Trump's Conviction and the 6th Amendment.

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not saying he'll win, but the appeal will be granted. That, too, will be politically motivated.

I have no doubt that it will go to appeal court. I do not think that anyone is denying that.

 

[F1fan]

Until he wins the appeal, yes, I believe so.

On what basis could he win the appeal?

I'm not sure why MAGAs keep thinking Trump is a winner. The appeal is not likely to go Trump's way, they seldom do, and won't be decided for over a year. Meanwhile the other trials with more severe crimes are going to go forward. His track record in court is dismal. Why are MAGAs so committed to a disturbed conman? It's a sickness. Has it ever occurred to MAGAs that Trump is actually guilty of these crimes? It's absurd to think that the problem is the legeal system, not a guy who has committed fraud many, mnay times, including his charity, his school, his real estate business, and also how he conducted himself in politics.

I'm not saying he'll win, but the appeal will be granted. That, too, will be politically motivated.

Granted? You mean he will be allowed to appeal? Right, that's part of the due process that has been afforded to Trump in every case. Anyone can file an appeal, but it has to have merit. It has to make points of actual problems with any part of the legal system or process. It can't just be whining about being found guilty on all charges.

Why? Just because of what is in your mind?
Liberals clearly think everyone is required to bow to their beliefs.

More irony. MAGAs keep insisting Trump was railroaded but can't explain how. Then they repeat the claim, and still no explanation. Seems MAGAs have learned how to whine like Trump, as if a five year old is the highest level of maturity they can reach.

Liberals can make the case why Biden should be re-elected, and that is over three years of stable government, good economic policies, infrastructure investment, great economic growth, a stock market hitting new highs, rebuilding international relations after Trump's threats of pulling out of NATO and covert support for Russia, and all the while republicans faling apart in congress, unable to legislate responsibly, namely Trump's sabotaging of the immigration bill. MAGAs do not work and play well with others, and the voters know this. Republicans have been losing elections in cases where they were supposed to win. Fine, let republicans be so vile that they turn off the majority. If they won't compromise, they will lose.

 

[Wirey]

I'm not sure why MAGAs keep thinking Trump is a winner.

Look, I dislike Trump, and I'm Canadian. I'm not defending the guy. But if you're crazy enough to think for a minute that the appeal in this case won't be considered very thoroughly, and not just from a legal perspective, you're bein naïve. The courts are going to allow him to exhaust every possible legal strategy. The end. If an appeal that would fail for you or I appears before them, just for the sake of appearances it has a better chance of being granted for him.

And don't call calling me a MAGA. I don't call you inbred. No need to get personal.

 

[F1fan]

Look, I dislike Trump, and I'm Canadian. I'm not defending the guy.

You are overly confident in his legal circumstances for some reason. And that is in essence a defense of him. It's irrelevant since the appeal won't be resolved until late next year, way after the election. He remains a convicted felon until the appeal is argued and ruled on.

But if you're crazy enough to think for a minute that the appeal in this case won't be considered very thoroughly, and not just from a legal perspective, you're bein naïve.

I've never claimed any such thing. I actually understand that the legal system works. My actual position is that Trump had a fair trial, he lost. I understand that appeals seldom overturn verdicts. I understand that Trump's case is valid, and no legal experts have been able to present a scenario where he could successfully appeal the verdict.

The courts are going to allow him to exhaust every possible legal strategy. The end. If an appeal that would fail for you or I appears before them, just for the sake of appearances it has a better chance of being granted for him.

So you think the system is biased for Trump? Based on what evidence? Look at all the losses. Appeals courts are typically deferential to the verdicts, and won't overturn verdicts unless there was a serious problem. He has gotten preferential treatment through the legal process, and a jail sentence may never happen, but the rulings will be recorded. How a jail sentence is enforced is unknown, probably house arrest.

And don't call calling me a MAGA. I don't call you inbred. No need to get personal.

You have rather MAGA positions. Define yourself any way you want.

 

[Copernicus]

Look, I dislike Trump, and I'm Canadian. I'm not defending the guy. But if you're crazy enough to think for a minute that the appeal in this case won't be considered very thoroughly, and not just from a legal perspective, you're bein naïve. The courts are going to allow him to exhaust every possible legal strategy. The end. If an appeal that would fail for you or I appears before them, just for the sake of appearances it has a better chance of being granted for him.

Bear in mind that the Court of Appeals is the highest court in the state of New York--their equivalent of the supreme courts in other states. So he really gets just one shot, and no Trump-appointed or Federalist Society judges to help him delay or win the appeal. The governor could pardon him, but she's a Democrat who has expressed satisfaction with his conviction. There will need to be some solid issue supporting his appeal, and that does not seem likely. There is no prospect of a federal pardon and little likelihood that SCOTUS will try to intervene. The guy probably isn't going to get jail time anyway, so what's the big deal? Most Republicans seem to take it in stride that he is officially a felon. They won't be shamed into not voting for him. They lost their sense of shame in 2016, and they've stopped looking for any means to get it back.

 

[Laniakea]

I offered to do so. You have to have known that fact. If a person will not own up to their obvious ignorance they lose the right to demand that someone present them with the evidence that everyone else is aware of.

Not interested in you "offering" to support your claim. Nothing stopping you from simply doing so.

 

[Laniakea]

MAGAs have a brand new definition of "liberal". If you do not drink the Kool Air you are a "liberal".

That's what the environmental wackos, Trump-haters, anti-free speech, and anti-life liars say while drinking the Kool Aid.
Then they accuse conservatives of it. But that's what liberal liars are known for.

 

[Laniakea]

I'm not saying he'll win, but the appeal will be granted. That, too, will be politically motivated.

Typical liberal assertion, even though it hasn't happened.
Don't try to be a fortune teller, and then assign motivation. It's a bad look.

 

[Laniakea]

Some will, but Trump has a habit of filing appeals that are so meritless that his lawyers have even been sanctioned for wasting the courts time.
Appeals are primarily delay tactics rather than real questions for Trump.

It's also part of the judicial system. But it's only acceptable when a liberal uses it. It's their "right" to do so, but if a conservative does it, it's a "waste of time" and a "delay tactic".
Double standard is the standard for Leftists.

 

[Watchmen]

….and no legal experts have been able to present a scenario where he could successfully appeal the verdict.

Ridiculous. I was watching CNN live when the verdict came in and CNN’s legal experts had no problem articulating scenarios where Trump’s appeal could be successful.

I’m no Trump fan, but let’s dispense with the hyperbole to maintain some semblance of credibility.

 

[Watchmen]

MAGAs have a brand new definition of "liberal". If you do not drink the Kool Air you are a "liberal".

You’re not wrong but it goes both ways. Liberals label every conservative leaning voter a MAGA. The polarization is frustrating for us moderates.

 

[F1fan]

Ridiculous. I was watching CNN live when the verdict came in and CNN’s legal experts had no problem articulating scenarios where Trump’s appeal could be successful.

I heard a lot of off the cuff expert comments right after the verdict. Alot of it seemed like theater. They get asked if there could be an appeal and of course there can. But how probable is it given the solid case and trial. The judge was near perfect in his management. In the weeks since experts are more confident that an appeal has little chance of overturning the verdict. The only possible issue is the principle of making felonies from misdemeanors. But it is the law even if seldom used.

I’m no Trump fan, but let’s dispense with the hyperbole to maintain some semblance of credibility.

I think you overestimate the chances of a successful appeal. We will revisit this in 12-18 months once the appeal court decides.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You’re not wrong but it goes both ways. Liberals label every conservative leaning voter a MAGA. The polarization is frustrating for us moderates.

I do not think so. A MAGA is not a conservative. They do not follow traditional Republican politics. They kept none of the virtues of conservatism and only focus selfishly on themselves.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's what the environmental wackos, Trump-haters, anti-free speech, and anti-life liars say while drinking the Kool Aid.
Then they accuse conservatives of it. But that's what liberal liars are known for.

No, one thing about the sciences is that they are no political. But then you admitted to being scientifically illiterate in an earlier post of yours. Would you like to learn the basics of science? The sciences just describe the world as it is, it says nothing about political parties.

 

[Watchmen]

I heard a lot of off the cuff expert comments right after the verdict. Alot of it seemed like theater. They get asked if there could be an appeal and of course there can. But how probable is it given the solid case and trial. The judge was near perfect in his management. In the weeks since experts are more confident that an appeal has little chance of overturning the verdict. The only possible issue is the principle of making felonies from misdemeanors. But it is the law even if seldom used.


I think you overestimate the chances of a successful appeal. We will revisit this in 12-18 months once the appeal court decides.

I didn’t say it’s be successful. I was shooting down your statement that no legal expert had said an appeal could be viable.

 

[F1fan]

I didn’t say it’s be successful. I was shooting down your statement that no legal expert had said an appeal could be viable.

So you didn't trust the experts that said an appeal could be successful?

 

[Stonetree]

So you didn't trust the experts that said an appeal could be successful?

An article from the Washington Post suggests that Trump may win an appeal.


Opinion:
Here’s the No. 1 reason Trump should win on appeal

Begin in July 2023, when New York state’s Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded Merchan, sending him a “caution” because the judge had made contributions to President Biden’s reelection campaign and to two anti-Republican and anti-Trump political action committees: Progressive Turnout Project and Stop Republicans. New York absolutely prohibits its judges from making such political contributions (see below), and while the rebuke delivered to Merchan was not made public — Reuters broke the story last month — it will be much discussed in the months between now and the election.

 

[Subduction Zone]

An article from the Washington Post suggests that Trump may win an appeal.


Opinion:
Here’s the No. 1 reason Trump should win on appeal

Begin in July 2023, when New York state’s Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded Merchan, sending him a “caution” because the judge had made contributions to President Biden’s reelection campaign and to two anti-Republican and anti-Trump political action committees: Progressive Turnout Project and Stop Republicans. New York absolutely prohibits its judges from making such political contributions (see below), and while the rebuke delivered to Merchan was not made public — Reuters broke the story last month — it will be much discussed in the months between now and the election.

Really? It must have been an awfully big donation then. It probably set him back more than few pennies:

Spoiler

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/06/politics/judge-merchan-trump-biden-contribution/index.html

Oh my! You are right. I did not realize how large his donation was.

 

[F1fan]

An article from the Washington Post suggests that Trump may win an appeal.


Opinion:
Here’s the No. 1 reason Trump should win on appeal

Begin in July 2023, when New York state’s Commission on Judicial Conduct reprimanded Merchan, sending him a “caution” because the judge had made contributions to President Biden’s reelection campaign and to two anti-Republican and anti-Trump political action committees: Progressive Turnout Project and Stop Republicans. New York absolutely prohibits its judges from making such political contributions (see below), and while the rebuke delivered to Merchan was not made public — Reuters broke the story last month — it will be much discussed in the months between now and the election.

That seems rather unrelated to his performace managing a trial, especially since he ruled in favor of Trump numerous times. Merchan donated $30 to Biden's re-election according to reporting. This seems a longshot as being viable for an appeal. If this is the best chance for an appeal it's weak, and must get weaker as the list goes on. If the verdict gets thrown out for Trump do all of Merchan's cases get thrown out, too? Do all cases under judges who made political donantions, or showed some personal preference in private life, get thrown out on appeal? That seems a dangerous precedent, and perhaps a first amendment issue for judges.

Now put that in contrast to SC justice Thomas taking some $4 million in gifts from wealthy people, including some who are linked to issues before the court. Alito has had two flags hung at his two homes that are linked to support for Trump. Alito refuses to recuse from cases involing the Jan 6 riots. If SC Justices think they have the right to support political candidates and issues, then it's hard to impose ethics rules only on liberals.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Maybe, but to not see a single not guilty found anywhere in such a long list is arguably red flag territory, that everyone speaking in unison and with one voice, doesn't come across as being atypical when compared to other cases with a considerably long list of levied charges against a defendant.

Or he's just clearly guilty.