Indeed:

In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict until
sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes this
designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries—including Canada
and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
they can, of course, make exceptions).

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/

Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.

On 19 Jun 2024, J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> posted some
news:v501u7$2c7pb$1@dont-email.me:

> Indeed:

TikTok star Dylan Mulvaney is seeking solace in Peru amid the onslaught of
anti-trans harassment she�s faced in recent months.

In April, the influencer posted a sponsored Instagram video promoting Bud
Light, sharing that the beer�s maker had sent her a can of Bud Light with
her face on it to commemorate her celebration of �Day 365 of Girlhood� a
couple of weeks earlier. The post triggered backlash against the company
and Mulvaney, who now says she feels safest outside the U.S.

Following Mulvaney�s initial Instagram post, Anheuser-Busch defended its
partnership with Mulvaney in a statement sent to The Times, writing that
the company �works with hundreds of influencers across our brands as one
of many ways to authentically connect with audiences across various
demographics.�

�From time to time we produce unique commemorative cans for fans and for
brand influencers, like Dylan Mulvaney,� Anheuser-Busch said. �This
commemorative can was a gift to celebrate a personal milestone and is not
for sale to the general public.�

But later that month, the company seemed to buckle under conservative
pressure and placed two of its marketing executives on leave. The move
came after weeks of blowback, including a video of Kid Rock shooting up
cases of Bud Light and rallying cries for a boycott backed by conservative
leaders including presidential candidate and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.

To date, that boycott has resulted in Bud Light losing almost a third of
its market share and ending its decades-long reign as the nation�s No. 1
light beer. Modelo now holds that title.

�I�m in Peru ... at Machu Picchu,� Mulvaney said in the TikTok posted
Monday. �I�m here by myself and I used to do a ton of solo traveling. I�m
telling you, it�s the best. If you could ever do a solo trip somewhere, it
is such a good way to get to know yourself better.�

The influencer revealed that she traveled to Peru to feel something and
that she has since participated in shamanic ceremonies that were �like 10
years� worth of therapy.� Mulvaney said she has enjoyed the kindness of
the Peruvian people and is starting to feel like her own best friend
again.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/story/2023-07-12/dylan-
mulvaney-peru-bud-light-anti-trans-harassment

In article <v501u7$2c7pb$1@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>
> Indeed:
>
> In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict until
> sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes this
> designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
> privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
> license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including Canada
> and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
> they can, of course, make exceptions).
>
> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>
> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.

Appeal time.

On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
> Indeed:
>
>    In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
> convict until
>    sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
> imposes this
>    designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>    privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke
> his
>    license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
> countries—including Canada
>    and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering
> (though
>    they can, of course, make exceptions).
>
> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>
> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.

So?

Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
the jury reached the wrong verdict.

On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>> Indeed:
>>
>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict until
>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes this
>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries—including Canada
>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>
>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>
>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>
> So?

Yes, just so.

> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the jury
> reached the wrong verdict.

No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
fact-based verdict possible.

Facts:

* the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
* Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by evidence at
trial
* the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime —
proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)

It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.

There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect verdict.

On 2024-06-20, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>> Indeed:
>>
>>    In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>> convict until
>>    sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>> imposes this
>>    designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>    privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke
>> his
>>    license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>> countries—including Canada
>>    and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering
>> (though
>>    they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>
>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>
>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>
> So?
>
> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
> the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>
It happens all the time which is one reason there is an appeals process in place.

--
pothead
Joe Biden is the absolute WORST President Of the U.S. ever.
Nobody else is even close. Including Jimmy Carter.
Vote for ANYBODY but Joe Biden in 2024.

On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>> Indeed:
>>>
>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>>> convict until
>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>>> imposes this
>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to
>>> revoke his
>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>> countries—including Canada
>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering
>>> (though
>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>
>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>
>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>
>> So?
>
> Yes, just so.
>
>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
>> the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>
> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical
> and fact-based verdict possible.
>
> Facts:
>
>   * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>   * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by
> evidence at trial
>   * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another
> crime —
>     proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)

So what was the crime?

> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair
> and orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>
> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an
> incorrect verdict.

If you cannot name the crime that made the acts a felony, then you don't
have sufficient information upon which to base your claim.

On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> Indeed:
>>>>
>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
>>>> until
>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
>>>> this
>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries—including
>>>> Canada
>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>
>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>
>>> So?
>>
>> Yes, just so.
>>
>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
>>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>
>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>> fact-based verdict possible.
>>
>> Facts:
>>
>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by evidence
>> at trial
>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime —
>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>
> So what was the crime?

Election interference and tax fraud.

>
>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
>> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>>
>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect
>> verdict.
>
> If you cannot name the crime

The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice Merchan
identified the crimes.

Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know you're going
to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.

In article <v51jnh$2jolk$22@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>
> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> > On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
> >> Indeed:
> >>
> >>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict until
> >>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes this
> >>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
> >>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
> >>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including Canada
> >>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
> >>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
> >>
> >> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
> >>
> >> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
> >
> > So?
>
> Yes, just so.
>
> > Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the jury
> > reached the wrong verdict.
>
> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
> fact-based verdict possible.
>
> Facts:
>
> * the payments were misclassified ? not in dispute
> * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification ? proved by evidence at
> trial
> * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime ?

what crime?

> proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>
> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>
> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect verdict.

In article <v51o0s$2lorq$5@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>
> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> > On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
> >> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
> >>>> Indeed:
> >>>>
> >>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
> >>>> until
> >>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
> >>>> this
> >>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
> >>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
> >>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including
> >>>> Canada
> >>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
> >>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
> >>>>
> >>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
> >>>
> >>> So?
> >>
> >> Yes, just so.
> >>
> >>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
> >>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
> >>
> >> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
> >> fact-based verdict possible.
> >>
> >> Facts:
> >>
> >>    * the payments were misclassified ? not in dispute
> >>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification ? proved by evidence
> >> at trial
> >>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime ?
> >>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
> >
> > So what was the crime?
>
> Election interference and tax fraud.

Not charged with either one.
>
> >
> >> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
> >> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
> >>
> >> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect
> >> verdict.
> >
> > If you cannot name the crime
>
> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice Merchan
> identified the crimes.

You mean the "conflict of interest" loons who said they were out to get
Trump?
>
> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know you're going
> to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.

You never prove anything. Are you ready to lose another account?

In article <v51js0$2kncp$4@dont-email.me>, pothead@snakebite.com says...
>
> On 2024-06-20, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
> > On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
> >> Indeed:
> >>
> >>    In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
> >> convict until
> >>    sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
> >> imposes this
> >>    designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
> >>    privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke
> >> his
> >>    license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
> >> countries?including Canada
> >>    and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering
> >> (though
> >>    they can, of course, make exceptions).
> >>
> >> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
> >>
> >> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
> >
> > So?
> >
> > Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
> > the jury reached the wrong verdict.
> >
> It happens all the time which is one reason there is an appeals process in place.

Poor Rudy. Just like the Rittenhouse and Zimmerman trials he is in
dreamland.

On 6/20/2024 9:00 AM, J Carlson wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>> Indeed:
>>>
>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>>> convict until
>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>>> imposes this
>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to
>>> revoke his
>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>> countries—including Canada
>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering
>>> (though
>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>
>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>
>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>
>> So?
>
> Yes, just so.

You jealous? Trump is still going to be President again.

>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
>> the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>
> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical
> and fact-based verdict possible.

It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut. Corporations
do it all the time, then the recipients sign NDAs as a condition of
receiving the money. Violate the NDA and they have to pay the money back.

When Hillary Clinton, a lawyer, was aware of being under investigation
by the federal government, and deliberately burned her mail server down,
that was destroying evidence and a crime.

When the Clintons left the Whitehouse, and stole everything that wasn't
nailed down like the hillbillies they are, that was also a crime.

On 6/20/2024 11:00 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <v51jnh$2jolk$22@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>>
>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> Indeed:
>>>>
>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict until
>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes this
>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including Canada
>>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>
>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>
>>> So?
>>
>> Yes, just so.
>>
>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the jury
>>> reached the wrong verdict.
>>
>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>> fact-based verdict possible.
>>
>> Facts:
>>
>> * the payments were misclassified ? not in dispute
>> * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification ? proved by evidence at
>> trial
>> * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime ?
>
>
> what crime?

Ha ha ha ha ha!

>
>> proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>
>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
>> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>>
>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect verdict.

<crickets>

On 6/20/2024 11:02 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <v51o0s$2lorq$5@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>>
>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
>>>>>> until
>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including
>>>>>> Canada
>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>
>>>>> So?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>
>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
>>>>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>
>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>>>> fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>
>>>> Facts:
>>>>
>>>>    * the payments were misclassified ? not in dispute
>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification ? proved by evidence
>>>> at trial
>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime ?
>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>
>>> So what was the crime?
>>
>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>
> Not charged with either one.

Does not need to be. In fact, they don't even have to be his crimes (although
they were).

>>
>>>
>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
>>>> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>>>>
>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect
>>>> verdict.
>>>
>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>
>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice Merchan
>> identified the crimes.
>
> You mean the "conflict of interest" loons who

No.

>>
>> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know you're going
>> to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.
>
> You never prove anything.

That's a lie.

Skeeter wrote:
> In article <v51o0s$2lorq$5@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>>
>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
>>>>>> until
>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including
>>>>>> Canada
>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>
>>>>> So?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>
>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
>>>>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>
>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>>>> fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>
>>>> Facts:
>>>>
>>>>    * the payments were misclassified ? not in dispute
>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification ? proved by evidence
>>>> at trial
>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime ?
>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>
>>> So what was the crime?
>>
>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>
> Not charged with either one.
>>
>>>
>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
>>>> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>>>>
>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect
>>>> verdict.
>>>
>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>
>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice Merchan
>> identified the crimes.
>
> You mean the "conflict of interest" loons who said they were out to get
> Trump?
>>
>> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know you're going
>> to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.
>
> You never prove anything. Are you ready to lose another account?
>
>
>
netKKKop heeeeeem, pissbum

On 6/20/2024 11:14 AM, Dave Wainwright wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 9:00 AM, J Carlson wrote:
>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> Indeed:
>>>>
>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
>>>> until
>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
>>>> this
>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries—including
>>>> Canada
>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>
>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>
>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>
>>> So?
>>
>> Yes, just so.
>
> You jealous?

No.

>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
>>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>
>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>> fact-based verdict possible.
>
> It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.

It's a crime to do that as a campaign expenditure to queer an election and not
report it.

On 20 Jun 2024, J Carlson <j_carlson@gmx.com> posted some
news:v51rlv$2mald$5@dont-email.me:

> On 6/20/2024 11:02 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell,
> convicted child molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:
>
>> In article <v51o0s$2lorq$5@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>>>
>>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a
>>>>>>> felon or a convict
>>>>>>> until
>>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and
>>>>>>> that state imposes
>>>>>>> this
>>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That
>>>>>>> already entails     privations. The New York City Police
>>>>>>> Department is seeking to revoke his     license to carry a
>>>>>>> concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including
>>>>>>> Canada
>>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from
>>>>>>> entering (though     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-co
>>>>>>> nviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect
>>>>>> that the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only
>>>>> logical and fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Facts:
>>>>>
>>>>>    * the payments were misclassified ? not in dispute
>>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification ?
>>>>> proved by evidence
>>>>> at trial
>>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal
>>>>> another crime ?      proved by evidence at trial (mostly
>>>>> Pecker's testimony)
>>>>
>>>> So what was the crime?
>>>
>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>
>> Not charged with either one.
>
> Does not need to be. In fact, they don't even have to be his crimes
> (although they were).

That logic will see a complete reversal on appeal.

In article <v51t3s$2mald$12@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>
> On 6/20/2024 11:14 AM, Dave Wainwright wrote:
> > On 6/20/2024 9:00 AM, J Carlson wrote:
> >> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> >>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
> >>>> Indeed:
> >>>>
> >>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
> >>>> until
> >>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
> >>>> this
> >>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
> >>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
> >>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including
> >>>> Canada
> >>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
> >>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
> >>>>
> >>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
> >>>>
> >>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
> >>>
> >>> So?
> >>
> >> Yes, just so.
> >
> > You jealous?
>
> No.
>
> >>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
> >>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
> >>
> >> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
> >> fact-based verdict possible.
> >
> > It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.
>
> It's a crime to do that as a campaign expenditure to queer an election and not
> report it.

He didn't do that.

On 6/20/2024 1:46 PM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <v51t3s$2mald$12@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>>
>> On 6/20/2024 11:14 AM, Dave Wainwright wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2024 9:00 AM, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a convict
>>>>>> until
>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state imposes
>>>>>> this
>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries?including
>>>>>> Canada
>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom?have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>
>>>>> So?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>
>>> You jealous?
>>
>> No.
>>
>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
>>>>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>
>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>>>> fact-based verdict possible.
>>>
>>> It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.
>>
>> It's a crime to do that as a campaign expenditure to queer an election and not
>> report it.
>
>
> He didn't do that.

He did exactly that. He got caught, and now he's a convicted felon.

On 6/20/24 12:14, J Carlson wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>
>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>>>>> convict until
>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>>>>> imposes this
>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already
>>>>> entails
>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to
>>>>> revoke his
>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>>>> countries—including Canada
>>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from
>>>>> entering (though
>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>
>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>
>>>> So?
>>>
>>> Yes, just so.
>>>
>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect
>>>> that the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>
>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only
>>> logical and fact-based verdict possible.
>>>
>>> Facts:
>>>
>>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by
>>> evidence      at trial
>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another
>>> crime —
>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>
>> So what was the crime?
>
> Election interference and tax fraud.

As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.
>
>>
>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably
>>> fair and orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a
>>> travesty.
>>>
>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an
>>> incorrect verdict.
>>
>> If you cannot name the crime
>
> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice
> Merchan identified the crimes.

cite please?

> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know
> you're going to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.

On 6/20/2024 9:51 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 6/20/24 12:14, J Carlson wrote:
>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>>>>>> convict until
>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>>>>>> imposes this
>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke his
>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven countries—including
>>>>>> Canada
>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering (though
>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>
>>>>> So?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>
>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that the
>>>>> jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>
>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical and
>>>> fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>
>>>> Facts:
>>>>
>>>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by
>>>> evidence      at trial
>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime —
>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>
>>> So what was the crime?
>>
>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>
> As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.

It didn't need to be.

You really have not been following this. It's obvious.

>>>
>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair and
>>>> orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.

<crickets>

>>>>
>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect
>>>> verdict.
>>>
>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>
>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice Merchan
>> identified the crimes.
>
> cite please?

Fuck off, troll. The underlying crimes have been much discussed here and in the
media. Do your own research, bitch. I'm not doing it for you unless you pay me.

Ask Josh Rosenbaum to explain it to you. He covered it here pretty thoroughly.

>> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know you're
>> going to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.

Well, Hartung?

On 6/21/24 00:27, J Carlson wrote:
> On 6/20/2024 9:51 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 6/20/24 12:14, J Carlson wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or
>>>>>>> a convict until
>>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that
>>>>>>> state imposes this
>>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already
>>>>>>> entails
>>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to
>>>>>>> revoke his
>>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>>>>>> countries—including Canada
>>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from
>>>>>>> entering (though
>>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect
>>>>>> that the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only
>>>>> logical and fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> Facts:
>>>>>
>>>>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved
>>>>> by evidence      at trial
>>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal
>>>>> another crime —
>>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>>
>>>> So what was the crime?
>>>
>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>
>> As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.
>
> It didn't need to be.
>
> You really have not been following this. It's obvious.
>
>>>>
>>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably
>>>>> fair and orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a
>>>>> travesty.
>
> <crickets>
>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an
>>>>> incorrect verdict.
>>>>
>>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>>
>>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice
>>> Merchan identified the crimes.
>>
>> cite please?
>
> Fuck off, troll. The underlying crimes have been much discussed here and
> in the media. Do your own research, bitch. I'm not doing it for you
> unless you pay me.

The fact that these crimes have been discussed in a Usenet group proves
nothing. It looks to me and to others that Trump was railroaded. It will
be interesting to see how the appeals process plays out.

> Ask Josh Rosenbaum to explain it to you. He covered it here pretty
> thoroughly.
>
>>> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know
>>> you're going to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible
>>> lies.
>
> Well, Hartung?
>

On 6/21/2024 6:12 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 6/21/24 00:27, J Carlson wrote:
>> On 6/20/2024 9:51 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/20/24 12:14, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>>>>>>>> convict until
>>>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>>>>>>>> imposes this
>>>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to revoke
>>>>>>>> his
>>>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>>>>>>> countries—including Canada
>>>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering
>>>>>>>> (though
>>>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
>>>>>>> the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical
>>>>>> and fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Facts:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by
>>>>>> evidence      at trial
>>>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another crime —
>>>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>>>
>>>>> So what was the crime?
>>>>
>>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>>
>>> As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.
>>
>> It didn't need to be.
>>
>> You really have not been following this. It's obvious.
>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair
>>>>>> and orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>>
>> <crickets>
>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an incorrect
>>>>>> verdict.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>>>
>>>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice Merchan
>>>> identified the crimes.
>>>
>>> cite please?
>>
>> Fuck off, troll. The underlying crimes have been much discussed here and in
>> the media. Do your own research, bitch. I'm not doing it for you unless you
>> pay me.
>
> The fact that these crimes have been discussed in a Usenet group proves nothing.

The crimes have been identified in the media and in the trial. Because you're a
stupid fuck — an illiterate, incompetent, incontinent stupid fuck — I did your
homework for you:

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/charting-the-legal-theory-behind-people-v.-trump

I know you won't thank me, because in addition to being an illiterate,
incompetent and incontinent stupid fuck, you're also a graceless stupid fuck.

>> Ask Josh Rosenbaum to explain it to you. He covered it here pretty thoroughly.
>>
>>>> Why do you tell such stupid, easily debunked lies? I mean, we know you're
>>>> going to lie, but you at least ought to try to tell plausible lies.
>>
>> Well, Hartung?
>>
>

On 6/21/24 11:34, J Carlson wrote:
> On 6/21/2024 6:12 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 6/21/24 00:27, J Carlson wrote:
>>> On 6/20/2024 9:51 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/24 12:14, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon
>>>>>>>>> or a convict until
>>>>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that
>>>>>>>>> state imposes this
>>>>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already
>>>>>>>>> entails
>>>>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking
>>>>>>>>> to revoke his
>>>>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>>>>>>>> countries—including Canada
>>>>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from
>>>>>>>>> entering (though
>>>>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to
>>>>>>>> suspect that the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only
>>>>>>> logical and fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Facts:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>>>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved
>>>>>>> by evidence      at trial
>>>>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal
>>>>>>> another crime —
>>>>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what was the crime?
>>>>>
>>>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>>>
>>>> As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.
>>>
>>> It didn't need to be.
>>>
>>> You really have not been following this. It's obvious.
>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an
>>>>>>> impeccably fair and orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to
>>>>>>> turn it into a travesty.
>>>
>>> <crickets>
>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an
>>>>>>> incorrect verdict.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>>>>
>>>>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice
>>>>> Merchan identified the crimes.
>>>>
>>>> cite please?
>>>
>>> Fuck off, troll. The underlying crimes have been much discussed here
>>> and in the media. Do your own research, bitch. I'm not doing it for
>>> you unless you pay me.
>>
>> The fact that these crimes have been discussed in a Usenet group
>> proves nothing.
>
> The crimes have been identified in the media and in the trial. Because
> you're a stupid fuck — an illiterate, incompetent, incontinent stupid
> fuck — I did your homework for you:

Unless a the accusations have been proven in a court of law, they are
meaningless. Show me where was charged with these actions, and where he
received a guilty verdict.

On 6/21/2024 10:33 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 6/21/24 11:34, J Carlson wrote:
>> On 6/21/2024 6:12 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/21/24 00:27, J Carlson wrote:
>>>> On 6/20/2024 9:51 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 6/20/24 12:14, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>> On 6/20/2024 9:20 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/20/24 11:00, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 6/20/2024 8:08 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/19/24 20:51, J Carlson wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Indeed:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>     In the federal system, a person is not technically a felon or a
>>>>>>>>>> convict until
>>>>>>>>>>     sentencing. But Trump was convicted in New York, and that state
>>>>>>>>>> imposes this
>>>>>>>>>>     designation *at the time of the jury verdict*. That already entails
>>>>>>>>>>     privations. The New York City Police Department is seeking to
>>>>>>>>>> revoke his
>>>>>>>>>>     license to carry a concealed weapon. Thirty-seven
>>>>>>>>>> countries—including Canada
>>>>>>>>>>     and the United Kingdom—have laws prohibiting felons from entering
>>>>>>>>>> (though
>>>>>>>>>>     they can, of course, make exceptions).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/06/trump-felony-conviction-probation-interview/678634/
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Trump is a convicted felon. This is settled.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, just so.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
>>>>>>>>> the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, that's a lie. Rational people know the jury reached the only logical
>>>>>>>> and fact-based verdict possible.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Facts:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    * the payments were misclassified — not in dispute
>>>>>>>>    * Trump ordered and coordinated the misclassification — proved by
>>>>>>>> evidence      at trial
>>>>>>>>    * the misclassification was done to further and to conceal another
>>>>>>>> crime —
>>>>>>>>      proved by evidence at trial (mostly Pecker's testimony)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what was the crime?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>>>>
>>>>> As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.
>>>>
>>>> It didn't need to be.
>>>>
>>>> You really have not been following this. It's obvious.
>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It was a solid verdict, and Justice Merchan conducted an impeccably fair
>>>>>>>> and orderly trial, despite Trump's efforts to turn it into a travesty.
>>>>
>>>> <crickets>
>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is not a single valid reason to think the jury reached an
>>>>>>>> incorrect verdict.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you cannot name the crime
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The crimes were named. You *know* that both Alvin Bragg and Justice
>>>>>> Merchan identified the crimes.
>>>>>
>>>>> cite please?
>>>>
>>>> Fuck off, troll. The underlying crimes have been much discussed here and in
>>>> the media. Do your own research, bitch. I'm not doing it for you unless you
>>>> pay me.
>>>
>>> The fact that these crimes have been discussed in a Usenet group proves nothing.
>>
>> The crimes have been identified in the media and in the trial. Because you're
>> a stupid fuck — an illiterate, incompetent, incontinent stupid fuck — I did
>> your homework for you:

Restore the part that Hartung unethically removed and that proves him wrong:

<r>
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/charting-the-legal-theory-behind-people-v.-trump

I know you won't thank me, because in addition to being an illiterate,
incompetent and incontinent stupid fuck, you're also a graceless stupid fuck.
</r>

>
> Unless a [sic] the accusations have been proven [sic] in a court of law, they are
> meaningless.

*Proved*, not "proven."

You're wrong. It is very well established that not only do the object offenses
not need to be proved – they don't even have to be charged.

Look, you stupid illiterate incompetent incontinent graceless fuck: Justice
Merchan *accepted* three of the four object crimes that Bragg wanted to
introduce. Justice Merchan knows the law, and you don't. He knows that the
object crimes do *not* have to be either charged or proved. That's why he
allowed three of them to be part of Bragg's case.

You may not like that feature of the law, and you may think it "ought" not to be
there, but it's there, and you're just going to have to live with it. Now, go
suck off Kremlin Girl / Bit of Nothingness again (but in private; not here).