- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
…make it this one.
This is an excellent article by a calm, balanced legal veteran and law school professor, one of the most cited legal professionals in the business. He’s not a Trump supporter, and he’s been anti-GOP in the past.In his article, he basically says this case is born to be reversed on appeal and divides the problems into four groups: the Judge, the charges, the evidence and the jury instructions. He finds fatal flaws with all four.Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
Does anyone at all worry about the dangerous precedent that this sets? Trump is found guilty of a conjured-up crime before a Democrat judge who donated to Biden, whose daughter raises funds for Democrats, with a fully Democrat jury in a very Democrat city.
Wouldn’t happen anywhere else in the world. HRC gets a free pass for her crimes. Biden doesn’t get indicted for similar crimes; e.g., retaining Top Secret files.
Trump and MAGA allies are learning, and listening very closely. They’re threatening similar behavior.
The G.O.P. Push for Post-Verdict Payback: ‘Fight Fire With Fire’
Former Harvard Law prof and registered lifelong Democrat Alan Dershowitz calls it the weaponization of the legal system. He says that no lawyer would privately consider Trump’s “offense” a legitimate legal violation.
Do we really want to go down this path?
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
-
More interesting commentary from former Federal prosecutor Jim Trusty (interviewed by Paul Gigot). Items I hadn’t realized before:
- SDNY initially rejected the case.
- Politicized prosecutor whose predecessor rejected it.
- Judge was hand-selected, not through lottery process.
- Favorable jury instructions to a favorably-selected jury.
Trusty’s opinion: defense strategy was correct, focus on Cohen’s credibility. Government bailed out the defense with a 5.5 hour closing argument. Thought they over-dignified Stormy Daniels. Govt successfully equated “sordid” with “criminal.”
Trusty said judge behaved in a way that helped the prosecution; (1) should have recused himself not because of his small donations, but because of his daughter’s commitment to the Democrat machine (raising millions for Dems), and (2) the trial proceeded without the theory of crime until the jury instructions happened. When the judge used pretzel logic to turn misdemeanors into felonies, the judge gave three vague options, two of which were Federal (in a state court).
Trusty thinks there was a due process violation; no clarity on the specific charges until the end of the trial, both baseline and underlying. Government didn’t give felony theory until the unethical press conference by Alvin Bragg…he skirted the ethical prohibitions. Vague indictment, judge didn’t particularize on how misdemeanors became felonies. Judge allowed lots of “sexy areas for appeal” per Trusty.
Sentencing on 7/11: Trusty thinks these Class C felonies (right on misdemeanor line) should be probation.
WSJ Opinion: The Law and Donald Trump | Watch (msn.com)
Audaces fortuna iuvat
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.