Trump sentenced to unconditional discharge what do you think?

@Musicman how would you know that the charges were phony? Did you listen to the testimony? Did trump not have a highly paid defense? Did trump's council not have the right to choose twelve citizens as jurists? Did those jurists not listen, read the evidence and conclude his guilt?
You would spend time in prison or have an electronic ankle bracelet. Pay fines. Even as a first offense.

@Carla Yes I did. I also heard the judges instructions to the jury. Like the one in New York "even if you think he just thought about defrauding someone, but didn't do it you can find him guilty". If we can start convicting people for what we think they are thinking we we are in trouble! All of us would be in prison. None of us have pure thoughts all the time.

@Musicman I will have to see that for myself, I'm sure that is taken out of context delivered to you with all the silly spin of your conspiracy theory tic toc videos.

@JimboSaturn Just look at the transcripts.

@Musicman What you evidently do not know is NY State law. If a person commits enough crimes...and is found guilty to show a pattern of breaking the law in NY State over time........and trump has 14 of those convictions since the 1970's including tax fraud, business fraud, real estate fraud, bank fraud, multiple convictions for IRS fraud, federal housing discrimination, rape of E. Jean Carroll.................and/or there is a string of misdemeanors committed in the commission of a felony.......ALL OF THE MISDEAMEANORS leading up to the felony can be upgraded to Class E felonies. This upgrading to Class E felonies can be done by the judge........or at the request of the prosecutor.

By NY State law trump is considered a "career criminal"

There was no "thinking" he was guilty of "phony charges".............he was found guilty by a jury of 34 MORE felonies in NY State.

@Musicman I shall.

@Musicman I would like to see those exact instructions that the judge allegedly gave to the jury:


Perhaps you can provide a link to a source.

I have a feeling I'll be waiting a very long time.

@SW-User Actually I believe the more exact words were the prosecution didn't need to prove Trump defrauded anyone. That if the jury felt that he just thought in his mind about defrauding someone they could find him guilty.

@Musicman

@Musicman show me

@Carla I wouldn't waste my time. When you look it up yourself you will have a easier time believing it.

@Musicman just did. There it is. Now show me yours

@Carla waiting....
By the way, i looked. No such instruction. Were you hearing things? Were you told what you heard?
When will you people come to realize you've been had?

@Carla Oh I'm sure! 🙄 It's amazing how anything that doesn't comply with the party rhetoric gets scrubbed from the Internet. Just Google the Judges closing instructions to the jury. If it says there are none then there is your answer. Every Judge gives instructions to the jury before deliberations.

@Musicman i just showed you his instructions

@Musicman Scrubbed from the internet? ha, another conspiracy theory. Seems like any facts that contradict your world view gets scrubbed from your brain.

@Musicman I think @Carla has just shown the the exact instructions that the judge gave to the jury. Is she lying? Were these fake? If they are, where is your evidence?

I would also like to know where you heard merchan instructing the jury.@Musicman

@Carla It was all over the news at the time.

@Musicman Reporters were reporting. Apparently, the reporters you heard were interpreting the instructions in such a way as to make you believe as you do. You didn't actually hear the judge at all. The truth is recorded in transcript and in real reporting. I showed you. You are being manipulated. I hope your ss and medicare will be grandfathered in. Your son's won't be.

@Carla It's truly sad to see some so brainwashed. I feel so bad for you. ☹

@Musicman Here is a link to the actual transcript. I will draw your attention to page 13, which I have reproduced in full here. @Carla

Reasonable Doubt
What does our law mean when it requires proof of guilt
"beyond a reasonable doubt"?

The law uses the term, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt,"
to tell you how convincing the evidence of guilt must be to permit
a verdict of guilty. The law recognizes that, in dealing with human
affairs, there are very few things in this world that we know with
absolute certainty. Therefore, the law does not require the
People to prove a defendant guilty beyond all possible doubt.

Onthe other hand, it is not sufficient to prove that the defendant is
probably guilty. In a criminal case, the proof of guilt must be
stronger than that. It must be beyond a reasonable doubt.

A reasonable doubt is an honest doubt of the defendant's
guilt for which a reason exists based upon the nature and quality
of the evidence. It is an actual doubt, not an imaginary doubt. It
is a doubt that a reasonable person, acting in a matter of this
importance, would be likely to entertain because of the evidence
that was presented or because of the lack of convincing
evidence.

Proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is proof that
leaves you so firmly convinced of the defendant's guilt that you
have no reasonable doubt of the existence of any element of the
crime or of the defendant's identity as the person who committed
the crime.

In determining whether the People have proven the
defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you should be
guided solely by a full and fair evaluation of the evidence. After
carefully evaluating the evidence, each of you must decide whether
that evidence convinces you beyond a reasonable doubt
of the defendant's guilt.

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/People%20v.%20DJT%20Jury%20Instructions%20and%20Charges%20FINAL%205-23-24.pdf

So, in other words, Judge Merchan did not direct the jury to find Trump guilty. Believe it, or don't. But it's the truth.

@SW-User nor did he tell them to convict if he was just only contemplating fraud.

Thanks for the transcript.

@Musicman a go to response which you refuse to understand is projection.
When shown facts, you people close down.
You never did show me yours...