#Justice Juan Merchan

[dontmeantobepoliticalbut]

Trump supporters call for riots and violent retribution after verdict | Reuters

By Joseph Tanfani, Ned Parker & Peter Eisler

Supporters of former President Donald Trump, enraged by his conviction on 34 felony counts by a New York jury, flooded pro-Trump websites with calls for riots, revolution and violent retribution.

After Trump became the first U.S. president to be convicted of a crime, his supporters responded with dozens of violent online posts, according to a Reuters review of comments on three Trump-aligned websites: the former president's own Truth Social platform, Patriots.Win and the Gateway Pundit.

Some called for attacks on jurors, the execution of the judge, Justice Juan Merchan, or outright civil war and armed insurrection.

“Someone in NY with nothing to lose needs to take care of Merchan,” wrote one commentator on Patriots.Win. “Hopefully he gets met with illegals with a machete,” the post said in reference to illegal immigrants.

On Gateway Pundit, one poster suggested shooting liberals after the verdict. “Time to start capping some leftys,” said the post. “This cannot be fixed by voting."

Threats of violence and intimidating rhetoric soared after Trump lost the 2020 election and falsely claimed the vote was stolen. As he campaigns for a second White House term, Trump has baselessly cast the judges and prosecutors in his trials as corrupt tools of the Biden administration, intent on sabotaging his White House bid. His loyalists have responded with a campaign of threats and intimidation targeting judges and court officials.

“This was a disgrace, this was a rigged trial by a conflicted judge who was corrupt,” Trump told reporters afterwards, echoing comments he often made during the trial.

A 12-member jury found Trump guilty on Thursday of falsifying documents to cover up a payment to silence a porn star’s account of a sexual encounter ahead of the 2016 election. Sentencing is set for July 11, days before the Republican Party is scheduled to formally nominate Trump for president ahead of the Nov. 5 election. Trump has denied wrongdoing and is expected to appeal.

Trump continued his attacks online after the verdict.

On Truth Social, he called Merchan “HIGHLY CONFLICTED” and criticized his jury instructions as unfair. One commentator responded by posting a picture of a hangman's platform and a noose with the caption: “TREASONOUS MOBSTER OF THE JUSTICES SYSTEM!!”

Jacob Ware, a co-author of the book “God, Guns, and Sedition: Far-Right Terrorism in America”, said the violent language used by Trump’s followers was testament to the former president’s “ironclad ability to mobilize more extreme supporters to action, both at the ballot box and through violence.”

“Until and unless he accepts the process, the extremist reaction to his legal troubles will be militant,” said Ware, a research fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

A spokesperson for Truth Social said, “It’s hard to believe that Reuters, once a respected news service, has fallen so low as to publish such a manipulative, false, defamatory and transparently stupid article as this one purely out of political spite.”

All three sites have policies against violent language, and some of the posts were later removed. Representatives of Patriots.Win and Gateway Pundit did not immediately return requests for comment. A Trump spokesperson also did not respond to an email seeking comment.

“HANG EVERYONE”

After Thursday's verdict, many of his supporters also said that his conviction was proof that the American political system was broken and that only violent action could save the country.

“1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to Washington and hang everyone. That's the only solution,” said one poster on Patriots.win. Another added: “Trump should already know he has an army willing to fight and die for him if he says the words...I’ll take up arms if he asks.”

Other posts specifically urged targeting Democrats, in some cases suggesting they be shot. “AMERICA FULLY DESTROYED BY DEMOCRATS. LOCK AND LOAD,” wrote a commentator on Gateway Pundit.

While the posts identified by Reuters all called for violence or insurrection, most fell short of the legal standard for a prosecutable threat, which typically requires evidence that the comment reflects a clear intent to act or instill fear, rather than simply suggesting a frightening outcome.

Still, one researcher who studies extremist militias said the guilty verdict could inspire violence by reinforcing a conviction among some of Trump's supporters that he's a victim of a conspiracy orchestrated by his enemies.

“I do think a lot of these folks have been looking for an excuse to maybe mobilize for a while,” said Amy Cooter of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies’ Center on Terrorism, Extremism and Counterterrorism. “I hope I’m wrong. I’ve said for a long time, though, that I would not be shocked to see violence result from a guilty verdict, either directed toward the jurors” or others connected to the case.

[filosofablogger]

Foot-Stomping Furious!

In most countries, if you’re planning a coup to overthrow the government, you get one chance and only one chance.  You either succeed, or you fail, and if you fail you will either be dead by the end of the day, or you will spend the rest of your life in prison.  But in the United States, the land of opportunity, you get multiple chances.  If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again! I’m not…

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

Steve Brodner, It was all rigged!

* * * *

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

May 30, 2024

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

MAY 31, 2024

After slightly less than ten hours of deliberation, a jury today found former president Donald J. Trump guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in order to unlawfully influence the 2016 election.

For the first time in our history, a former president of the United States is a convicted felon.

For the first time in our history, a former president of the United States has been convicted of committing crimes to steal an election. 

Republican senators could have convicted Trump of high crimes and misdemeanors in 2019. In that year, the House impeached Trump after he tried to rig the 2020 presidential election by withholding congressionally appropriated funds to support Ukraine’s resistance to Russia’s 2014 invasion. He withheld the funds to try to force Ukraine president Volodomyr Zelensky to manufacture dirt on Democrat Joe Biden.

Republican senators could have convicted Trump, but they acquitted him.

Republican senators could have convicted Trump of high crimes and misdemeanors in 2021. In that year, the House impeached him after he tried to seize the presidency by instigating an attack on the U.S. Capitol and trying to rig the count of the electoral vote after Americans had elected Democrat Joe Biden. 

Republican senators could have convicted Trump, but they acquitted him.

Today, twelve ordinary Americans did what Republican senators refused to do. They protected the rule of law and held Trump accountable for his attempt to rig an election.

Trump stared blankly ahead as the verdict was read. “Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty. Guilty.” 

Trump has managed to escape accountability from the political system, but in a court of law, where prosecutors brought facts, witnesses were under oath, and jurors did not need him to keep them in positions of power, he lost.

And so he continued his assault on the rule of law. MAGA lawmakers, including House speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), both of whom were involved in the events of January 6, 2021, joined him in attacking the system that produced the guilty verdicts, although they steered clear of defending Trump himself.

After the verdict, Trump turned back to politics. He went directly to the television cameras outside the courtroom, where he gave his usual speech, saying the trial was rigged, he was “a very innocent man,” and that “our country has gone to hell.” Within four minutes of the verdict, his campaign posted a fundraising pitch on social media, proclaiming, “I am a political prisoner!” 

Trump has repeatedly urged his supporters to defend him with violence, but there was none reported. In some cities, there was cheering. Shares in Trump media fell sharply in after-hours trading.

Judge Juan Merchan will sentence Trump at 10:00 in the morning of July 11, four days before the Republican National Convention begins. 

A spokesperson for the White House said: “We respect the rule of law, and have no additional comment.”

Tonight, for the first time in our history, a former president of the United States is a convicted felon.

LETTERS FROM AN AMERICAN

HEATHER COX RICHARDSON

[william-r-melich]

Trump Gagged? No Way! - 04/03/2024

The New York supreme court judge Juan Merchan in Trump's "hush money" case has expanded on his earlier gag order which tried to restrict what Trump could publicly say about the case. The order came late yesterday which gags the former president from speaking in public about Manhattan D.A. Alvin Brag's family members and all others named including jurors, potential jurors, counsel, court staff, witnesses, and their families. The judge wrote, “This pattern of attacking family members of presiding jurists and attorneys assigned to his cases serves no legitimate purpose, it merely injects fear in those assigned or called to participate in the proceedings that not only they, but their family members as well, are ‘fair game,’ for Defendant’s vitriol.” He further wrote that courts are "understandably concerned" on restricting defendants' free speech, especially for those who are publicly notable. He further wrote, “The circumstances of the instant matter, however, are different. The conventional ‘David vs. Goliath’ roles are no longer in play as demonstrated by the singular power defendant’s words have on countless others.” In his ruling arguments he cited from the prosecution, “multiple potential witnesses have already raised grave concerns [...] about their own safety and that of their family members should they appear as witnesses against the defendant.” On those fears he wrote that they would "undoubtedly interfere" with the proceedings, and he continued. “The average observer, must now, after hearing defendant’s recent attacks, draw the conclusion that if they become involved in these proceedings, even tangentially, they should worry not only for themselves, but for their loved ones as well.” State prosecutor Matthew Colangelo wrote, “Defendant’s dangerous, violent, and reprehensible rhetoric fundamentally threatens the integrity of these proceedings and is intended to intimidate witnesses and trial participants alike—including this Court.” The state attorney's office was referencing Trump's remarks about the judge's daughter.

This judge, Juan Merchan, is compromised with a serious case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and Trump's lawyers think he should recuse himself from the case because his daughter, Loren Merchan who owns a Democrat political consulting firm, heavily profited from her fundraisers dedicated to hurt and remove Trump from the political scene. The judge's wife, Lara Merchan, used to work for New York Attorney General Letitia James, who prosecuted Trump for a victimless crime of "over valuating" his property to get a more favorable loan, and to which he paid back fully with interest that made Duetsche Bank (no complaints) a lot of money. Another ridiculous, unconstitutionally brought case, which, like all the others, is nothing more than political persecution. Judge Juan Merchan's profile picture on X was of Donald Trump behind bars. I think it's fair to say that this judge is compromised, or as Trump would say, "by a lot!"

Of course, the mainstream media's talking point's echoe-chamber put out that Trump made threatening remarks about the judge's daughter, when in fact he did no such thing. One of his Truth Social posts reads, “Judge Juan Merchan, a very distinguished looking man, is nevertheless a true and certified Trump Hater who suffers from a very serious case of Trump Derangement Syndrome. In other words, he hates me! His daughter is a senior executive at a Super Liberal Democrat firm that works for Adam ‘Shifty’ Schiff, the Democrat National Committee, Senate Majority PAC, and even Crooked Joe Biden.”

As I have said before, I think all of these cases against Trump should be dismissed and thrown out, as they are obviously political witch hunts directed by Biden's crooked administration and their weaponized justice department. So, Trump appropriately calls them the "Biden trials." The left thinks they can stop him from coming back to DC, and this judge thinks he can silence him, to keep him from pointing out all of the obvious corruption in that's clearly in plain sight for anyone with a functioning brain to see; --No Way! No Way! - will they ever silence or stop him, and No Way! - will they ever silence or stop us, we the people. Trump is right when he declares these trials as being "election interference," and that they should never, ever take place in the United States of America: abso-futting-lutely; -- No Way!

[bohdisanders]

When the justice system and the law are corrupt, it is not only right, but honorable, to be an OUTLAW! When the justice system and the law are corrupt, it is not only right, but honorable, to be an outlaw. This may

[reasonsforhope]

Former President Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felonies by the jury in his "hush money" trial in New York on Thursday, making him the first former president in U.S. history to be convicted of a crime.

The jury, composed of 12 Manhattan residents, found that Trump illegally falsified business records to cover up a $130,000 payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election. They found him guilty on all counts on their second day of deliberations.

The presumptive Republican nominee for president is now also a convicted felon, a label that could reverberate across the electorate in the months between now and Election Day in November.

The verdict was handed down in the same Manhattan courtroom where Trump has been on trial for the past six weeks. Trump stared at each juror as they confirmed their vote to convict and angrily denounced the decision in the hallway outside the courtroom, vowing to fight the conviction.

Jurors sided with prosecutors who said that Trump authorized the plan to falsify checks and related records in an effort to prevent voters from learning of an alleged sexual encounter with Daniels. Prosecutors from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office said the conspiracy spanned his 2016 campaign and continued well into his first year in the White House. Trump denied having sex with Daniels and pleaded not guilty.

Justice Juan Merchan set a sentencing date of July 11, just four days before the start of the Republican National Convention, where Trump will be formally nominated as the party's standard-bearer. He could face up to four years in prison and a $5,000 fine for each count, but Merchan has broad discretion when imposing a sentence, and could limit the punishment to a fine, probation, home confinement or other options...

The Biden campaign warned that former Trump's conviction doesn't prevent him from winning another term in the White House from a legal standpoint. 

"There is still only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: at the ballot box. Convicted felon or not, Trump will be the Republican nominee for president," the campaign's communications director Michael Tyler said in a statement.

-via CBS News, May 30, 2024. Live updates: 7:36 pm, 7:23 pm Eastern Time

--

Note: Even if Trump gets reelected, he cannot pardon himself in this case, because this is a state-level conviction. The president can only pardon people convicted of federal crimes, not people convicted by the states. (x, x)

[simply-ivanka]

Trump’s Trial Violated Due Process

Trump was denied notice of the charges, meaningful opportunity to respond and proof of all elements.

By 

David B. Rivkin Jr. and Elizabeth Price Foley

Wall Street Journal

Whether you love, hate or merely tolerate Donald Trump, you should care about due process, which is fundamental to the rule of law. New York’s trial of Mr. Trump violated basic due-process principles.

“No principle of procedural due process is more clearly established than that notice of the specific charge,” the Supreme Court stated in Cole v. Arkansas (1948), “and a chance to be heard in a trial of the issues raised by that charge, if desired, [is] among the constitutional rights of every accused in a criminal proceeding in all courts, state or federal.” In in re Winship (1970), the justices affirmed that “the Due Process Clause protects the accused against conviction except upon proof beyond a reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged.” These three due-process precepts—notice, meaningful opportunity to defend, and proof of all elements—were absent in Mr. Trump’s trial.

The state offense with which Mr. Trump was indicted, “falsifying business records,” requires proof of an “intent to defraud.” To elevate this misdemeanor to a felony, the statute requires proof of “intent to commit another crime.” In People v. Bloomfield (2006), the state’s highest court observed that “intent to commit another crime” is an indispensable element of the felony offense.

New York courts have concluded that the accused need not be convicted of the other crime since an “intent to commit” it is sufficient to satisfy the statute. But because that intent is, in the words of Winship, “a fact necessary to constitute the crime,” it is an element of felony falsification. Due process requires that the defendant receive timely notice of the other crime he allegedly intended to commit. It also requires that he have opportunity to defend against that accusation and that prosecutors prove beyond a reasonable doubt his intent to commit it.

Mr. Trump’s indictment didn’t specify the other crime he allegedly intended to commit. Prosecutors didn’t do so during the trial either. Only after the evidentiary phase of the trial did Judge Juan Merchan reveal that the other crime was Section 17-152 of New York’s election law, which makes it a misdemeanor to engage in a conspiracy “to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”

To recap, the prosecution involved (1) a misdemeanor elevated to a felony based on an “intent to commit another crime,” (2) an indictment and trial that failed to specify, or present evidence establishing, another crime the defendant intended to commit, and (3) a jury instruction that the other crime was one that necessitated further proof of “unlawful means.” It’s a Russian-nesting-doll theory of criminality: The charged crime hinged on the intent to commit another, unspecified crime, which in turn hinged on the actual commission of yet another unspecified offense.

To make matters worse, Judge Merchan instructed the jury: “Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were.”

Due process demands that felony verdicts be unanimous, but in Schad v. Arizona (1991), a murder case, the high court indicated that there need not be unanimity regarding the means by which a crime is committed. But a plurality opinion by Justice David Souter cautioned that if the available means of committing a crime are so capacious that the accused is not “in a position to understand with some specificity the legal basis of the charge against him,” due process will be violated. “Nothing in our history suggests that the Due Process Clause would permit a State to convict anyone under a charge of ‘Crime’ so generic that any combination of jury findings of embezzlement, reckless driving, murder, burglary, tax evasion, or littering, for example, would suffice for conviction,” Justice Souter wrote.

Justice Antonin Scalia concurred, observing that “one can conceive of novel ‘umbrella’ crimes (a felony consisting of either robbery or failure to file a tax return) where permitting a 6-to-6 verdict would seem contrary to due process.” Four dissenting justices argued that the In re Winship precedent requires unanimity regarding all elements of a crime, including the means by which it’s committed.

All nine justices in Schad, then, believed unanimity is required to convict when the means by which a crime can be committed are so broad that the accused doesn’t receive fair notice of the basis of the charge. New York’s election law requires that the violation occur “by unlawful means,” so any “unlawful” act—including, in Scalia’s example, either robbery of failure to file a tax return—can qualify. That’s clearly overbroad. Thus, Judge Merchan’s instruction that the jury “need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were” was unconstitutional.

That isn’t all. Judge Merchan hand-selected three laws—federal election law, falsification of “other” business records and “violation of tax laws”—as the “unlawful means” by which state election law was violated. Mr. Trump received no notice of any of these offenses, and the prosecutor briefly alluded only to federal election law, during the trial. Mr. Trump tried to call former Federal Election Commission Chairman Brad Smith to explain why this law wasn’t violated, but Judge Merchan ruled Mr. Smith couldn’t testify on whether Mr. Trump’s conduct “does or does not constitute a violation” of federal election law, denying him a meaningful opportunity to be heard.

Judge Merchan’s second “unlawful” means, falsification of other business records, is circular: A misdemeanor becomes a felony if one falsifies business records by falsifying business records. Further, the prosecution never alleged or provided evidence that Mr. Trump falsified “other” business records. The prosecutors likewise neither alleged nor offered evidence that Mr. Trump had violated tax laws, Judge Merchan’s third predicate.

Mr. Trump, like all criminal defendants, was entitled to due process. The Constitution demands that higher courts throw out the verdict against him. That takes time, however, and is unlikely to occur before the election. That unfortunate reality will widen America’s political divide and fuel the suspicion that Mr. Trump’s prosecution wasn’t about enforcing the law but wounding a presidential candidate for the benefit of his opponent.

Mr. Rivkin served at the Justice Department and the White House Counsel’s Office during the Reagan and George H.W. Bush Administrations. Ms. Foley is a professor of constitutional law at Florida International University College of Law. Both practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington.

[dragon-in-a-fez]

my deepest thanks to Justice Juan Merchan and courtroom sketch artist Jane Rosenberg for this timeless image that I will be posting for years

[mariacallous]

You’ve been asked to serve on the jury in the first-ever criminal prosecution of a United States president. What could possibly go wrong? The answer, of course, is everything.

A juror in former president Donald Trump’s ongoing criminal trial in New York was excused on Thursday after voicing fears that she could be identified based on biographical details that she had given in court. The dismissal of Juror 2 highlights the potential dangers of participating in one of the most politicized trials in US history, especially in an age of social media frenzies, a highly partisan electorate, and a glut of readily available personal information online.

Unlike jurors in federal cases, whose identities can be kept completely anonymous, New York law allows—and can require—the personal information of jurors and potential jurors to be divulged in court. Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing Trump’s prosecution in Manhattan, last month ordered that jurors’ names and addresses would be withheld. But he could not prevent potential jurors from providing biographical details about themselves during the jury selection process, and many did. Those details were then widely reported in the press, potentially subjecting jurors and potential jurors to harassment, intimidation, and threats—possibly by Trump himself. Merchan has since blocked reporters from publishing potential jurors’ employment details.

The doxing dangers that potential jurors face became apparent on Monday, day one of the proceedings. An update in a Washington Post liveblog about Trump’s trial revealed the Manhattan neighborhood where one potential juror lived, how long he’d lived there, how many children he has, and the name of his employer. Screenshots of the liveblog update quickly circulated on social media, as people warned that the man could be doxed, or have his identity revealed publicly against his will with the intent to cause harm, based solely on that information.

“It's quite alarming how much information someone skilled in OSINT could potentially gather based on just a few publicly available details about jurors or potential jurors,” says Bob Diachenko, cyber intelligence director at data-breach research organization Security Discovery and an expert in open source intelligence research.

Armed with basic personal details about jurors and certain tools and databases, “an OSINT researcher could potentially uncover a significant amount of personal information by cross-referencing all this together,” Diachenko says. “That's why it's crucial to consider the implications of publicly revealing jurors' personal information and take steps to protect their privacy during criminal trials.”

Even without special OSINT training, it can be trivial to uncover details about a juror’s life. To test the sensitivity of the information the Post published, WIRED used a common reporting tool to look up the man’s employer. From there, we were able to identify his name, home address, phone number, email address, his children’s and spouse’s identities, voter registration information, and more. The entire process took roughly two minutes. The Post added a clarification to its liveblog explaining that it now excludes the man’s personal details.

The ready availability of those details illustrates the challenges in informing the public about a highly newsworthy criminal case without interfering in the justice process, says Kathleen Bartzen Culver, the James E. Burgess Chair in Journalism Ethics and director of the School of Journalism & Mass Communication at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

“Simply because a notable figure is on trial does not mean that a juror automatically surrenders any claim to privacy,” Bartzen Culver says. “People who have been drawn into a case that is exceptionally newsworthy are not aware that a simple statement that they make about where they work might identify them and open them up to scrutiny and possibly risk.”

The dangers to jurors or potential jurors has only increased since the first day of jury selection, which remains ongoing, in part due to the challenges of prosecuting a former US president and the presumptive Republican nominee in the 2024 US presidential election. Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records, a class E felony in New York state, for payments made ahead of the 2016 presidential election related to alleged affairs with two women, adult performer Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal. Trump has claimed his prosecution is a “communist show trial” and a “witch hunt” and has pleaded not guilty.

On Fox News, coverage of Trump’s trial has repeatedly focused on the potential political motivations of the jurors, bolstering the former president’s claims. Trump, in turn, has repeated the claims by the conservative news network’s hosts. In a post on Truth Social on Wednesday, Trump quoted Fox News commentator Jesse Watters claiming on air that potential jurors in Trump’s trial are “undercover liberal activists lying to the judge in order to get on the Trump jury.” This, despite a gag order that forbids Trump from “making or directing others to make public statements about any prospective juror or any juror in this criminal proceeding.”

Broader media coverage of the Trump trial jurors appears to often be the work of political reporters who are unfamiliar with the journalism ethics specific to covering a criminal trial, says UW-Madison’s Bartzen Culver. “It's like when political reporters covered Covid and science journalists lost their minds.” She adds that it’s important for any journalist covering a criminal case—Trump’s or otherwise—to “consider our role within the justice system.”

“Unethical behavior by journalists can delay trials. It can result in overturned convictions and the people having to go back and do a retrial,” Bartzen Culver says. “That all works against our system of justice.”

The New York case is one of four ongoing criminal proceedings against Trump. In Georgia, where he faces multiple felony charges for alleged attempts to interfere with the state’s electoral process in 2020, Trump supporters leaked the addresses of members of the grand jury, after their names were listed in the 98-page indictment against the former president, as required by state law. Georgia’s Fulton County Sheriff’s Office said last August that it was investigating threats against the jury members. The incident highlights the persistent dangers people can face from Trump’s supporters, both in the near term and for the rest of their lives, if they’re viewed as having acted against him.

The leaks were discovered by Advance Democracy Inc. (ADI), a nonpartisan, nonprofit research and investigations organization founded by Daniel J. Jones, a former investigator for the FBI and the US Senate Intelligence Committee. So far, Jones tells WIRED, ADI has not uncovered attempts to dox jurors in Trump’s New York trial. But it’s still early days.

“We have not yet found identifying information on the extremist forums we monitor,” Jones says. “Having said that, I share your concern that it is only a matter of time before this happens.”

[onix]

"In the meantime, a judge in New York is set to sentence the former president later this month after holding off on handing down the punishment ahead of Election Day to avoid any appearance of affecting the outcome of the presidential race – though Trump’s lawyers are expected to ask the judge to put off the sentencing now that he’s the president-elect.

The filing is expected before Judge Juan Merchan’s self-imposed deadline of November 12 to decide whether to wipe away Trump’s conviction because of the Supreme Court’s decision this summer granting a president some presidential immunity. If Merchan decides to wipe away the conviction, the charges would be dismissed, and Trump would not be sentenced.

Should Merchan move ahead with sentencing, Trump could be ordered to serve as much as four years of prison time, but the judge is not required to sentence the president-elect to prison, and he could impose a lesser sentence, such as probation, home confinement, community service or a fine.

Since it is a state case, Trump does not have the power to pardon himself next year after he is sworn into office.

The former president is also defending himself in a litany of civil lawsuits, including ones concerning his role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, two E. Jean Carroll defamation cases, and a civil fraud case brought by the New York attorney general where Trump was ordered to pay nearly $454 million in damages.

Trump lost two defamation cases to Carroll in 2023 and 2024 in federal court after a jury found him liable for sexually abusing the onetime columnist and subsequently defaming her. Two juries awarded Carroll $5 million and $83 million.

A federal appeals court heard Trump’s appeal to dismiss the first Carroll verdict in September. The court has yet to issue a decision.

Trump is also still facing civil lawsuits brought by Democratic lawmakers and others over his role in the January 6 Capitol attack.

It’s possible that all these cases continue to play out even as Trump serves his second term in the White House. In a 1997 Supreme Court ruling stemming from a civil lawsuit then-President Bill Clinton was involved in, the justices unanimously decided that sitting presidents could not invoke presidential immunity to avoid civil litigation while in office."

-

I'm not holding my breath, but I do want to point out that the potential for some serious comedy is right there. I think going to jail would break his spirit even worse than if he just flat out lost the election.

[fatsamsgrandslamspeakeasy]

Justice has been served on November 5th and 6th, 2024!

Congratulations to our true POTUS, Donald J Trump, on your rightful win as POTUS #47!

A huge FUCK YOU to a huge list of crybaby so-called "celebrities". The list is so huge, I apologize to anyone who I may leave out: Taylor Swift, Harrison Ford, Cardi B, Jesse The Nobody Ventura, Mick Foley, Robert DeNiro, Stephen (Pedo) King, Jennifer Lopez, Whoopi Goldberg, Quentin Tarantino, Mark Hammil, Christina Applegate, John Cusack, Wendell Pierce, George Clooney, Katy Perry, Cher, Mark Ruffalo, Meryl Streep, Rob (Meathead) Reiner, Miley Cyrus, Lena Dunham, Alec Baldwin, Amy Schumer, Chelsea Handler, Zendaya, Angelina Jolie, Lady Gaga, Rosie O'Donnell, George Takei, America Ferrera, Madonna, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Jack Black, Will Smith, Barbara Streisand, Trevor Noah, Charlie Sheen, Johnny Depp, Stephen Colbert, Susan Sarandon, Jimmy Kimmel, LeBron James, Ben Stiller, Samuel L Jackson, Bette Midler, Jane Fonda, Ellen (Degenerate) DeGeneres, Eminem, Harpo, Richard Gere, Bruce Springsteen, Chris Evans, Alyssa Milano, Chrissy Teigan, George Lopez, The View hosts, Pope Francis.......

No true patriot gives a flying fuck what y'all think. Go back to your perverted Hollywoodland, and keep y'alls MF-ing mouths shut while y'all cry rivers of tears. Y'all and y'alls' sick demented fans and followers should crawl into a hole and disappear forever. Better yet, if y'all ain't totally full of shit, and wish to leave America, the Great....I would be only too happy to personally pay for y'alls 1 way ticket the hell out of here! Good bye and good fuckin' riddance........

An even bigger FUCK YOU to: Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Fani Willis, Juan Merchan, Arthur Engoron, Lewis Kaplan, Merrick Garland, Mehdi Hasan, Tanya Chutkan, Jack Smith, Shenna Bellows, Jena Griswold, George and Alex Soros and of course.... Joe Biden. Y'all led a witch hunt against an innocent man, tried unconstitutionally to get his name off of state ballots, convict him of bullshit crimes, imprison him, empower the DOJ as a weapon against him, simply because he dared to love our country's freedom by opposing your NWO Globalist masters. Because of the rhetoric that y'all helped spread, y'all are directly responsible for the attempts by the crazy leftists loonies who tried to take this great man's life. Thank God that you failed in that attempt. Y'all should be ashamed of yourselves, but when y'all look in the mirrors, y'all must recognize the true Fascists that have been in power for way too long.....yourselves! Each and every one of y'all is an indelible stain on the American Way of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. History will NOT be kind to any of y'all. Y'all do understand that your un-American actions were crucial in getting DJT re-elected. Live with that knowledge daily, as it burns a hole in each of y'alls miserable stomachs.

FINALLY: a well-deserved FUCK YOU to Kamala Harris, puppet extraordinaire to the Globalist regime. It turns out, darlin' that YOU were at the wrong rally, all this time!!!!! You don't get to diss our Lord Jesus and not suffer the consequences. You and your fellow Satanic followers will be finding that out for eternity someday soon, one can only hope! But really, sweettums.....your whole platform was a complete sham and a slap in the face to all hard-working, intelligent, decent Americans. Any true public servant... which you clearly are NOT..... would know that, in order to secure my vote, you need to convince me why I should vote for YOU, not why I should NOT be voting for your opponent. All you had in your arsenal was "Don't vote for Trump, because....". Never once could you say "Vote for me because....." and come up with a legitimate, valid reason why I should cast my vote for you. A lesson that you should have learned long ago! The fact that you didn't, shows you for the charlatan that you are, have been and always will be. The fact that your supporters could not see that is testimony to their brainlessness and/or their indoctrination. Now, please just do the American people a great big favor and pull yourself into a huge hole, go off into oblivion, and leave the adults to clean up the big mess that you and your partners-in-crime have created.

Thank you truly to my friends, family and followers for putting up with me the past 4 years in my time of indignation, depression and rage. While I still plan to keep my blog's finger on the pulse of political events, and especially, any and all injustices that may ensue this historical win, I really need to make this blog more fun and relaxing for myself, the way I initially envisioned it to be. Thanks for putting up with my craziness and for being my support when I felt that the world was going to Hell in a hand basket. I respect and love you all, patriots! Have a blessed day and a great life!

Finally, Thank you to Donald J Trump for being an inspiration to myself and for being a great POTUS for all Americans. Your mantra of FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT will forever be my blueprint of action for future navigation thru turbulent waters.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

David Smith at The Guardian:

It will be a study in contrasts around age, gender, race, temperament and policy. It will also be the first time in US presidential history that a former courtroom prosecutor will take the debate stage alongside a convicted criminal with the White House at stake. Vice-President Kamala Harris, the Democratic nominee, has served as a trial lawyer, district attorney and state attorney general in California. Former US president Donald Trump, her Republican rival, has been convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a sex scandal.

The pair will go head to head in Philadelphia on Tuesday night in their first – and perhaps only – debate, just 75 days after Joe Biden’s dire performance against Trump triggered a political earthquake that ultimately forced him from the race for the White House. Few expect such a transformative result this time. But Trump has his last best chance to end Harris’s extended “honeymoon” while the Democrat is aiming to prosecute her opponent’s glaring liabilities before tens of millions of voters watching on live television. “It’s the first time Donald Trump is actually going to be cross-examined in front of the American people,” said Tara Setmayer, a former Republican communications director on Capitol Hill. “Kamala Harris’s career and experience as a prosecutor, attorney general and a senator is something that Trump should not underestimate in this debate.”

This will be Trump’s seventh appearance in a national general election debate, making him the most experienced debater in US presidential history. Against Biden in June he repeated familiar falsehoods that mostly went unchallenged. Harris is expected to be a more formidable opponent and could put Trump on the defensive over facts, policy and his conduct following the 2020 election. The 59-year-old has not been shy about embracing her career in law enforcement so far in the campaign. A video at the recent Democratic national convention in Chicago declared: “That’s our choice. A prosecutor or a felon.” In a speech accepting the party’s nomination, Harris told cheering delegates: “Every day, in the courtroom, I stood proudly before a judge and I said five words: Kamala Harris, for the people.” She has also been touting her record taking on predators and fraudsters, telling crowds across the country: “I know Donald Trump’s type!” Harris brought that experience to bear in her memorable 2018 cross-examination of Brett Kavanaugh during Senate confirmation hearings after Trump, then president, nominated him as a justice on the supreme court.

But she is unlikely to go after Trump directly over his convictions – or three other criminal cases still looming over him. When, at a rally in New Hampshire this week, an audience member shouted, “Lock him up!” Harris replied: “Well, you know what? The courts are going to handle that, and we will handle November. How about that?” In May Trump became the first former US president to be convicted of felony crimes when a New York jury found him guilty of all 34 charges in a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 election through a hush-money payment to an adult film performer. On Friday the judge, Justice Juan Merchan, delayed Trump’s sentencing until 26 November – after the election date of 5 November. For any other candidate on a debate stage, the convictions would be a huge liability. But Trump has repeatedly rallied his base by falsely claiming that the case, and others relating to election interference and mishandling classified information, are bogus and politically motivated. Should the topic arise on Tuesday, he is likely to cast himself as a martyr and also remind viewers that he was nearly assassinated in July. The 90-minute duel, held at Philadelphia’s National Constitutional Center, will be moderated by the ABC News anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. In accordance with rules negotiated by both campaigns, there will be no live audience and candidates’ microphones will be muted when it is not their turn to speak.

The same rules seemed to work in Trump’s favour when he took on Biden in Atlanta in June. Aaron Kall, director of debate at the University of Michigan, said: “Trump adjusted well to no audience and the cutting of the microphones in Atlanta. Biden clearly didn’t. “He had never debated when there’s no audience; same thing with Harris. Not getting any feedback and not knowing how things are going, you have to trust your judgment and who’s got better media instincts than a reality television host?” The muting of the microphones may not only save Trump from himself – he interrupted Biden 71 times during their first presidential debate in 2020 – but prevent Harris offering sharp rejoinders such as “I’m speaking”, a line she delivered against Mike Pence in the vice-presidential debate four years ago. Harris and Trump have never met before in person and, in the city of Rocky Balboa, are likely to take on the roles of boxer and fighter respectively. Trump, 78, is not known for his discipline, preparation or fidelity to the truth. His debate performances, like his governing style, are typically based on gut instinct rather than considered analysis.

The first (and possibly only) debate between Kamala Harris (D) and Donald Trump (R) will take place on Tuesday with ABC as the host outlet that will air on numerous cable, streaming, and broadcast outlets.

Tuesday night is the prosecutor v. felon debate, and it’ll be an epic one in which hopefully Harris wins.

Will Harris emerge as the victor in her path to become the first woman to become President? Or will Trump win the debate to set him on a path to a return to 1600? Stay tuned.

[starseedpatriot]

Judge in Trump Case Is a Biden Donor Whose Daughter Worked for Kamala

The judge in Trump's case, acting New York County Supreme Court Justice Juan Manuel Merchan, is an apparent 2020 Biden donor.

His daughter, Loren Merchan, previously worked for Kamala Harris' failed 2020 presidential campaign and is now president of a consulting company for the Biden-Harris campaign, according to a report by Breitbart.

🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️🤦🏻‍♀️

https://t.me/LauraAbolichannel

[militantinremission]

Donald Trump: Potential Felon- In Chief?

Donald Trump has been convicted on 34 Felony Counts of falsifying Business Records in his attempt to hide his [past] infidelity during the 2016 Presidential Election. I'm not a Lawyer, so I don't understand what This Trial accomplished. Trump received a 'Scarlet Letter', but he's STILL the likely GOP Nominee for POTUS. Republican Leaders continue to Pledge their Allegiance, & Trump's MAGA Minions will likely double down on their efforts to put him back in Office. Just as Vladimir Putin survived 16,000 Sanctions, I see Donald Trump surviving this Conviction. In fact, he has reportedly raised $35M in the first 24hrs following his Conviction; he's currently up to $39M.

What was The Point of this Trial? What does finding Trump Guilty on 34 Counts actually accomplish? In essence, Nothing has changed; The MAGA Bus rolls onward. Donald Trump faces Sentencing on July 11th (3 Days before the Republican National Convention), & even then, it's not likely that he will face any Jail Time for a 'Low Level Felony'. Even if he's Sentenced, Trump vows to continue Campaigning. Dems run the risk of Donald Trump being likened to Nelson Mandela. New York State Attorney General Letitia James & Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg were aiming for a Knock Out Punch, but at best, they only gave Trump a Black Eye... I don't see their End Game; unless it's a Win that Attorney General James & D.A. Bragg are planning to ride into the Governor's Mansion & Gracie Mansion respectively.

Despite his position of being a Former President, Donald Trump IS a flawed Candidate. His greatest strength, is his Cult of Personality. I credit him for being a Master Marketer, who has created a formidable Base among Working Class Republicans. This demographic is the traditional Republican Base, so it's not a big surprise to see Republican Leadership following their Key Voting Block into MAGALand. I said before that Politicians underestimated Donald Trump's Media Savvy. He has a knack for staying relevant in a Society conditioned to 30 second Sound Bites & a Short Attention Span.

TD Hip Hop did a great analysis of Trump's Guilty Verdict; looking at the Jury Instructions in particular. The Mainstream Media pointed out Judge Juan Merchan's instructions regarding sole use of Michael Cohen's testimony as grounds for Conviction; Jurors have to consider additional elements in order to Convict. Tony pointed out how the Judge also permitted Jurors to find Trump Guilty on Each Count w/ as few as 4 Jurors out of the 12; This is a precedent. It also raises a huge question mark regarding Trump's Guilty Verdict on ALL 34 [Felony] Charges. How many Counts were actually unanimous votes? Why was conformity among All 12 Jurors bypassed in this particular Trial? What does it mean for future Trials in Manhattan Courts, NYC, & N.Y. State?

The Mainstream Media is running w/ Trump's Conviction; Political Correspondents are quick to point out how 20% of Donald Trump's Supporters say they will 'reconsider' their stance if he's Convicted. But then again, are they only fanning the flames of Trump Supporters? Many in the MAGA Camp believed all along that he is being politically persecuted & pledged to support him regardless. I wonder how this Verdict will affect Libertarians that were on The Fence- will they cry foul & lend their support to Donald Trump? What about Black Voters? Some can see Trump getting the 'Black Treatment' from the Justice System, and may identify w/ that. Then there are those who point to Judge Merchan's daughter, Loren; who through her Firm- Authentic Campaigns, made $10M from information related to this Trial. Attorney Kash Patel pointed out that this is a Violation of N.Y. State Law & the F.E.C.

Meanwhile, Joe Biden is in Scramble Mode. His disregard for Black Specific Issues are coming Home to Roost. His Campaign & the Democratic Shills associated w/ it are trying to push his accomplishments for Black Americans, but NOTHING is Black Specific. Joe Biden is basically citing a laundry list of 'Rising Tide' Measures that benefitted EVERYONE... It harkens back to Kamala Harris stating that she wasn't going to do anything 'Just for Blackfolk', & Joe Biden telling the CBC that 'Latinx is The Future, so they have to get behind them'. TD Hip Hop pointed out how his 'Blacks for Biden' Rally in Philadelphia was a DISMAL FAILURE. The video clips show a Crowd, but wide angle views show a nearly empty gymnasium. Cornell West had a better Turnout in Harlem, & THAT was embarrassing! The fact that Joe Biden is NOT running away in the Polls, says more about Biden than Trump... Stephen Gardner went deeper into Legal Precedent in his interview w/ Kash Patel.

Patel, is a former Federal Public Defender & Prosecutor w/ 60 Criminal Prosecution Trials under his belt. In his interview, he says that he attended proceedings & saw things in the Trump Trial that he never saw before. He gave examples of Legal Precedent in a Court Case, including 'Reversible Error' illegalities during Jury Instructions (citing Richardson vs United States). Both he & Stephen Gardner cite a Double Standard in the Justice System; from a Black Perspective, this is Pure Comedy! They cite a Miscarriage of Justice that Black Americans have suffered through since Emancipation. The question is: How can Black America use this to Our advantage?

Donald Trump has a history of Anti-Black Discrimination Practices in his Business Dealings, while immersing himself into Black American Culture. Black Anti- Trumpers are quick to remind Black Trump Supporters of Donald Trump's Crusade against the 'Central Park 5' & his refusal to apologize for his actions. I think they're justified in doing so. At the same time, The Mantra of Politics is: 'Nothing Personal, just Politics'. The height of Political Maturity is being able to put personal feelings aside for The Greater Good. Black America sits in 'The Catbird Seat'. Dems NEED Black Votes to retain Power; at the same time, We can play on Donald Trump's 'Black Treatment' as: The Enemy of My Enemy...

This is NOT an endorsement of Donald Trump. In fact, I don't support Trump or Biden. I refer to BOTH as:

Anti- Black Racist 'A' &

Anti-Black Racist 'B'

That said, a little political savvy will go a long way to help Our Cause. Joe Biden has proven himself to be a 21st Century Dixiecrat. I personally think that his Policies over the Decades have done more damage to Black Americans than Donald Trump's Discriminatory Business Practices. NEITHER Candidate gets a Pardon from Me, but if we're 'Playing Politics', We have to remember that LBJ was also an Anti- Black Racist, that We could do business with. The Black Vote is OFFICIALLY FOR SALE, & The Price is a Black Agenda for ALL Black & Afrikan Americans, PLUS a 'Lineage Based' Multigenerational Federal Reparations Program to indemnify American Descendants Of Chattel Slavery. We're past Exploratory Committees & Commissions; Illegal Immigrants are literally getting a Blank Check for Crossing the Border.

The question Now is: How Bad does each Candidate want to Win?

-Just My Opinion.

[follow-up-news]

A New York judge has delayed former President Donald Trump's sentencing on felony criminal charges until Nov. 26. "This is not a decision this Court makes lightly but it is the decision which in this Court's view, best advances the interests of justice," Judge Juan Merchan wrote in the decision handed down Friday. Merchan issued the ruling Friday after Trump's attorneys had asked him to postpone the Sept. 18 sentencing until after the election in order to allow them to be in position to appeal a pending ruling involving presidential immunity. That ruling was expected by Sept. 16 - just two days before what would have been the first ever sentencing of a former president on criminal charges. Trump was convicted in May on 34 counts of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels near the end of the 2016 presidential campaign.