Trump sentenced to unconditional discharge what do you think?

@MarkPaul Since the orange traitor has gotten away with his crimes, no average person should ever be convicted for anything.

@Diotrephes This I agree

@Diotrephes Well, that's just crazy and petty. Life isn't always fair and to suggest the law should now be suspended, purge-style, because one person didn't get the sentence you wanted, doesn't even make logical sense. The law was followed. The Judge gave his reasoning. Nothing was hidden or disguised. And, justice was served.

@MarkPaul You are wrong. It is definately NOT trump's first recorded offense. Trump has been tried successfully in NY State since the 1970's. Back then...federal housing discrimination. Since then, bank fraud, business fraud, IRS fraud....multiple counts, IRS Charities fraud...multiple counts,.real estate fraud.......E. Jean Carroll...twice. Plus a pile of civil actions that trump has lost.

Even if it was the FIRST count he was found guilty of..........there are still sentencing guidelines.

The reason trump faced 34 felonies in NY State for paying off his ho's is because by NY State law if you have a criminal record of convictions........or multiple misdemeanors lead up to the commission of a felony.........ALL of the misdemeanors can be upgraded to Class E felonies. By definition of NY State law trump is considered a career criminal.

He did not get sentenced because he stalled off his trial and sentencing long enough there is now no time to give him house arrest or probation..........and incarceration is off of the table because he has Secret Service protection 24/7 the rest of his life from his first term and cannot be in jail.

But he will forever be a convicted felon.

@Sidewinder Hanged. Not hung.

@JSul3 Yes, like that, except mission completed.

@anythingoes477 The judge followed sentencing guidelines and if he applied a penalty or remained silent of his intentions, more than likely and almost a certainty, the Supreme Court would have invalidated the entire case. So, at least getting the conviction to stand is a good and probably the best outcome. Kudos to the Judge.

@Sidewinder That's why the term is 'hanged' and not 'hung'

@Vin53 Yes, I know that, but @MarkPaul said "hung" and I just couldn't resist throwing that in there.

@Sidewinder @Vin53 I don't get it. How is something hung like a horse? How do you hang a horse? By its tail?

@FrogManSometimesLooksBothWays You'll understand when you're older.

@Sidewinder Cool!

@MarkPaul
The judge violated the equal protection clause of the federal constitution. He should be impeached and removed from office.

@Diotrephes State case....not federal.

@MarkPaul The Supreme Court would not have intervened. It was not a federal trial that convicted trump. It was a state trial so any appeal that the judge allowed would go to the state courts..........but they would never reverse a JURY decision either.

@anythingoes477 That makes 0.0 sense... since the appeal DID go to the Supreme Court and they voted on it, 5-4 against stopping the sentencing. If the Judge either went on record with his intent to apply a penalty or remained silent about his intent, more than likely at least 1 and most likely 2 Justices would have stopped the sentencing dead in its tracks.

@MarkPaul You're confused. trump wanted his lawyers to take that case to SCOTUS to block sentencing and SCOTRUS refused to do that. SCOTUS rejected trump's appeal,.

@MarkPaul https://www.politico.com/news/2025/01/09/supreme-court-trump-hush-money-sentencing-decision-00197432

@anythingoes477 You basically just told me what I already had told you. You claimed the Supreme would not intervene because it's a state trial. But, by voting on the appeal, they did intervene. If the voting had gone in favour of the felon, then sentencing would not have been able to advance.

@MarkPaul Wow..........mental block???????? Voting NOT to intervene.........is intervening to you??????????

@MarkPaul So......saying NO we won't do that................is the same to you as getting involved and hearing the entire case and then delivering a verdict???????????? Wow. Zero reasoning power.

That's like a woman saying NO I WILL NOT MARRY YOU............but then you think you're married because she said responded by saying......... NO I WON'T DO THAT.