Wasn’t her organization paid during Biden’s 2020 campaign for services supporting his reelection? I think it’s customary for judges to recuse themselves for that sort of thing. But for all his conflicts, it appears more like he was hand-picked for the job.
-
Be sure to read this post! Beware of scammers. https://www.indianagunowners.com/threads/classifieds-new-online-payment-guidelines-rules-paypal-venmo-zelle-etc.511734/
Trump 2024 — The second term
- Thread starter GodFearinGunTotin
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
I am realistic that there will be political connections among a judges family, some are more casual than others. The judge himself donating any amount of money to a stop Trump organization is a hard stop. A daughter raising millions for opponents and profiting off of the defendant while her father is the judge is also a pretty big leap…
LeftyGunner
Sharpshooter
First…I am not telling Mike (or anyone else, for that matter) what opinions he is allowed to hold…that’s ridiculous.
I am trying to point out that his opinion of what the constitution says ultimately means dick. Same goes for my opinion btw, or your opinion…when in comes to the constitution the only opinion that matters is judicial opinion.
for instance…some people believe that a right to abortion is incumbent in the rights to privacy enumerated in the first, third, fourth, and fifth amendments…but judicial opinion differs, so no such right gets recognized.
It simply doesn’t matter what we each individually think the constitution says, under the rule of law it only matters what the court’s opinion is.
Why stop there…go build yourself a machine gun. We all hold the opinion that the NFA is unconstitutional here in INGO, so you should be covered!
At the end of the day the jury decides the case based on the jury’s own conscience…it is one of the greatest features of our system…and one of the greatest potential points of failure, as well.
Of course you have some evidence of this, right?
Jurors who have gone on record saying as much, maybe?
Post those links…this sounds like you talking out of your ass to me.
Their receipt brought a 12-0 decision on all 34 counts.
Those were the right receipts.
Cohen’s testimony was corroborated by multiple credible witnesses, and was supported by documents entered into evidence.
They didn’t need to prove the purpose of the payments, they only needed to prove that the payments existed, and the records reporting these payments were posted to the ledger under false pretenses.
Their receipts were the falsified ledger entries listing loan repayments as legal fees paid.
NY law (apparently) does not require this. Nate the Lawyer did a 20-min video going through just the legal aspects of the case (trying to remove the politics as much as possible) and he pointed this out.
…And that he falsified business record in violation of NY criminal law.
That’s a lot of words to say “Trump Would have lied under oath”.
Yes, on page 11 of the jury instructions:
DocumentCloud
www.documentcloud.org
Have you not read them?
Do I really say that? I may have said it once or twice, but it's not common. What I typically say for that case is less metaphorical. Something like, they're not the same thing, and then I explain why I think they're different.
See? Not only are you violating your "you need a court to decide it," you are supporting the suspicion you're in this more for the neeners than to understand Trumpers.
But, about your belief that Trump is guilty as charged in all the cases, without a trial you believe he's already guilty without having heard the evidence. All you have is what you already believe with an activist news media helping to confirm your bias.
And I suspect that even if found innocent, you'll still believe he's guilty. It's not the facts of the case that convinced you he's guilty in NY. It's the TDS coupled with your perspective that Trump deserves it even if he isn't guilty, because of his sins of the past and Karma.
Prove me wrong.
Trump has sixty more felony counts to try over three different jurisdictions, we will have plenty of opportunity to test your hypothesis…but only if he ever actually gets acquitted of something.
The NY case has been widely reported across all branches of media as the weakest of the four.
Rephrased: neener neener…First…I am not telling Mike (or anyone else, for that matter) what opinions he is allowed to hold…that’s ridiculous.
I am trying to point out that his opinion of what the constitution says ultimately means dick. Same goes for my opinion btw, or your opinion…when in comes to the constitution the only opinion that matters is judicial opinion.
for instance…some people believe that a right to abortion is incumbent in the rights to privacy enumerated in the first, third, fourth, and fifth amendments…but judicial opinion differs, so no such right gets recognized.
It simply doesn’t matter what we each individually think the constitution says, under the rule of law it only matters what the court’s opinion is.
Why stop there…go build yourself a machine gun. We all hold the opinion that the NFA is unconstitutional here in INGO, so you should be covered!
At the end of the day the jury decides the case based on the jury’s own conscience…it is one of the greatest features of our system…and one of the greatest potential points of failure, as well.
Of course you have some evidence of this, right?
Jurors who have gone on record saying as much, maybe?
Post those links…this sounds like you talking out of your ass to me.
Their receipt brought a 12-0 decision on all 34 counts.
Those were the right receipts.
Cohen’s testimony was corroborated by multiple credible witnesses, and was supported by documents entered into evidence.
They didn’t need to prove the purpose of the payments, they only needed to prove that the payments existed, and the records reporting these payments were posted to the ledger under false pretenses.
Their receipts were the falsified ledger entries listing loan repayments as legal fees paid.
NY law (apparently) does not require this. Nate the Lawyer did a 20-min video going through just the legal aspects of the case (trying to remove the politics as much as possible) and he pointed this out.
…And that he falsified business record in violation of NY criminal law.
That’s a lot of words to say “Trump Would have lied under oath”.
Yes, on page 11 of the jury instructions:
DocumentCloud
Have you not read them?
Trump has sixty more felony counts to try over three different jurisdictions, we will have plenty of opportunity to test your hypothesis…but only if he ever actually gets acquitted of something.
The NY case has been widely reported across all branches of media as the weakest of the four.
LeftyGunner
Sharpshooter
He was, but the defense chose not to call him because testimony has to be limited to what a witness, well…actually witnessed, not to argue matters of law in front of the jury (which is why Trump wanted him on the stand at all). It is the judge’s sole responsibility to inform the jury on matters of law concerning the testimony they heard. (Again…apparently. I also picked this tidbit up from a NTL video on YouTube)
Brad Smith wasn’t in the room where and when the criminal activity actually happened, so he didn‘t actually witness anything he could testify about…so the defense didn’t call him.
Exactly as concerned as I am about Alito and Thomas taking paid vacations with petitioners of SCOTUS…how about you?
LeftyGunner
Sharpshooter
It’s okay, buddy, I know…words are hard.
The judge disallowed him from testifying.
So even friends is equated by you as needing recusal? Do you realize almost all the top lawyers and judges know one another? They went to school together clerked together or for one or the other. Do you not see the difference between contributing to a Stop Trump organization and knowing someone?
LeftyGunner
Sharpshooter
That is simply not factually true. Here’s a tweet from the same guy you posted, the former FEC chairman Brad Smith:
Having friends? No.
Letting friends who are petitioners in multiple cases pending before you pay for your vacation together?
Yes…definitely.
The difference between publicly donating to a partisan political organization, and secretly paying for a sitting judge’s vacation when you have business on their docket?
I certainly can…what about you?
Communication is difficult. Sure. Let me help you out. Trying to point out that his opinion of what the constitution says means nothing, usually reads a lot more like "your opinion doesn't mean anything" than "Actually, Mike…we do need a court to tell us what is constitutional and what is not...it’s in the constitution."
Incorrect. Juries tend to base their decisions on social factors and pre-existing beliefs. Not just jurors. Everyone. When you learn new information, subconsciously you compare that with your pre-existing beliefs, and if it doesn't match. You disbelieve it, unless you trust the source of the information. Also, jurors are as susceptible to motivational reasoning as anyone.
A jurisdiction of 94% Democrats is as likely to believe the worst about Trump as a 94% conservative jurisdiction is to believe the worst about Obama or Biden or take your pick. The jury in NY lives in a far left bubble which could not possibly think of Trump as not guilty. Put it this way. If there were 12 LeftyGunner's on that jury, I can predict the verdict with 100% accuracy. I don't even need to know what the charges are or the facts of the case.
Uh, I kinda don't think you paid a lot of attention to the trial.
For example, this. The "falsified" ledger entries is a misdemeanor which the statute of limitations for have expired. To get past the statute of limitations there needed to be a secondary crime committed that was a felony. Which would elevate the charge of falsifying ledger entries.
They didn't have dick on the secondary charge which is needed to make the primary charge even viable at this point.
what? Lol. Now I know you didn't read the jury instructions. Nate, for a liberal, is usually objective but is not without his own biases. He's been wrong before, and he's wrong about this. He's not the only lawyer who's opined about the case on the internet.
I did not say that Trump would have lied under oath. And you know that. Show me the man, I'll show you the crime. That's how it works. If they want to get him on perjury. The questioning would be about trying to trick him into saying something that's untrue, and then claiming he lied. Even though it's not a crime to be incorrect on the stand. Cross examination would be a constant perjury trap.
Not all of them until now. I skipped through most of the preliminary stuff about biases and whatnot. Juries don't pay attention to that crap. But with some of what you've been saying, it sounds like you didn't. lolYes, on page 11 of the jury instructions:
DocumentCloud
Have you not read them?
Like I said, in a jurisdiction with 94% ideological homogeneity, I don't think it's possible for any juror not to have chronic TDS. Jurors will be rooting for the prosecution, believing everything they say, and will be skeptical of the defense, rejecting everything they say. It's like hearing a story with protagonists and antagonists, and rooting for what they believe are the good guys. It's how you see it.
Last edited:
This speaks for me 100%.
semperfi211
Master
Talking pool float only 49.99. I wish I had a pool.
Get a kiddie pool! Or do a float trip on a river with one!
Then why was he able to continue to get contractors if this was true? Who would do business with him? What you claim does not pass the
Not only that, I would bet you he also believes that Thomas and Alito should recuse themselves from Trump's Jan 6 trial because they expressed support for Trump
Not sure why peeps think somehow they'll be the ones to get through to LeftyKutter. I don't think the man is here to argue the logic of his positions, he's just here to argue
Site Supporter
Staff online
-
GodFearinGunTotinSuper Moderator -
KellyinAvonBlue-ID Mafia Consigliere
Members online
- GodFearinGunTotin
- dak109
- BJHay
- Living
- cavemike
- BeDome
- Mike Grasso
- AndreusMaximus
- MrSmitty
- Hawkeye7br
- Leadeye
- Mark-DuCo
- DoggyDaddy
- HCALREF
- gottabeoutdoors
- hunt4fun
- NyleRN
- CrazyCat
- nucular
- Tankerdave
- Gaffer
- Htrailblazer
- hotcupofbro
- gdun67
- blain
- bstie
- Wolfhound
- fireball168
- klausm
- KellyinAvon
- Demoderb1989
- usmcdjb
- Creedmoor
- Ltrain37
- freekforge
- Twinsen
- Mongo59
- ShawnC
- Dog1
- littletommy
- 357 Terms
- 92FSTech
- OneBadV8
- Limpy88
- Ingomike
- Cozy439
- solarpimp
- Penton 175
- skydelta34
- mgdiaz1993