re: Liberal debates Trumps conviction and is asked what crime he committed

quote:

---

And what’s the underlying crime? F

---

We don't know what the jury relied on, specifically, but there are multiple potential options. See my post above.

Thank you OML

quote:

---

In a case that will eventually be remembered as a textbook instance of selective prosecution, the Manhattan district attorney breathed life into an alleged bookkeeping misdemeanor that the statute of limitations had expired on and, Merlin-like, transformed it into 34 felonies.

---

quote:

---

What was applied here was not the law; it was a unique interpretation of an infrequently enforced statute that had never been used before. At first glance, the statute of limitations had expired, but Bragg convinced the judge that Trump’s time outside of the state, including his four years as president, didn’t count.

---

quote:

---

Falsifying business records is usually a misdemeanor, but Bragg’s team argued, and the jury believed, that the records were falsified in the furtherance of another crime. The prosecution contended the payments to Stormy Daniels were an effort to cover up what was essentially an illegal campaign expenditure. But as the editors observe, “Paying porn stars for their silence is not a campaign expense.”

---

quote:

---

Falsifying business records is usually a misdemeanor, but Bragg’s team argued, and the jury believed, that the records were falsified in the furtherance of another crime. The prosecution contended the payments to Stormy Daniels were an effort to cover up what was essentially an illegal campaign expenditure. But as the editors observe, “Paying porn stars for their silence is not a campaign expense.”

---

quote:

---

Trump is facing four years in prison for each of the 34 counts — conceivably 136 years in prison, for the crime of listing his payment to Michael Cohen as an ongoing legal fee rather than a loan reimbursement. That’s it, that’s the crime.

---

quote:

---

Mind you, under this same district attorney, Alvin Bragg, “Armed robbers who use guns or other deadly weapons to stick up stores and other businesses will be prosecuted only for petty larceny, a misdemeanor, provided no victims were seriously injured and there’s no ‘genuine risk of physical harm’ to anyone. . . . Convicted criminals caught with weapons other than guns will have those felony charges downgraded to misdemeanors unless they’re also charged with more serious offenses.”

---

You're moist, aren't you?

quote:

---

We don't know what the jury relied on, specifically, but there are multiple potential options.

---

“There are multiple potential options” is by definition reasonable doubt. If you don’t know how or why or what someone did, you can’t convict them. You can’t try someone for murder, rape, and jaywalking and convict if the jury can’t come to an agreement if he murdered or jaywalked.

quote:

---

It's literally not, based on law that pre-dates Trump by a long while.

---

This has never happened before.

quote:

---

Why did you ignore the rest of that post?

---

Because it’s absolute gibberish.

quote:

---

“There are multiple potential options” is by definition reasonable doubt.

---

Not true, and, again, you keep ignoring my post that goes into specifics on this. Why?

quote:

---

Because it’s absolute gibberish.

---

1. It isn't

2. It addressed your histrionics directly

quote:

---

He legitimately hates you and people like you.

---

I don't hate OML, of his ilk

quote:

---

Trump has caused the people SFP hates to be more vocal and annoying.

So he hates Trump too and wants him eliminated.

---

I'm explaining the law apolitically and without any personal opinion or preference. Pure, objective analysis/responses.

quote:

---

No that is true.

---

The jury can be given many options to choose from.

Again, go back to my post that you keep ignoring to understand how this will need to be done at the re-trial.

I've already explained the issues and how they will be fixed.

quote:

---

That’s why this is going to be thrown out in five fricking seconds when it reaches the Supreme Court.

---

It will be remanded for re-trial, again, as I have said.