Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What does the future hold for Donald Trump? - threadbans in OP

Options
1…11401141114311451146…1190

Comments

  • Options
    #34262
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,357 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    Will the Trump named be totally removed from properties in NY? It lowers the property value so has no benefit.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/apr/21/trump-plaza-rename-real-estate-value



  • Options
    #34263
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,321 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122045954#Comment_122045954

    Though some tweets were indeed read to Trump’s discomfort, that wasn’t one of them. It was a hypothetical from Angry Staffer.

    https://twitter.com/Angry_Staffer/status/1780322291068416470



  • Options
    #34264
    briany
    Registered Users Posts: 13,714 ✭✭✭✭briany


    @amandstu

    Trump and his followers deserve disrespect ,but not the judge in charge of his case.


    Some do, yeah. I'm thinking of the higher up ones closer to him who are facilitating the man, and know full well what they're doing is destructive, but the possibility of power is corrupting their conscience. The ordinary people who are using Trump as a way to stick it to the establishment or as the only alternative in a two party system could benefit from a proper talk, however. If America is to really heal its divisions, at least some of that latter group will need to be listened to and have their concerns addressed in an effective way that (by definition) doesn't involve propping up Trump, the bellicose demagogue.



  • Options
    #34265
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,420 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    So, Republicans don't have a problem with a POTUS interfering with the DOJ, they just want them to interfere in their favor

    https://www.mediaite.com/politics/fox-news-host-stops-kevin-mccarthy-after-puzzling-comment-youre-saying-biden-should-meddle-with-the-justice-system-in-trumps-favor/



  • Options
    #34266
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,094 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    Why are they using the fact that Cohen is a liar as some kind of win against the prosecution? He lied on behalf of Trump didn't he, and that's why he was prosecuted himself, and also why he's a witness for the prosecution against Trump now.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #34267
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,415 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048091#Comment_122048091

    The argument is "once a liar, always a liar", and he shouldn't be believed.

    Problem is... Cohen has tapes..



  • Options
    #34268
    LambshankRedemption
    Registered Users Posts: 6,304 ✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    Is anyone else excited?

    Lying-Scumbag-Gets-Comeuppance-Day comes but once a year(not even that often in fact).



  • Options
    #34269
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,454 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048299#Comment_122048299

    Sort of. Court proceedings are usually pretty boring. Today might be better because it's opening statement day, the prosecution goes first and hopefully does a bang-up job. The defense, well, we'll see, I expect some variation on 'no one got hurt/the main witness is a liar/…,' but I doubt we'll hear much whining from the defense about witch hunts.

    Not excited though, more deeply depressed at how far America has fallen when an ex-POTUS is on trial facing felony convictions. America is the country that eventually gets it right after exhausting all other possibilities, but its still very discouraging, so glad I left the place.



  • Options
    #34270
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,415 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048335#Comment_122048335

    my understanding of the case is that on the facts, he is caught bang to rights.

    The apparent difficulty is a technical one, state crime vs federal crime and the procedure for prosecuting. Before all of the cases began, this was deemed to be the weakest one I heard.

    My fear is a not guilty verdict before November, enabling Trump to amplify his "witch hunt" message to all and sundry..



  • Options
    #34271
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,607 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048366#Comment_122048366

    I think just one juror selecting a Not Guilty vote means a hung jury, neither found Guilty nor Not Guilty (which means Trump et al will be claiming he was found Not Guilty). The prosecution could try for another trial but it would never happen before the election.

    So all it takes is one Trump fan on the jury who has been careful enough to not have a huge social media presence and hasn't displayed his allegience during jury selection, and it's over.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #34272
    LambshankRedemption
    Registered Users Posts: 6,304 ✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048335#Comment_122048335

    Well I know it's not going to be a quick proceeding. I'm just excited, that we have gotten this far. Some pundits were suggesting getting the jury together could take months alone. I have read comments in the last few months stating this trial would not even go ahead. So it's a step in the right direction.



  • Options
    #34273
    Detritus70
    Registered Users Posts: 766 ✭✭✭Detritus70


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048392#Comment_122048392

    To me that is always a problem with juries.

    I'm sure that pretty much all of these cases are hugely complex technical and legal issues that experts in their field have studied for years and have decades of experience in order to understand them. And now they have to get a bunch of randomers to understand a highly specialised and hugely complex issue in a short time.

    One of the biggest US legal tropes is the defence attorney putting on a big show with lots of theatricals and razzmatazz and winning over the jury by blinding them with bullsh!t. That's why I would never trust a jury, even without some MAGA sleeper infiltrating them.

    "I'm not a Trump supporter, but..." is the new "I'm not a racist, but...".



  • Options
    #34274
    ronjo
    Registered Users Posts: 3,330 ✭✭✭ronjo


    What would happen if the jury were making decision and one of them started with the "election was stolen" and "witch hunt" etc etch…

    Would that be just tough luck on prosecution for not weeding them out or can jury do anything?



  • Options
    #34275
    EltonJohn69
    Registered Users Posts: 4,261 ✭✭✭EltonJohn69


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122045698#Comment_122045698

    what was the podcast ?



  • Options
    #34276
    kowloon
    Registered Users Posts: 13,442 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048706#Comment_122048706

    Behind the Bastards.



  • Options
    #34277
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,420 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    ”allowed” and “peacefully protest” both doing a lot of heavy lifting in this screed

    https://www.mediaite.com/trump/trump-whips-up-maga-base-to-protest-at-courthouses-to-compete-with-pro-palestinian-protests/



  • Options
    #34278
    Igotadose
    Registered Users Posts: 13,454 ✭✭✭✭Igotadose


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122049178#Comment_122049178

    What's he on about re:SCOTUS justices? It's been MAGA types doing that, the most recent was a paranoid who left threatening messages on the Chief Justice's voicemail: https://www.thedailybeast.com/former-google-programmer-sentenced-for-threatening-to-kill-supreme-court-justice-john-roberts



  • Options
    #34279
    Overheal
    Registered Users Posts: 82,420 ✭✭✭✭Overheal


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122049197#Comment_122049197

    probably referring to the Roe protests and the guy who turned himself in but who knows I’m not his interpreter but suggesting such acts were “allowed” is really a stretch. No guessing required at what trump wants to happen though and it’s chaos



  • Options
    #34280
    everlast75
    Registered Users Posts: 19,415 ✭✭✭✭everlast75


    I'm guessing 45 *won't* be taking the stand...

    https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1782419111177322829



  • Options
    #34281
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,321 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048624#Comment_122048624

    In an unusual move, two of the jurors are lawyers and the other jurors are likely to look to them for guidance. More often than not, they tend to be avoided in juries. The thinking is that the prosecution is going to rely on them to guide the rest through the somewhat tortuous logic of the charge to try to join the elements, and the defense is going to rely on them hold the prosecution to task to uphold the burden of proof standard. Overall, the jury has a higher proportion than normal of better educated/professional types.

    That said, the complex legalities are left to the judge. The juries are tasked only to determine the facts. Watch for the jury instructions to be "If you decide that this happened, then move to requirement 2. If you decide that X did not happen, aquit" sort of flowchart.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #34282
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,607 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122049914#Comment_122049914

    Judge: Does you client wish to take the stand?

    Trump's Lawyers: No, your honour.

    Truth Social a few minutes later

    Trump: THE CORRUPT JUDGE WOULDN'T LET ME TAKE THE STAND! WHAT HAPPENED TO THE FIRST AMENDMENT! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE! ELECTION INTERFERENCE!



  • Options
    #34283
    Brussels Sprout
    Registered Users Posts: 7,110 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048773#Comment_122048773

    The only one of those I ever listened to was their Clarence Thomas episodes and they were fantastic



  • Options
    #34284
    Brussels Sprout
    Registered Users Posts: 7,110 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122049946#Comment_122049946

    Must be hard to get a random sample of people living in Manhattan who aren't disproprtionately better educated/professional types. A lot of them seem to be New York Times readers which I guess would skew toward that demographic.



  • Options
    #34285
    Brussels Sprout
    Registered Users Posts: 7,110 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    So I think the dogs on the street know that Trump had Stormy Daniels paid off, via his surrogates in order to keep her quiet before the election.

    What exactly is the challenge in this case? Is it proving that election funds were ultimately used for this purpose and that paying hush money isn't a legitimate election expense or is it actually linking the decision to pay her off to Trump himself?

    Is Trump's likely defence to pretend that this was a solo run by Michael Cohen and that Trump was entirely unaware and would have not condoned such underhanded and potentially illegal tactics?



  • Options
    #34286
    robinph
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,094 Mod ✭✭✭✭robinph


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122049914#Comment_122049914

    Why do they only get to bring up those cases if Trump takes the stand?



  • Options
    #34287
    LambshankRedemption
    Registered Users Posts: 6,304 ✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122049952#Comment_122049952

    That is exactly what will happen.



  • Options
    #34288
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,321 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122050093#Comment_122050093

    That's why it's a difficult hill for the prosecution to climb.

    Cohen, Trump's lawyer, paid Daniels. Trump reimbursed Cohen. On the books, the payment by Trump to Cohen was listed as legal fees. Had they been listed on the books as "reimbursement to lawyer to pay off Daniels" there would have been no case, the misrepresentation is a critical component of the charge, but in itself is not the charge. (It would have been one had it been made three or four years ago, statue of limitations for a misdemeanor)

    There are two follow-on effects which are relevant. Firstly, if the payments were made to hide the story from potential voters (as opposed to any other reason), then the argument is that as the money was used to help the election campaign, thus would have counted as a political contribution, subject to a limit of a few thousand dollars. The intent to bypass the political contribution limit is the crux of the charge as it relates to election law.

    Apparently there is a second alternate route that he charge can be substantiated. It seems that such reimbursements have to be declared under a separate income category for Cohen, and by using the category they actually did, it reduced Cohen's tax bill by a few tens of thousands of dollars, thus permitting tax fraud. The catch with this one is that Trump (or realistically his agent) had to have that intent in mind when he put the entry into the ledger.

    That help?



  • Options
    #34289
    LambshankRedemption
    Registered Users Posts: 6,304 ✭✭✭LambshankRedemption


    As I understand it, the issue isn't with him having an affair or paying her off. He could have "hired" her as an aide, and paid her a salary + bonus that would have equalled the pay off money.

    It's that he didn't want there being any link between her and him so he got his lawyer to pull funds from an account not his own, and the funds came from an account used for the campaign. It boils down to him being accused of tax fraud which funnily enough is how they got Capone in the end.



  • Options
    #34290
    Brussels Sprout
    Registered Users Posts: 7,110 ✭✭✭Brussels Sprout


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122050153#Comment_122050153

    Yes, that's helpful thank you.

    The second issue sounds like it's irrelevant to Trump so I presume the emphasis will be on the first one.

    It sounds like that in turn will come down to what Michael Cohen says Trump told him to do. In previous instances he said that Trump "Never explicitly told me what to do but he made his intentions clear indirectly" so that might be tricky - especially since the defence can just label Cohen as a convicted criminal who also bears a grudge against Trump.



  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #34291
    Penn
    Registered Users Posts: 33,607 ✭✭✭✭Penn


    The simplest way to remember it that I saw earlier, is that it's financial fraud due to misrepresentation, which is a state crime, and done for the purposes of hiding the info from the electorate in the run-up to the election, which would be a federal crime.



This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement