David Hartung wrote:
>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>
> As I understand, that was not determined by the trial.

The jury was not required to say whatever magic word you demand.

You don't understand how juries work.

How the jury decides is not subject to any kind of review. They
can flip a coin, roll dice, discuss all the evidence, discuss none
of it, decide out of bigotry. Anything. What and how they decide
cannot be reviewed. They are the sole decider of facts.

The jury decided to convict on all 34 counts. That's all that
matters. If the judge told them decide tax fraud, interference,
etc, we would have their decision on that, but since the only
facts they were to decide was convict or acquit on each count,
that all they reported back to the court. No court can review how
they decided.

The defendant can appeal all decisions in law by the judge. The
judge's conduct can be reviewed. If the appellate court decides
the judge made a mistake and that mistake might have influenced
the jury's decision (the jury is not questionned about this; the
appeals itself infers how a jury might have been misinformed).

The appellate court can decide the judge made a sufficient error
to invalidate the trial. Then it can be retried with a new jury
this time not hearing the mistakes the judge made previously.

By definition the jury's conviction is the correct decision. The
jury alone is decider of facts: they alone decide what evidence
and testimony presented to them shall be regarded as the absolute
truth on behalf of all the people of New York. They alone decide
whether in fact the defendant did or did not commit the crime.

The judge knows everything he says, every objection, every
decision will be recorded in the transcript, and the appellate
court can examine his conduct in detail. He is not going to be
frivolous but attempt to make each decision how the appellate
court wants him to.

The defendant can identify possible mistake and request an appeal.
Sure. The appellate can decide those weren't mistakes and deny the
defendant a review. They can decide to review and let the
defendant and prosecutor their views before the court. They can
decide the defendant is wrong an reject the appeal.

The defendant can try every available appeal in New York courts.
Then they can claim a constitutional issue and request a federal
appellate review.

The right to appeal does not mean the trial will be voided. Nor
does granting an appeal.

I don't know how this will turn out. Given the scrutiny, Merchan
has been very careful; I don't think any appeal will reverse.

If it reaches the Supremes, normally I expect their decision to be
partial, partisan, and corrupt, but the Injustices are already
under uncomfortable public scrutiny and displeasure. I don't
expect them to expose themselves over a state criminal matter.

--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 10:08:53 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:

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

No, they don't.

Swill

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:20:38 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:

>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.

When did you take your bar exam in New York?

Swill

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 12:02:40 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:

>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>
>Not charged with either one.

The law as written in New York does not require the object crime to have been charged or
tried.

Swill
NP: Cat Stevens - Another Saturday Night

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:14:26 -0700, Dave Wainwright <nospam@comcast.net> wrote:

>It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.

He wasn't charged with that.

Try to keep up.

Swill
NP: Chicago - (I've been) Searchin' So Long

Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in
news:ts6c7j90c3dspt1fhq3tr7a1cfdbgvkpb2@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:14:26 -0700, Dave Wainwright
> <nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.
>
> He wasn't charged with that.

He certainly was.

SECOND COUNT:AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further
accuses thedefendant of the crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE
FIRST DEGREE,in violation of Penal Law �175.10, committed as follows:The
defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February
14, 2017,with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid
and conceal the commissionthereof, made and caused a false entry in the
business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry inthe Detail General
Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher
number842457, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.
> Try to keep up.

Learn to read, bub.

In article <5k6c7j9gv130cicrbmmmskaccdfhhkrfdj@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 10:08:53 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
>
> >Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
> >the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>
> No, they don't.
>
> Swill

Many people in jail right now due to wrong verdicts.

On 6/21/24 19:29, Governor Swill wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 12:02:40 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>
>> Not charged with either one.
>
> The law as written in New York does not require the object crime to have been charged or
> tried.

Whhich, to me, has constitutional implications.

On 6/22/2024 6:50 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <5k6c7j9gv130cicrbmmmskaccdfhhkrfdj@4ax.com>,
> governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 10:08:53 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Rational people recognize that there are valid reasons to suspect that
>>> the jury reached the wrong verdict.
>>
>> No, they don't.
>>
>> Swill
>
> Many people in jail right now due to wrong verdicts.

No, not "many," you stupid fuckstain. Some are, like that innocent man Missouri
is going to execute in a few weeks, but you don't care about them unless they're
your fellow Republiscum/QAnon traitors, *all* of whom are guilty.

On 6/22/2024 7:33 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 6/21/24 19:29, Governor Swill wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 12:02:40 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>>
>>> Not charged with either one.
>>
>> The law as written in New York does not require the object crime to have been
>> charged or
>> tried.
>
> Whhich, to me, has constitutional implications.

No one cares if an illiterate degreeless bumpkin like you thinks there are
constitutional implications.

In article <v56ug2$3q9l4$34@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>
> On 6/22/2024 7:33 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> > On 6/21/24 19:29, Governor Swill wrote:
> >> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 12:02:40 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
> >>>
> >>> Not charged with either one.
> >>
> >> The law as written in New York does not require the object crime to have been
> >> charged or
> >> tried.
> >
> > Whhich, to me, has constitutional implications.
>
> No one cares if an illiterate degreeless bumpkin like you thinks there are
> constitutional implications.

Translation: It's all about me.

On 6/22/2024 10:35 AM, Skeeter-Shit Jack-Off Shit-4-Braincell, convicted child
molester and another fucking do-nothing, lied:

> In article <v56ug2$3q9l4$34@dont-email.me>, j_carlson@gmx.com says...
>>
>> On 6/22/2024 7:33 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 6/21/24 19:29, Governor Swill wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 12:02:40 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>>>>
>>>>> Not charged with either one.
>>>>
>>>> The law as written in New York does not require the object crime to have been
>>>> charged or
>>>> tried.
>>>
>>> Whhich, to me, has constitutional implications.
>>
>> No one cares if an illiterate degreeless bumpkin like you thinks there are
>> constitutional implications.
>
> Translation:

No.

On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:12:26 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:

>The fact that these crimes have been discussed in a Usenet group proves
>nothing.

Then why do you keep bringing it up? Why do you keep asking if the answer is irrelevant?

>It looks to me and to others that Trump was railroaded. It will
>be interesting to see how the appeals process plays out.

I believe you will be using the word, "disappointing" for it then.

Swill
NP: Stevie Wonder - Superstition

On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:33:29 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> 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:
>
>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.
>

That's not how it works. If you don't like how it works, move to NY state and lobby your
legislators.

Swill
NP: Jim Croce - Time In A Bottle

On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:28:30 -0400, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:20:38 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
>
>>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.
>
>When did you take your bar exam in New York?

Well? You're awfully good at asking questions but shit it answering them.

Swill
NP: Dan Fogelberg - The Innocent Age

In article <pcee7j1b6edv7ijafj3p4jgpu4bi7mg1v1@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:12:26 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
>
> >The fact that these crimes have been discussed in a Usenet group proves
> >nothing.
>
> Then why do you keep bringing it up? Why do you keep asking if the answer is irrelevant?
>
> >It looks to me and to others that Trump was railroaded. It will
> >be interesting to see how the appeals process plays out.
>
> I believe you will be using the word, "disappointing" for it then.
>
> Swill
> NP: Stevie Wonder - Superstition

Why is it you libs seem to know the outcome of a Trump trial before it
begins but cry "proof" when it comes to Bidens son?

In article <ghee7jle6ckq6cjsioqb060dmufcgo9icv@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:33:29 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> 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:
> >
> >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.
> >
>
> That's not how it works. If you don't like how it works, move to NY state and lobby your
> legislators.
>
> Swill
> NP: Jim Croce - Time In A Bottle

Nothing in NY works. You know damn well the whole thing was a sham.

In article <8nee7jdl8bc71lvf8m9e1e5fpdsglquslm@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:28:30 -0400, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:20:38 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
> >
> >>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.
> >
> >When did you take your bar exam in New York?
>
> Well? You're awfully good at asking questions but shit it answering them.
>
> Swill
> NP: Dan Fogelberg - The Innocent Age

and you're good at acting like you did take the exam.

On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 09:33:34 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:

>On 6/21/24 19:29, Governor Swill wrote:
>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 12:02:40 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> Election interference and tax fraud.
>>>
>>> Not charged with either one.
>>
>> The law as written in New York does not require the object crime to have been charged or
>> tried.
>
>Whhich, to me, has constitutional implications.

Then file suit in federal court.

Swill
NP: The Hollies - The Air That I Breathe

On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:20:51 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:

>In article <ghee7jle6ckq6cjsioqb060dmufcgo9icv@4ax.com>,
>governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:33:29 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> 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:
>> >
>> >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.
>> >
>>
>> That's not how it works. If you don't like how it works, move to NY state and lobby your
>> legislators.
>>
>> Swill
>> NP: Jim Croce - Time In A Bottle
>
>Nothing in NY works. You know damn well the whole thing was a sham.

Biggest city in North America.

Financial capitol of the planet.

Something's working.

Swill
NP: Bill Withers - Lean On Me

On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:21:32 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:

>In article <8nee7jdl8bc71lvf8m9e1e5fpdsglquslm@4ax.com>,
>governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>>
>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:28:30 -0400, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:20:38 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >>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.
>> >
>> >When did you take your bar exam in New York?
>>
>> Well? You're awfully good at asking questions but shit it answering them.
>>
>> Swill
>> NP: Dan Fogelberg - The Innocent Age
>
>and you're good at acting like you did take the exam.

I'm pointing out that a New York courtroom and a New York jury know more about New York
law than a hick in Mississippi.

Swill
NP: Paul Simon - Slip Slidin' Away

On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 06:47:46 -0000 (UTC), Nikos Aliagas <nospam@oui.fr> wrote:

>Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in
>news:ts6c7j90c3dspt1fhq3tr7a1cfdbgvkpb2@4ax.com:
>
>> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:14:26 -0700, Dave Wainwright
>> <nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.
>>
>> He wasn't charged with that.
>
>He certainly was.
>
>SECOND COUNT:AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further
>accuses thedefendant of the crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE
>FIRST DEGREE,in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows:The
>defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February
>14, 2017,with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid
>and conceal the commissionthereof, made and caused a false entry in the
>business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry inthe Detail General
>Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher
>number842457, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.
>
>> Try to keep up.
>
>Learn to read, bub.

Maybe YOU need to learn to read. That charge is for HIDING the payment as LEGAL FEES
which it was not.

There was no charge for PAYING hush money to his whore. Again, it was about falsifying
the records of what the expenditure was for.

Learn to read English. Surely they taught you the rudiments in Moscow didn't they?

Swill

In article <k0kh7jdsr23ghfa20p3l9h51rits61g1u5@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:20:51 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <ghee7jle6ckq6cjsioqb060dmufcgo9icv@4ax.com>,
> >governor.swill@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 12:33:29 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> 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:
> >> >
> >> >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.
> >> >
> >>
> >> That's not how it works. If you don't like how it works, move to NY state and lobby your
> >> legislators.
> >>
> >> Swill
> >> NP: Jim Croce - Time In A Bottle
> >
> >Nothing in NY works. You know damn well the whole thing was a sham.
>
> Biggest city in North America.
>
> Financial capitol of the planet.
>
> Something's working.
>
>High crime, housing is impossible, homeless everywhere...

In article <03kh7j5i0e7gi09tfg6s00svg93rl7ckgk@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 15:21:32 -0600, Skeeter <skeeterweed@photonmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <8nee7jdl8bc71lvf8m9e1e5fpdsglquslm@4ax.com>,
> >governor.swill@gmail.com says...
> >>
> >> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 20:28:30 -0400, Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:20:38 -0500, David Hartung <junk@nogood.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>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.
> >> >
> >> >When did you take your bar exam in New York?
> >>
> >> Well? You're awfully good at asking questions but shit it answering them.
> >>
> >> Swill
> >> NP: Dan Fogelberg - The Innocent Age
> >
> >and you're good at acting like you did take the exam.
>
> I'm pointing out that a New York courtroom and a New York jury know more about New York
> law than a hick in Mississippi.
>
Even one that were bought?

In article <t8kh7jtnr1gcr0i2mr005btup2ukiqlpsm@4ax.com>,
governor.swill@gmail.com says...
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2024 06:47:46 -0000 (UTC), Nikos Aliagas <nospam@oui.fr> wrote:
>
> >Governor Swill <governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote in
> >news:ts6c7j90c3dspt1fhq3tr7a1cfdbgvkpb2@4ax.com:
> >
> >> On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:14:26 -0700, Dave Wainwright
> >> <nospam@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>It's not a crime to pay someone to keep their mouth shut.
> >>
> >> He wasn't charged with that.
> >
> >He certainly was.
> >
> >SECOND COUNT:AND THE GRAND JURY AFORESAID, by this indictment, further
> >accuses thedefendant of the crime ofFALSIFYING BUSINESS RECORDS IN THE
> >FIRST DEGREE,in violation of Penal Law §175.10, committed as follows:The
> >defendant, in the County of New York and elsewhere, on or about February
> >14, 2017,with intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid
> >and conceal the commissionthereof, made and caused a false entry in the
> >business records of an enterprise, to wit, an entry inthe Detail General
> >Ledger for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, bearing voucher
> >number842457, and kept and maintained by the Trump Organization.
> >
> >> Try to keep up.
> >
> >Learn to read, bub.
>
> Maybe YOU need to learn to read. That charge is for HIDING the payment as LEGAL FEES
> which it was not.
>
> There was no charge for PAYING hush money to his whore. Again, it was about falsifying
> the records of what the expenditure was for.

Then why 34 counts?
>
> Learn to read English. Surely they taught you the rudiments in Moscow didn't they?
>
> Swill