Yale law professor says Trump isn’t a convicted felon despite guilty verdict

Despite media reports, Rubenfeld insisted that it’s “not true” that Trump is already a “convicted felon,” arguing that one is “not a convicted felon because of a jury verdict.”

“You are not convicted until the judge enters that judgment of guilt. That'd be July 11..."

“Going after, criminally, a former president of the United States and somebody who is running for president now, that’s a very bad look for this country,” he said.

“It’s an especially bad look when the folks bringing the case and the judge deciding it are members of the opposing political party. And it’s an even worse look when the crime is so unclear that the state is hiding the ball about what the actual charges are right up through the trial and indeed into the trial.”

‘”Even now, we don’t know exactly what the jury found Trump guilty of,”


“That could be a very dangerous precedent for this country. A very bad and dangerous precedent.”

“That’s why it’s so important for a federal court to review the constitutionality of this prosecution and decide was it constitutional or was it not,”

Trump gets charged for crimes Congress has committed for decades

This is all a distraction.
It doesn't matter, nor does President Trump being President again or not.

Let say he is.

What do we do, when those four years are over?

Are we playing chess as a country, or checkers...

No one, seems to be concerned about that fact.

How are we going to turn this country around and keep it, on course.

originally posted by: ADVISOR

Despite media reports, Rubenfeld insisted that it’s “not true” that Trump is already a “convicted felon,” arguing that one is “not a convicted felon because of a jury verdict.”

“You are not convicted until the judge enters that judgment of guilt. That'd be July 11..."

“Going after, criminally, a former president of the United States and somebody who is running for president now, that’s a very bad look for this country,” he said.

“It’s an especially bad look when the folks bringing the case and the judge deciding it are members of the opposing political party. And it’s an even worse look when the crime is so unclear that the state is hiding the ball about what the actual charges are right up through the trial and indeed into the trial.”

‘”Even now, we don’t know exactly what the jury found Trump guilty of,”


“That could be a very dangerous precedent for this country. A very bad and dangerous precedent.”

“That’s why it’s so important for a federal court to review the constitutionality of this prosecution and decide was it constitutional or was it not,”

Trump gets charged for crimes Congress has committed for decades

This is all a distraction.
It doesn't matter, nor does President Trump being President again or not.

Let say he is.

What do we do, when those four years are over?

Are we playing chess as a country, or checkers...

No one, seems to be concerned about that fact.

How are we going to turn this country around and keep it, on course.

A decent portion of the voting public thinks we are heading in the right direction. I sure can't say why, but they claim to think that in polling, and voting as it seems.

a reply to: ADVISOR

It's simple legal process, Trump cannot be convicted of a "Felony", even in a criminal court, if no Felony has been charged.

What Bragg did is to accuse Trump of a misdemeanor charge in a criminal court, and then attempt to 'trump' the charges up to a felony in what SHOULD have been a Civil Court proceeding.

Basic "Law" 101, people! This is the United States Code, or USC". Every legal principle in the United States rolls up to this one section of Code. Beyond this, the Constitution of the United States ratifies this Code.

What part are y'all missing??????

a reply to: ADVISOR

Bottom line, Trump CAN'T be a FELON, regardless of what any lefty says! Those are just feel-good concepts.

The law is clear, and these people who have come after Trump are on the WRONG side of the law.

This will work well for Trump on appeal, but the damage has been done. The lefties will never let go of this wrongful, misguided and partisan conviction.

Sad, not for me, but more for this entire nation!

a reply to: ADVISOR

Allegedly, trump paid "campaign expenses" to cover up a scandal which would have affected his election outcome. Allegedly.

That's what he was convicted for, the effort to influence the public in his favor by suppressing the stormy daniels controversy. Allegedly.

I don't know, that's the most sense I can sorta kinda make from my research and much smarter folks with degrees and salaries have agreed it doesn't get better than what I explained.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: ADVISOR

Allegedly, trump paid "campaign expenses" to cover up a scandal which would have affected his election outcome. Allegedly.

That's what he was convicted for, the effort to influence the public in his favor by suppressing the stormy daniels controversy. Allegedly.

I don't know, that's the most sense I can sorta kinda make from my research and much smarter folks with degrees and salaries have agreed it doesn't get better than what I explained.

Nope.

The FEC didn’t charge him with anything.

If they did, they would have only fined him just like they have fined many many campaigns over the years.

a reply to: ADVISOR

Yea whatever ... jeez what drivel.

a reply to: ADVISOR

'Biden tells Iowans: ‘We choose truth over facts’

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

That's the way it's going to be. The facts are irreverent.

a reply to: ADVISOR

Are there ANY Non Jewish Lawyers saying this to ? Some of Us Goyim Want to Know ...........*)

originally posted by: rigel4
a reply to: ADVISOR

Yea whatever ... jeez what drivel.

So you Liberals are smarter than Yale law professors now?

Yea whatever…what drivel.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: ADVISOR

Bottom line, Trump CAN'T be a FELON, regardless of what any lefty says! Those are just feel-good concepts.

The law is clear, and these people who have come after Trump are on the WRONG side of the law.

This will work well for Trump on appeal, but the damage has been done. The lefties will never let go of this wrongful, misguided and partisan conviction.

Sad, not for me, but more for this entire nation!

Hmm... After eventually being Exonerated of these False Charges Against Him , Could Mr. Trump then turn around and Sue some of these People for Defamation or Slander ?

In a fair and just world I should think the judge would be charged for allowing Stormy to drivel on with irrevelent details and her long-wided stroy while refusing to allow Trump's lawyers to present their evidence.

I think even the most die-hard, brain-washed Biden supporters must know somewhere deep in their two brain cells that this trial was a setup and a sham.

a reply to: ADVISOR

Makes you wonder that a Yale law professor doesn't know what the jury convicted Trump of?

I think America, as a country, is not ready to play board games. Games have all sorts of rules, and that would be too un-free, you know, having to follow rules. And, yeah, no-one gives a damn.

Your country also has no course, is fairly firmly affixed to the Earth's crust. But you can put on your pirate's costume and pretend. No-one will be too upset.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
a reply to: ADVISOR

It's simple legal process, Trump cannot be convicted of a "Felony", even in a criminal court, if no Felony has been charged.

What Bragg did is to accuse Trump of a misdemeanor charge in a criminal court, and then attempt to 'trump' the charges up to a felony in what SHOULD have been a Civil Court proceeding.

Basic "Law" 101, people! This is the United States Code, or USC". Every legal principle in the United States rolls up to this one section of Code. Beyond this, the Constitution of the United States ratifies this Code.

What part are y'all missing??????

A felony was charged. Thirty four of them, actually. You can read it here, if you care to:

www.manhattanda.org...

New York Penal Law § 175.10: Falsifying business records in the first degree.

"A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony."

www.nysenate.gov...#:~:text=§%20175.10%20Falsifying%20business%20records%20in%20the%20first%20degree.&text=another%2 0crime%20or%20to%20aid,is%20a%20class%20E%20felony.

I know your reading comprehension and basic intelligence are easily good enough to understand this. What part are you missing?

originally posted by: ADVISOR

This is all a distraction.
It doesn't matter, nor does President Trump being President again or not.

Let say he is.

What do we do, when those four years are over?

Are we playing chess as a country, or checkers...

No one, seems to be concerned about that fact.

How are we going to turn this country around and keep it, on course.

In my opinion we can't. This deep into the socialism as it turns to communism, the only thing going for us is the 2nd. We know the 1st is dead unless you have the "right" opinions. I'm at the point where I duck my head and stay invisible.

a reply to: Boomer1947

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

I think they’re asking what the ‘another crime’ is.
Do you know what that ‘another crime’ is?

a reply to: Vermilion

That part has been layed out many times. The other crime was the intent of using those monies to cover for an affair so the public wouldn't know as to not affect his chances of winning. Fraud

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: Boomer1947

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

I think they’re asking what the ‘another crime’ is.
Do you know what that ‘another crime’ is?

The poster demeans anyone who can't understand his viewpoint as being unintelligent and having poor reading comprehension, yet cannot read past the first line of what they quote.

No sense debating that...

Just go to the Appeal to Authority debate tactic and state that we can in most instances trust a Yale Law Professor over an ATS lawyer on the topic of law.

Problem solved.

originally posted by: budzprime69
a reply to: Vermilion

That part has been layed out many times. The other crime was the intent of using those monies to cover for an affair so the public wouldn't know as to not affect his chances of winning. Fraud

You mean like Clinton did more than once?

Or is that... (D)ifferent?

a reply to: Lumenari

Sure, whatever floats your boat.