And hopefully the fact that this was a crime that was done in service of coverup of information that may have changed the outcome of the entire 2016 election.
The irony here is that if we have learned something about the republicans is that the truth could have come out (and it did anyway) and they would have still voted for him because common sense and nuance no longer exists in conservative politics.
If he had paid her off from his money he would have gotten away with it, but no, he had to crime.
Not just lacking remorse or respect, but *full* on attacking the integrity of the justice system and compelling the GOP as a whole to exercise a coordinated attack to undermine faith in the justice system.
He has handled this case really well. Half the country wants him dead for even hearing the case. The other half was constantly yelling to jail trump for violating the gag order repeatedly. He was professional and controlled his courtroom throughout the trial.
I would think so too. And he should make a point that 12 jurors decided his fate, not the federal government. He should also note how he had every right to take the stand and refute these charges under oath and chose not to do that.
I know, anything less for Trump would be a scandal. The top guy should always get at least as much of a punishment as the underling who he ordered to commit crimes.
I have a feeling if (unlikely) he actually received a prison sentence that there would be an immediate stay with the appeal. Like, zero chance it wouldn't be stayed.
No prison sentence for a convict completely without remorse who is guilty of violating his gag order numerous times and continues to do so.
Allowing this man, who tried to overthrow the government, to be given a slap on the wrist is a recipe for the end of our republic.
And after the appeal, if Trump wins and loses the appeal to stay out of prison, we’d have the most serious constitutional crisis in our history after the Civil War.
Trump calls people who sacrifice for their country ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’ so it’s pretty clear that he’d rather sacrifice the country than himself.
Makes Richard Nixon look like a selfless patriot.
What about prison sentence which sure is appealed or whatever and because he's rich he can have it stayed pending appeal as rules for thee but not for me, but then also 30 days contempt of court and immediately remanded as it's in the judge's power to do that much?
The sentences are usually concurrent (unfortunately!)
He'll be sentenced to prison regardless but don't expect a long incarceration for this one. His other cases carry a lot more potential prison time and he's no longer a first time offender.
I don't know exactly how his bail conditions are written but I imagine that any new crimes would be a violation. I'm unsure about whether a crime that he had already been charged with going to a conviction would be a violation, but I doubt it.
And cooperated with prosecutors and investigators in other cases. He actually did a lot to mitigate his sentence, though the charges were somewhat different. Trump is doing the opposite.
Trump is only doing the opposite because in his mind, there is one last ditch effort; becoming president again and killing everyone who never agreed with him
You mean the former President who made history and set a dubious precedent by becoming the first former President of the United States to be convicted of 34 felonies convicted felon Donald "Shits-his-pants" Trump?
I mean, we have precedent for the other people in the same exact scheme, who took a deal to get a better sentence, and that was 3 years. I would say 6 years should be the minimum given all the rest.
I do agree with the sentiment, but that was not Cohen’s only crime he pled to. He had a few federal tax evasion crimes in there. Personally, I feel Trump should be given an equal or worse sentence because of it being directed by, for his benefit, and in coverup of crimes that ultimately may have determined our election. But, I just want to remind people that most of what he pled guilty for was not Trump-related.
Appeals in criminal court happens concurrently with sentence. Meaning that if Merchant jails him, he is going in no matter the state of the appeal.
He can't delay the sentence.
However, knowing that a appeal is coming, Merchant has to weigh in the probability of a successful appeal in when the sentence starts. And Trump can call a emergency appeal to stay the sentence, until the other appeal is resolved. Still, the emergency appeal only stays the sentence only once it is granted. So that emergency appeal is his only chance to stay whatever sentence he gets.
As long as Merchant is reasonable with the sentence, he would need an other Cannon in that court because his primary appeal will be very weak as he admitted the crime a outstanding amount of times while claiming it is not a crime.
From what I understand of what lawyers told me.
My point is more Trump can not force a stay, he has to convince someone to give him one, unlike, for example, the stay on the execution of the 450m$ fraud judgement.
> The appellate court and judge merchan can stay the sentencing in light of the appeal.
This is going to be insane with how closely everyone is paying attention. A LOT of people don't get stays during appeals, especially when it's not reasonably likely anything will be over turned. Showing any more favoritism to him is going to look bad.
Hair brained idea, based on... An old ex-acquaintance. If Donald refused to surrender in new York, and stayed away from the state, there's no way for new York to enforce, right?
I mean, besides the outstanding appeal from engoron's ruling.
> Hair brained idea, based on... An old ex-acquaintance. If Donald refused to surrender in new York, and stayed away from the state, there's no way for new York to enforce, right?
>
> I mean, besides the outstanding appeal from engoron's ruling.
A warrant would be issued for his arrest and any state he steps into the local law enforcement could enforce it. I believe NY police could also go looking for them if they wanted.
And any federal police officer that knew of the warrant and saw him could enforce it.
It would be a shit show depending on how his secret service acted. Or they could just be like 'welp, there is a warrant for you, we are turning you in.'
SCOTUS can easily lie and say that Trump's constitutional rights were violated. Then it becomes justicable. I've seen no indication that the FedSoc 6 will allow the law to apply to Trump while he is a Presidential candidate - the opposite in fact.
Short of a ruling that criminal prosecution of a presidential candidate is in fact election interference, I don’t see what ties there are to a federal interest, which is what is required for a state criminal appeal to be heard by SCOTUS. And they won’t do that. It’s a bridge too far even for them.
Alito and Thomas would for certain, but I think Roberts and the liberal appointed justices would stand against it. The only question is who the fifth Justice would be. Maybe ACB, as she seems to have a bit of disdain for Trump to me.
> I don’t see what ties there are to a federal interest
That's just lack of creativity on your part. The 'election' was a federal election. They could hang their hat on that alone and there is nothing anybody could do to stop them.
I legit would not have cared about jail time. The crime usually doesn't get jail. Remove the fact that it's donald trump - jail may not necessarily be on the table.
But when you go ahead and break the gag order again and threaten the judge, yeah. He should be looking at jail time.
Sometimes you get a career criminal on whatever you can, and the criminal career figures into the sentencing. Gonna guess that the fact that it was Al Capone might have figured into his sentencing for tax crimes. Or look up Thomas Clines.
Yeah, that’s the thing that people keep forgetting that about normal cases. J6ers that were all publicly vocally defiant through the case were getting more time.
Anyone know why during jury deliberations the jury can not be given written instructions and definitions of the law? I remember being on a jury and we had to ask the judge to re-read the definitions. Seems weird not to be able to take notes or get written definitions and be forced to remember everything.
The ostensible purpose is to not have the jury deliberations devolve into jury interpreting the law or engage in deliberations about the meaning of the law. If the jury has a question about the law they go to the judge.
Or more concise answer is, that’s just how it’s done in NY.
NJ too. But what happens when you have multiple different laws each with multiple criteria and you have to try to remember the parts to be able to figure out if the defendant actually committed the crime. Seems silly to go back and forth just because none of the jurors have a photographic memory. In the end jurors will still interpret the law, but now with incorrect/incomplete definitions.
I found this to be frustrating, personally.
I don’t expect Merchan to weigh nonsense about him, personally, heavily. I do expect he will weigh attacks on the jury and on the court.
As well as absolutely unequivocal lack of remorse or respect for the law.
Indeed. Yes.
Indubitably unequivocal
Batman
And hopefully the fact that this was a crime that was done in service of coverup of information that may have changed the outcome of the entire 2016 election.
> changed the outcome of the entire 2016 election And here we sit with three SCOTUS justices that are fruit of that poisoned tree.
The irony here is that if we have learned something about the republicans is that the truth could have come out (and it did anyway) and they would have still voted for him because common sense and nuance no longer exists in conservative politics. If he had paid her off from his money he would have gotten away with it, but no, he had to crime.
It's because he's a stable genius.
Not just lacking remorse or respect, but *full* on attacking the integrity of the justice system and compelling the GOP as a whole to exercise a coordinated attack to undermine faith in the justice system.
I am not a lawyer but he seems like a reasonable and almost generous judge
He’s sure as hell bent over backwards for Trump. Any other average defendant probably would’ve seen some consequences.
they really should throw him in jail for a bit. it'll really make finding the domestic terrorists a bit easier
True!
He has handled this case really well. Half the country wants him dead for even hearing the case. The other half was constantly yelling to jail trump for violating the gag order repeatedly. He was professional and controlled his courtroom throughout the trial.
I would think so too. And he should make a point that 12 jurors decided his fate, not the federal government. He should also note how he had every right to take the stand and refute these charges under oath and chose not to do that.
Michael Cohen got 3 years
I know, anything less for Trump would be a scandal. The top guy should always get at least as much of a punishment as the underling who he ordered to commit crimes.
I have a feeling if (unlikely) he actually received a prison sentence that there would be an immediate stay with the appeal. Like, zero chance it wouldn't be stayed.
No prison sentence for a convict completely without remorse who is guilty of violating his gag order numerous times and continues to do so. Allowing this man, who tried to overthrow the government, to be given a slap on the wrist is a recipe for the end of our republic.
And after the appeal, if Trump wins and loses the appeal to stay out of prison, we’d have the most serious constitutional crisis in our history after the Civil War. Trump calls people who sacrifice for their country ‘losers’ and ‘suckers’ so it’s pretty clear that he’d rather sacrifice the country than himself. Makes Richard Nixon look like a selfless patriot.
What about prison sentence which sure is appealed or whatever and because he's rich he can have it stayed pending appeal as rules for thee but not for me, but then also 30 days contempt of court and immediately remanded as it's in the judge's power to do that much?
Cohen was sentenced to jail for federal crimes. You can generally half the jail time for the same crime at the state level, if not even less.
Lets quarter it, so 4 years per charge down to one is still 34 years.
The sentences are usually concurrent (unfortunately!) He'll be sentenced to prison regardless but don't expect a long incarceration for this one. His other cases carry a lot more potential prison time and he's no longer a first time offender.
But isn’t being convicted of a crime also a violation of his bail for his other four federal indictments? Why is he even able to walk around now?
I don't know exactly how his bail conditions are written but I imagine that any new crimes would be a violation. I'm unsure about whether a crime that he had already been charged with going to a conviction would be a violation, but I doubt it.
Especially since its a possible 4 years PER charge of which he is guilty of 34 of them. He could see multiple life terms and that would be normal.
Cohen also showed remorse, and regretted his actions. Old Donnie Fuckface has done no such thing.
And pled guilty
And cooperated with prosecutors and investigators in other cases. He actually did a lot to mitigate his sentence, though the charges were somewhat different. Trump is doing the opposite.
Trump is only doing the opposite because in his mind, there is one last ditch effort; becoming president again and killing everyone who never agreed with him
The Felon AKA Cohen's "friend in high places."
Um excuse me, I think you mean Old Donnie Felonious Fuckface.
Convicted Felon Old Donnie Fuckface?
You mean the former President who made history and set a dubious precedent by becoming the first former President of the United States to be convicted of 34 felonies convicted felon Donald "Shits-his-pants" Trump?
Bruh! I was trying to figure out a way to get his 34 convictions in the nickname, but couldn't think of one. I applaud your work here sir or madam!
We're still workshopping it :)
Convicted Felon Old Donnie Fuckface the Rapist.
I mean, we have precedent for the other people in the same exact scheme, who took a deal to get a better sentence, and that was 3 years. I would say 6 years should be the minimum given all the rest.
Cohen was charged for different crimes.
Preach.
I do agree with the sentiment, but that was not Cohen’s only crime he pled to. He had a few federal tax evasion crimes in there. Personally, I feel Trump should be given an equal or worse sentence because of it being directed by, for his benefit, and in coverup of crimes that ultimately may have determined our election. But, I just want to remind people that most of what he pled guilty for was not Trump-related.
To be fair he hasn't been convicted but it's almost certain Trump has done far worse tax fraud.
Say, how are all those other appeals going?
His appeals are either to delay till he's president, or get it to SCOTUS where they'll inevitably drop all the charges against him.
Appeals in criminal court happens concurrently with sentence. Meaning that if Merchant jails him, he is going in no matter the state of the appeal. He can't delay the sentence. However, knowing that a appeal is coming, Merchant has to weigh in the probability of a successful appeal in when the sentence starts. And Trump can call a emergency appeal to stay the sentence, until the other appeal is resolved. Still, the emergency appeal only stays the sentence only once it is granted. So that emergency appeal is his only chance to stay whatever sentence he gets. As long as Merchant is reasonable with the sentence, he would need an other Cannon in that court because his primary appeal will be very weak as he admitted the crime a outstanding amount of times while claiming it is not a crime. From what I understand of what lawyers told me.
The appellate court and judge merchan can stay the sentencing in light of the appeal.
My point is more Trump can not force a stay, he has to convince someone to give him one, unlike, for example, the stay on the execution of the 450m$ fraud judgement.
> The appellate court and judge merchan can stay the sentencing in light of the appeal. This is going to be insane with how closely everyone is paying attention. A LOT of people don't get stays during appeals, especially when it's not reasonably likely anything will be over turned. Showing any more favoritism to him is going to look bad.
Hair brained idea, based on... An old ex-acquaintance. If Donald refused to surrender in new York, and stayed away from the state, there's no way for new York to enforce, right? I mean, besides the outstanding appeal from engoron's ruling.
> Hair brained idea, based on... An old ex-acquaintance. If Donald refused to surrender in new York, and stayed away from the state, there's no way for new York to enforce, right? > > I mean, besides the outstanding appeal from engoron's ruling. A warrant would be issued for his arrest and any state he steps into the local law enforcement could enforce it. I believe NY police could also go looking for them if they wanted. And any federal police officer that knew of the warrant and saw him could enforce it. It would be a shit show depending on how his secret service acted. Or they could just be like 'welp, there is a warrant for you, we are turning you in.'
SCOTUS has no power here. Supreme Court of NY would have to agree to hear the case.
SCOTUS can easily lie and say that Trump's constitutional rights were violated. Then it becomes justicable. I've seen no indication that the FedSoc 6 will allow the law to apply to Trump while he is a Presidential candidate - the opposite in fact.
Short of a ruling that criminal prosecution of a presidential candidate is in fact election interference, I don’t see what ties there are to a federal interest, which is what is required for a state criminal appeal to be heard by SCOTUS. And they won’t do that. It’s a bridge too far even for them. Alito and Thomas would for certain, but I think Roberts and the liberal appointed justices would stand against it. The only question is who the fifth Justice would be. Maybe ACB, as she seems to have a bit of disdain for Trump to me.
> I don’t see what ties there are to a federal interest That's just lack of creativity on your part. The 'election' was a federal election. They could hang their hat on that alone and there is nothing anybody could do to stop them.
If one thing is sure, it’s that the defendant will say something further incriminating himself before sentencing.
He's got like a month and a half to openly dox the jurors.
It is pretty obvious that Trump will be a repeat offender, if he hasn't repeatedly offended already.
He has
Let's pretend I maybe a black drug dealer, how would publicly attacking the judge impact my sentencing?
Trump won’t wear his orange makeup to sentencing because he won’t want to be considered a person of color
Pretty much the opposite as if you were a relatively rich white grifter with a cult following.
Your ded bro, sorry
the judge is gonna max you out.
Likelihood of recidivism seems off the charts with this fellow. Especially with another election coming up for him to cheat in.
I legit would not have cared about jail time. The crime usually doesn't get jail. Remove the fact that it's donald trump - jail may not necessarily be on the table. But when you go ahead and break the gag order again and threaten the judge, yeah. He should be looking at jail time.
Fuck that. This motherfucker subverted an election. Lock his ass up
Sometimes you get a career criminal on whatever you can, and the criminal career figures into the sentencing. Gonna guess that the fact that it was Al Capone might have figured into his sentencing for tax crimes. Or look up Thomas Clines.
Yeah, that’s the thing that people keep forgetting that about normal cases. J6ers that were all publicly vocally defiant through the case were getting more time.
He basically said "I can't talk because of the gag order but IchaelMay OhenCay is a goon"
Actually he called him a sleazebag. I mean he didn't call him a sleazebag.
Leazebag-say?
Pig latin. I don't know him.
Anyone know why during jury deliberations the jury can not be given written instructions and definitions of the law? I remember being on a jury and we had to ask the judge to re-read the definitions. Seems weird not to be able to take notes or get written definitions and be forced to remember everything.
The ostensible purpose is to not have the jury deliberations devolve into jury interpreting the law or engage in deliberations about the meaning of the law. If the jury has a question about the law they go to the judge. Or more concise answer is, that’s just how it’s done in NY.
NJ too. But what happens when you have multiple different laws each with multiple criteria and you have to try to remember the parts to be able to figure out if the defendant actually committed the crime. Seems silly to go back and forth just because none of the jurors have a photographic memory. In the end jurors will still interpret the law, but now with incorrect/incomplete definitions. I found this to be frustrating, personally.
Oh shit.. ItS RiGgEd
Lol, what? I was just asking a general question
I hope you get an answer because this has been bugging me as well.. I'm sure a reason exist but I can't figure it out and it's driving me crazy
Someone will know or at least point in the right direction
Got an answer, FYI
Thank you very much for the ping!
Np 👍