact that it was charged in the 1st degree that made it a felony not a misdemeanour. They have not said many misdemeanours = a felony, because it wouldn't be true, and would not be relevant. the second point is also wrong. They have specified what laws he broke - falsifying business records. The prosecution also gave 3 potential motivational criminal reasons which the jury could consider as a possible reason for carrying out the falsification. In their summing up, they said that the underlying crime they were alleging was violation of NY state election law.
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,424
Likes: 2,545
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 17:23:03 GMT
Post by keitha on Jun 3, 2024 17:23:03 GMT
Anyone who knows history knows the only thing they ever pinned on Al Capone one of the worst gangsters in American history was tax evasion. he took a plea on tax evasion on 5000 other law breaches for 2.5 years . things that worry me with the Trump case :- despite what the Judge and prosecutors say multiple misdemeanours do not add up to felony - that's like saying 10 thefts of mars bars from corner shop is the same as robbing a bank The prosecutors have kept banging on about illegal acts without specifying what laws he broke, I think the defence didn't bring this up as they will use it in the appeal to have all the charges dismissed. While I've already said that I'm a little bit dubious about the stretch to a 1st degree, what you've said above is, as I understand, wrong on both counts (maybe even 34....). On the first one. That is not the case that they made. As I understand it, all charges - are all counts - are on the same charge: falsification of business records, in the 1st degree. It could equally have been a single charge and it would still have been a felony: Its the fact that it was charged in the 1st degree that made it a felony not a misdemeanour. They have not said many misdemeanours = a felony, because it wouldn't be true, and would not be relevant. the second point is also wrong. They have specified what laws he broke - falsifying business records. The prosecution also gave 3 potential motivational criminal reasons which the jury could consider as a possible reason for carrying out the falsification. In their summing up, they said that the underlying crime they were alleging was violation of NY state election law. what I was saying in effect they have given themselves 3 bites of the cherry, It could be that 6 jurors felt it was for reason A, 3 for B and 3 for C. I have no doubt that the charges will be dismissed on appeal ( and I think he's guilty )
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,599
Likes: 5,020
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 19:37:04 GMT
Post by adrianc on Jun 3, 2024 19:37:04 GMT
Anyone who knows history knows the only thing they ever pinned on Al Capone one of the worst gangsters in American history was tax evasion. he took a plea on tax evasion on 5000 other law breaches for 2.5 years . things that worry me with the Trump case :- despite what the Judge and prosecutors say multiple misdemeanours do not add up to felony - that's like saying 10 thefts of mars bars from corner shop is the same as robbing a bank The prosecutors have kept banging on about illegal acts without specifying what laws he broke, I think the defence didn't bring this up as they will use it in the appeal to have all the charges dismissed. While I've already said that I'm a little bit dubious about the stretch to a 1st degree, what you've said above is, as I understand, wrong on both counts (maybe even 34....). On the first one. That is not the case that they made. As I understand it, all charges - are all counts - are on the same charge: falsification of business records, in the 1st degree. It could equally have been a single charge and it would still have been a felony: Its the fact that it was charged in the 1st degree that made it a felony not a misdemeanour. They have not said many misdemeanours = a felony, because it wouldn't be true, and would not be relevant. the second point is also wrong. They have specified what laws he broke - falsifying business records. The prosecution also gave 3 potential motivational criminal reasons which the jury could consider as a possible reason for carrying out the falsification. In their summing up, they said that the underlying crime they were alleging was violation of NY state election law. It's the falsification TO PROTECT, AID OR CONCEAL A CRIME that makes it 1st degree, promoting it from misdemeanour to felony. The crime behind the falsification involved election finance limits. If he'd declared the payments as campaign payments, he'd have exceeded those limits, a criminal offence. A defence to that would have been if the "hush money" had been totally unrelated to the election, which is patently not true. Second degree: www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.10First degree: www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/PEN/175.05So the only real question the trial had to determine was whether the records were falsified, and if so whether Trump himself was involved in the falsification. Nobody has any credible doubt that they were paid, and that the records were not accurate. Cohen pleaded guilty to paying them, and said Trump authorised them. Giuliani also said Trump authorised them. Trump himself said in a 2018 legally-required ethics declaration that he authorised them. www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1IH2J4/So - was he lying then, or now? As for an appeal overturning the convictions... on what legal grounds?
|
|
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 20:48:56 GMT
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 3, 2024 20:48:56 GMT
While I've already said that I'm a little bit dubious about the stretch to a 1st degree, what you've said above is, as I understand, wrong on both counts (maybe even 34....). On the first one. That is not the case that they made. As I understand it, all charges - are all counts - are on the same charge: falsification of business records, in the 1st degree. It could equally have been a single charge and it would still have been a felony: Its the fact that it was charged in the 1st degree that made it a felony not a misdemeanour. They have not said many misdemeanours = a felony, because it wouldn't be true, and would not be relevant. the second point is also wrong. They have specified what laws he broke - falsifying business records. The prosecution also gave 3 potential motivational criminal reasons which the jury could consider as a possible reason for carrying out the falsification. In their summing up, they said that the underlying crime they were alleging was violation of NY state election law. It's the falsification TO PROTECT, AID OR CONCEAL A CRIME that makes it 1st degree, promoting it from misdemeanour to felony. yes I know. That is what I've said. Several times.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,599
Likes: 5,020
|
Trump
Jun 3, 2024 20:57:58 GMT
Post by adrianc on Jun 3, 2024 20:57:58 GMT
I know you know.
That's why I was backing you up on that, and expanding on the rest of it.
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jun 3, 2024 20:58:33 GMT
While I've already said that I'm a little bit dubious about the stretch to a 1st degree, what you've said above is, as I understand, wrong on both counts (maybe even 34....). On the first one. That is not the case that they made. As I understand it, all charges - are all counts - are on the same charge: falsification of business records, in the 1st degree. It could equally have been a single charge and it would still have been a felony: Its the fact that it was charged in the 1st degree that made it a felony not a misdemeanour. They have not said many misdemeanours = a felony, because it wouldn't be true, and would not be relevant. the second point is also wrong. They have specified what laws he broke - falsifyting business records. The prosecution also gave 3 potential motivational criminal reasons which the jury could consider as a possible reason for carrying out the falsification. In their summing up, they said that the underlying crime they were alleging was violation of NY state election law. what I was saying in effect they have given themselves 3 bites of the cherry, It could be that 6 jurors felt it was for reason A, 3 for B and 3 for C. I have no doubt that the charges will be dismissed on appeal ( and I think he's guilty ) but I don't think that is really true. It is the judge who has said that a s a point of law the jury members did not have to agree on which of the posited reasons they chose to make their decision. So for that to be grounds for an appeal, the judge would have to be wrong in law. And if that was the case, you would have had the legal profession en masse jumping up and down. They haven't, as far as I'm aware. And whatever they might have said during the body of the trial, I think in their summing up the prosecution made it clear that their focus was on alleging it was to hide a breach of state election law. How strongly they did that, I don't know. But it is kind of not that relevant if the judge is correct in his ruling.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Trump
Jun 4, 2024 7:55:30 GMT
Post by registerme on Jun 4, 2024 7:55:30 GMT
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 6,316
|
Post by registerme on Jun 6, 2024 20:43:28 GMT
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 5,943
Likes: 4,382
|
Trump
Jun 7, 2024 9:49:42 GMT
Post by agent69 on Jun 7, 2024 9:49:42 GMT
I guess he'll be the first on the pardon list if Tango man gets back into power (as opposed to Hunter Biden, who may be some way down that list)
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 9,599
Likes: 5,020
|
Trump
Jun 7, 2024 10:01:34 GMT
Post by adrianc on Jun 7, 2024 10:01:34 GMT
I guess he'll be the first on the pardon list if Tango man gets back into power (as opposed to Hunter Biden, who may be some way down that list) Didn't they have a big falling out a while back? I suspect Trumplethinskin is superb at holding grudges.
|
|