Guilty-NOT Guilty-Hung Jury---Last Chance to Make Your NY v. Trump Verdict Prediction

a reply to: Boomer1947

yeahbut NY Jurors in a State Court case don't have the authority to determine if somebody (Trump) broke a Federal Law without a Federal conviction. 😃

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Lazy88

I'd like to hear it from a paralegal's pointy of view.

You want an honest answer based on fact, logic, and cited criminal and civil law/statutes.

When’s the last time that happened for a conservative charged with a crime on ATS?

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: Threadbarer
a reply to: tanstaafl

Falsification of business records in the first degree. 34 counts of it.

Yes, explain why.

Here is what we know to be true.

Trump porked a whore. Trump (however it happened) had an NDA with the whore to not talk, and she was paid. So far, none of that is illegal, if it is, you need to explain why. Then we have the lawyer who Trump hired who facilitated the NDA. If he did it on his own, or by direction of Trump is irrelevent, since it's not a crime. He paid his lawyer for the work he did and for other things, and listed them as a leagal expense. I think those are the verifiable facts.

now, explain where the crime is please.

You can’t make this sh!t up, what’s the damn crime?

These Liberal idiots have a direct hotline to stupidity and they never hang up.

a reply to: network dude

With equal application of law?

😂😂😂😂😂

a reply to: TheMisguidedAngel
indeed. What makes it even more glaring is that Biden had truckloads of documents stored in several
different houses from when he was veep and somehow that's fine. Not to mention stormy daniels saying they never had sex and she was the aggressor in the situation. Apparently testimony and facts don't have any bearing in these cases.
They have been going after Trump since he first announced he was running in 2015. Clearly the justice system only
takes orders from one side of the aisle these days. Justice for all and innocent until proven guilty no longer seem to apply.

The jury might ask a question if a victim of a rouge lawyer can cause a lawyer to steal from a victim before the victim knows he's a victim? 😀😀😀 Wate ferr it

originally posted by: Lazy88

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Lazy88

I'd like to hear it from a paralegal's pointy of view.

You want an honest answer based on fact, logic, and cited criminal and civil law/statutes.

When’s the last time that happened for a conservative charged with a crime on ATS?

I have given him a few opportunities to school me and others, and amazingly enough, scared little child when it comes to the facts. Sad, but 100% predictable.

originally posted by: Lazy88
a reply to: network dude

With equal application of law?

😂😂😂😂😂

Best I can do:

Federal election regulators fined Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee earlier this month for not properly disclosing the money they spent on controversial opposition research that led to the infamous Trump-Russia dossier.

The DNC was fined $105,000 and the Clinton campaign was fined $8,000, according to a letter sent by the Federal Election Commission to a conservative group that requested an inquiry.

CNN....

a reply to: network dude

Oh. A certain individual claims to be an actual paralegal.

Maybe they got confused because they stayed at a holiday inn.

Best I could find..

Holiday Inn Express Surgeon

a reply to: Lazy88

No, I think he has delusions of grandure and thinks himself a lawyer, but your rendition is likely closet to the truth.

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Boomer1947

The State has no jurisdiction to bring a case based on federal crimes.

You're telling the wrong guy.

Perhaps you should inform Bragg or Colangelo....

As soon as the Trump administration was over, the DOJ said it had no more interest in the case, which freed up the State of New York to pursue it if they wanted to.

Which the state of NY declined...until that DoJ guy Colangelo came to NY.

...and Trump decided to run.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Boomer1947

The State has no jurisdiction to bring a case based on federal crimes.

You're telling the wrong guy.

Perhaps you should inform Bragg or Colangelo....

As soon as the Trump administration was over, the DOJ said it had no more interest in the case, which freed up the State of New York to pursue it if they wanted to.

Which the state of NY declined...until that DoJ guy Colangelo came to NY.

...and Trump decided to run.

Totally not political....

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: wAnchorofCarp
a reply to: Boomer1947

The State has no jurisdiction to bring a case based on federal crimes.

You're telling the wrong guy.

Perhaps you should inform Bragg or Colangelo....

As soon as the Trump administration was over, the DOJ said it had no more interest in the case, which freed up the State of New York to pursue it if they wanted to.

Which the state of NY declined...until that DoJ guy Colangelo came to NY.

...and Trump decided to run.

Totally not political....

Totally not.

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: JadedGhost

I had to make sure my boss's girlfriend and wife didn't run into each other.

The girlfriend knew about the wife -- but the wife didn't know about the girlfriend. There were times I had to shove the girlfriend in a closet.

Did the boss' wife ever find out about the boss' GF...or did you successfully protect the lying cheat because he paid your bills?

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: JadedGhost

I had to make sure my boss's girlfriend and wife didn't run into each other.

The girlfriend knew about the wife -- but the wife didn't know about the girlfriend. There were times I had to shove the girlfriend in a closet.

Did the boss' wife ever find out about the boss' GF...or did you successfully protect the lying cheat because he paid your bills?

She covered for a liar and a cheat back then and she still covers for liars and cheats now.

She has no morals or integrity and her boss paid her for it but she is offended by what Trump does.

So guys, first of all a bit of honesty....I stopped following the trial and the related threads here on ATS simply because of the predictable nature of them; Pro-Trump supporters believe he's innocent regardless of evidence and anti-Trump supporters believe he's guilty regardless of evidence.

Its incredibly boring to read and quite numbing to the neutrals etc.

My question are these;
What is the general, unbiased opinion both here on ATS and in the USA - guilty or not guilty?
What will the sentence be if guilty and what will be the likely repercussions?
What happens next if found not guilty?

Genuinely well intentioned questions and ever hopeful for truly unbiased and honest answers.

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: JadedGhost

I had to make sure my boss's girlfriend and wife didn't run into each other.

The girlfriend knew about the wife -- but the wife didn't know about the girlfriend. There were times I had to shove the girlfriend in a closet.

Did the boss' wife ever find out about the boss' GF...or did you successfully protect the lying cheat because he paid your bills?

She covered for a liar and a cheat back then and she still covers for liars and cheats now.

She has no morals or integrity and her boss paid her for it but she is offended by what Trump does.

I just feel sorry for the boss' wife and kids.
In the end...her boss wasn't the only one in that office lying to and deceiving them.

Jury just sent third note to judge.
More questions.

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: RazorV66

originally posted by: CarlLaFong

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: JadedGhost

I had to make sure my boss's girlfriend and wife didn't run into each other.

The girlfriend knew about the wife -- but the wife didn't know about the girlfriend. There were times I had to shove the girlfriend in a closet.

Did the boss' wife ever find out about the boss' GF...or did you successfully protect the lying cheat because he paid your bills?

She covered for a liar and a cheat back then and she still covers for liars and cheats now.

She has no morals or integrity and her boss paid her for it but she is offended by what Trump does.

I just feel sorry for the boss' wife and kids.
In the end...her boss wasn't the only one in that office lying to and deceiving them.

It’s just beyond hypocrisy at this point and it is bordering on plain stupidity.

She assisted an adulterer because he paid her money but claims moral outrage over things Trump has done in his personal life.

a reply to: Freeborn

Pro-Trump supporters believe he's innocent regardless of evidence and anti-Trump supporters believe he's guilty regardless of evidence.

That's one perspective. Another is that there exist analog and precedent to what Trump is being tried for federally and by state yet there is clearly a different standard.

What is the general, unbiased opinion both here on ATS and in the USA - guilty or not guilty?

Even the left leaning media has said this is a joke. To the point where a popular pundit has stated that these charges would never have been brought save for the fact that the defendant is named Trump.

What will the sentence be if guilty and what will be the likely repercussions?

No idea as this is a novel legal case and defendant.

What happens next if found not guilty?

No idea as this is a novel legal case and defendant.