Florida Republicans on Thursday quickly attacked the conviction of former President Donald Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records, while Democrats said the verdict showed nobody is above the law.
A 12-member jury returned the verdict more than a month after the criminal hush-money trial began in New York and after just one day of deliberations. Trump is the first former president to be convicted of a crime after leaving office.
U.S. Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., called the verdict a “political witch hunt,” while Republican Party of Florida Chairman Evan Power accused the district attorney and judge of “making a mockery of our judicial system,” alleged Democrats engaged in “election interference” and said that “in the real world” Trump “only grows stronger.”
Gov. Ron DeSantis, who has been raising money for Trump’s presidential campaign after unsuccessfully seeking the Republican nomination, issued a statement that called the charges against Trump “alleged misdemeanor business records violations from nearly a decade ago.”
DeSantis said the case wouldn’t have moved forward if Trump wasn’t the defendant.
“In America, the rule of law should be applied in a dispassionate, even-handed manner, not become captive to the political agenda of some kangaroo court,” DeSantis said in a statement posted on social media.
But the Florida Democratic Party quickly sent out a fundraising request under the title “34-0.”
U.S. Rep. Frederica Wilson, D-Fla., said the verdict shows “our justice system at work!”
“No one is above the law, including the four-time indicted, twice impeached, insurrection inciter and now convicted felon, former President Donald Trump,” Wilson said in a statement.
“There was no witch hunt, no foul play — just the impartial application of justice that treats everyone equally, regardless of who they are,” Wilson added.
The verdict closed a trial in which prosecutors from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office argued that the former president conspired with associates to make hush-money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.
Trump’s former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, was a star witness in the trial. Trump became the first president, current or former, to be criminally indicted last year, when he was charged with 34 separate counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, a low-level felony.
Adding to the intense attention on the case is that it came as Trump campaigns to try to defeat President Joe Biden in November and return to the White House.
Trump is scheduled to be sentenced on July 11.
How Trump’s conviction could affect his re-election bid has been the subject of much speculation, with one recent poll finding that for roughly two-thirds of voters, a guilty verdict wouldn’t affect their choice in November.
At a news conference after the verdict, Trump promised to appeal and gave an impromptu stump speech.
“We’re a nation in decline. Serious decline,” he said. “Millions and millions of people pouring into our country right now from prisons and from mental institutions, terrorists, and they’re taking over our country. We have a country that’s in big trouble. But this was a rigged decision, right from day one. You have a conflicted judge who should have never been allowed to try this case. And we will fight for our constitution. This is long from over.”
The Trump campaign also attempted to raise money off the verdict, sending out an email to supporters with the message: “I was just convicted in a RIGGED political Witch Hunt Trial: I DID NOTHING WRONG! … But with your support at this moment in history, WE WILL WIN BACK THE WHITE HOUSE AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.”
In a statement, Biden campaign communications director Michael Tyler repeated a reaction shared widely by Democrats – including New York Attorney General Letitia James – following the ruling: No one is above the law.
“Donald Trump has always mistakenly believed he would never face consequences for breaking the law for his own personal gain,” Tyler said. “But today’s verdict does not change the fact that the American people face a simple reality. There is still only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: at the ballot box. Convicted felon or not, Trump will be the Republican nominee for president.”
The verdict marks a victory for Bragg, who in a brief tweet responded simply, “Today, a jury found Donald J. Trump GUILTY on ALL 34 felony counts.”
–Jim Turner, Annie McDonough, Peter Sterne and Rebecca C. Lewis, News Service of Florida
Annie McDonough, Peter Sterne and Rebecca C. Lewis are reporters for City & State New York, a sister publication of The News Service of Florida.
David Schaefer says
Can’t wait to see when July 11th gets here. I really hope he gets jail time he deserves it. He has got away with so much crap for years and I can only hope that the next trials start ASAP.
Ken says
You liberals and democrats are the ones need to be locked up! What about Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden and all the other ones? This wasn’t a fair trial!
Ray W. says
I can’t help but remember my mother’s mantra: “[Ken] has the ‘I wantie curse.'” “You want, you want, you want”, my mother would say.
I called my younger son yesterday. As we talked about the day’s event, I asked him if he remembered what I commonly told all my children. When I told him of what I used to say to them, he said that was one of the things he really remembered from his childhood. What did I say to my children?
If you determine right and wrong by what you want to do, then right and wrong can change every day, because what you want to do can change every day. If your standard is: If I want to do it, it is right; and, if I don’t want to do it, it is wrong, then there will be no stability in your life. Chaos will be your life. Lying will be your life. Cheating will be your life.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that I have never given in to the “I wantie curse.” I have experienced chaos. Ken is experiencing it right now. He wishes harm on others because he isn’t getting what he wants.
DaleL says
Please explain how this was not a fair trial. Mr. Trump, through his attorneys, was involved in the jury selection. His attorneys were afforded the opportunity to present and question witnesses. Mr. Trump was afforded the opportunity to testify in his own behalf, which he declined to do. In reality this was a simple business fraud case. It is the sort of case that frequently brings down Mafia type criminals. Al Capone was famously locked up because of tax fraud, not for his real crimes of murder and extortion.
Mr. Trump was president for four years. If either Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Biden had an actual criminal past, I am confident that the Trump Justice Department would have taken action. That same Trump Justice Department prosecuted both Roger Stone and Paul Manafort. Mr. Trump pardoned both of them. In addition, the Republican controlled House thoroughly sought to find anything they could on President Biden to justify impeaching him. They could not.
Many think that the economy would be better under a Trump presidency. That is mistaken. The Hill has an economic analysis which concludes that the inflation and deficit are largely a holdover from the Trump presidency. The Trump/Republican tax cut, gutting the IRS, excessive spending, and mismanaging the COVID crisis all contributed to our present economic problems.
Bill C says
This was not “a simple business fraud case”. That would have been a misdemeanor, perhaps not even brought to trial. It was elevated to a felony because the business fraud was used to cover up a greater crime- a conspiracy to illegally influence the 2016 election. Guilty on 34 felony counts!!!
Bill C says
PS the whole shell game was an attempt to hide an illegal campaign contribution, a violation of Election Law, which is a felony:
https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/news/congressional-testimony-and-reports/campaign-finance/200305_RtC_Increased_Penalties_Campaign_Finance_Offenses.pdf
Nephew Of Uncle Sam says
What about them Ken? Please inform us with FACTS.
Deborah Coffey says
Looks like our justice system is working quite well. Had Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden committed crimes, they would have been convicted felons, too! BUT, they didn’t. So, there is TRUTH. Just like the South lost the Civil War, the Republican Fascist Party will lose this one. I will say, it’s very hard trying to survive all the lies coming from the right wing but, in the end, we liberals and Democrats will save America.
Judith Michaud says
Ken, we wouldn’t be in this mess right now if the people had listened to Hillary. Donald Trump has been a criminal for years and has gotten away with so many crimes that you and I would have been in jail for in a heartbeat. This has nothing to do with politics! There are plenty of other candidates the Republicans could have chosen to run. A convicted felon cannot join the military, so how in the world is one allowed to be the head of our military. Do some research!
Laurel says
Judith: You go, woman! Excellent point! I would like to know that as well. Also, a convicted felon is not cleared for top secrets and top secret documents.
Depending on the state, many rights felons lose, or difficulties they may have are:
Employment;
Driving privileges;
Child custody;
Child visitation; and
Voting.
I’d like to know what else.
Been There says
Deflection is the right’s way. Who said the poster is a liberal or a democrat? Plenty of Independents and Republicans are disgusted with him. He is a deterent to progress.
All the Springer type drama that surrounds him is nauseating. He’s trash with money. If a man will cheat on his wives, cheat on his taxes, cheat to get elected (talks about protecting the constitution but personally tried to circumvent it by inciting a riot on January 6), lie to his constituents; you think he is honorable about anything? The office of the president needs to be held to a higher standard. Everyone around him has been found guilty. They didn’t break the law on his behalf without his knowledge. He won’t go to jail, but he doesn’t deserve to be POTUS ever again.
Skibum says
Ken, just saying it wasn’t a fair trial doesn’t make it so. If you actually had facts, even one, to substantiate that lie, I’m quite sure you would have put it in your comment. Just because you don’t like the outcome doesn’t mean DJT’s first of several criminal cases, and his first felony conviction, was anything but the system of American justice working the same way it works with every criminal defendant every day of the week. Let’s look at some of the actual fact surrounding this case:
Many of us have long known DJT to be a crooked, corrupt, morally bankrupt man, but I’ll try to stick to the facts despite his well-established history of being a mafioso-like, criminally minded individual who surrounds himself with other similarly minded, corrupt individuals who do his bidding. As is often the case, the coverup is worse than the original crime. And in this particular case, the scheme involved in the coverup WAS the crime! Had DJT simply paid off Stormy Daniels and not falsified his business records to conceal the fact that he was paying her off to shut her up, he would have been fine, no crime would have been committed despite the immoral and salacious behavior of a married man. But no, DJT always thinks and acts like a criminally minded mob boss, conducting his business with the same criminal mindset that he has used throughout his entire adult life.
DJT lived in NY, and he decided to commit his crimes in NY. He was the one who gave the orders to others to cover up his sex scandal by falsifying his company’s business records in a misconceived effort to prevent his sex scandal from hindering his presidential election chances. And when federal prosecutors from DJT’s own Justice Dept. finished their investigation and charged Michael Cohen with a federal crime, DJT’s own republican appointed federal prosecutor listed DJT as “Individual 1” in their indictment of Cohen, stating that Cohen’s efforts were for the benefit of, and at the direction of Individual 1… none other than DJT.
The State of New York prosecuted DJT for violating NY state laws after republican appointed federal prosecutors bowed to political pressure and indicted only Michael Cohen, refusing to charge DJT with federal campaign finance violations even though federal prosecutors had sufficient evidence to charge DJT and even included him and his role in Cohen’s federal indictment. So it was natural, and completely legal and above board when the Manhattan D.A. reviewed the federal indictment and looked to see if there were any NY state laws that were violated by DJT so he could be held accountable for his role in the sex scandal coverup.
Whether or not anyone chooses to believe Michael Cohen’s testimony in DJT’s criminal case, everything he testified to under oath regarding DJT’s scheme to coverup the sex scandal is corroborated by the documents that were entered into evidence. And DJT’s ultimate downfall was not Cohen, but Trump’s own longtime friend and co-conspirator David Pecker. Pecker still considers DJT as a friend but testified against him under oath, validating and corroborating Cohen’s testimony about the coverup scheme that was approved by and put into motion by DJT.
DJT’s attorneys approved every juror on the panel. But now that they voted unanimously to convict DJT on all 34 felony counts, somehow they were “democrat plants” who conspired to frame DJT. Despite the plain fact that this criminal case was a state case, prosecuted by the Manhattan D.A., DJT wants everyone to believe that he was being persecuted by the “Biden Administration”, which had no authority or involvement whatsoever in the NY state criminal case.
As I stated, DJT lived and did all of his dirty business in NY for decades, yet now that he has been convicted of 34 felonies in NY, he laughably wants all of his MAGA mush-heads to believe the only reason he was indicted by a NY Grand Jury and convicted in a NY courtroom was so-called “political persecution”. My reply to DJT is simply: Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time!
Laurel says
Hey Skibum: You explained that very well, and reminded us of “Individual 1” in Cohen’s case, which sent Cohen to prison.
The fact is: Did Trump do it, or did he not? The 12 jurors approved by Trump’s lawyers said he did. He should have been cuffed and escorted to jail right after sentencing.
Ray W. says
It is being reported that the Trump organization raised $34 million from the gullible in just one day after the verdict. Wow!
Laurel says
Ray W.: Well, that may be so, but we do not know yet who actually came up with that money. Maybe it was the gullible, maybe it was also some who got the actual tax cuts from Trump.
Regardless, Independent me, and Independent (fka Republican) hubby are now inspired to donate to the Democratic Party!
The Sour Kraut says
That’s a nice dream, but he will not see any jail time. He will have this conviction tied up in appeals for years. All the other cases against him have been delayed until after the election. He I banking on winning the election, then making all his troubles go away, or staying in office for life like his hero Vladimir Putin.
Edith Campin says
As glad as I am to see justice prevail, I am saddened that one man has brought down the image of our country, Just like so many third world countries we now have a history of having a crook as president.
Laurel says
“I am not a crook!”
– Richard Nixon
Skibum says
I had a good chuckle when I heard one of today’s newspapers headline read: “Donald Trump, A Man of Conviction”. So true!
Dont pop the champagne just yet says
This is just the first Kangaroo court, no chance of a fair trial in Liberal NY, this Guaranteed to be reversed on appeal in federal court, Just no way that’s happening before election. Have you seen Joe’s miserable poll performance? This ensures he will lose to Trump, his weaponization of the George Soros funded justice system will bite him in his ass in the end, mark my words.
Beachgirl says
Agree
Laurel says
Don’t Pop and Beachgirl: Explain, exactly and how it was a “kangaroo court” (the crime would be tried and convicted in the state the crime was committed in) and, please explain, exactly and factually, how President Biden “weaponized Soros.”
It seems that Trump supporters find Trump innocent with much evidence to the contrary, while finding Biden guilty with no evidence whatsoever.
So, explain please. I’d like to know how you got there (please, no Democratic responses).
DaleL says
This was a NY state business fraud trial. Mr. Trump certainly will appeal the case to even the NY Supreme Court. Unless the law under which Mr. Trump was convicted conflicts in some way with the US Constitution, federal courts have no jurisdiction.
Political polls do not elect a president. A mob at the Capitol do not elect a president. Fake electors do not elect a president. It is the November election and the Electors thus elected who elect our president.
Ray W. says
An interesting corollary point occurred during the reading of additional instructions to the jury hours before the convictions issued.
The jury was told that anything Cohen testified about that was not corroborated by other witnesses or evidence must be disregarded. Why? Cohen was impeached by the defense team on a number of points of importance. He admitted that he lied or changed his story. He admitted to having prior convictions. He admitted to an interest in how the case was decided. The prosecution did what it could to rehabilitate him.
This is a common issue, but very few lawyers argue to a court that the entirety of a witness’ testimony should be disregarded, to the point of striking the testimony from the record. Had Cohen not be rehabilitated on redirect examination or had his testimony not been corroborated by other evidence or testimony in the trial record, the judge would have had to strike his testimony from the record. If the Trump lawyers brought this issue to the trial judge’s attention, kudos to them for their good work.
Essentially, the issue is simple. The government always bears the burden of proof. Michael Cohen was called to the witness stand by the government. The moment his testimony was impeached on a number of different points, the government bore a burden of rehabilitating him on each different point if it could. If the government did not rehabilitate him on any of the points at issue, his testimony is to be disregarded by the jury, point by point, unless independent testimony or evidence corroborated his testimony. If he is rehabilitated on a point, then the jury can still accept or disregard his testimony, just as they can accept or reject anyone else’s testimony.
Let’s look at it on a microscopic level.
For purposes of argument, if Michael Cohen testified about 200 different facts and he was impeached, then if zero evidence and testimony from other witnesses that corroborated any of his 200 points of testimony, then the jury would have to be told to disregard all of his testimony, because the state bears the burden of proof.
If corroborating evidence and testimony exists for all 200 of his points, then none of Cohen’s testimony could be automatically disregarded by the jury. However, the jury would still be told they could accept or reject any or all of his testimony, just like the testimony of all other witnesses.
If 100 of the 200 points are corroborated by other testimony or evidence, and he is rehabilitated on 50 other points, then the jury must reject those 50 of the points that were neither rehabilitated nor corroborated. Each of those 50 points fail the requirement mandated by the state’s burden of proof.
From my decades of prosecution and defending cases, I have learned that this is something very few law enforcement officers understand. They commonly think that their testimony, standing alone, is always enough to prove their case. It isn’t. Let’s say there is a motion to suppress. A law enforcement officer testifies that he participated in a warrantless search. By constitutional law, the state bears the burden of proof whenever a defendant challenges a warrantless search via motion to suppress. If the officer testifies that upon warrantless entry into a home he, alone, saw drugs in open view in a dresser drawer that he says was open for all to see, he might think it is enough to carry his case in front of the judge. But if he admits that he lied to the occupants of the home in hopes of tricking them into incriminating themselves and they don’t incriminate themselves, he would be impeached by admitting that he lies to persuade people to say things. If a grandmother of the defendant who is in the home during the warrantless entry testifies that the dresser drawer was closed when the officer entered the home, then contradictory evidence is in the record on a critical point at issue. If the prosecutor does not impeach the grandmother in any way and, if the state does not rehabilitate the officer and, if the state does not present corroborating evidence or testimony from other witnesses about the allegedly open dresser drawer, then a simple he said, she said conundrum exists. Since the state bears the burden of proof, the trial judge must accept the testimony of the unimpeached grandmother and reject the testimony of the impeached officer.
Wherever there is a factual dispute in the testimony, the party bearing the burden of proof will always lose, unless the party can impeach the other party’s witness and rehabilitate or corroborate the testimony of its own witness. If the party bearing the burden of proof fails on any of the three options, it loses.
So, the Trump jury was told to disregard anything the impeached Cohen said that was not either rehabilitated or that was not corroborated. They convicted on all 34 counts after deliberating for many hours. This will be a main point of contention by the defense team of lawyers in the appeal. They apparently brought the issue to the judge during deliberations and the judge added a special jury instruction on that point. Again, it appears that kudos to an alert defense team are appropriate.
Dont Pop the Champagne cork yet says
Thank you for your insight and explanation to the non legal eagle laymen here.
Laurel says
Ray W.: But as you stated, Cohen’s testimony was rehabilitated and corroborated, so I’m not certain that helps the defense in an appeal. It seems that the rehabilitated and corroborated testimony was sufficient for the jury to consider.
What I didn’t like, was when Trump’s lawyer suggested to the jury that they were the ones sentencing Trump. That was a cheap shot, and their licenses should be in jeopardy over that one. They damn well knew what they did was unethical.
Ray W. says
It was highly improper for the defense team to bring sentencing into the argument to the jury. Thank you for adding your thoughts to the comment thread.
My point of the evidentiary issue was that the defense team alertly saw something that many lawyers don’t see. By bringing it to the court’s attention, they created an issue for appeal. I am not saying they will succeed on appeal, but I tried to bring appealable error issues into every one of my defense trials. I tried to avoid them when I was a prosecutor by not foolishly objecting to every little objection. I had no problem with a special defense jury instruction if it followed the law as I understood it. My goal was to win a fair trial. That meant that the defense should be allowed every possible theory of defense and a special instruction in support of that theory of defense.
Skibum says
Ray, I have an interesting question for you. You state above that defense counsel should be allowed every possible theory of defense, including a judge’s special jury instruction in support of that theory. What about the tired old “the other guy did it” defense? Is it your opinion that a judge should include in jury instructions a statement in support of that when sending jurors off to deliberate? I always love to hear your views, and when I read your comment above this question was the first to come to mind, so I would love to hear from you if you have time to answer it.
Ray W. says
Hello Skibum. Thank you.
Please keep in mind that jury instructions differ from closing arguments. Jury instructions, either standard or special, reflect the judge’s assessment of what laws apply to the case, based on the charge(s) at issue and the evidence in the record.
Argument, on the other hand, is far more expansive a concept. Both the state and the defense are allowed to argue to the jury any inference that can be drawn from the evidence in the record.
There are limitations to the scope of oral argument, but judges commonly give wide latitude to attorneys. No, a defense attorney cannot argue sentencing issues to a jury. No, a prosecutor cannot express his or her opinion about the guilt of a defendant (“I think he is guilty of a crime” will draw an almost automatic mistrial from a judge, if a proper objection is raised).
But there are oddities. One of the most egregious examples of prosecutorial misconduct that I ever read about occurred in the mid-90s when a prosecutor during closing argument called the defendant, “Young Mr. Hitler.” The defendant was accused of losing control of a motor vehicle on a busy highway at extremely high speed, resulting in six deaths, as I recall. The appellate court held that the comment was so egregious that they referred the prosecutor to the Florida Bar for potential sanctions, but the court upheld the conviction, writing that the evidence of guilt was so well established that the prosecutorial error did not mandate reversal of the conviction.
Skibum says
Thank you Ray, for responding to my question.
Nephew Of Uncle Sam says
Man that George Soros must have plenty of deep pockets because he is the only name GOP supporters ever mention. He seems to have his hand in every local, state and federal election or problem according to Donalds “supporters”.
Tired of it says
What does Pres. Biden’s poll performance have to do with anything? Soros? Really? is that the best you can come up with? A Gran Jury, made up of American citizens issued 91 indictments. a jury of his peers saw the evidence presented to them and unanimously said “Guilty”. Please explain to me why you think he didn’t violate the laws of the counrty. Be specific. Cite sources. Because unless you saw the evidence yourself, you don’t know what you are talking about. You would rather be governed by a proven felon, con man, grifter, rapist?
Deborah Coffey says
Trump: “I fought the law and the law won.” Sing it loud for democracy!
Been There says
He has a lot to say about “liberal New York” but how far is Trump Tower from the courthouse? New York served him when he was building his fortune.
Would you be crying, “foul”, if the case was tried in a heavily right slanted venue. I didn’t think so. Hypocrites at there most transparant.
Pat Stote says
What a day for the USA. God bless America
Pogo says
@Elsewhere
As stated
https://www.google.com/search?q=return+of+0+down+mortgage
Atwp says
A good late Father’s Day Present for me is to see him go to jail. That might not happen but I can dream and hope. Am very glad the world saw this liar being found guilty. Even a crazy liar isn’t above the law. My Christmas Present would be to see him loses the election. I have to wait and see what happens in July and November.
John Stove says
Republican or Democrat…..doesn’t matter. This case was about illegal acts under New York law and was tried in New York as it should have been. Jury was 12 random people from New York. All 12 jurists agreed with the prosecution that 34 illegal acts took place. If there was “no crime” then he would have been acquitted.
Trump is a convicted felon, serial liar and sex offender with multi-million dollar judgements against him. His previous fraudulent activities include Trump University (closed by legal action against him) and fraudulent activities related to a charity he was involved in. He calls military service members “suckers and losers”. Everything he touches turns to S**T
Enough with his bull s**t and with the people who continue to prop him up. The man is an imbecilic buffoon and has no business running this country…..
Enough says
Poor Donny!! The judge is corrupt; the jury is corrupt (except of course, his own lawyers chose them for the jury), the city is corrupt and liberal (why is he still living there then?) ; even the elevator guy is corrupt. Why? Because they were all smarter than this asshole and wise to his crap. His cheating and lying finally caught up to him.
And of course, they interview ass wipes like DUH Santis and Rubio; what would you expect them to say/ They even talked to that hillbilly in Palm Bay, whose city has high crime!
Hey, but all is not lost. Duh Santis and Rubio will hold an event at Mar-a-Lardo for the Chump. Requirements are to bring your checkbook and a bottle of ketchup. They will also be selling their ideas: DUH Santis has new kneepads for purchase, and Rubio has a new mouthwash called ‘Tongue n Cheeks”. All proceeds go to Chumps lawyers because we all know Chump isn’t going to pay them! What’s next? Georgia? I guess they’ll be corrupt too (LOL)
The dude says
Get a grip MAGA morons.
The man bumped uglies with a porn star, paid her off to keep quiet before the election, then orchestrated a cover up of his actions to keep any of it from being reported.
He was tried in front of a jury of his peers and found unanimously guilty on all charges.
All your unhinged MAGA wailing and gnashing of (false) teeth changes the actual facts not one bit. Your would be great MAGA king is a criminal.
Embarrassing… simply embarrassing.
Ray W. says
On of the many divisions within our nation has now been laid bare.
Did those few among our many founding fathers who were selected to serve their communities as representatives to each of the thirteen state ratifying commissions vote to ratify a proposed Constitution that gave the limited political power to determine guilt solely to jurors duly selected to serve on juries?
Or did they intend for defendants to possess the political power to determine for themselves whether they were guilty of committing a crime?
Over the past three years or so, I have consistently argued that the ratifiers of our then-proposed liberal democratic Constitutional republic held all of their communities’ political powers.
I have consistently argued that the job of the ratifying commissions was to determine whether to give to the proposed liberal democratic Constitutional republic only those limited political powers necessary for it to function.
I have consistently argued that all political powers not delegated by the ratifying commissions to the liberal democratic Constitutional republic were retained by the people.
I have consistently argued that once a limited political power was delegated to the liberal democratic Constitutional republic, the people no longer held that limited political power.
Under our system of government, once the proposed liberal democratic Constitutional republic was ratified, only prosecutors have held the limited political power to allege that a defendant committed a crime, but never has a prosecutor held the limited political power to determine guilt. Only jurors hold the limited political power to determine guilt. I do not hold that limited political power. Dennis C. Rathsam does not hold that political power. Marco Rubio does not hold that limited political power. Governor DeSantis does not hold that limited political power.
We all hold the individual right to protest, to proclaim, to profess whatever we wish to believe. But individual rights are not limited political powers. We gave up those limited political powers long ago.
JW says
In 1905 W.E.B. Du Bois stated: “Either the United States will destroy ignorance or ignorance will destroy the United States”
Trump and his followers count on the second part, doing away with democracy and replace it with autocratic Christian nationalism (buy my bible). It is all a matter of poor education resulting in most Americans being ignorant about what is happening here and in the world. What most want is sports and entertainment (Trump is first and foremost entertaining his followers).
Local says
He should have used bleach bit like the DEMS and he wouldn’t be in this predicament….just sayin’! It’s apparently legal to do so.Hillary was never even charged for destroying evidence…
The dude says
BUTTERY MALES!!!
Been There says
More deflection. We’re talking about Donal Trump and his multiple indictments, and his multiple cases in multiple states. What do you have to say about that? Who gives a rat’s hairy bum about Hillary. She was never President, isn’t trying to be President. The office of the President deserves a honorable, honest, ethical non-felon. Instead, you want a habitual liar, cheat, fraudster felon. What’s that say about the character of the people who admire him? They want someone just like them to validate their own behavior. We’ve seen how the country was more violent, entitled, and rude because his followers emulate him.
cpp says
Well, this is good news, guilty. And then you have those 75 million people plus that voted for him last time and no doubt will still vote yet again for the new felon Donald. And its very possible we have a man that will be president and run the country in jail or at his home under guard. What a messed up country we have.
Nephew Of Uncle Sam says
He lost by almost 8 Million votes last time so the odds are not too favorable this time with many of his voters jumping ship.
dave says
Donald Trump has always mistakenly believed he would never face consequences for breaking the law for his own personal gain, wrong !. 34 felons convictions = guilty. But his typical MO, its rigged. But its still very possible , we could have a president in some cushy prison or on some type of house arrest leading this country. What a freaking disgrace this country has become if this actually occurs..
Samuel L. Bronkowitz says
You two party voters have a great choice this fall, the white guy with dementia that does war crimes or the orange convicted felon with dementia. White moderates will claim that a third party vote is a vote for the felon and you should be ok with war crimes because at least it isn’t a vote for the guy that wears diapers in court. White MAGA will make noises about persecution and stolen elections.
There will be endless pundit chatter about lesser evils and the real value of palestinian lives (no more than 3/5 that of an israeli one, but probably far less), claims by the democrats that this time they’ll take Roe v Wade seriously, and pronoucements from republicans that life starts at conception but once those kids pop out they’re freeloaders and only get rights once they receive their first AARP mailer.
Vote 3rd party. I mean really, your vote *doesn’t* matter, but third party means you can at least send a message.
Deborah Coffey says
Sorry. Joe Biden is not a war criminal nor does he have dementia. Third party voters will get what they deserve, a convicted felon, Donald J. Trump, whose retribution they will certainly receive.
Samuel L. Bronkowitz says
Aha, here comes the white moderates that MLK warned people about
John says
Everyone is corrupt if it doesn’t go Trumps way. Now he will spread the lies and propaganda to feed his base like he always does.
And for Rubio and Cruz calling our justice system communistic, you both have some never saying that, you are both a disgrace of our nation just like Trump. He wants to be a dictator and you both are helping his cause. Stop lying to the American people, they are the real victims in this whole Trump’s lying day in and day out, He could never prove election fraud yet he still spreads those lies.
Now a 12 jury of citizens who listened to the evidence and witnesses found him guilty the Cult Trump party will be spreading more crap that isn’t true.
Enough is enough. If this is the best pick for the Republican party for the next president you all should be embarrassed and ashamed of yourselves. How about being honest to yourselves he is a con man plan and simple. He doesn’t care about anyone except himself.
Laurel says
John: OMG! Trump stated Rubio had little hands, hinting at a little dick, said Cruz’s dad assassinated Kennedy and that Cruz had an ugly wife, called Haley names, called McConnell’s wife names, and it goes on and on, yet they will all support Trump! How stupid is that? My God, I’m embarrassed for them! All Hell would break loose if anyone talked about a family member of mine like that! Wishy washy people.
Hawksbill sea turtle says
haha gop cant stand being held accountable for their crimes, now only 70 more felonies to trial. Havent even charged all the fake electors yet. Amazing how corrupt and terroristic the republicans are today. Gladly sabatoage the courts and justice system since their orange guy committed countless crimes including paying off hookers to avoid bad press while he was getting assistance from the Russian federation.
So just wondering in the history of the usa has a black man ever been convicted of 34 felonies and NOT gone to prison? Justice for all right? He should get the maximum penalty to you know set an example out of him. But of course the gop will run interference for their convict leader and bash anyone who doesnt lick the boot. Now watch little ron the brown nose lick trumps boots hopefully right after he just walked on the toxic pavement. Dont worry though there is a plan to get him in power no matter what and this time they have changed enough rules for it work.
John Yankovich says
Trump’s appeal will be upheld on the 5th of November. Then a new pandemic will occur. TDS. And will last for 4 years!
DaleL says
Mr. Trump lost the 2020 presidential election by a substantial margin. The final vote was Biden 81,283,501 to Trump 74,223,975 in the popular vote and 306 to 232 electoral votes. Mr. Trump had the advantage in 2020 of being the incumbent. Mr. Biden is now the incumbent president and Mr. Trump is a convicted felon.
The Republican controlled House of Representatives turned over every proverbial stone in an attempt to find something to impeach President Biden for. They failed. In contrast, Mr. Trump is a convicted felon and the defendant in multiple federal and state criminal cases.
The choice this November is clear. Do we want to live in a flawed democracy or do we want a “Unified Reich”?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/unified-reich-trump/
Deborah Coffey says
Dream on.
Joseph Barand says
If he lives that long? Plenty of people getting tired of Trump’s lies and Bullshit. Where is his Communist Escort? She not been seen or heard of since Jeffery Epstien died. You think she blames Trump or does she really know what happened.
The Sour Kraut says
For those of you who think the trial was a sham, how about reading what actually happened in the courtroom? Read the evidence. Trumpers can read…right?
https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/
c says
@The Sour Kraut
“Trumpers can read…right?”
Only if it’s a chyron at the bottom of Faux news. And then the big words are explained by the newscaster telling you what the person *really* said.
Charles says
Donald indented on appealing this case even before it got started, more waste of courts time and money. Our court system is the best in the world so those that are going to bad mouth it because the con man finally has to pay for crimes a jury of 12 citizens listened to evidence and witnesses that is how the were to determine their results. Stop with the propaganda and the Trump lies that he feeds his base just to please them while making a complete fool out of himself as usual.
Tony Mac says
According to 10 U.S.C. 504, any person who is a convicted felon is prohibited from enlisting in any military service. So if Trump were to be elected in November — how can he serve as Commander in Chief?/s And his finger would be on the nuclear trigger — scary, really.
Bill C says
What the MAGA crowd is objecting to is the Constitution and the rule of Law! If the decision went the other way they would be shouting that justice has prevailed.
Ray W. says
Articles about social media threats of violence began appearing some 30 hours after the guilty verdicts. Examples of such threats include:
“‘Find the jurors. All of them. Take no prisoners,’ wrote one user on a Trump-focused message board.”
“‘Just give them the rope,’ said another, in an explicit reference to lynching. ‘The time for talking has long gone. Let them swing outside the courthouse.'”
“Some posts used coded language, such as one which urged ‘short drops’ – that is execution by hanging – for the people responsible for Trump’s trial.”
“Another user replied with ‘short walks and long drops’, plus a helicopter emoji – an apparent reference to ‘death flights’ such as those used by right-wing dictators in Argentina and Chile to dispose of dissidents.”
“One post seen by Reuters claimed that ‘someone in New York with nothing to lose needs to take care of Merchan,’ referring to the judge who oversaw the trial, while another declared: ‘Time to start capping some lefties.'”
“‘One million men (armed) need to go to Washington and hang everyone. That’s the only solution,’ said one message quoted by Reuters.”
I remain convinced in my belief that we are still early in a decades-long phase of political violence the likes of which we have not seen in America since the early decades of the 20th century.
Last Sunday, the New York Times Magazine published an in-depth article titled: “The Dynamite Club.” The theme of the article was that the wave of bombings that swept over America prompted a governmental response that gave us the FBI and J. Edgar Hoover’s library-based methodology of coordinated and cross-referenced investigations.
The author references New York City’s “chief bomb expert”, Owen Eagan. He writes, “Eagen spent a quarter century on the force, until his death in 1920; over the period, he was called on to either dismantle or survey the wreckage of 7,000 bombs, or ‘infernal machines,’ as the press came to call them.”
7,000 bombs over a term of 25 years comes to almost one per day. That is just one American city. Baltimore, Chicago, Cleveland, and many others endured the wave of violence. European cities saw the same wave, enduring from 1890 to 1915 or so. Other books I have read pose the idea that but for the storm that was WWI, the age of political violence would have continued. It became socially unacceptable to speak of politics at the dinner table and other social gatherings. Children were told “no politics” at dinner.
The author continues:
“From the anarchist’s perspective, the true infernal machine that had been unleashed was James Watt’s steam engine. Horrifying workplace accidents were simply the cost of doing business. The industrialists had been blowing people up or dismembering them long before the anarchists launched their counterattacks. A week after the Lexington Avenue blast, at a Union Square memorial held to honor the ‘martyred’ bombers behind the Lexington Avenue explosion Becky Edelson made the case to thundering applause: ‘They talk about violence! What about the massacre in Ludlow? What about the Triangle fire? What about the thousands and thousands of victims in the factories who are daily crippled and maimed or killed in explosions in the subway, railways and mines?'”
The disaffected have always been among us. Many of the disaffected among us see the government as the enemy. Many of the disaffected among us adhere to the concept of “lex talionis”, or law of retaliation. Taking the law into one’s own hands is an ancient urge. Maintaining the experiment in a liberal democratic Constitutional republic has always been a fragile effort.
When Franklin famously retorted to a prominent female questioner who wanted to know what the members of the Constitutional Convention had wrought, he said (paraphrased) that we have a republic if we can keep it. Franklin wasn’t talking about outside forces forcefully taking power; he knew that the American rebellion had just defeated the strongest military force the world had ever seen. Franklin was referring to the anti-federalists among us, the disaffected among us. He knew that the disaffected of his day posed the greatest danger to his proposed government.
James Madison termed the disaffected among us as “pestilential”, he knew that if the pestilential among us ever came to control a partisan political party, it could be the end of democracy.
The founders who debated the wording of their proposed Constitution responded to their fears by creating a system of checks and balances for every political power that the people were to surrender to the new government when they ratified the Constitution.
No one person, in the collective mind of those relatively few Americans who gathered to create a wholly new form of government, was ever to hold unlimited political power for an indeterminate period of time. They knew the gullible among them were susceptible to the guile of a political opportunist. Were they right?
Sherry says
These are the word I sent to my list of friends and family yesterday:
Tonight we will toast with a bottle of champagne.
We celebrate the 12 brave men and women who made an historic decision to hold a very powerful man accountable for his criminal actions.
We celebrate our democratic processes. . . although imperfect .
We celebrate our system of justice. . . although imperfect.
We celebrate the American rule of law. . . although imperfect.
We take comfort in the fact that justice has prevailed.
Now, we can only pray that sanity and peaceful, factual “reality” returns to all the citizens of the USA.
DaleL says
Just a reminder as to Mr. Trump’s character. Colin Cowherd, a sports talk host pointed out that Mr. Trump associates with convicted felons and has pardoned many of them.
“Donald Trump is now a felon,” Cowherd said. “His campaign chairman was a felon. So is his deputy campaign manager, his personal lawyer, his chief strategist, his national security adviser, his trade advisor, his foreign policy advisor … they’re all felons.”
Mr. Trump’s former team members who’ve been convicted of a crime include: former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, former campaign vice chairman, Rick Gates; former fixer and lawyer, Michael Cohen; former chief strategist, Steve Bannon; former national security advisor, Michael Flynn; former trade advisor, Peter Navarro; and former foreign policy adviser, George Papadopoulos.
There is an old truism, “Birds of a feather flock together.” People of similar character, background, or taste tend to congregate or associate with one another. Voters need to consider that a vote for one felon is a vote for all the felons in that circle. Believe nothing from an unrepentant convicted criminal.
JOE D says
My personal thought about Trump being sentenced: Probably a Big FINE….LIKELY Probation for 4-5 years and 2000 + of Community Service (speech making/teaching a class/ or donating money should not count)…it should be like EVERYONE ELSE…working in a soup kitchen, picking up trash, painting over graffiti)
I GUARANTEE he will NEVER spend 1 hour in a jail cell ( unless a Judge charges him with CONTEMPT of COURT, during his anticipated MULTIPLE APPEALS for running his mouth) NO ONE knows how to play out the APPEALS timetable like Donald J Trump….until his case is in front of his hand selected MAJORITY in the current SUPREME COURT.
Just praying he gets all the security details he needs to protect him….the LAST thing ANYONE NEEDS is for him to be ASSASSINATED….and become a MAGA MARTYR!
Hard to believe that ONE MAN has the power to tear an entire country apart…how SAD!