Tramp96 said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

nortex97 said:

---

And the adults at the next level;

Trump's appeal oral arguments will be heard in front of the first all-Black women appellate bench.

Do you think Trump will get treated fairly? pic.twitter.com/G6rxhdAj45

— Clown World ™ 🤡 (@ClownWorld_) May 31, 2024

Sigh…

---

There are 20 justices at the appellate court. The chances that he would draw this exact panel are rather slim.

---

Don't underestimate the NY court system.

The chances of Merchan getting all of the Trump-related trials he did was even more slim...way more slim.

---

Merchan wasn't a random assignment. He was assigned the case because of his familiarity with Trump through other cases. The appeal will be a random assignment.

I just want to remind everyone we still have five months until the election. This **** is just getting started.

aggiehawg said:

---

I am not sure we, as a country, can come back from this. The appellate division in Manhattan will not provide an expedited appeal. And given the makeup of that court, no meaningful review will be done. NY Court of Appeals might provide some relief as the recent reversal of the Harvey Weinstein verdict.

Can the US Supreme Court step in? Before the state appellate procedure has been completed? People point to Bush v. Gore in 2000 but A) that decision itself was stated to have no precedential value and B) the Court took the case from the Florida state supreme court, not a trial court. And the Court's reputation has taken a massive hit since then.

Nor is this a death penalty case, another area in which SCOTUS can and has issued stays to a trial court pending a constitutional review.

But let us suppose enough Justices are deeply concerned enough to grant such an extraordinary writ and stay further proceedings in the trial court? What would be the blowback? How severe? And how far would it extend?

We saw in 2020 how our elections can be manipulated towards a certain preferred outcome. Putting the composition of the Court on the ballot as an issue with promises to either impeach Justices or change the Judiciary Act to pack the Court with activist Justices? Just need control of both Houses of Congress and the WH to destroy the US Supreme Court.

After that, is there any coming back?

---

If he does what I think he should, ignore the rest of the trial and go to Florida. Let them try to get the US Marshalls arrest him


Aren't extradition agreements based on accepted crimes and reciprocity. Like we all agree what murder is as we have a similar statute. Could this not be a way to force judicial review?

Quote:

---

Can the US Supreme Court step in? Before the state appellate procedure has been completed? People point to Bush v. Gore in 2000 but A) that decision itself was stated to have no precedential value and B) the Court took the case from the Florida state supreme court, not a trial court. And the Court's reputation has taken a massive hit since then.

---

Excellent point!

Didn't SCOTUS get involved after FL Sup Court ordered a recount? To me, not appellate lawyer, that appears to be a final ruling that SCOTUS would look at.

Nothing like a trial court judgment!

Quote:

---

ignore the rest of the trial

---

You know trial is over, right?

no, its not

Still has to be sentenced

You are aware thats what the July 11 date is

All I can say is--welcome to the Left Wing World Order.

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

Can the US Supreme Court step in? Before the state appellate procedure has been completed? People point to Bush v. Gore in 2000 but A) that decision itself was stated to have no precedential value and B) the Court took the case from the Florida state supreme court, not a trial court. And the Court's reputation has taken a massive hit since then.

---

Excellent point!

Didn't SCOTUS get involved after FL Sup Court ordered a recount? To me, not appellate lawyer, that appears to be a final ruling that SCOTUS would look at.

Nothing like a trial court judgment!

---

SCOTUS had jurisdiction over Bush v Gore because it came out of Florida's Supreme Court. Appeals from a state's highest court go to SCOTUS.

SCOTUS has no jurisdiction over Trump's trial appeal until it works it's way through the state courts.

Same as the disqualification case which came via Colorado's Supreme Court, etc.

Jurisdiction 101


Oh, and this isn't ending up at SCOTUS unless there is an issue about whether New York can enforce a sentence against a sitting President

Quote:

---

Excellent point!

Didn't SCOTUS get involved after FL Sup Court ordered a recount? To me, not appellate lawyer, that appears to be a final ruling that SCOTUS would look at.

Nothing like a trial court judgment!

---

SCOTUS actually stepped in twice as the first attempt to get the Florida state supreme court on the correct page did not work. And the Safe Harbor date was rapidly approaching. Their final order to the high court in Florida was issued barely a day or so before that drop dead date. Which would have had the practical effect of throwing the 2000 election to a contingent one under the 12th.

In the fullness of time, it would seem to us 24 years later as perhaps more acceptable since it was an established procedure and in reality Bush would have still won given the make up of the state delegations in the House back then. But what SCOTUS was concerned about was if the American people would even accept that constitutionally approved procedure given that result at that time?

If that was the overriding concern back then, it would be 100 times more of a concern for this Court again acting in an electoral issue directly affecting another Republican Presidential candidate? Given the anti-Court sentiment from the Democrats?

Gigem314 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

milner79 said:

---

A country in distress.

---

This kind of thing does those who actually served in wars and had a REAL need to fly it a great disservice. Those folks often died.

---

Uh, the greater disservice to those who died for a free country is what's happening under its current leadership and climate. But yes, let's get upset over someone posting an image of an upside down flag. Definitely the more important thing to be concerned about.

---

Cool. So go ahead and pick up a purple heart from the military surplus and wear it around. Ridiculous. And remember too that flying the flag upside down is what the liberal hippies did in the sixties. So guess you have that in common.

BluHorseShu said:

---

Gigem314 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

milner79 said:

---

A country in distress.

---

This kind of thing does those who actually served in wars and had a REAL need to fly it a great disservice. Those folks often died.

---

Uh, the greater disservice to those who died for a free country is what's happening under its current leadership and climate. But yes, let's get upset over someone posting an image of an upside down flag. Definitely the more important thing to be concerned about.

---

Cool. So go ahead and pick up a purple heart from the military surplus and wear it around. Ridiculous. And remember too that flying the flag upside down is what the liberal hippies did in the sixties. So guess you have that in common.

---

Wrong
Those hippies are running blm and the antisemitic protests now... and burning the flag

pacecar02 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

I am not sure we, as a country, can come back from this. The appellate division in Manhattan will not provide an expedited appeal. And given the makeup of that court, no meaningful review will be done. NY Court of Appeals might provide some relief as the recent reversal of the Harvey Weinstein verdict.

Can the US Supreme Court step in? Before the state appellate procedure has been completed? People point to Bush v. Gore in 2000 but A) that decision itself was stated to have no precedential value and B) the Court took the case from the Florida state supreme court, not a trial court. And the Court's reputation has taken a massive hit since then.

Nor is this a death penalty case, another area in which SCOTUS can and has issued stays to a trial court pending a constitutional review.

But let us suppose enough Justices are deeply concerned enough to grant such an extraordinary writ and stay further proceedings in the trial court? What would be the blowback? How severe? And how far would it extend?

We saw in 2020 how our elections can be manipulated towards a certain preferred outcome. Putting the composition of the Court on the ballot as an issue with promises to either impeach Justices or change the Judiciary Act to pack the Court with activist Justices? Just need control of both Houses of Congress and the WH to destroy the US Supreme Court.

After that, is there any coming back?

---

If he does what I think he should, ignore the rest of the trial and go to Florida. Let them try to get the US Marshalls arrest him


Aren't extradition agreements based on accepted crimes and reciprocity. Like we all agree what murder is as we have a similar statute. Could this not be a way to force judicial review?

---

That's a "straight to jail" thing if he chooses to do that. It would be very, very dumb on his part.

what does it matter, I say bring on judicial chaos

SCOTUS "stepped in" after Bush filed an appeal (asking for a stay) to SCOTUS of the Florida Supreme Court's ruling ordering a recount.

SCOTUS had jurisdiction at that point as it was an appeal of a state's highest court.

This case won't be appealable to SCOTUS until the top New York court issues some kind of ruling. That's 3 appeals away.

Statistically impossible…

🚨 Judge Merchan was “Randomly Selected” for Two of Donald Trumps Cases, from a List he Wasn’t even On

• From a list of 24 sitting judges, one judge was supposed to be “randomly selected” to take this case — Judge Merchan was selected, but he wasn’t… pic.twitter.com/4Xz9aqSzGn

— MJTruthUltra (@MJTruthUltra) May 30, 2024

HTownAg98 said:

---

pacecar02 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

I am not sure we, as a country, can come back from this. The appellate division in Manhattan will not provide an expedited appeal. And given the makeup of that court, no meaningful review will be done. NY Court of Appeals might provide some relief as the recent reversal of the Harvey Weinstein verdict.

Can the US Supreme Court step in? Before the state appellate procedure has been completed? People point to Bush v. Gore in 2000 but A) that decision itself was stated to have no precedential value and B) the Court took the case from the Florida state supreme court, not a trial court. And the Court's reputation has taken a massive hit since then.

Nor is this a death penalty case, another area in which SCOTUS can and has issued stays to a trial court pending a constitutional review.

But let us suppose enough Justices are deeply concerned enough to grant such an extraordinary writ and stay further proceedings in the trial court? What would be the blowback? How severe? And how far would it extend?

We saw in 2020 how our elections can be manipulated towards a certain preferred outcome. Putting the composition of the Court on the ballot as an issue with promises to either impeach Justices or change the Judiciary Act to pack the Court with activist Justices? Just need control of both Houses of Congress and the WH to destroy the US Supreme Court.

After that, is there any coming back?

---

If he does what I think he should, ignore the rest of the trial and go to Florida. Let them try to get the US Marshalls arrest him


Aren't extradition agreements based on accepted crimes and reciprocity. Like we all agree what murder is as we have a similar statute. Could this not be a way to force judicial review?

---

That's a "straight to jail" thing if he chooses to do that. It would be very, very dumb on his part.

---

Plus, this would be antithetical to his personality. Trump digs in and fights. He doesn't run and hide.

the poster that's been ratioed to oblivion on this thread about the distress signal is now trying to equate the distress signal to stolen valor / military imposters.

He wasn't randomly selected. He got the case because of the other cases in Trump's orbit that he'd presided over.

Which further goes to prove my point that any X/Twitter post you see with flashing beacons should be viewed with great skepticism.

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

BluHorseShu said:

---

milner79 said:

---

A country in distress.

---

This kind of thing does those who actually served in wars and had a REAL need to fly it a great disservice. Those folks often died.

---

Some number of soldiers dying in wars, as tragic as that is, doesn't hold a candle to what is happening in this country right now.

You're whistling past the graveyard like the poet who said "but I was not a jew" so they didn't care. Marxist authoritarians are taking over this country and persecuting their political opponents.

It doesn't work out well for anyone other than the political elites.

---

Yikes. Sounds like Trump's quote ...." I like people who weren't captured". I'm sure anyone who lost someone in a war would think that holds just a little more than 'a candle' to all the political pearl clutching that has been built up to be viewed as an American Armageddon.

And now were packing to comparing yourself to the Jews who were exterminated. Kudos on that insane comparison. Your life is obviously very close now to what they experienced....(insert eyeroll emoji). I challenge you to make that comparison to a survivor of the holocaust while living in the country with the most freedom and one of the highest standards of living. In one term of Republican control, our economy and all the crazy liberal bs that's we've been sliding toward is cured.
Our fealty should be to our ideals, not to a person. And flying the flag upside down is due to one thing only...Trump. He has been elevated to that of a prophet that is the only one that can save us. And we have to be vigilant about who we follow like that....because someone very similar was foretold in scripture...and it isn't our true Savior.

its not run and hide, its come and get me, here I am

Hurry up and do closing arguments, speed up to trial before the election but sentencing can wait 6 weeks.

Trump just dropped this video on Truth after getting convicted in New York: pic.twitter.com/IXch3B2Hua

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) May 30, 2024

I am surprised we have not heard from any of the jurors.

Im Gipper said:

---

Then your understanding is wrong. These were all felonies.


The misdemeanor aspect would have been barred by the statue of limitations.


While this was the expected verdict, it's still complete horse****

---

It was 34 misdemeanors past statute of limitations escalated to a felony by another misdemeanor (NY 17-152).

Sims said:

---

What if Biden pardoned Trump to win back that "adult in the room" mantle?

---

This is a state case, so the feds can't pardon it.

Will we ever know the actual votes on each of the 34 counts? Were they all 12-0? Were any of them 4-8?

Aggie95 said:

---

Will we ever know the actual votes on each of the 34 counts? Were they all 12-0? Were any of them 4-8?

---

Every count was 12-0. A unanimous decision was required on all counts.


You are thinking of the "unlawful means." Unless the jurors tell people, we will never know. That is not documented as part of the Court's record.

Aggie95 said:

---

Will we ever know the actual votes on each of the 34 counts? Were they all 12-0? Were any of them 4-8?

---

No and that was completely by design by Merchan

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Then your understanding is wrong. These were all felonies.


The misdemeanor aspect would have been barred by the statue of limitations.


While this was the expected verdict, it's still complete horse****

---

It was 34 misdemeanors past statute of limitations escalated to a felony by another misdemeanor (NY 17-152).

---

Yes, as I said, 34 felonies. All charges under 175.10:

Quote:

---

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.

Falsifying business records in the first degree is a class E felony.

---

Trump was not charged with a misdemeanor and no misdemeanor was submitted to the jury.

As much horse**** today as it was yesterday.

Im Gipper said:

---

Aggie95 said:

---

Will we ever know the actual votes on each of the 34 counts? Were they all 12-0? Were any of them 4-8?

---

Every count was 12-0. A unanimous decision was required on all counts.


You are thinking of the "unlawful means." Unless the jurors tell people, we will never know. That is not documented as part of the Court's record.

---

But hadn't it been stated that unanimous was not actually unanimous and it just took 4?

aggiehawg said:

---

I am surprised we have not heard from any of the jurors.

---

Gotta sell that story to the highest bidder! Why give the cow's milk for free when someone will pay you for it?

Quote:

---

But hadn't it been stated that unanimous was not actually unanimous and it just took 4?

---

For the unlawful means, it just took the jurors believing one of three theories was the unlawful means.

It could be 12 on first theory, none of the others;
1 on the first theory, 11 on the second, none on the third
ETC ETC.

Until jurors talk, we wont know.

My understanding of New York law (which is just access to google) is that Merchan had the option to ask special questions for jury to find out this information, and Team Trump requested it even though they admitted it was not usually how it was done. Merchan (shocked face) denied that request.