How hard can it be..?? Implement the further sanctions and punish the third part that traffic russian oil..

Putin understand money..this tactic worked for Reagan. CCCP imploded.

quote:

Originally posted by Pondoro:
How hard can it be..?? Implement the further sanctions and punish the third part that traffic russian oil..

Putin understand money..this tactic worked for Reagan. CCCP imploded.

Thought he would play hardball, but instead he went soft. Sure wasn't the Viagra summit. More like PE.

The sentencing went foward. The court so ruled 5-4 on that. They reasoned the appeal issues could continue as regular court traffic.

There

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
https://www.google.com/search?...gHNg&sclient=gws-wiz

Excerpt:

Status: A decision from the 2nd Circuit panel is still pending, but they acknowledged the case was "extraordinary" and "highly unusual" during the hearing.

Significance of removal (if successful):
If Trump's efforts to move the case to federal court were to succeed, it could potentially allow him, as president, to intervene in the case or even dismiss it. However, legal experts have noted that even if moved to federal court, it would likely still be considered a state conviction, making the impact on his ability to pardon himself less clear.

========================================

Also: was trump's conviction in NY appealed to the supreme court?

https://www.google.com/search?...sclient=gws-wiz-serp

Supreme Court allows Trump’s New York criminal sentencing to go forward
By Amy Howe
on Jan 10, 2025

https://www.scotusblog.com/202...ntencing%20put%20off.

======================================

The latest articles on this seem to be around June of 2025

=======================================

https://youtu.be/sKIGbcnGGBI?si=TZmbjscBk6o0N0M8

2 months ago
A federal appeals court heard arguments Wednesday as part of President Trump's attempt to get his "hush money" verdict overturned.

=============================================

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/0....html?smid=url-share

Trump and His Allies Push False Account of What the Judge Told Jurors
A tweet from a Fox News anchor falsely said that the jury would not have to settle unanimously on a charge to find the former president guilty.

May 30, 2024

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
The sentencing went foward. The court so ruled 5-4 on that. They reasoned the appeal issues could continue as regular court traffic.

How do you know what SCOTUS "reasoned" since they refused to hear the case?

And what is "regular court traffic?

The facts are that Trump falsified business records to cover up hush money payments, and paid a lot more than just the hush money to Stormy Daniels. Why did he want to cover it up? Obviously because he was running for office.

The fact is that he falsified the business records with intent to hide another crime.

The fact that he has appealed and pursued lawfare and spin on this is unique to Trump. He has the money to hire lawyers.

He can't erase the conviction. The best he can hope for is technicality. He can never truthfully claim vindication.

See:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...s_and_Karen_McDougal

Payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal

Excerpt from the previous section:

On May 2, 2024, the Daily Beast published a story which revealed that Weisselberg was secretly involved in Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

https://www.scotusblog.com/202...ncing-to-go-forward/

It’s certainly not a “technicality” if a defendant is convicted by a jury without a unanimous verdict of a predicate crime.

Looking at all the convictions Trump had against him.

And how new judges are reversing them, it speaks VOLUMES of sheer, unadulterated CORRUPTION!

There is nothing left as to right or wrong.

If you are in a position of power, just like in a dictatorship.

Evidence shows that you are correct, Saeed.

Just one example of many:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/..._to_court_of_appeals

Emil Bove

https://www.msnbc.com/top-stor...epartment-rcna221948

Loyalty above all else: Trump stacks DOJ with former personal attorneys

Emil Bove isn’t the only ex-Trump lawyer being rewarded for their years of loyal service to the president.

July 30, 2025, 1:41 PM EDT
By Jen Psaki

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
https://www.scotusblog.com/202...ncing-to-go-forward/

It’s certainly not a “technicality” if a defendant is convicted by a jury without a unanimous verdict of a predicate crime.

Reading the article you linked, I don't see where the "unanimous verdict of a predicate crime" is or was the issue on appeal. As I recall I also linked the article previously.

I have highlighted the sentences in the article explaining the issue on appeal.

I also highlighted in bold and italic the ironic part.

Excerpt from the article:

The trial judge in New York, Juan Merchan, has indicated that he does not intend to sentence Trump to jail time, and he is allowing Trump to appear by video at Friday’s sentencing hearing. But Trump sought to have the sentencing put off. He argued that as the president-elect, he is entitled to immunity from criminal proceedings. Moreover, he added, prosecutors improperly relied on evidence of his official acts – such as his posts on the social-media platform X, then known as Twitter – to obtain his convictions .

Merchan declined to put Trump’s sentencing on hold. He contended that Trump himself was responsible for the delays in sentencing. Trump should not now be able to avoid sentencing, he wrote, by asserting that the hearing will take place too close to the inauguration.

After a New York appeals court judge also rejected Trump’s request to block his sentencing, Trump came to the Supreme Court on Wednesday, asking the justices to intervene. Citing the Supreme Court’s July 2024 ruling in Trump v. United States, in which a majority of the justices held that former presidents have broad immunity from criminal prosecution for their conduct while in office, Trump contended that requiring him “to prepare for a criminal sentencing in a felony case while he is preparing to lead the free world as President of the United States in less than two weeks imposes an intolerable, unconstitutional burden on him that undermines these vital national interests.”

New York prosecutors urged the justices on Thursday morning to allow Trump’s sentencing to proceed as scheduled, telling them that there is no need for the justices to take “the extraordinary step of intervening” now. Calling Trump’s suggestion that he should not be sentenced on Friday because he is the president-elect “baseless,” they added that the evidence of Trump’s guilt was “overwhelming,” so that a jury would have found him guilty even without the evidence that he now claims was based on his official acts as president.

In its order denying Trump’s request to halt his sentencing, the court explained that Trump’s complaints regarding the use of evidence of his allegedly official acts could be addressed on appeal. And it added that “the burden that sentencing will impose on the President-Elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court’s stated intent to impose a sentence of ‘unconditional discharge’ after a brief virtual hearing.”

============================================================

This is cringeworthy:

Trump contended that requiring him “to prepare for a criminal sentencing in a felony case while he is preparing to lead the free world as President of the United States in less than two weeks imposes an intolerable, unconstitutional burden on him that undermines these vital national interests.”

That reeks of irony so much that I can smell it through cyberspace.

No, it's not something burning in my oven. It's something rotten in the Nation's capitol.

Trump undermines vital national interests.

I’ll try one more time:
https://www.justsecurity.org/9...p-unanimous-verdict/

I think that's the same article you linked before.

I didn't read it carefully because it's too long and I didn't see where they said the issue is being appealed.

Could you point that out?

So, I'll ask pointedly - was the issue you are so concerned about, unanimous verdict, appealed? If so what was the outcome or is it still pending? If not appealed - why not? If appealed, what is the status?

quote:

Originally posted by JudgeG:
I’ll try one more time:
https://www.justsecurity.org/9...p-unanimous-verdict/

Written by lawyers!

For one reason only.

To line up their pockets at others expense!

Saeed, you are correct: the Judge's article was obviously written by a lawyer.

It's written like a party's legal brief. That party would be defendant Donald Trump.

It's not even a good legal brief. The case cites, even some of the quotes, don't support the legal conclusions drawn by the author. Moreover, the author is forced to admit that NY law is undecided on the issue.

The Judge has been guzzling the Kool Aid again, or else has never seen a first-rate legal brief.

What might convince me that Trump should prevail in his appeal is a decision by the NY Court of Appeals that NY law requires a unanimous jury on each alleged crime predicate; OR a decision by the US Supreme Court that due process requires it. The author can't produce either, apparently.

This might convince me too:

quote:

a decision by the NY Court of Appeals that NY law requires a unanimous jury on each alleged crime predicate; OR a decision by the US Supreme Court that due process requires it. The author can't produce either, apparently.

As far as I can tell, the Judge hasn't shown that the issue he's harping about has been appealed at all,

except in the court of public opinion. Fox has pushed false narratives, lies, about this and so much more, really nothing they say can be trusted as credible. Yet, many think they are credible. Why is that when Fox can be shown to be spewing lies and spin and in effect propaganda.

Some True Believers, like the Judge, seem to think making it complicated and blowing smoke and the truth has to be in there somewhere.

Ironically, the truth really is in there. It's just the flip side.

It's really incredible.

As much time you expend toutng your opinions, you would do well to read a bit more, particularly stuff you don’t agree with at first blush. The article I referenced goes into depth as to why Trump’s verdict will most probably be reversed due to the trial judge’s error in his instructions to the jury. The author clearly explains how the trial judge applied the wrong (and lesser) burden on the State. I believe you are quite proud of your somewhat self righteous opinions as to Trump’s ultimate title (convicted felon) that you harp. You might do yourself well to read the entire article before remaining so cocky sure.

quote:

Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
I think that's the same article you linked before.

I didn't read it carefully because it's too long and I didn't see where they said the issue is being appealed.

Could you point that out?

So, I'll ask pointedly - was the issue you are so concerned about, unanimous verdict, appealed? If so what was the outcome or is it still pending? If not appealed - why not? If appealed, what is the status?

I still ask is the issue you harp on being appealed?

As I understand it, in order to reverse the conviction it must be appealed.

You haven't answered that question.

If it had any merit then most certainly, surly, Trump would appeal it.

As far as I know, as a matter of fact, Trump is a convicted felon.

Prove me wrong, please.

Trump is appealing these state convictions.

He has put forward an interesting argument to turn this state matter into a Federal question to get around NY state law.

We have discussed that at length. I have no idea if it will work. I remember when I read saying, “ That is smart lawyering. I wish I would have thought of it.”

The jury instruction argument is less interesting to me.

NY uses form jury instructions. Here we have to write them, and they become voluminous. For example, a child pornography case requires the jury to make a finding for every piece of material charged is obscene. That is before instructing on guilt.

JudgeG’s articles does not give any NY caselaw to know anything. However, the article is not saying under NY law President Trump’s due process right to an unanimous verdict was violated. The article is making the argument that under Federal Due Process rights recognized the federal Constitution as applied and incorporated by the S. Ct., the instructions by not requiring the jury to unanimously and specifically find how the Trump violated the statute (predicate acts) is a due process violation, unanimous verdict, guaranteed by the Constitution.

One thing that would help the article that is not present is as follows:

to take a similar state statute to the one Trump was convicted under,
show the factual similarities of the cases, the similarities in the statute,
similar jury instruction with sand issue,
then show the Fed case invalidating that similar state conviction as a substantive due process violation incorporated against the states. Of gives case holdings, but does not give us the facts as applied to the jury instructions that was overturned.

I’m actually okay with that. It is a popular article designed to make one agree. The cases are there for one to go look up for compare and contrast. It is not a brief where that information would be provided. I would prefer some basic fact application myself.

Note, this jury instruction appeal does not say, “Trump did not commit a crime. The big Truth he is innocent. This appeal is saying, “Innocence does not matter. Trump is presumed innocent. The jury instruction violated his substantive due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution and incorporated against the states. That right being the protection of unanimous verdict. Therefore, the conviction is void.”

It is the most direct path to get Trump’s state convictions to Federal Court. That ultimately, after NY state appellate process gets to way in, creates a federally justifiable question/issue. That issue being:

Whether jury instructions complained of permitting unanimous verdict of guilt but instructing the jury that the means of violating the statute need not be specifically and unanimously found by the jury violate the right to an unanimous verdict guaranteed by the Constitution as amended by the Sixth Amendment and previously incorporated against the states by the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause?

This is less interesting than the other attack I spoke of first, because this is basic lawyering stuff. The jury instruction attack is not unique. That does not mean it is less effective. It is just a play we know to run. Like, every football team knows how to run a sweep. A sweep can still get you a touchdown.
Now, I assume Trump’s trial team made an express objection to the jury instruction complained and tendered jury instructions in opposition. That is a prerequisite to appeal based on faulty jury instruction.

Yes, Trump stands convicted.

Yes, he is appealing with two main theories to create a federally justifiable question.

Yes, the right to appeal is due process. I am glad Trump is able to avail himself of due process.

Yes, I will accept what the appellate courts do. I reserve to see the opinion to say whether the analysis is correct.

Yes, the Federal Courts will, shall, and should decide whether the jury instructions violated the incorporated 6th Amendment. It will not hurt my feelings at all if the resolution is yes. I hope they expressly restate an unanimous verdict is a Fundamental Right regardless of result to Trump. I expect this to land at the federal S. Ct.

Yes, due process is what governs the state’s ability to take, deprive, life, liberty, or property. Trump is receiving Due Process.

Unlike most convicted felons, he is not receiving these due process protections while incarcerated. He has been treated very gently. Some of that is because of his status as President. I accept that because in applying S. CT., precedent, the trial judge has been appropriately cautious.

"Federally justifiable" should be "federally justiciable," I think.

I disagree that the Supreme Court should ultimately take the appeal, if that's what you're saying. This was Trump the private party guilty of garden variety tax fraud under state law. (And yes, he is guilty as of now, a convicted felon, until an appeals court says otherwise.) No significant federal question is raised beyond what the lower courts, state or federal, decide.

Every year many thousands of litigants appeal to the SC for review of their cases: 99 percent of them are denied. The most litigious president in history shouldn't be given an express path to SCOTUS for his private conduct.

You are 100 percent correct, but that is auto correcting. I am not fighting.

I did miss spacing a paragraph.