Mark this day

Lock him up

^demented old man thinks it's okay to imprison a person convicted of non-violent crimes

Trump's website for donations has crashed from the surge of logins

^ Lock him up LOL I’m in your head loser

^^ I'll mail him a check if necessary.

i DONT like trump. but he was RAILROADED. and will be a better choice than sleepy joe.

I think big picture it's a good thing. People are finally waking up to how the fix is in and how deep all this corruption is. I don't think New York and New Jersey are going to go for Trump this November but it's going to be VERY close. There's an uprising right going on now around here, people have had it. It's amazing to see though first hand.

“Welcome to the world of political candidates working to jail the opposition.”

—

I do not like Trump. But let the above statement sink in. It’s chilling. Is America becoming the Soviet Union, or Cuba or China?

Biden's handling of the Israel - Gaza war, the handling of the college protest demonstrations and the illegal migrant situation in NYC will have a far greater effect on NYC voters than the Trump decision. They may just not vote or vote for some third party candidate, but I doubt they will go for Trump. And as NYC goes, so goes the state.

As motorhead rightly said, to see the criminal justice system weaponized in this way is indeed chilling. This is a sad day for our democracy. Remember, what can happen to me, can happen to thee, when the shoe is on the other foot.

Part of what has always ensured a peaceful transfer of power to newly elected presidents was the restraint shown by new administrations in avoiding seeking revenge against political rivals. When a country's leaderhas to worry about what his rivals will do when he no longer has power, he is tempted to try to keep power. It's why every dictator tries to stay in control for life, fighting tooth and nail and even committing atrocities when necessary. Until now we have been blessedly free of this concern, but I fear that what is happening with Trump will set the stage for a future President to try to stay in office in perpetuity.

Anyone who thinks an past president of the United States of America, a world leader in all things freedom, should be locked up had better find another country. Because if we lock Trump up, America will begin a rapid demise into a uniparty-government-ruled-separation-of-classes banana republic.

I don’t mean to sound like a pussy but I don’t ever recall being “scared” for an election. I fear some bad stuff is going to go down in November regardless of who wins. There’s probably going to be riots somewhere, and I hope it’s not on the same scale as the George Floyd riots of 2020.

My advice is that if you support Trump, put ALL of your money into DJT stock. Please.

It’s really not a matter of what any of us think, Mr Trump’s behavior and actions, made it impossible for there to be any other outcome to this fiasco, the prosecution may very well have been political, but making enemies intentionally, is what leads to outcomes of this nature. If you believe that this man didn’t bring it on himself by his own actions than you folks are really deluding yourselves.

Making enemies intentionally? Like you and Gam? Do you actually believe you posted something that ridiculous? Making enemies on purpose makes it ok? Delusional beyond all belief. Just an awful post. delude away that was beyond awful. Making enemies on purpose makes it ok. Wow.

this year will be the most important one on many fronts. this year 40 countries will be holding presidential elections. and for most of these countries, including ours, it's trending towards a direction that many will become way even more miserable than they are at this moment.

It has nothing to do with me liking or not liking him, if he had kept his big mouth shut, and not intentionally picked a fight with the judge, who was quite clearly lenient despite his arrogant behavior this outcome probably would have been much different. I am not happy to see a former president in this position but he is solely responsible for his own behavior and his own actions, it’s a reckoning that’s been a long time coming, and it’s an unfortunate thing to put the country through. If Mr. Trump cared about anyone other than himself this would never have happened. Don’t make me laugh by telling me he is getting raped because of his dressing provocatively, he’s creating this chaos because he believes he is above the law.

^ I’m not trying to convince anyone just expressing my own opinion. I have less than no interest in the debate, the simple fact is twelve people on a jury of his peers has had their say, you can respect the rule of law or not. It’s not very complicated.

^The Jews also said Jesus was guilty of crimes and sentenced him to death.

USA! USA! USA!

God bless America!

Don't commit the crime if you can't do the time

(A Person)'s guilty of a very, very serious crime. (They) should not be allowed to run for president.

-Donald J Trump (paraphrased)

Anyone who has less than no interest in the political and legal ramifications of twisting the US judicial system to punish enemies where no real crime exists should take Founder's advice and GTFO. I always knew you hated America, and you have just proven it. All patriots who cherish free elections and representative government have a deeply vested interest in what happened today and how it the ramifications play out.

Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up!

Political views aside, it's so embarrassing that grown men slurp and simp for a politician.

Wow this thread has really jumped the shark if we’re now comparing Donald J Trump to Jesus H Christ. WTF! The fact that he is still considered a viable political candidate in 2024 means we’re truly living in the upside down, folks. He tried to fucking steal an election and get his VP to rip up the constitution to get it done! The dude can’t even turn a profit on a casino but we’re gonna let him tear our country apart so he doesn’t to go down in the history books as a one-termer? I’m no Biden lover but I’d just as soon vote for the dead corpse of Bill Walton before I let him have the keys to the White House again. Stop crying about it being a dark day for democracy and stick your faces in the tits of a hot and deserving dancer (who most likely ain’t voting for him either).

I hate Donald Trump, but not the people supporting him. I hate progressives and the people who vote with them and see none of them as Americans. The open border policy people whining about democracy are stupid hypocrites who are too stupid to realize they are the danger. Sinclair you are one fucking scumbag. You must be a Muslim. The Romans sentenced Jewish Jesus to death and after he died some stupid fucks created a new religion. Go fuck mohammed.

^At every Passover festival the Roman governor could set free a prisoner chosen by the crowd. Pilate asked the crowd whether they wanted Barabbas or Jesus set free. The chief priest persuaded the crowd to ask Pilate to set Barabbas free and have Jesus put to death. They shouted for Pilate to crucify him. When Pilate saw that a riot might break out, he washed his hands in front of the crowd, and said, “I am not responsible for the death of this man!” The whole crowd answered, “Let the responsibility for his death fall on us and on our children!” Then Pilate set Barabbas free and handed Jesus over to be crucified. (Matthew 27:1-2, 11-26)

If Trump goes to jail, he'll be "suicided" like Jeffery Epstein, Vince Foster, and others.

One can only hope.

Trump was bad for the republican party. He's now made us the party of criminals the way we always said the dems were. And there's still three other cases that he is more likely to be convicted for than he was here.

Don't commit crimes if you don't want to be a convicted felon. Would love to see this be the catalyst for my party to clean house of him, mtg, boebert, eyc and get back to traditional conservatism like that of McCain and the Bushes.

All you illiterates need to take this shit to the Politics forum and leave the rest of us to slobber on titties in peace.

A conviction by a Bronx jury in a case presided over by a democrat and brought by a democrat for political purposes only is not a conviction in the normal use of the word. This is Dreyfus in our country, brought by the same ignorant bigots, just for slightly different reasons. Watching the Democratic party march in the streets supporting the Palestinian terrorist rats makes much more sense now against this backdrop.

"traditional conservatism like that of McCain and the Bushes"

😂 The irony of calling someone a criminal for paying off a hooker and supporting a guy who invaded a country on the basis of "WMDs" ... do you have no self-awareness or are you just trolling?

Historic day yesterday. When future scholars write about the rise and fall of the United States, yesterday will be cited as a significant event like Julius Caesar crossing the Rubicon and Kristallnacht.

If he gets jail time, the secret service goes with him. Safest prisoner ever.

This bell, once rung, cannot be unrung.

Eisenhower stopped Nixon from suing when Kennedy stole the election from him. The democrat party has no such great patriot and statesman when Gore sued Bush in 2000. The Firector of the FBI confirmed that Hillary committed felonies and other crimes in her midhandling of classified information. Trump wanted to prosecute, but his advisors warned against starting a cycle of prosecutorial retaliation, which would begin the banana republic decline of the United States. The democrat party is so jealous and power- hungry that they went all in. They are the Fascists, prosecuting your political opposition is textbook Fascism.
Republicans in Congress, state offices, and district attorneys, need to stop being polite and seeking comity. The only way the Democrat party will understand the gravity of what they've just done will be if they get their hands burned by the same iron. The gloves are already off.

Collection of Editorials in response to yesterday’s events.

newser.com

I agree with Lemmy. I’m no fan of Trump, but these were all “trumped up” BS charges for really insignificant misdemeanor offenses. No DA would ever prosecute an anonymous citizen for these “crimes”. The fact that our political / legal system is able to be weaponized to defeat a political opponent is really scary.

g95, & ikb +1

I disagree that no DA would ever prosecute these charges. They’d tack them on to charges for the underlying crime as additional leverage to get a plea. They might even prosecute solely without charging the underlying crime, but they’d plead them down to a misdemeanor on one count and a fine. No plea was going to happen here, so you wind up going all the way to trial on all 34 counts. Same was true for the E Jean Carroll and Trump Organization fraud cases. Ordinarily, those would have been settled for far less than the eventual judgment because the risks of losing were so high.

Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts. He received a fair trial, and 12 average citizens found him guilty. The convicted felon Donald Trump is starting to pay for his crimes. He lost the lawsuit against him by E. Jean Carroll, charging he had defamed her by denying he sexually assaulted her. Trump also faces felony charges in the Georgia election interference case, the January 6 case and the classified documents case. The US government got the top secret documents back only by raiding Mar-a-Lago. Why was he so intent on keeping classified documents? Was he going to sell them to Putin or was he just going to give them to his Russian master?

Lock him up! Lock him up! Lock him up! And throw away the key!

^anyone who feels this way cannot be recognized as a fellow American.

A "fair trial" presided over by a judge who donated to Biden's campaign. It was a paltry amount, but any amount means the judge should absolutely not be presiding over this case. From a BBC article:

"Soon after Trump was arraigned, records emerged showing Justice Merchan had donated a total of $35 to Democrats during the 2020 election.

That included a $15 donation to Joe Biden's campaign, NBC News reported, as well as $10 donations to groups called the "Progressive Turnout Project" and "Stop Republicans".

New York state, following the American Bar Association's guidance, prohibits judges from making contributions to political organisations or candidates.

Even though the donations were ill-advised, they would be "viewed as trivial, especially given the small sums", Stephen Gillers, an expert on legal ethics at New York University, told the BBC.

Justice Merchan did not recuse himself over the donations."

Most of you are incapable of objective introspection, but just pretend that you're not boot licking cowards, and ask yourself, if a judge presided over a case against Joe Biden, and the judge had contributed $1 to Trump's campaign, and $1 to "Stop Democrats", would you think it's fair?

This day is marked as the day in which Trump’s conviction on all counts in his first criminal trial affirms the principle on which the United States was supposedly founded — that everyone is equal under the law and that no one, not even a billionaire and former and possibly future POTUS , should enjoy impunity or immunity.

:D

Why be upset? His bought and paid for SCOTUS will overturn it anyway.

The only way to limit and undo the damage that the democrat party has done by maliciously prosecuting the a former Republican president will be to respond in kind. On his (or her) second day in office, the first thing the next Republican president should do is have Hillary Clinton indicted in Mississippi or Florida grand juries for her violation of the espionage act and Crooked Joe indicted for his unlawful storage of federal documents. Hunter, Garland, anyone else they can reign in should also be charged for all of their crimes and malfeasances. The NY Bar should be sued and forced to disbar Merchan and that DA Fatty Braggy for their part in this disaster. The only think I would still consider to be a step too far, a step the democrat party has already taken, is too interfere with a presidential election by attempting to imprison the leading opposition candidate.

I want you never-Trumps, blue-no-matter-whos, democrats, and liberals to just stop and consider that last sentence (the progressive and leftists already support such state Fascism): The government of a "democracy with free elections" is attempting attempting to convict and imprison the leading opposition candidate. The trial was held in a government loyalist city, with a loyalist prosecutor, before a loyalist judge. The loyalist judge prevented the defense from calling in witnesses and testimony that could have exonerated him. The prosecutor was not required to disclose which actual laws were broken. Most assumed the conviction was a foregone conclusion. This wasn't Russia or Iran. This was the United States of America where a deeply unpopular president with low odds of re-election has had his justice department and party allies in major cities change laws and erase constitutional freedoms to ensure that his chief opponent will not be able to run against him. How depraved must you to be to sanction that?

I see so many false statements asserted as though they are fact that I am sure Fox News informs this thread. Please, recognize that the combination of "Fox" next to "News" is an oxymoron.

@Puddy_Tat: "Was the SCOTUS bought and paid for when they pulled rights to abortion and gay marriage out of thin air? Or only when they rule in a way you don't like?"

SCOTUS did not pull the right to abortion out of thin air. What they did was determine that Roe V Wade was based on the wrong interpretation of law. I read the decision and, as much as it pains me to say, they had a point.

A much better defense of the right to abortion would be a religious freedom one. Unless you're not fond of Jews, that is.

On the subject of abortion, I think the American Left got it wrong back in the 1970s when they attached it to privacy and personal bodily integrity rights. They could perhaps have done better long-term if they had, instead, presented abortion as a business opportunity for small doctor-led clinics nation-wide, and had somehow attached the right to making a profit off of small businesses to the right for a doctor to engage in a profitable medical practice in whatever manner he would choose, unfettered by over-reaching government influence. Make it more like cosmetic surgery for ethically questionable aims, where the perceived "wrong" of an act takes back seat to the potential profit from it.

Though I'm a Progressive (not necessarily a Democrat) I nevertheless can concur with a good deal of what Puddy_Tat just said. The Supreme Court is definitely not supposed to be the "tool" of either Left or Right, and I do see a LOT of left-leaning complaints that the court can no longer be relied on for their agenda. Well duh, and honestly that's a good thing. I want that agenda, but I want it legislated.

Just trying to pipe up with cross-the-aisle style agreement whenever I can manage it. :)

@Puddy_Tat: "'Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion' isn't a great grounds for codifying abortion."

SCOTUS and other courts have made lots of rulings concerning the establishment clause. Just as it doesn't permit "respecting" a religion, it also forbids restricting one, except as regards the violations of others' rights, e.g. human sacrifice and the other straw men you raised. Judaism explicitly places the mother's health and safety over the unborn, and abortion is definitely an option.

Not sure how this conversation came around to abortion, but Roe v Wade was a 7-2 decision with the majority opinion written by a republican appointed justice. It certainly was controversial, but it’s been the law forever or almost forever for all of us reading this post. Should’ve left it alone.

Abortion was never a law, it was a right based on the court's opinion. Congress should try to make it a law. Why do you think they haven't already?

Too bad most of you reading this post can’t remember what happened prior to the 7-2 ruling in Roe v Wade. If you want to know how it came about you should look into how abortions were performed prior. It was terrible and you can make all of the laws restricting abortion you like, it’s still not going to stop desperate women from getting pregnant and aborting their fetus, much smarter to regulate it and have performed in a safe environment rather than the back alley butchering of women, that was pretty common back then.

“It would was terrible and you can make all of the laws restricting abortion you like, it’s still not going to stop desperate women from getting pregnant and aborting their fetus”

—

Sorry, but I couldn’t resist. 😊

The same could be said for gun control laws. The left clamors for restrictive gun control laws after every mass shooting yet no law will stop the desperate criminal from obtaining one.

@Motorhead Big difference desperate woman aren’t criminals, unlike those folks buying a gun illegally, and there is a legal path to buying a firearm.

@founder Roe v Wade affirmed the right to privacy, and basically stated that a woman has the right to consult with an advisor and receive treatment without government interference, this recent reversal, Dodd, claims the government has the right to refuse privacy to women, and intervene in what was previously allowed. The main problem here is the state taking away women’s rights to privacy, and even worse some states seem to have authorized private parties to intervene, reeks of big brotherism and empowering private parties to act as unauthorized state agents.

I personally am ok with abortion, especially for mothers and fathers who can’t/ won’t support their offspring. I don’t want to pay for your kid! That being said, there are sincere people with valid points on both sides of the abortion issue. I understand people who are against the snuffing of a helpless life. And it’s not rare, abortions are happening on a massive scale. Approximately 30% of AA pregnancies are terminated by abortion. The reality is, if fetuses could vote, Joe Biden would be banning every abortion.

I'm OK with abortion too, though I know I will never have one. Early-term abortions, world-wide, are very common, to the point that I think it's fair to say they're being relied on as a form of birth-control. The prevalence of the idea that any abortion is some horrible desecration of human life is a mid-20th-century invention, propagated mostly by Evangelicals with specific political aims in mind, not motivated by a belief in those lives' sanctity or desire to protect those lives. Look to the history of the anti-abortion movement, you'll see plenty of minor opponents with very little sway, generally viewed as cranks and fringe nut-cases, until Billy Graham and Jerry Falwell and similar realized they could galvanize White rural voters into supporting the party of pro-Big-Business and anti-Labor to the benefit of the Republicans. How else to move a starving coal miner into the self-destructive behavior of voting in favor of trickle-down economic policies and supply-side stimulus and tax-cuts for the rich, other than to create moral imperatives and hook them to his religious life? I advocate for the law following teachings such as in the Bible on the subject of abortion -- stating practically nothing.

@Puddy_Tat You make fair points. I agree, the privacy-argument was thin at best. (Calls to mind the commerce-clause argument on a lot of other subjects.) And I agree, the Dems have begun to become (have completely become?) the party of "elites" and have largely lost the Labor movement, while the Repubs have begun to become (completely?) the party of the working class. Excellent expression that encapsulates a lot of these ideas, "Chamber of Commerce Republicans." Glad to know that you understand what I'm talking about, at least. :) "Morally" pro-life and "legally" pro-choice could be my stance, too, except there are some people I think need to be aborted but that's another point. And the whole "if you don't like ... don't have" and what you mention that it implies ("don't have to participate in") is not offensive to me, but wasn't what I was getting at. My quip "I know I'll never have [an abortion]" was just a point that I'd personally never have an abortion because I'm male, har har get it making a funny. I don't like the way you use the word "progressive" (the specific policies you've just mentioned aren't ones that I espouse at all, but I call myself a "proud Progressive" for a lot of other reasons; then again, it's possible that there's no way to have category A without category B, so maybe I'm contradicting myself, but that's a different discussion). I'm sorry you'd vote for Trump and send him money, but you make the fairest points I've heard lately in favor of that direction. A level of revulsion at the available Democrats (often justifiable) to me isn't (yet) enough to justify support of the insurrectionist criminal. But I do get what you're getting at. Maybe they'll both accidentally die ... or get teleported to Mars ... ?

Regarding Abortion, you realistically would need 60 votes in the Senate to actually pass it as law. There's no way to sneak it through in reconciliation like some stuff that only needs a simple majority and can't be filibustered.

@founder. I didn’t say abortion was a law. I said Roe v Wade was THE law for 50 years. That is also part of the answer to your question of why congress never passed an abortion law. First, they didn’t need to. Roe v Wade was precedent. Second, despite being probably the most supported right across political lines with 65-70% support, you have candidates who can’t take a middle position and agree on legislation. From both sides.

On the case itself we have 75 posts. Complaints from supporters of Mar A Lardo? Selective prosecution. Biased judge. Blue venue. What has nobody said? HE DIDNT DO IT.

Maybe this was a Jay Z 99 Problems case “you were doing 55 in a 54” but there weren’t facts in dispute. The jury came back quickly. That’s what happens when you don’t defend the case.

@puddy - where is your source for Weisselberg “not being allowed” to testify. I’ve seen Lara Trump say this too. The defense didn’t call him to testify. How is that on the judge?

@Puddy_Tat (quick point -- I've seen your inquiry and your 7 points, etc., just don't have time to put together anything articulate right now)

I’m not objective. I can’t stand the orange menace. It doesn’t make what I’m saying any less true.

The hush money wasn’t a crime. Concealing it was. That said, I don’t think he should’ve been prosecuted for this. He’s done much much worse. This is like a speeding ticket. But it doesn’t mean he’s not guilty.

He slept with Stormy. He signed a hush money NDA and agreed to pay her $130k. That is legal. But why go to such lengths to cover it up if not to conceal it from voters in 2016? Why not just pay her? He’s rich. But instead, he comes up with some crazy scheme where Cohen takes out a home equity loan and pays her out his own pocket. Then Weisselberg runs the math and writes down on paper to double it to $260k then add another $160k and pay Cohen out over 12 months. Remember, Cohen got a salary and bonus for working for Mango Unchained. These weren’t ordinary legal fees. It was a concealment scheme.

Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men “why the two orders colonel Jessup? If your orders were that Santiago wasn’t to be touched, why was it necessary to transfer him off the base?” If the hush money payment was legal, why was it necessary to cover it up? The answer is because he didn’t want it to hurt the election.

Weisselberg was “slimed?” I guess by slimed you mean convicted of fraud, and then later convicted of perjury? Yes, his testimony would be suspect. But the defense could’ve called him as a witness. The statement that the judge prohibited Weisselberg from testifying is objectively false.

If you actually want to debate, you have to deal with facts that go against your position. If you just want to toe the Fox News line, then you can just discount everything I say because I’m biased.

I’ve pretty much posted only facts. Fact, the judge didn’t prevent weisselberg from testifying. You got that from Fox News or Trump allies. It’s not a stretch. We don’t need to stipulate. It’s false.

And I agree with you that this shouldn’t have gone to trial. Most defendants would’ve pled to a lesser charge and paid a fine.

Stormy’s testimony was as much on the defense strategy as anything else. They could’ve admitted the affair and then her testimony wouldn’t have been necessary. But the defense’s opening statement denied the affair so her testimony became necessary. The judge even objected to some of her testimony and criticized the defense for not objecting enough. That’s their primary job and they blew it.

The case shouldn’t have been brought. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t guilty or didn’t commit a crime. Even you said it was a misdemeanor. The guy engaged in a conspiracy to cover up his affair and now he’s the victim. Instead of holding him accountable for his bad decisions and actions, all we get is that it’s the judge’s fault, the jury’s fault, the witnesses’ fault, Bragg’s fault. Don’t want to get charged with a bullshit crime? How about you don’t commit the crime in the first place.

It’s getting boring the Trump supporters whine about anything that is contrary to their version of reality, they insist everything that happens where they get called to account, fact is the jury was agreed on by both sides, the trial was fair, rulings were pretty evenly distributed, and the complaint about venue has less than zero credibility considering Trump was judged by his peers New Yorkers jus like him. With that being said I’m glad he got convicted, y’all keep throwing shit on the ceiling, just because it stinks doesn’t change a thing. 34 counts guilty, appeal it, I doubt it will change the verdict.

I got 3 words for you MAGA....COPE AND SEETHE.

This is probably the best thing that could have happened to him with regards to the election. Even being a convicted felon doesn't prohibit him from running, taking office, or being President. The Constitution rules in this regard, and there's not restriction listed there. No state, as per a recent SCOTUS ruling, can interfere with a federal election, and taking him off the ballot if he otherwise qualifies to run.

All this does is convince his cultists that he's being persecuted, and support him even more. Combine that with a crap economy and a corpse for an opponent, and he's a virtual shoe-in for the race.

Stupid fucking Democrats thinking it'll have any negative effect on him.

I was hoping for a Hail Mary pass during the convention that the Republicans would nominate a better candidate.

Now I fear this verdict may have handed the election to Trump. It seems only the hardcore Democratic base seems this is fair. I think many middle of the road independents might swing red.

Gregory Peck, where have you gone?

Anyone mentioning a news support as being flawed and using that as proof of their position is simply stupid and childish. Progressives and their snide Fox news comments are the perfect example of such stupidity.