i

There is a relentless case being constructed which says nothing happened without Trump’s approval and that the campaign buried the story because of their concern about its impact on female voters. Not yet an email directly from him instructing it. You wouldn’t expect that on this or any subject from Trump. But very strong indirect links.

Trump isn’t going to be sent to the gallows. A heavy fine is the worst he can expect. Damage to his reputation with independent voters is much more important. That should happen whether he found guilty or let off because of a hold out on the jury.,

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

I don’t know why New York are handling it this way. I can only guess. It seems they have been hacked off with Trump and his organisation’s behaviour for many years. So nailing him for falsifying business records in these particular circumstances might be providing a sense of achievement and demonstrating to others that no matter how big they think they are they aren’t above the law.

Introducing the motivation is, I think, needed to avoid Trump’s defence claiming plausible deniability. If the prosecution can show that Trump knew what was being done and why, then that defence fails.

The possible impact on independent voters is therefore a side effect. Who knows how strong it might be, but surveys have indicated that some would be influenced by a guilty verdict making Trump the first ex President to also be a convicted criminal.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

[Link]

Thin end of a very large wedge. Maybe if the dems were a shoe in for a win come November this wouldn’t make chip paper.

Why?

All I think it shows is the independence of the Justice Department in dealing with alleged corruption.

Or is this a witch hunt?

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Given that the jury selection is....as the OJ case proved....pretty much the decisive factor in court case outcomes this case was decided the moment that it was held in New York.

We all know that it's all performative and a show trial by Democrats so desperate that they'll subvert their own republic.

Mind you when you look at the modern day Democratic party this was inevitable.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

So this guy decided to be corrupt years ago just so he could be indicted, found guilty and spend years in jail, just so it looks as if the cases against Trump aren’t politically motivated?

Really likely!

The gullible in the USA might swallow these kinds of bs conspiracy theories but it’s shameful to see people here prepared to believe it as fact.

The Justice Department just doesn’t work like that. The risk to them of allowing any kind of political shenanigans to surface is far too great. This is being prosecuted by them because it needs to be. Just as Trump is being prosecuted by various States and Special Investigators.

Now it’s down to the courts to look at the evidence and decide guilt or innocence.

As to jury selection in Trump’s case there were hundreds looked at and rejected before they found enough able to be objective. Can they be objective? If they are honest of course they can:-

[Link]

I worry much more about Trump supporters slipping through the net and holding out against the others in the face of overwhelming evidence. Hold outs are the threat to justice in the current case, not where it is being held. Even if the Judge accepts a majority verdict there only needs to be 3 who believe this is really a witch hunt for him to be let off when the rest are convinced he is guilty.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.