Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
The Attic
Election interference at it's most blatant.
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
Dec 12, 2023 16:20:00   #
Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
 
National Park wrote:
I don't disagree, although I would add that the public interest in having the cases resolved before the election should not and will not be a consideration for the trial court. I would also suggest that Trump's attorneys will likely file every motion in the book to try to delay the cases from going to trial until after the election. I would think that they especially don't want the confidential documents going to trial before the election, as it seems to be the case that has the most merit and would be the easiest for the Special Prosecutor to prosecute.
I don't disagree, although I would add that the pu... (show quote)


Totally agree and when they get to the point where (meritless) motions are offered seemingly with the only purpose being to delay then the Judge should set it for trial and let Trump file appeals after the fact.

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 18:40:41   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
Effate wrote:
Former prosecutor Andy Mc Carthy (disclosure, he is a Fox contributor) just made the legal point (which is true) that as some have argued that it would be in the public’s interest to have these cases resolved before the election but that should not and will not be a consideration for any higher court. What the public’s interest may be can never supersede (trump) the interests of any defendant’s constitutional right to due process.


The court didn't agree with you in Bush v Gore, or whatever the case was called.
I believe Scalia said it was based on "get over it".

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 19:01:09   #
DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods
 
Effate wrote:
Former prosecutor Andy Mc Carthy (disclosure, he is a Fox contributor) just made the legal point (which is true) that as some have argued that it would be in the public’s interest to have these cases resolved before the election but that should not and will not be a consideration for any higher court. What the public’s interest may be can never supersede (trump) the interests of any defendant’s constitutional right to due process.

Right to delay trials.???

Reply
 
 
Dec 12, 2023 19:12:51   #
Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
 
thom w wrote:
The court didn't agree with you in Bush v Gore, or whatever the case was called.
I believe Scalia said it was based on "get over it".


Irrelevant, you cite a civil case.

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 19:14:57   #
Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
 
DennyT wrote:
Right to delay trials.???


Did you look at my post two above your post? Never suggested a frivolous delay was a right.

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 20:47:23   #
DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods
 
Effate wrote:
Did you look at my post two above your post? Never suggested a frivolous delay was a right.


I never thought you suggested frivolous. There is no right for defendant to ask for a delay is there. ? Frivolous or not

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 21:16:43   #
Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
 
DennyT wrote:
I never thought you suggested frivolous. There is no right for defendant to ask for a delay is there. ? Frivolous or not


Defendants ask for continuances routinely for any number of reasons. I don’t know why anyone would ask for a delay but a continuance has that affect.

Reply
 
 
Dec 12, 2023 21:34:41   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
Effate wrote:
Defendants ask for continuances routinely for any number of reasons. I don’t know why anyone would ask for a delay but a continuance has that affect.


Continuances are given for many reasons but "so that the calendar runs out on the prosecution" hardly sounds like a valid one.

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 21:42:23   #
Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.
 
thom w wrote:
Continuances are given for many reasons but "so that the calendar runs out on the prosecution" hardly sounds like a valid one.


Don’t think he can do that as he is an indicted defendant and would have to waive his right to a speedy trial anytime he requests a continuance. I am sure in his mind (and I use the term loosely) if the trial was held after the election (he assumes he will be elected) worse case scenario he could pardon himself.

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 21:46:24   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
Effate wrote:
Don’t think he can do that as he is an indicted defendant and would have to waive his right to a speedy trial anytime he requests a continuance. I am sure in his mind (and I use the term loosely) if the trial was held after the election (he assumes he will be elected) worse case scenario he could pardon himself.


That he could pardon himself is not a given, and I doubt that he could. Under that theory a VP could Cap the president and then as President pardon himself. I believe there is a reason it was Ford and not Nixon who pardoned Nixon. I do not doubt that Trump would put it to the test.

Reply
Dec 12, 2023 21:49:23   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
Effate wrote:
Don’t think he can do that as he is an indicted defendant and would have to waive his right to a speedy trial anytime he requests a continuance. I am sure in his mind (and I use the term loosely) if the trial was held after the election (he assumes he will be elected) worse case scenario he could pardon himself.


He must have already waived his right to a speedy trial. The only way he wouldn't have is if he were confident the state couldn't make it's case in time. The last thing in the world Trump wants is for this to take place in a timely manner.

Reply
 
 
Dec 12, 2023 21:52:09   #
thom w Loc: San Jose, CA
 
National Park wrote:
Smith's motions to move the trial forward are part of the "wheels of justice," just at Trump's motions to delay are part of the wheels of justice. It's all part of the "process running its course." The process includes motions from from the prosecution that are beneficial to the prosecution as well as motions from the defense that are beneficial to the defense. Why would Smith want to move the trial forward? There may be many reasons that have nothing to do with the coming election. Perhaps some of his key witnesses have life-threatening illnesses. Witnesses can also suddenly die without warning. Or perhaps key members of his prosecution team have given notice that they will be leaving his office at the end of the year. Or he wants to prosecute the case while the evidence is fresh in his mind. And testimony becomes less accurate with the passage of time--three years have already passed since the crimes alleged against Trump have occurred.
Smith's motions to move the trial forward are part... (show quote)


Trump probably won't be able to pardon himself, but he sure could throw a monkey wrench into the gears of the justice department.

Reply
Dec 13, 2023 11:34:22   #
letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.
 
National Park wrote:
You would like me to use unbiased NewsMax as a source, I assume.


I am carrying a lantern looking for the truth, something that is becoming hard to find.

Reply
Dec 13, 2023 11:40:06   #
letmedance Loc: Walnut, Ca.
 
rwoodvira wrote:
NY Trial - 2 sets of books, testimony & conviction of CFO, exaggeration of values, property description.

Jan. 6 - video tape of Trump's speeches, inaction in securing National Guard, testimony of Jan. 6 participants

Georgia - testimony of officials, two of his co-defendants, asking to find votes for him after they were counted 3 times.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know."

Trump's as cooked as a Christmas goose, unless his buddies on the Supreme Court say nay-nay.
NY Trial - 2 sets of books, testimony & convic... (show quote)


You are certain of these claims, I learned in Business law many moons ago that two sets of books are legal.

Reply
Dec 14, 2023 09:13:03   #
rwoodvira
 
letmedance wrote:
You are certain of these claims, I learned in Business law many moons ago that two sets of books are legal.


There are often two sets of books if you took accounting. One can be to record depreciation - that's legal and assists in keeping with the tax rules. The difference is if you are saying one gives much lower valuations to the tax authorities and your lenders. say you tell your lenders that your property values are 3 times the actual and likewise the property is actually 1/3 the size you tell the lenders - they want security to back up their loan, but the actual value if they default results in them losing their loan amount, that's fraud. See Trump Atlantic City and how many lenders, workers and contractors were damaged by our former President. Also tax wise, giving a lower than actual value, taxes are less than they should be - hence fraud.

Let's take another example of tax fraud - Trump gave the Porn star and Playboy Bunny money to suppress them going public to let the world know he was cheating on his pregnant wife. He fed the monies through his attorney so he could take it as a write-off. That wasn't a legit business expense; again fraud. The attorney did time, but the real theft was by Trump.

Reply
Page <<first <prev 3 of 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
The Attic
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.