Can you Explain Trumps Crime?

JulesKorngold

@MichaelElpers
Your debate topic is not a question.  

MichaelElpers

@JulesKorngold

I changed it for you.  But I want to know of you could explain it without going online first.  Then how many sources or searches do you have to go through before getting a good legal basis.

Barnardot

@MichaelElpers ;I want to know if anyone could explain it without going online first?

And whats the prize for any one answering a question thats not a question with out going on line? And what the f for any way. Cant we prey to God and ask him or make up a good explanation. You certainly havent got any better in the top floor since being a way for so long. Perhaps you should go back to the care center and ask them to put you on a different med this time.

MichaelElpers

@Barnardot

You get nothing but it does show a level of ignorance people agreeing with and cheering a conviction they dont even understand.
Either way, all you did was change the subject and adhominem. Im not sure what prize you were hoping for there.

MayCaesar

Corporate jurisprudence is extremely complicated. In many cases crimes can have layers of abstraction and obstruction making them hard to parse without a firm background in the field. For example, there can be a derivative with the underlying asset itself being a derivative on some convoluted business contract, and the contract itself may contain a clause that makes existence of such a derivative impossible - and the person putting the derivative on sale may be aware of it, but doing so anyway in order to gain unfair competitive advantage. It is very hard to explain why this is a crime, and even if I write down a few equations and explain to you how the person essentially appropriates funds he does not have a claim on, you will likely be very confused unless you have a serious experience working with very exotic contracts and deliveries. Yet the crime is very real and, in essence, not different from taking something expensive from a store and leaving without paying for it.

I cannot explain Trump's crime: not an expert, did not study the case. I, however, am highly suspicious of the zeal with which many people jump to the assumption that this was a political case. As far as I can tell, the US is not a banana republic in which the court system is highly politicized, and Trump is not exactly a champion of virtue and integrity either.

There are witch hunts, and there are fair court procedures. Multiple attacks by Democrats on Trump during and after his presidency, especially the attempt to impeach him, were witch hunts. This one does not come across as a witch hunt to me, and just because the guy was mistreated by a group of influential people in the past does not give him an alibi for all possible accusations.

I, however, will be the first to say that the pressure to imprison Trump based on this verdict would be a witch hunt. Whether Trump should go to prison or not should have absolutely nothing to do with his presidential candidacy, and all senators, representatives and other candidates should shut the hell up and let the system of justice do its job.

MichaelElpers

@MayCaesar

The problem is a major piece of the crime involves being tied to federal campaign finance violations which was not prosecuted by federal courts/DOJ.

Its always hard not to be suspicious when a trial involves major political candidate. You have a local court using a judge on political left, pulling from a local jury that has a very high percentage of democrats prosecuting in part to a federal crime.  Its extremely hard for a Jury member of any political persuasion to be impartial here if they have any politicsl ties.

So Id agree with you there I dont believe in a banana republic where there is political power over majority of courts as a whole, but moving down to an individual local court may be a different story.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@MichaelElpers ; Trump did not commit a "crime"...Joe Biden and his corrupt administration committed the crime of false arrest.

jack

MichaelElpers said:

Just curious if anyone can actually explain the crime Trump commited outside of generic "falsifying business records".

Hello M:

Falsifying business records with the intent to defraud the public by HIDING information about his candidacy that the public was, by LAW, entitled to, IS the crime. 

But, I get your misunderstanding.  Laws are complicated, and they change all the time.  For example, what was once a highly illegal substance, is now available at your corner store.  And, just your ordinary falsifying of records to avoid taxes would have been a misdemeanor. 

Go figure.

excon

MayCaesar

MichaelElpers said:

@MayCaesar

The problem is a major piece of the crime involves being tied to federal campaign finance violations which was not prosecuted by federal courts/DOJ.

Its always hard not to be suspicious when a trial involves major political candidate. You have a local court using a judge on political left, pulling from a local jury that has a very high percentage of democrats prosecuting in part to a federal crime.  Its extremely hard for a Jury member of any political persuasion to be impartial here if they have any politicsl ties.

So Id agree with you there I dont believe in a banana republic where there is political power over majority of courts as a whole, but moving down to an individual local court may be a different story.

I do not understand the legal issues in question very well, so I cannot really comment on the specifics of this case. I will point out two things though.

1. The fact that it is hard for the juries to be impartial in a particular case does not undermine the validity of the case. As an extreme example, consider the Nuremberg trials. It is hard to overestimate the incentives for the officials appointed by the Allies to be extremely biased against the German officers put on trial - yet the argument that, therefore, the officers should not have been put on trial, that they should have been allowed to just walk away free, sounds quite preposterous. I would, in fact, argue that these are the most important legal procedures to be had, for they truly stress-test and strengthen the system. If the system can even find a former president with a huge support base and incredible media influence guilty of felony, then to me it indicates that the court system is doing pretty well.
2. People are inconsistent when calling out the alleged corruption in cases such as this. They assume that it is the court system that is corrupt/biased, and not the public official in question. Yet why? Why is the default assumption that the court is more corrupt than Trump's team? Many of these people would see no problem with, say, Biden being found guilty of felony - in fact, you can see a couple of people in this very thread advocating for that. If that was to happen, they would praise the justice system, yet now their opponents would claim that the system is corrupt... There is just no comprehensive approach here. People rationalize their personal political preferences (going as far as to advocating for imprisoning the rival political candidate) with circumstantial arguments.

Personally, I refrain from jumping to strong conclusions as soon as I hear a story that I can twist in a way that supports my biases. I have no idea whether Trump's conviction is fair or not. My default assumption is that the American system of justice works quite well, and given that in the past it helped Trump get elected by disclosing crucial pieces of information at important time points of the 2016 presidential race, I see no reason to assume that it is somehow fundamentally biased against Trump.

What worries me much more is not particular outcomes of particular legal procedures, but people's attitude towards them. Many are just convinced that "Trump should go to prison", or "Biden should go to prison", and they do not really care if these people have actually committed any crimes: as long as something can be put on them to make them imprisonable, they will be happy. What they actually want is for these people to just not be able to run again - they could not care less about justice itself - and for that they are okay with dispensing with any formalities and conjuring up something. Yet that is exactly the way towards a dictatorship. Electing a dictator is merely the logical outcome of this attitude; the attitude itself - "to combat threat X, everything is acceptable" - is what destroys a liberal society.

Joeseph

@MichaelElpers


Its extremely hard for a Jury member of any political persuasion to be impartial here if they have any politicsl ties.


But " any political persuasion " in the US is  on account of the fact your either Republican or Democrat and all  that entails,  there is no meaningful  in-between a country totally divided 50 / 50  political bias decides everything in the US.

jack

MichaelElpers said:

Its always hard not to be suspicious when a trial involves major political candidate. You have a local court using a judge on political left, pulling from a local jury that has a very high percentage of democrats prosecuting in part to a federal crime.  Its extremely hard for a Jury member of any political persuasion to be impartial here if they have any politicsl ties.

Hello Michael:

Nahhh..  You have no faith in your fellow citizens..  Du*de!.  

Personally, I believe a judge can put aside his political views to render honest and honorable judgments..  When a potential juror is asked whether they can put aside their politics, and they say yes, I believe them.

Call me naive, but I believe my neighbors..

excon

Barnardot

@MichaelElpers ;You get nothing but it does show a level of ignorance people agreeing with and cheering a conviction they dont even understand.

Hay Im not the loony here. Your the one who cant even understand Trumps crime and even made a topic out it. Like derr. And like derr even a three year old tard can even understand the crime.

And saying that the media cant explain it. Like derr.

And then saying dont go on line to research it. Like derr.

So whose ignorant and admits that he cant even tell his nose from his a hole? Like you. Derr.

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Trump's Crime

Trump's crime was being born.  At his birth, the doctor slapped his mother.

MichaelElpers

@MayCaesar

It may not undermine the validity of how the case fits under law but it does question the validity of the verdict. Although I would find it hard pressed to find someone treated simarly.  Bill Clinton paid hush money, Hilary Clinton only received civil fines for finance violations for the Steele dossier.

"If the system can even find a former president with a huge support base and incredible media influence guilty of felony, then to me it indicates that the court system is doing pretty well."

I would find this argument more palpable of they had not purposefully prosecuted from a locality that is nearly 100% politically opposed.
Are we to believe that was by random chance? Also is this the only court able to come up with this supposed charge?

"Many of these people would see no problem with, say, Biden being found guilty of felony - in fact, you can see a couple of people in this very thread advocating for that. If that was to happen, they would praise the justice system, yet now their opponents would claim that the system is corrupt... There is just no comprehensive approach here. People rationalize their personal political preferences.
Trump should go to prison", or "Biden should go to prison", and they do not really care if these people have actually committed any crimes"

These attitudes are precisely why I have a problem with who and where this was tried.

"They assume that it is the court system that is corrupt/biased, and not the public official in question. Yet why? Why is the default assumption that the court is more corrupt than Trump's team?"

My assumption is innocent until proven guilty.  No matter is Trumps team is corrupt or not, a corrupt court or purposefully attempting to stack a court would be wrong. Same for anyone.

RickeyHoltsclaw

@MichaelElpers ; Trump committed no crime...It's a false accusation. The "crimes" belong to the Biden family, Clinton's....