EX-PRESIDENT INDICTED

[Trell]

When does a misdemeanour become a felony?

For all of your postings in this thread, and the many replies, on this very subject, and you still ask this question?

 

[MaxInValrico]

When does a misdemeanour become a felony?

I would suggest you watch Braggs post arraignment statement which spells it all out as it does in the indictment.

 

[Dude#1279435]

NY Felony Charges Attorney - E. Stewart Jones Hacker Murphy

Felony charges are serious so choose your lawyer carefully. Call our experienced defense attorneys today to review your charges at no cost.

www.joneshacker.com

.

New York State defines a felony as an offense for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one year may be imposed. Jail sentences for a misdemeanor, violations or infraction are shorter. However, multiple convictions can extend jail time.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Here Vance can't even give any details as to what makes this a case worth pursuing further.

 

[lovinthehd]

Here Vance can't even give any details as to what makes this a case worth pursuing further.

Why does it need to make sense until the court case develops particularly? What makes your personal view so important?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Why does it need to make sense until the court case develops particularly? What makes your personal view so important?

It isn't clear what the charges are other than 'we think he might have hidden this thing we can't identify.' Misdemeanors as felonies come across as weak. 34 count appears not to be 34 separate counts (ie stacking).

The whole point is they're not giving me a reason to believe this case is worth pursuing further, which should be the point of the judicial system IMO. It seems this is well lets go after DJT anyway. I hope for the sake of our judicial system they have some actual meat to make a case

 

[Trell]

It isn't clear what the charges are other than 'we think he might have hidden this thing we can't identify.' Misdemeanors as felonies come across as weak. 34 count appears not to be 34 separate counts (ie stacking).

The whole point is they're not giving me a reason to believe this case is worth pursuing further, which should be the point of the judicial system IMO. It seems this is well lets go after DJT anyway. I hope for the sake of our judicial system they have some actual meat to make a case

The DA don’t have to convince you of anything, unless you’re a jury member at his trial.

 

[MaxInValrico]

It isn't clear what the charges are other than 'we think he might have hidden this thing we can't identify.' Misdemeanors as felonies come across as weak. 34 count appears not to be 34 separate counts (ie stacking).

The whole point is they're not giving me a reason to believe this case is worth pursuing further, which should be the point of the judicial system IMO. It seems this is well lets go after DJT anyway. I hope for the sake of our judicial system they have some actual meat to make a case

Instead of making excuses, just watch Braggs post arraignment statement which spells it out. If after that you don't understand, you're simply being willfully blind. Obviously the Grand Jury had no problem with the felony charges.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Instead of making excuses, just watch Braggs post arraignment statement which spells it out. If after that you don't understand, you're simply being willfully blind. Obviously the Grand Jury had no problem with the felony charges.

I've watched. It's pretty vague.

 

[Dude#1279435]

The DA don’t have to convince you of anything, unless you’re a jury member at his trial.

But having faith in the legal system you have to tell me some detail about what these "other" higher crimes are.

 

[Alex2507]

why work for a living when you can run for president instead?

I never thought of it like that. But the idea of being a scumbag, competing with other scumbags for the high honor of top scumbag seems like a job and a half. 2024 is starting to interest me like an accident on the side of the highway that I purposely avoid looking at while I drive by.

 

[Trell]

But having faith in the legal system you have to tell me some detail about what these "other" higher crimes are.

Nope, I don’t have to, and there are sources for this. You can look at the indictment, another written statement from the DA, as well as what the DA said at a press conference after the arraignment. This is public information, and no, I won’t Google that for you.

You also sidesteps my earlier questions whether or not this indictment is unlawful or not similar to other indictments in New York. If no, then your complaint is with New York state law.

 

[Dude#1279435]

Nope, I don’t have to, and there are sources for this. You can look at the indictment, another written statement from the DA, as well as what the DA said at a press conference after the arraignment. This is public information, and no, I won’t Google that for you.

You also sidesteps my earlier questions whether or not this indictment is unlawful or not similar to other indictments in New York. If no, then your complaint is with New York state law.

I've read the indictment and the DAs response on TV. Is the charge all these state misdemeanors can equal a federal felony? If there's hidden higher crimes, what are they? Or are you proceeding in *hopes* you will find more information?

 

[Dude#1279435]

Another question in itself. If you don't have to reveal in the indictment specifically what the charge/higher crime is than why? Jeez even a theory as to what the higher crime is would be something.

 

[Trell]

I've read the indictment and the DAs response on TV. Is the charge all these state misdemeanors can equal a federal felony? If there's hidden higher crimes, what are they? Or are you proceeding in *hopes* you will find more information?

The DA will continue to investigate and possibly bring new charges, as is commonly done as I understand it.

But yet again you don’t answer “You also sidesteps my earlier questions whether or not this indictment is unlawful or not similar to other indictments in New York. If no, then your complaint is with New York state law.”

 

[Dude#1279435]

The DA will continue to investigate and possibly bring new charges, as is commonly done as I understand it.

But yet again you don’t answer “You also sidesteps my earlier questions whether or not this indictment is unlawful or not similar to other indictments in New York. If no, then your complaint is with New York state law.”

I don't know the laws, but I question if the state has jurisdiction in federal.

 

[MaxInValrico]

I've read the indictment and the DAs response on TV. Is the charge all these state misdemeanors can equal a federal felony? If there's hidden higher crimes, what are they? Or are you proceeding in *hopes* you will find more information?

There is nothing federal about this indictment, the NY State Supreme Court issued it and it says it on the first page of the indictment that you allegedly read. Bragg is not a Federal prosecutor, he works for NY State. It's not confusing but yet you are confused.

 

[Dude#1279435]

There is nothing federal about this indictment, the NY State Supreme Court issued it and it says it on the first page of the indictment that you allegedly read. Bragg is not a Federal prosecutor, he works for NY State. It's not confusing but yet you are confused.

Ok I see it now. These are state felonies.

 

[highfigh]

What do we need? How do you get there?
Who and how many will accept what you propose?

Who? NO idea- as I have posted far too many times, "The ones we have aren't the ones we need and the ones we need don't want the job".

IMO, we need both sides to move back toward the center. I have commented about the Left being too far to that side and the response was "The Left is in the Middle. No, it's not. The 'middle' moves back and forth over time and the politicians who are making the most noise and getting the most attention aren't 'in the middle'.

The problem with the GOP is that they have moved so far to the right that they can't even see the Middle.

We need cooler heads on both sides and if that can't/won't happen, we need a stronger Independent party that doesn't promote candidates who seem to make sense for about fifteen minutes before people say "And, there they go" as the comments and candidates become more unhinged and out of touch.

 

[highfigh]

Yes, political affiliations of legislators don't show life in places, but it does show how the state legislates by the tyranny minority with the help of the state supreme court.
Will see how it goes for the next election cycle.

We have a political system. Not sure how you would run a state or country without elected officials who are politicians by design.

How can a state legislature be run by a 'tyranny minority' when bills and laws require a majority vote and sometimes, a 2/3 majority? If the vote isn't passed, the SC can't push it through- that's not their purpose and they have no authority to do that. They test the legality of it with/without whatever slant they use. IMO, justices should be far less politically biased.