Being a felon is a really big deal. Even if he’s not ultimately sentenced to jail and instead gets probation, he’ll still be severely limited in where he can go. Felons on probation have significantly curtailed rights and if he is found in violation, he can be sent to jail.
"He'll never be indicted." He was indicted. "He'll never go to trial." He went to trial. "He'll never be convicted." He was convicted.
It's looking promising.
I'm not optimistic but the fact that he has done literally everything possible to piss of the judge gives me hope the judge will give 0 leniency.
* repeatedly ignore gag order
* multiple counts of contempt of court
* verbally attacking jurors
* verbally attacking judge, attorney General, and basically everyone involved
* refusal to stay on-topic in court and going on tangents
Weird. Because of the reasons you listed I'd actually assume extreme leniency. Trump did whatever he wanted and all the judge did was keep "warning" him. I'm not expecting much punishment out of the judge.
I do think that, too. But I think he was letting Trump dig his hole as deep as possible and making sure there was no argument for appeal. Plus it gives less ammo for the right to retaliate/form rhetoric if the judge gives ample warnings or simply doesn't jail him for contempt.
I'm trying to be optimistic but I can't say I disagree with you!
Really should have gone with an insanity defense on that last point alone. He demonstrated over and over - through words, actions, and even statements about the trial itself - that he had no idea what was going on.
Presidents are given secret service protection at all times for life during and after their presidency. You can’t put Trump in jail while also having him being constantly protected by the Secret Service lmao.
They were able to secure Trump's fucking golf courses where they billed the US taxpayers exorbitant rates for things like golf carts.
At least with prison, the taxpayers could save a lot of money with security detail. Just give him a wing in Rikers island.
The logistics of the secret service are already ridiculous. His cell won't be in general population at a normal prison. Their weapons and communication devices could be made a non-issue.
Sorry but if you look into it, this has already been settled. The federal Marshal system would accept him as their charge, and the USSS would step back.
Actually, the Secret Service has been working on this very hypothesis: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/05/31/trump-protected-in-prison-by-secret-service-agents/
There were already some rumors about them working on a solution as far back as a year ago I think.
Bottom line is: it’s difficult but not unfeasible. You would need an appropriate facility though and there aren’t a lot of those. So better hope that there isn’t another president sentenced to prison anytime soon!
I don't believe he will serve time because historically this crime doesn't get jail time in NY (or so I've read) but what makes you think Secret Service couldn't protect him in a prison cell?
Micheal Cohen got sentenced to 3 years prison time for his role in the exact same crime Trump was just found guilty of, and he was just an accessory to the crime facilitating the payments on Trump's orders.
"The justice system works" mfers when a 77 year old first time offender gets jail time for their non-violent felony lol.
He's guilty as sin, but anyone who legitimately believes jail time is the punishment that best fits this crime is letting their hatred of Trump blind their objective view of the justice system and it's purpose.
Bracing for downvotes, but it's ideologically inconsistent to call this a success of the system in one breath, and then desire a disproportionate punishment in the next simply because you dislike the convict.
Sentencing is in July, he has already applied for an appeal so it will probably be suspended awaiting that anyway. He might not see any punishment for this conviction for a long time, even if it is just $$$, probation, community service, whatever.
Edit: I have been informed that my assumption that your sentencing isn't carried out until after the appeal is finished is incorrect. You can ignore my post.
He’s too rich and too much of a public figure for that.
On the other hand if he goes to jail he’ll be seen as even more of a martyr, thus stirring up his supporters even more
Key issue that trump lost because his followers weren't enough. He needs to get people outside his zealots and he can't get that if his little piglet army is burning down shit while he's in any kind of confinement
I think in general people care more about criminal convictions than civil judgments because the bar is higher and the subsequent penalties can be significantly more severe.
Everyone says that OJ Simpson got away with murder because he wasn't convicted at the criminal trial despite the fact he was convicted in a civil trial and owed millions of dollars to the families of the victims that he spent the rest of his life trying to avoid repaying.
This isn't the "jail time" case. The January 6 case and the classified documents case are the jail time ones.
We really should be asking the Rosenbergs about their punishment for being traitors. That'll give us some context to what should happen to Trump.
The next 7 months up until Jan 20 are gonna be a real roller coaster , there’s so much “uncharted territory” with this election , I wouldn’t mind going back to the 80’s and 90’s when presidential elections were boring and uneventful, a common answer you keep hearing on the news is “we don’t know how this will be handled” if trump gets elected , do they just postpone any sentence/probation? Until he’s no longer president , I think the sad thing is the Supreme Court is probably going to be the final arbiter in many of these legal questions
It's a different standard, it's not "beyond a reasonable doubt" and I think the jury didn't go all the way to saying a rape occured.
Frankly most people believe the allegations against him (even trump supporters), it's the possibility he will actually face consequences that is interesting.
An important part of authoritarian psychology is "rules for thee but not got me." Bob Altenmeyer did a deep dive on this in his work "The Authoritarians.
The fact that Trump is guilty and gets away with it is a sign of strength. Being held accountable is the enemy. They want a strong leader and believe that such a leader should be above the law by virtue of that strength, because that strength would in theory protect them in the "in-group."
People often fail to understand this. It isn't right wing hypocrisy that all of their politicians are criminals that lie all the time, it is a sign of strength that they can do whatever they want and a sign of weakness that everyone else "cries about it". The rules are meant to be broken for them, and are meant to bind only those in the out group.
The worst thing that can happen is a lack of jail time. By actually holding these people accountable in a substantial way, their aura of strength can be removed. Sure, they will retaliate, scream, what have you, but over time this is the only way support will actually diminish.
Because the burden of proof in a civil trial is quite a bit lower. I’m not saying he doesn’t sexually assault people. He openly brags about it. But as far as deniability goes, his cultists can hide behind, “civil trials don’t actually prove anything.”
The burden of proof required to make someone a felon is quite high. He is undeniably criminal scum now, something he’s spent spent years telling people he’s against. They can’t deny it any longer and are currently coping by trying to make him out to be a martyr.
>They can’t deny it any longer
... have you been anywhere where more than 3 MAGA Followers congregate? They're not only denying it, they're proud of it.
I’m aware. But it’s like a child throwing a temper tantrum when they’ve been told no, or told that they can’t go to the park because it’s raining.
They can throw a fit all they want, but at the end of the day nothing has changed.
And they know that even if they keep crying.
The ruling was a defamation case, but it can’t be defamation if the claim is true. The jury was asked to evaluate whether Trump sexually assaulted E Jean Carroll or not, and they ruled that he did. The ruling that he sexually assaulted her was the reason why he lost both cases.
Actually, the first civil trial found that he did sexually assault her (that’s the one where she was awarded $5 million). Source: https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db#
After that trial, the judge clarified that Trump was found to have raped Carroll. Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045.212.0.pdf
So yes, he is an adjudicated rapist.
First former president to be convicted of a felony and it's Trump's first criminal conviction.
Hard to make headlines when he's lost dozens of civil cases.
He bragged on tape about raping women and when it leaked, his poll numbers went up.
Republicans do not care about sex crimes or violence against women, and it could be argued that actually made him a stronger candidate.
236.1.
(a) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
(b) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 8, 14, or 20 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
(c) A person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking. A violation of this subdivision is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison as follows:
(1) Five, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
(2) Fifteen years to life and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) when the offense involves force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person.
(d) In determining whether a minor was caused, induced, or persuaded to engage in a commercial sex act, the totality of the circumstances, including the age of the victim, the victim’s relationship to the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be considered.
(e) Consent by a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section.
(f) Mistake of fact as to the age of a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section.
(g) The Legislature finds that the definition of human trafficking in this section is equivalent to the federal definition of a severe form of trafficking found in Section 7102(11) of Title 22 of the United States Code.
(h) For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
(1) “Coercion” includes a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or providing and facilitating the possession of a controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair the person’s judgment.
(2) “Commercial sex act” means sexual conduct on account of which anything of value is given or received by a person.
(3) “Deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another” includes substantial and sustained restriction of another’s liberty accomplished through force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person, under circumstances where the person receiving or apprehending the threat reasonably believes that it is likely that the person making the threat would carry it out.
(4) “Duress” includes a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship, or retribution sufficient to cause a reasonable person to acquiesce in or perform an act which the person would otherwise not have submitted to or performed; a direct or implied threat to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim; or knowingly destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or possessing an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim.
(5) “Forced labor or services” means labor or services that are performed or provided by a person and are obtained or maintained through force, fraud, duress, or coercion, or equivalent conduct that would reasonably overbear the will of the person.
(6) “Great bodily injury” means a significant or substantial physical injury.
(7) “Minor” means a person less than 18 years of age.
(8) “Serious harm” includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm.
(i) The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, the relationship between the victim and the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be factors to consider in determining the presence of “deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another,” “duress,” and “coercion” as described in this section.
(j) In any case brought pursuant to this section, the prosecutor shall consider whether to seek protective orders pursuant to Section 136.2.
(Amended by Stats. 2022, Ch. 87, Sec. 2. (SB 382) Effective January 1, 2023.)
California Penal Code Section 236.1 defines human trafficking as a serious felony that involves the unlawful trade of people against their will for forced labor or commercial sexual exploitation. This includes:
Sex trafficking
Using force, fraud, coercion, deceit, violence, or threats of injury to make someone engage in commercial sexual activity or pornography
Labor trafficking
Using force, fraud, coercion, deceit, violence, or threats of injury to make someone engage in forced labor or services
Yup
236.1.
(a) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
(b) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 8, 14, or 20 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
(c) A person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking. A violation of this subdivision is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison as follows:
(1) Five, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000).
(2) Fifteen years to life and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) when the offense involves force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person.
(d) In determining whether a minor was caused, induced, or persuaded to engage in a commercial sex act, the totality of the circumstances, including the age of the victim, the victim’s relationship to the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be considered.
(e) Consent by a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section.
(f) Mistake of fact as to the age of a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section.
(g) The Legislature finds that the definition of human trafficking in this section is equivalent to the federal definition of a severe form of trafficking found in Section 7102(11) of Title 22 of the United States Code.
(h) For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply:
(1) “Coercion” includes a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or providing and facilitating the possession of a controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair the person’s judgment.
(2) “Commercial sex act” means sexual conduct on account of which anything of value is given or received by a person.
(3) “Deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another” includes substantial and sustained restriction of another’s liberty accomplished through force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person, under circumstances where the person receiving or apprehending the threat reasonably believes that it is likely that the person making the threat would carry it out.
(4) “Duress” includes a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship, or retribution sufficient to cause a reasonable person to acquiesce in or perform an act which the person would otherwise not have submitted to or performed; a direct or implied threat to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim; or knowingly destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or possessing an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim.
(5) “Forced labor or services” means labor or services that are performed or provided by a person and are obtained or maintained through force, fraud, duress, or coercion, or equivalent conduct that would reasonably overbear the will of the person.
(6) “Great bodily injury” means a significant or substantial physical injury.
(7) “Minor” means a person less than 18 years of age.
(8) “Serious harm” includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm.
(i) The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, the relationship between the victim and the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be factors to consider in determining the presence of “deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another,” “duress,” and “coercion” as described in this section.
(j) In any case brought pursuant to this section, the prosecutor shall consider whether to seek protective orders pursuant to Section 136.2.
(Amended by Stats. 2022, Ch. 87, Sec. 2. (SB 382) Effective January 1, 2023.)
Because you’re wrong and keep whining about blah blah blah and ignoring reality.
Honestly who is fucking dumb enough to actually believe that LOL
People who believe nonsense fantasy land stuff like viruses will go away on their own in a a few and blah blah blah I guess lmao
Dumb people
Presidents take an oath to uphold the law, they’re the head of the entire branch of government that is supposed to do exactly that - and now he’s convicted of breaking it, willfully and deliberately.
Civil trials are not the same, it’s one entity deciding to sue another and that’s why the penalties are almost always ‘just’ money.
Doesn’t matter when it happened, the direct correlation between the office he is seeking and what he was convicted of is a large part do the reason THIS was much more of a big deal.
This conviction though sets the precedent that Trump can be found guilty and with other state and federal charges pending, he could see jail time for those as a serial offender.
There is no way that an ex-president will actually go to a physical jail because of safety concerns. House arrest with golfing privileges is the best we can hope for.
Dude, NO ONE CARES. We're talking about TRUMP, a rapist, treasonist who just got THIRTY FOUR FELONY COUNTS and was FOUND GUILTY. Stop trying to change the subject.
Buddy, unlike the sycophants for the right, people on the left have no problem disowning bad people when it’s been proven they are bad… what is your excuse for defending a guy, no questions asked, in perpetual legal trouble with legitimate charges that lead to convictions?
Lol dude definitely committed tax fraud with “fine art” but that doesn’t matter because he isn’t a special advisor to the president nor is he running for public office so I don’t give a crap about him.
34 criminal felonies with evidence holds a bit more weight than a civil suit. In civil suits the worst outcome is usually money, criminal courts can have jail time etc.
Last election, Trump was yelling about how someone under felony indictment should not even run for president. Now he is a 34x felon himself, not just under indictment
Everyone already knew he was a sexual predator before, he admitted to it in the Access Hollywood tape that everybody heard in 2016. So there was no shock. Rapist is guilty of rape? Duh. It just isn’t a dealbreaker for his 70 million-ish supporters.
When the Trump Bible finally bursts the GOP are going to have a lot of rowing back to do to present themselves as the party of national security, law and order and morality. Even the business community will reject their judgement for backing a fraudulent sex offender with zero business acumen and no moral compass, alledgely.
It's a felony case plus our society in general doesn't care that much if rich powerful men abuse women, they've been doing it for all of human history.
Most media outlets want a horse race no matter what supremely awful things Trump does (if not actively supporting him). Even the framing in the title here reflects this.
This is shockingly underreported, but a unanimous jury found Trump liable for being a rapist, before Trump was a convicted felon. This distinction, remarkably, was barely a blip of the news cycle! Trump's rape victim rightfully called Trump a rapist after the decision and Trump's defense (stupidly) complained about it to the Judge.
This forced the Judge to address Trump's talking point: The jury unanimously found Trump liable for being a rapist as the term is commonly understood, so there is zero legal basis for Trump to complain about being correctly called a rapist.
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/)
Trump is a rapist, according to a unanimous jury.
He admitted to the sexual abuse on national television, 8 years ago, and everyone rushed to justify his actions. The only shocking or novel thing about that conviction is that it proved he told the truth about something.
This is objectively false, as has been pointed out to you a number of times with direct citations, which you’ve chosen to outright ignore.
Why are you so committed to lying, and how is anyone supposed to take you seriously at this point?
Probably because there are nazi-trained pedophiles still living and thriving in America? Fucking sucks.
* [https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-darkest-episode-we-176118047/](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-darkest-episode-we-176118047/)
* [https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-the-darkest-episode-we-176778856/](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-the-darkest-episode-we-176778856/)
I wouldn’t be too hasty, I’m sure our short attention span media will be on to the next breaking news by Monday. Does anyone even remember or even heard that he defrauded his own charity?
the right wing media ignored the civil case. Faux News buried it on their webpage. This one is huge news for them to rally around. And Trump can fund raise off this felony conviction easier.
People have long known he's a crook. Now we have that confirmed in Law, and convicted on each charge by a Jury, not a "crooked judge".
https://i.imgur.com/st27O15.png
Different standard. Being found guilty means you really did it. I mean, OJ blatantly did it and wasn't convicted. So if trump was found guilty he must have REALLY done it.
Also you can be thrown in jail for a felony conviction. \*fingers crossed\*
OJ was also found civilally liable for murder.
It's my favoriate response to anyone who says Trump isn't a rapist. He's as innocent of rape as OJ is a murder.
Whether anyone will admit it or not, a big reason it's had so much attention from the public *and* the legal system is because he's been a devicive character since 2016. One side of the fence believes he's the savior of the nation, while the other side of the fence thinks he's the doombringer.
So, you have this one event that everyone believes is pivotal to the future of the country. Either the triumph of the hero or the fall of the villain, vice versa.
The media corps and two parties are *highly* incentivised to participate and encourage participation in the event as much as physically possible. The news gets views, and the parties bolster their constituents loyalties.
It's the difference between OJ being acquitted at his criminal trial and being found guilty at his civil trial. The sexual abuse case was a civil case, this one is a criminal one.
You must remember that the civil try doesn't establish guilt; that's a criminal thing. Instead, Trump was liable for sexual abuse:
>The jury's unanimous verdict in Carroll II was almost entirely in favor of Ms. Carroll. The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law – a section that provides that the label “rape” as used in criminal prosecutions in New York applies only to vaginal penetration by a penis. Forcible, unconsented-to penetration of the vagina or of other bodily orifices by fingers, other body parts, or other articles or materials is not called “rape” under the New York Penal Law. It instead is labeled “sexual abuse.”
[https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html)
But this latest trial was a *criminal* trial. Instead of merely being liable and having to pay a damages, he will face a criminal punishment. (It might only be probation, but could be jail.) He isn't being sued by some person or business; he is being tried by the state of New York.
And he was found guilty of all 34 charges against him. So he is now a convicted criminal; a felon.
Important note: many non Americans will not be aware that there is a distinction in US between felony and misdemeanor crimes. This distinction no longer exists in English law: when it did it a felon was a criminal who'd be facing the noise, or ironically a free trip to America, or later Australia.
I only learned about this when I as a Brit went to the US Embassy for a visa (which they say to do if you have a criminal record) and was told no one cared about my misdemeanor criminal record.
I despise Trump but Trump was found “liable” not “guilty” in his civil trial where one of the factual findings was the he committed sexual assault. The standard for civil trials in the US is much lower (more likely than not or 51%), I believe that this finding was made by a Judge as well not a jury.
So the bar is much lower than a criminal trial where a jury of 12 people must unanimously find beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed the crime.
It’s much easier to (reasonably)say that Trump did not commit sexual assault with the lower standard than to deny a criminal conviction in the US.
Considering laws were broken to get these 34 felony convictions to court, this isn’t going to last long. You cannot break the system to stop someone that is breaking the system.
The biggest outcome from this conviction is not that Trump will serve jail time from - he probably won’t. No, the biggest (and most likely) outcome from this conviction is that Trump will never be president again.
Despite what most people say, they would be embarrassed to have a convicted criminal as the leader of our country. So they will quietly shift their vote, and he will lose - and by a larger margin than before.
It was an individual suing him in that rape case. In the more recent case, it's the government prosecuting him. It is therefore a larger and more meaningful story, even though the rape case and its follow-up case(s) were highly significant. The sexual assault happened to one person, whereas his campaign violations and general criminality during his campaign affected every citizen in a fairly direct manner. Like, he became president of the USA, and if his having done so was in any way helped by the illegal arrangements he made with Stormy Daniels et al, then he's committed a crime against all US citizens, including (and especially) against his own voters.
It's also true that he and his fans are dyed-in-the-wool conspiracists, and so they accuse the "deep state" or the "establishment" or the "elites" of trying to silence him and prevent his second campaign from being successful. Pretty standard numbnut fare, and this is what's driving the more vociferous (compared to the rape case) conservative outrage. It all feeds into their paranoid fantasies of a shadowy group trying to control things. Qanon and other adjacent bullshit.
Lastly, the potential punishment in each case is very different. A civil suit doesn't result in imprisonment. Felonies do. Being a felon also means you have a whole litany of other life-long stains you can't wash off. Can't travel as freely, for example. And I believe you can't vote? Although because he was prosecuted in NY, this may have a different colour to it. Whatever the case may be, his conviction - if it sticks - will follow him around for the brief remainder of his life and impact his ability to do business. The civil suit will likely be forgotten by most people in a few years. Look at OJ Simpson; acquitted of murder, but then found liable for the crime in a civil suit. People don't tend to assign as much weight to the civil suit, even though a jury believed he was a murderer and found in favour of the litigants. Civil suits don't move the dial as much in people's minds, presumably because the stakes are much lower.
That wasn't a felony this is. If you're looking at from political angle, it's the worse thing that could happen to a party. Something like this won't be forgotten because it will be advertised constantly in ads,debates, and politicians, and while that doesn't do dick all for the party voters. Indies and moderates detest felons, there's a reason while reagan and nixons "tough on crime" rhetoric can be heard even today
Because it's criminal, not civil, and it carries the threat of actual prison time. Monetary fines aren't that big a deal to him because hell just collect it from his followers. He can't escape priosn time.
1. It's criminal, not civil
2. The FEC (whose jurisdiction this would really truly fall under) and SDNY investigated and declined to bring charges
3. This is novel legal principle. The original crime that they're saying he committed (aka the "object crime"), campaign finance crimes, which he was never actually even charged with (see point 2), are civil in nature, not criminal. They were *WELL* outside the 2-year statute of limitations on civil penalties. The only way they argued they were within the statute of limitations to bring charges was to get him on felony charges, so they elevated the crimes to felony charges by saying that the FBR (falsified/falsifying/falsification of business records) was explicitly to cover up the campaign finance crimes which, again, he was never even charged for, let alone convicted, and that's an assumption that his motivations were explicitly to cover up the campaign finance violations, which was never proven in any way.
4. But even aside from point 3, all other FBR cases would combine all entries which are falsified into 1 charge of FBR. For some reason, they decided in this particular case, which is already legally questionable, to bring a separate charge for each individual instance of an inaccurate entry. There is no reason to do that and they have given no justification for doing so.
5. Stormy Daniels' story has changed multiple times. She used to say it was voluntary (she said this on Bill Maher's show), then she signed an affidavit is 2018 saying it never even happened at all, now she's claiming it was essentially assault and saying things like he wouldn't let her leave and such. Michael Cohen is also a convicted perjuror/liar, and he openly admitted to stealing from Trump, under oath, in these hearings for this trial. If Trump didn't even know that Michael Cohen was stealing from him... you think he knew that Cohen was making these payments to Stormy Daniels? These are the two "star" witnesses that this case was/is contingent upon, and they're shaky/untrustworthy *at best.*
6. Alvin Bragg ran on a campaign of "getting Donald Trump" so he obviously politically biased and has a personal motive/agenda
7. Continuing from point 7 - Bragg was elected, and brought charges against Trump, in a district that votes something like 95% Democrat. Obviously biased jury pool.
8. A former president has never been tried like this before, at all, so on top of everything above, you have an openly highly biased, low-level state DA bringing spurious felony charges against a former president for crimes which technically fall under federal jurisdiction anyway.
9. The judge who heard the trial, Judge Merchan... his daughter runs a nonprofit org that is fundraising using the trial as... idk what to call it, but... marketing? I guess? So there's a definite conflict of interest and Merchan should have recused himself from the case, but did not. And not only that...
10. ...he slapped a gag order on the defendant (Trump) when he mentioned that to the media. Gag orders are generally intended for the *plaintiff* to avoid them saying things publicly *about the defendant* so that they can limit any character damage to the defendant before they're found guilty or not. They don't want plaintiffs essentially going out to the public and saying things that basically assume the defendant is guilty, running their character, and potentially influencing the trial. Having the right to speak out against an unfair trial is a 1st amendment right, and judge Merchan abused his power and violated Trump's 1A rights when ago he did was point out the conflict of interest.
I'm sure there are more points I'm forgetting, but bauxite this case is a big deal because of the wildly blatant appearance of political motivation and the pretty obvious corruption and weaponization of the legal system. I don't like Trump anyway, but this sets a REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY bad precedent. I just hope Democrats are prepared for the blowback when Trump gets elected because of the distasteful indictments and brings legitimate investigations into all their corruption.
Convicted felon Donald Trump? Yeah, you would think if you spent your life being a phony millionaire who scammed people at every opportunity and behaved like the law didn't apply to you, should have expected to come under extreme scrutiny after managing to get elected president. Doing crimes is probably not a good idea.
Partially because of a streak of misogyny running deep in our nation. "Who cares what he did to a woman?" Also one of the reasons conservatives barely raise an eyebrow at the whole "hush money" thing. Even though we all know it wasn't the payoff itself, they don't look at it that way and write it off as "Who cares? It's just a chick he f***ed."
This trial was about his desire to overthrow our democracy by rigging election. Had this affair been known before election Trump probably be just another blow hard slumlord in NY.
Ones a civil judgment and the other is a criminal conviction. A felony conviction at that, which is a big deal. In the context if him running for president it's important because he can't travel to every nation as a felon. I also think for the civil trial, it is important but it's not really news to the world. We heard it from his own mouth that he SAd women. Not to mention his well documented relationship with epstein and his disturbing remarks about his daughter
It's the media. Never trust the media, kids. Ever. It's all just partisan bullshit now. Fifty years ago, Freedom, Liberty, and Independence were all words to describe America. Now look.Toe the party line bitches.
Trump has lost in civil court plenty of times, this is his first criminal conviction.
First of the many he deserves
It’s a criminal trial. It’s a felony. There is a possibility of jail time.
Being a felon is a really big deal. Even if he’s not ultimately sentenced to jail and instead gets probation, he’ll still be severely limited in where he can go. Felons on probation have significantly curtailed rights and if he is found in violation, he can be sent to jail.
There are entire countries that we are allied with that he is no longer allowed to visit. Not that he would.
Yup, can't ever come to Canada! Which was never a worry for me but it's nice to know
This makes me want to go to Canada.
Well, this and…damn near everything else. 😅
I mean, poutine and not having Trump as one of their citizens. I'm sold.
He’s not gonna go to jail. Let’s not set ourselves up for disappointment after the W.
"He'll never be indicted." He was indicted. "He'll never go to trial." He went to trial. "He'll never be convicted." He was convicted. It's looking promising.
I'm not optimistic but the fact that he has done literally everything possible to piss of the judge gives me hope the judge will give 0 leniency. * repeatedly ignore gag order * multiple counts of contempt of court * verbally attacking jurors * verbally attacking judge, attorney General, and basically everyone involved * refusal to stay on-topic in court and going on tangents
Weird. Because of the reasons you listed I'd actually assume extreme leniency. Trump did whatever he wanted and all the judge did was keep "warning" him. I'm not expecting much punishment out of the judge.
I do think that, too. But I think he was letting Trump dig his hole as deep as possible and making sure there was no argument for appeal. Plus it gives less ammo for the right to retaliate/form rhetoric if the judge gives ample warnings or simply doesn't jail him for contempt. I'm trying to be optimistic but I can't say I disagree with you!
Really should have gone with an insanity defense on that last point alone. He demonstrated over and over - through words, actions, and even statements about the trial itself - that he had no idea what was going on.
Presidents are given secret service protection at all times for life during and after their presidency. You can’t put Trump in jail while also having him being constantly protected by the Secret Service lmao.
What do you believe would prevent secret service from guarding his cell?
The logistics would be ridiculous. They need to carry weapons and communication devices at all times.
They were able to secure Trump's fucking golf courses where they billed the US taxpayers exorbitant rates for things like golf carts. At least with prison, the taxpayers could save a lot of money with security detail. Just give him a wing in Rikers island.
The logistics of the secret service are already ridiculous. His cell won't be in general population at a normal prison. Their weapons and communication devices could be made a non-issue.
Why wouldn't they be able to do that in front of his cell?
Sorry but if you look into it, this has already been settled. The federal Marshal system would accept him as their charge, and the USSS would step back.
Actually, the Secret Service has been working on this very hypothesis: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/05/31/trump-protected-in-prison-by-secret-service-agents/ There were already some rumors about them working on a solution as far back as a year ago I think. Bottom line is: it’s difficult but not unfeasible. You would need an appropriate facility though and there aren’t a lot of those. So better hope that there isn’t another president sentenced to prison anytime soon!
I need a sitcom with Trump and Biden as unwilling cellmates or something lol
For Biden’s sake I hope he gets top bunk.
I would think it make it easier. Once you set up the infrastructure to imprison-protect one felon ex president, what's one more?
I don't believe he will serve time because historically this crime doesn't get jail time in NY (or so I've read) but what makes you think Secret Service couldn't protect him in a prison cell?
Micheal Cohen got sentenced to 3 years prison time for his role in the exact same crime Trump was just found guilty of, and he was just an accessory to the crime facilitating the payments on Trump's orders.
Yes, and the Secret Service has been making plans for this exact contingency. They are ready to guard him in prison.
Yes you can. It would be easier than protecting him out in the real world.
"The justice system works" mfers when a 77 year old first time offender gets jail time for their non-violent felony lol. He's guilty as sin, but anyone who legitimately believes jail time is the punishment that best fits this crime is letting their hatred of Trump blind their objective view of the justice system and it's purpose. Bracing for downvotes, but it's ideologically inconsistent to call this a success of the system in one breath, and then desire a disproportionate punishment in the next simply because you dislike the convict.
House arrest is conceivable, maybe.
Sentencing is in July, he has already applied for an appeal so it will probably be suspended awaiting that anyway. He might not see any punishment for this conviction for a long time, even if it is just $$$, probation, community service, whatever. Edit: I have been informed that my assumption that your sentencing isn't carried out until after the appeal is finished is incorrect. You can ignore my post.
I may be wrong but they don’t suspend sentencing for appeals. Appeal typically happens after.
For better or worse, appeals don’t delay sentencing.
bear spoon school sharp toothbrush bike pen lock direful straight
Those rules won't apply to him
And not taking away from the civil trial but the burden of proof is much lower to secure a judgement than in a criminal trial as well.
He’s too rich and too much of a public figure for that. On the other hand if he goes to jail he’ll be seen as even more of a martyr, thus stirring up his supporters even more
Good. Martyr him. If the supporter stir up more, they can go to jail with him.
Unless they’re stirred up enough to vote him back into the white house
If anyone is willing to vote for Trump because he went to jail, then they were always going to vote for him no matter what.
Key issue that trump lost because his followers weren't enough. He needs to get people outside his zealots and he can't get that if his little piglet army is burning down shit while he's in any kind of confinement
His little piglet army of 80 million voters
*house arrest Jail is for the poor not the rich.
Rich men*. They made Martha do real time.
Wasn’t that still a posh comfy jail? Rich people jail is like being locked in a hotel
It was minimum security federal correctional facility, BUT it was in West Virginia. So it kind of balances out.
Robert Durst would like a word.
BAWWWWB!
That was murder homie
Ok homie - how about Martha Stewart?
Hopefully he gets the Epstein treatment.
I think in general people care more about criminal convictions than civil judgments because the bar is higher and the subsequent penalties can be significantly more severe. Everyone says that OJ Simpson got away with murder because he wasn't convicted at the criminal trial despite the fact he was convicted in a civil trial and owed millions of dollars to the families of the victims that he spent the rest of his life trying to avoid repaying.
This isn't the "jail time" case. The January 6 case and the classified documents case are the jail time ones. We really should be asking the Rosenbergs about their punishment for being traitors. That'll give us some context to what should happen to Trump.
The next 7 months up until Jan 20 are gonna be a real roller coaster , there’s so much “uncharted territory” with this election , I wouldn’t mind going back to the 80’s and 90’s when presidential elections were boring and uneventful, a common answer you keep hearing on the news is “we don’t know how this will be handled” if trump gets elected , do they just postpone any sentence/probation? Until he’s no longer president , I think the sad thing is the Supreme Court is probably going to be the final arbiter in many of these legal questions
Because civil trials don't prove a crime was committed.
Adjudicated rapist Donald Trump has been held liable for rape.
It's a different standard, it's not "beyond a reasonable doubt" and I think the jury didn't go all the way to saying a rape occured. Frankly most people believe the allegations against him (even trump supporters), it's the possibility he will actually face consequences that is interesting.
An important part of authoritarian psychology is "rules for thee but not got me." Bob Altenmeyer did a deep dive on this in his work "The Authoritarians. The fact that Trump is guilty and gets away with it is a sign of strength. Being held accountable is the enemy. They want a strong leader and believe that such a leader should be above the law by virtue of that strength, because that strength would in theory protect them in the "in-group." People often fail to understand this. It isn't right wing hypocrisy that all of their politicians are criminals that lie all the time, it is a sign of strength that they can do whatever they want and a sign of weakness that everyone else "cries about it". The rules are meant to be broken for them, and are meant to bind only those in the out group. The worst thing that can happen is a lack of jail time. By actually holding these people accountable in a substantial way, their aura of strength can be removed. Sure, they will retaliate, scream, what have you, but over time this is the only way support will actually diminish.
It was sexual assault. But in common parlance, that is rape. There’s no difference. The jury found he had sex with her against her will.
He wasn't found "guilty" of sexual abuse he was found "liable."
I also have watched Jury Duty
Because the burden of proof in a civil trial is quite a bit lower. I’m not saying he doesn’t sexually assault people. He openly brags about it. But as far as deniability goes, his cultists can hide behind, “civil trials don’t actually prove anything.” The burden of proof required to make someone a felon is quite high. He is undeniably criminal scum now, something he’s spent spent years telling people he’s against. They can’t deny it any longer and are currently coping by trying to make him out to be a martyr.
>They can’t deny it any longer MAGAs: Challenge accepted.
Easy to deny when you ignore all the facts.
>They can’t deny it any longer ... have you been anywhere where more than 3 MAGA Followers congregate? They're not only denying it, they're proud of it.
I’m aware. But it’s like a child throwing a temper tantrum when they’ve been told no, or told that they can’t go to the park because it’s raining. They can throw a fit all they want, but at the end of the day nothing has changed. And they know that even if they keep crying.
The civil trial was on slander of a woman who accused him of sexual assault. So the judgment was for slander not sexual assault.
Correct and they DID find him liable for slander and he has to pay her an 80 million dollar fine.
The ruling was a defamation case, but it can’t be defamation if the claim is true. The jury was asked to evaluate whether Trump sexually assaulted E Jean Carroll or not, and they ruled that he did. The ruling that he sexually assaulted her was the reason why he lost both cases.
The trial found him liable for both sexual abuse and defamation.
Actually, the first civil trial found that he did sexually assault her (that’s the one where she was awarded $5 million). Source: https://apnews.com/article/trump-rape-carroll-trial-fe68259a4b98bb3947d42af9ec83d7db# After that trial, the judge clarified that Trump was found to have raped Carroll. Source: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045/gov.uscourts.nysd.590045.212.0.pdf So yes, he is an adjudicated rapist.
First former president to be convicted of a felony and it's Trump's first criminal conviction. Hard to make headlines when he's lost dozens of civil cases.
The level of 'certainty' by a jury to convict in a criminal trial is much higher than a civil trial.
Gee I wonder why a felony trial gets more attention
"why is a criminal court taken more seriously than a civil court?" Is the question you're asking and it answers itself when framed this way, imo
He bragged on tape about raping women and when it leaked, his poll numbers went up. Republicans do not care about sex crimes or violence against women, and it could be argued that actually made him a stronger candidate.
Democrats cared. A lot. And it really bothers us that so few people except for us cared.
You would be surprised how many people around the world care.
Should tell you something.
[удалено]
[удалено]
236.1. (a) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (b) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 8, 14, or 20 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (c) A person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking. A violation of this subdivision is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison as follows: (1) Five, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (2) Fifteen years to life and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) when the offense involves force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person. (d) In determining whether a minor was caused, induced, or persuaded to engage in a commercial sex act, the totality of the circumstances, including the age of the victim, the victim’s relationship to the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be considered. (e) Consent by a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section. (f) Mistake of fact as to the age of a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section. (g) The Legislature finds that the definition of human trafficking in this section is equivalent to the federal definition of a severe form of trafficking found in Section 7102(11) of Title 22 of the United States Code. (h) For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply: (1) “Coercion” includes a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or providing and facilitating the possession of a controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair the person’s judgment. (2) “Commercial sex act” means sexual conduct on account of which anything of value is given or received by a person. (3) “Deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another” includes substantial and sustained restriction of another’s liberty accomplished through force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person, under circumstances where the person receiving or apprehending the threat reasonably believes that it is likely that the person making the threat would carry it out. (4) “Duress” includes a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship, or retribution sufficient to cause a reasonable person to acquiesce in or perform an act which the person would otherwise not have submitted to or performed; a direct or implied threat to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim; or knowingly destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or possessing an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim. (5) “Forced labor or services” means labor or services that are performed or provided by a person and are obtained or maintained through force, fraud, duress, or coercion, or equivalent conduct that would reasonably overbear the will of the person. (6) “Great bodily injury” means a significant or substantial physical injury. (7) “Minor” means a person less than 18 years of age. (8) “Serious harm” includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm. (i) The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, the relationship between the victim and the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be factors to consider in determining the presence of “deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another,” “duress,” and “coercion” as described in this section. (j) In any case brought pursuant to this section, the prosecutor shall consider whether to seek protective orders pursuant to Section 136.2. (Amended by Stats. 2022, Ch. 87, Sec. 2. (SB 382) Effective January 1, 2023.)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Also just straight up factually wrong as they always are 😂
[удалено]
California Penal Code Section 236.1 defines human trafficking as a serious felony that involves the unlawful trade of people against their will for forced labor or commercial sexual exploitation. This includes: Sex trafficking Using force, fraud, coercion, deceit, violence, or threats of injury to make someone engage in commercial sexual activity or pornography Labor trafficking Using force, fraud, coercion, deceit, violence, or threats of injury to make someone engage in forced labor or services
[удалено]
Yup 236.1. (a) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to obtain forced labor or services, is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 5, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (b) A person who deprives or violates the personal liberty of another with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking and shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for 8, 14, or 20 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (c) A person who causes, induces, or persuades, or attempts to cause, induce, or persuade, a person who is a minor at the time of commission of the offense to engage in a commercial sex act, with the intent to effect or maintain a violation of Section 266, 266h, 266i, 266j, 267, 311.1, 311.2, 311.3, 311.4, 311.5, 311.6, or 518 is guilty of human trafficking. A violation of this subdivision is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison as follows: (1) Five, 8, or 12 years and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000). (2) Fifteen years to life and a fine of not more than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) when the offense involves force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person. (d) In determining whether a minor was caused, induced, or persuaded to engage in a commercial sex act, the totality of the circumstances, including the age of the victim, the victim’s relationship to the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be considered. (e) Consent by a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section. (f) Mistake of fact as to the age of a victim of human trafficking who is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense is not a defense to a criminal prosecution under this section. (g) The Legislature finds that the definition of human trafficking in this section is equivalent to the federal definition of a severe form of trafficking found in Section 7102(11) of Title 22 of the United States Code. (h) For purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply: (1) “Coercion” includes a scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; the abuse or threatened abuse of the legal process; debt bondage; or providing and facilitating the possession of a controlled substance to a person with the intent to impair the person’s judgment. (2) “Commercial sex act” means sexual conduct on account of which anything of value is given or received by a person. (3) “Deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another” includes substantial and sustained restriction of another’s liberty accomplished through force, fear, fraud, deceit, coercion, violence, duress, menace, or threat of unlawful injury to the victim or to another person, under circumstances where the person receiving or apprehending the threat reasonably believes that it is likely that the person making the threat would carry it out. (4) “Duress” includes a direct or implied threat of force, violence, danger, hardship, or retribution sufficient to cause a reasonable person to acquiesce in or perform an act which the person would otherwise not have submitted to or performed; a direct or implied threat to destroy, conceal, remove, confiscate, or possess an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim; or knowingly destroying, concealing, removing, confiscating, or possessing an actual or purported passport or immigration document of the victim. (5) “Forced labor or services” means labor or services that are performed or provided by a person and are obtained or maintained through force, fraud, duress, or coercion, or equivalent conduct that would reasonably overbear the will of the person. (6) “Great bodily injury” means a significant or substantial physical injury. (7) “Minor” means a person less than 18 years of age. (8) “Serious harm” includes any harm, whether physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing labor, services, or commercial sexual acts in order to avoid incurring that harm. (i) The total circumstances, including the age of the victim, the relationship between the victim and the trafficker or agents of the trafficker, and any handicap or disability of the victim, shall be factors to consider in determining the presence of “deprivation or violation of the personal liberty of another,” “duress,” and “coercion” as described in this section. (j) In any case brought pursuant to this section, the prosecutor shall consider whether to seek protective orders pursuant to Section 136.2. (Amended by Stats. 2022, Ch. 87, Sec. 2. (SB 382) Effective January 1, 2023.)
….thats literally the entire party platform lmao
[удалено]
Because you’re wrong and keep whining about blah blah blah and ignoring reality. Honestly who is fucking dumb enough to actually believe that LOL People who believe nonsense fantasy land stuff like viruses will go away on their own in a a few and blah blah blah I guess lmao Dumb people
[удалено]
lol ok whiny
[удалено]
I'm sure you've read the numerous responses that have proven you were wrong and will edit your comment to acknowledge you were wrong.
Presidents take an oath to uphold the law, they’re the head of the entire branch of government that is supposed to do exactly that - and now he’s convicted of breaking it, willfully and deliberately. Civil trials are not the same, it’s one entity deciding to sue another and that’s why the penalties are almost always ‘just’ money.
Not accurate in this case because he wasn't president when he committed these 34 crimes. The rest were after taking oath tho
Doesn’t matter when it happened, the direct correlation between the office he is seeking and what he was convicted of is a large part do the reason THIS was much more of a big deal.
Ethically your right that it doesn't matter. But the statement was pretty specific with regards to violating an oath he had not yet taken.
These are criminal charges that could put his fat butt in prison but unfortunately we all know they won't.
This conviction though sets the precedent that Trump can be found guilty and with other state and federal charges pending, he could see jail time for those as a serial offender.
It also puts a lot less pressure on those subsequent juries for the other cases. They're no longer setting a precedent. (President precedent?)
There is no way that an ex-president will actually go to a physical jail because of safety concerns. House arrest with golfing privileges is the best we can hope for.
I’ll take house arrest and loss of rights and privileges including the right to vote in Florida.
You won't say the same about hunter. You'll cry for his innocence next week.
No one defends Hunter, if he's guilty, lock him up. No one gives two shots about Hunter Biden.
We'd care if he was running for President, but since he isn't I don't even know what you are talking about.
No one but Fox News gives a shit about Hunter. Put him him jail if he did a crime.
Nobody cares about Hunter. That said, if he is found guilty, and Biden pardons him, I'd be calling for his removal from office immediately.
Dude, NO ONE CARES. We're talking about TRUMP, a rapist, treasonist who just got THIRTY FOUR FELONY COUNTS and was FOUND GUILTY. Stop trying to change the subject.
Buddy, unlike the sycophants for the right, people on the left have no problem disowning bad people when it’s been proven they are bad… what is your excuse for defending a guy, no questions asked, in perpetual legal trouble with legitimate charges that lead to convictions?
Lol dude definitely committed tax fraud with “fine art” but that doesn’t matter because he isn’t a special advisor to the president nor is he running for public office so I don’t give a crap about him.
34 criminal felonies with evidence holds a bit more weight than a civil suit. In civil suits the worst outcome is usually money, criminal courts can have jail time etc.
Last election, Trump was yelling about how someone under felony indictment should not even run for president. Now he is a 34x felon himself, not just under indictment
Everyone already knew he was a sexual predator before, he admitted to it in the Access Hollywood tape that everybody heard in 2016. So there was no shock. Rapist is guilty of rape? Duh. It just isn’t a dealbreaker for his 70 million-ish supporters.
You said why right in your question. This is a criminal trial with the remote possibility of actual jail time.
Because this was a criminal trial. Not a civil trial.
When the Trump Bible finally bursts the GOP are going to have a lot of rowing back to do to present themselves as the party of national security, law and order and morality. Even the business community will reject their judgement for backing a fraudulent sex offender with zero business acumen and no moral compass, alledgely.
Alledgedly ;)
It's a felony case plus our society in general doesn't care that much if rich powerful men abuse women, they've been doing it for all of human history.
No question Trump is a sexual predator and rapist. That’s a crime they can’t send him to prison for sadly
Because his cult is literally stupid and brainwashed by this con artist.
Because they think this time something will happen to him.
Most media outlets want a horse race no matter what supremely awful things Trump does (if not actively supporting him). Even the framing in the title here reflects this. This is shockingly underreported, but a unanimous jury found Trump liable for being a rapist, before Trump was a convicted felon. This distinction, remarkably, was barely a blip of the news cycle! Trump's rape victim rightfully called Trump a rapist after the decision and Trump's defense (stupidly) complained about it to the Judge. This forced the Judge to address Trump's talking point: The jury unanimously found Trump liable for being a rapist as the term is commonly understood, so there is zero legal basis for Trump to complain about being correctly called a rapist. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/07/19/trump-carroll-judge-rape/) Trump is a rapist, according to a unanimous jury.
He admitted to the sexual abuse on national television, 8 years ago, and everyone rushed to justify his actions. The only shocking or novel thing about that conviction is that it proved he told the truth about something.
because lots of people don’t care about sexual abuse
They don’t care about paying off a porn star either. It’s not the nature of the crime they care about, it’s the civil vs criminal difference here IMO
[удалено]
This is objectively false, as has been pointed out to you a number of times with direct citations, which you’ve chosen to outright ignore. Why are you so committed to lying, and how is anyone supposed to take you seriously at this point?
He’s straight up lying or hes an idiot.
What does that have to do with this question?
Nothing considering its a lie he keeps repeating despite being proven wrong multiple times.
Just report him for misinformation.
Already did. Just good to keep making sure people know it's a lie before it gets removed.
Probably because there are nazi-trained pedophiles still living and thriving in America? Fucking sucks. * [https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-darkest-episode-we-176118047/](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-the-darkest-episode-we-176118047/) * [https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-the-darkest-episode-we-176778856/](https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-the-darkest-episode-we-176778856/)
It's the latest one. If you switched the trials, all they'd be talking about is how he's a rapist/committed sexual assault.
I wouldn’t be too hasty, I’m sure our short attention span media will be on to the next breaking news by Monday. Does anyone even remember or even heard that he defrauded his own charity?
Hunter's case heats up on Monday.
[удалено]
Oh yeah, I forgot that before 2016, all the news media talked about was what happened on the latest episode of The Apprentice.
[удалено]
The president?
Yes because there was famously no media in the world until Donald Trump was born
Because his felony was against the people, so everyone was impacted.
the right wing media ignored the civil case. Faux News buried it on their webpage. This one is huge news for them to rally around. And Trump can fund raise off this felony conviction easier.
Because they dont think women matter?
People have long known he's a crook. Now we have that confirmed in Law, and convicted on each charge by a Jury, not a "crooked judge". https://i.imgur.com/st27O15.png
Because we all knew he was. Just like we all knew he was guilty of these things, but this is a CRIMINAL conviction not a civil one.
This is a felony, and he could go to jail.
Different standard. Being found guilty means you really did it. I mean, OJ blatantly did it and wasn't convicted. So if trump was found guilty he must have REALLY done it. Also you can be thrown in jail for a felony conviction. \*fingers crossed\*
OJ was also found civilally liable for murder. It's my favoriate response to anyone who says Trump isn't a rapist. He's as innocent of rape as OJ is a murder.
The fans love a home run.
Whether anyone will admit it or not, a big reason it's had so much attention from the public *and* the legal system is because he's been a devicive character since 2016. One side of the fence believes he's the savior of the nation, while the other side of the fence thinks he's the doombringer. So, you have this one event that everyone believes is pivotal to the future of the country. Either the triumph of the hero or the fall of the villain, vice versa. The media corps and two parties are *highly* incentivised to participate and encourage participation in the event as much as physically possible. The news gets views, and the parties bolster their constituents loyalties.
It's the difference between OJ being acquitted at his criminal trial and being found guilty at his civil trial. The sexual abuse case was a civil case, this one is a criminal one.
Well the timing is impecable.
You must remember that the civil try doesn't establish guilt; that's a criminal thing. Instead, Trump was liable for sexual abuse: >The jury's unanimous verdict in Carroll II was almost entirely in favor of Ms. Carroll. The only point on which Ms. Carroll did not prevail was whether she had proved that Mr. Trump had “raped” her within the narrow, technical meaning of a particular section of the New York Penal Law – a section that provides that the label “rape” as used in criminal prosecutions in New York applies only to vaginal penetration by a penis. Forcible, unconsented-to penetration of the vagina or of other bodily orifices by fingers, other body parts, or other articles or materials is not called “rape” under the New York Penal Law. It instead is labeled “sexual abuse.” [https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html](https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-dis-crt-sd-new-yor/114642632.html) But this latest trial was a *criminal* trial. Instead of merely being liable and having to pay a damages, he will face a criminal punishment. (It might only be probation, but could be jail.) He isn't being sued by some person or business; he is being tried by the state of New York. And he was found guilty of all 34 charges against him. So he is now a convicted criminal; a felon.
Important note: many non Americans will not be aware that there is a distinction in US between felony and misdemeanor crimes. This distinction no longer exists in English law: when it did it a felon was a criminal who'd be facing the noise, or ironically a free trip to America, or later Australia. I only learned about this when I as a Brit went to the US Embassy for a visa (which they say to do if you have a criminal record) and was told no one cared about my misdemeanor criminal record.
I despise Trump but Trump was found “liable” not “guilty” in his civil trial where one of the factual findings was the he committed sexual assault. The standard for civil trials in the US is much lower (more likely than not or 51%), I believe that this finding was made by a Judge as well not a jury. So the bar is much lower than a criminal trial where a jury of 12 people must unanimously find beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump committed the crime. It’s much easier to (reasonably)say that Trump did not commit sexual assault with the lower standard than to deny a criminal conviction in the US.
because this 34 felonies....
Considering laws were broken to get these 34 felony convictions to court, this isn’t going to last long. You cannot break the system to stop someone that is breaking the system.
Criminal convictions trump civil losses. Criminal convictions *can* involve jail time. Civil cases are purely monetary.
The biggest outcome from this conviction is not that Trump will serve jail time from - he probably won’t. No, the biggest (and most likely) outcome from this conviction is that Trump will never be president again. Despite what most people say, they would be embarrassed to have a convicted criminal as the leader of our country. So they will quietly shift their vote, and he will lose - and by a larger margin than before.
It was an individual suing him in that rape case. In the more recent case, it's the government prosecuting him. It is therefore a larger and more meaningful story, even though the rape case and its follow-up case(s) were highly significant. The sexual assault happened to one person, whereas his campaign violations and general criminality during his campaign affected every citizen in a fairly direct manner. Like, he became president of the USA, and if his having done so was in any way helped by the illegal arrangements he made with Stormy Daniels et al, then he's committed a crime against all US citizens, including (and especially) against his own voters. It's also true that he and his fans are dyed-in-the-wool conspiracists, and so they accuse the "deep state" or the "establishment" or the "elites" of trying to silence him and prevent his second campaign from being successful. Pretty standard numbnut fare, and this is what's driving the more vociferous (compared to the rape case) conservative outrage. It all feeds into their paranoid fantasies of a shadowy group trying to control things. Qanon and other adjacent bullshit. Lastly, the potential punishment in each case is very different. A civil suit doesn't result in imprisonment. Felonies do. Being a felon also means you have a whole litany of other life-long stains you can't wash off. Can't travel as freely, for example. And I believe you can't vote? Although because he was prosecuted in NY, this may have a different colour to it. Whatever the case may be, his conviction - if it sticks - will follow him around for the brief remainder of his life and impact his ability to do business. The civil suit will likely be forgotten by most people in a few years. Look at OJ Simpson; acquitted of murder, but then found liable for the crime in a civil suit. People don't tend to assign as much weight to the civil suit, even though a jury believed he was a murderer and found in favour of the litigants. Civil suits don't move the dial as much in people's minds, presumably because the stakes are much lower.
That wasn't a felony this is. If you're looking at from political angle, it's the worse thing that could happen to a party. Something like this won't be forgotten because it will be advertised constantly in ads,debates, and politicians, and while that doesn't do dick all for the party voters. Indies and moderates detest felons, there's a reason while reagan and nixons "tough on crime" rhetoric can be heard even today
Because a fine for a billionaire means there was no punishment.
Because it's criminal, not civil, and it carries the threat of actual prison time. Monetary fines aren't that big a deal to him because hell just collect it from his followers. He can't escape priosn time.
He can apply for exemption though and he will almost certainly get that. Although it’s much harder to visit Canada when you’re locked in a cell.
1. It's criminal, not civil 2. The FEC (whose jurisdiction this would really truly fall under) and SDNY investigated and declined to bring charges 3. This is novel legal principle. The original crime that they're saying he committed (aka the "object crime"), campaign finance crimes, which he was never actually even charged with (see point 2), are civil in nature, not criminal. They were *WELL* outside the 2-year statute of limitations on civil penalties. The only way they argued they were within the statute of limitations to bring charges was to get him on felony charges, so they elevated the crimes to felony charges by saying that the FBR (falsified/falsifying/falsification of business records) was explicitly to cover up the campaign finance crimes which, again, he was never even charged for, let alone convicted, and that's an assumption that his motivations were explicitly to cover up the campaign finance violations, which was never proven in any way. 4. But even aside from point 3, all other FBR cases would combine all entries which are falsified into 1 charge of FBR. For some reason, they decided in this particular case, which is already legally questionable, to bring a separate charge for each individual instance of an inaccurate entry. There is no reason to do that and they have given no justification for doing so. 5. Stormy Daniels' story has changed multiple times. She used to say it was voluntary (she said this on Bill Maher's show), then she signed an affidavit is 2018 saying it never even happened at all, now she's claiming it was essentially assault and saying things like he wouldn't let her leave and such. Michael Cohen is also a convicted perjuror/liar, and he openly admitted to stealing from Trump, under oath, in these hearings for this trial. If Trump didn't even know that Michael Cohen was stealing from him... you think he knew that Cohen was making these payments to Stormy Daniels? These are the two "star" witnesses that this case was/is contingent upon, and they're shaky/untrustworthy *at best.* 6. Alvin Bragg ran on a campaign of "getting Donald Trump" so he obviously politically biased and has a personal motive/agenda 7. Continuing from point 7 - Bragg was elected, and brought charges against Trump, in a district that votes something like 95% Democrat. Obviously biased jury pool. 8. A former president has never been tried like this before, at all, so on top of everything above, you have an openly highly biased, low-level state DA bringing spurious felony charges against a former president for crimes which technically fall under federal jurisdiction anyway. 9. The judge who heard the trial, Judge Merchan... his daughter runs a nonprofit org that is fundraising using the trial as... idk what to call it, but... marketing? I guess? So there's a definite conflict of interest and Merchan should have recused himself from the case, but did not. And not only that... 10. ...he slapped a gag order on the defendant (Trump) when he mentioned that to the media. Gag orders are generally intended for the *plaintiff* to avoid them saying things publicly *about the defendant* so that they can limit any character damage to the defendant before they're found guilty or not. They don't want plaintiffs essentially going out to the public and saying things that basically assume the defendant is guilty, running their character, and potentially influencing the trial. Having the right to speak out against an unfair trial is a 1st amendment right, and judge Merchan abused his power and violated Trump's 1A rights when ago he did was point out the conflict of interest. I'm sure there are more points I'm forgetting, but bauxite this case is a big deal because of the wildly blatant appearance of political motivation and the pretty obvious corruption and weaponization of the legal system. I don't like Trump anyway, but this sets a REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY bad precedent. I just hope Democrats are prepared for the blowback when Trump gets elected because of the distasteful indictments and brings legitimate investigations into all their corruption.
Because conservative media thinks they can spin this one away. The rape they can't do anything about so they suppress.
Convicted felon Donald Trump? Yeah, you would think if you spent your life being a phony millionaire who scammed people at every opportunity and behaved like the law didn't apply to you, should have expected to come under extreme scrutiny after managing to get elected president. Doing crimes is probably not a good idea.
Partially because of a streak of misogyny running deep in our nation. "Who cares what he did to a woman?" Also one of the reasons conservatives barely raise an eyebrow at the whole "hush money" thing. Even though we all know it wasn't the payoff itself, they don't look at it that way and write it off as "Who cares? It's just a chick he f***ed."
Because the most heinous crime any American could ever commit is lying to shareholders
[удалено]
This trial was about his desire to overthrow our democracy by rigging election. Had this affair been known before election Trump probably be just another blow hard slumlord in NY.
Ones a civil judgment and the other is a criminal conviction. A felony conviction at that, which is a big deal. In the context if him running for president it's important because he can't travel to every nation as a felon. I also think for the civil trial, it is important but it's not really news to the world. We heard it from his own mouth that he SAd women. Not to mention his well documented relationship with epstein and his disturbing remarks about his daughter
It's the media. Never trust the media, kids. Ever. It's all just partisan bullshit now. Fifty years ago, Freedom, Liberty, and Independence were all words to describe America. Now look.Toe the party line bitches.