As I have already said I don’t think a higher court has the capacity to throw it out. They cannot overturn a jury decision. They can only rule on a point of law involving a direction given by the judge to the jury that was so wrong that it could have influenced their decision. Minor errors being ignored. It’s possible that it could happen, although it seems unlikely to me. However, should it happen the case would be returned to the lower court for corrective action, probably a retrial. Which is Trump’s likely aim, because, as with the other cases, it would then not be heard before the election and probably would never then be heard, whether he wins or loses.

If Trump had any good in him I would happily recognise it, but I see none at all. Let alone bringing the world out of poverty! That’s hardly the aim of someone who puts America first! The only excuse I see for Trump is that must be ill. No one normal could behave as he does.

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.

If you watch him with veterans families at funerals or remembrance. You will see he’s very good and compassionate. Queue the ‘it’s for the camera line’.

You are right. He is good at that. I overlooked the fact that he missed his true vocation because, as was proved by his performances on “The Apprentice”, he is not a bad actor in certain types of roles. He is also good looking, in a way that appeals to some women and also the macho type of man.

Every politician has to be able to act to a degree but Trump has nothing underneath. There isn’t any sincerity or genuine compassion for others. With everything he does his sole concern is how it has impacted his ratings. It’s the first question he asks.

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.

So his compassion in these situations is an act then iyo !
Although Biden does a good act as a peodo so it must be a presidential requisite

Untrue. A fact is always a fact.

You can regard the reasons something became a fact as bs if you choose but the fact remains intact.

No one knows why the jury convicted him. That was their decision to make and it hasn’t been revealed or even leaked. They were presented with evidence and a defence and reached their conclusion. Quickly and unanimously. The fact is they convicted him.

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.

How can it be a fact if opinion comes into it? What proof could be provided that he wasn't trying to conceal the details from his family?
Wanting to believe something doesn't prove it's a fact as has been pointed out regarding religions.