Now a Convicted Felon
Been waiting for Joyce Vance to comment. And why? Bio Now: Law Prof, MSNBC/NBC Legal Analyst, Podcaster Before: US Atty, Fed’l prosecutor. Always: Wife, Mom, Dogs, Cats & Chickens, Knitting.
We are hearing from many people who simply refuse to accept the fact the man is an instigator of the attack on the capital, a briber of people to hide the truth, and threatens people directly or indirectly. A proven and convicted Felon. Perhaps, Joyce’s rundown will give you a better foundation as to why trump should be guilty, and brought to trial again for other crimes.
~~~~~~~~
Felon
by Joyce Vance
Last night, Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that what happened to him wasn’t a prosecution. He called it a persecution. He was wrong. It’s a conviction. Donald Trump is now a convicted felon.
Americans have let Trump shake their faith in many of our democratic institutions our country is built on, From the start of his first campaign, Trump denigrated immigrants as criminals. He challenged confidence in our elections, the work of the intelligence community, the Justice Department, military leaders, and perhaps most dangerously of all, public health officials during a deadly pandemic. Now, and unsurprisingly, he’s after the jury system that convicted him. He’s spent months calling prosecutors, judges, and witnesses corrupt and putting them and their families in danger.
Trump has plenty of surrogates to do his bidding. He has no concerns about exposing the 12 brave Americans who served on the jury that convicted him to the risk of harassment and violence. NBC reported that a non-profit that conducts public interest research found posts that contained addresses of people claimed to be jurors on a message board known for pro-Trump content.
It is long past time to draw a line and stop the damage Trump is doing to democracy. But still, Republicans pander to him shamelessly.
At the time the Access Hollywood Tape was released, Senator Lee said, “I respectfully ask you [Trump] with all due respect, to step aside. Step down,” in a Facebook video. He mentioned the women in his family and said that if someone spoke to them like Trump had, “I wouldn’t hire that person, wouldn’t want to be associated with that person … I certainly don’t think I would feel comfortable hiring that person to be the leader of the free world.” But Lee has endorsed Trump in this election and apparently has no intention of backing away.
Independents and other voters may take a different view. Guilt is a powerful word. There are polls that suggest it may exert a gravitational pull over some voters who might have otherwise voted for Trump. We are in for a long, hard time heading into the November election, where the future of democracy will hang in the balance, not metaphorically, like candidates sometimes say it will in the next election, but in a very real, concrete sense.
Hunter Biden, the President’s son, goes on trial Monday. Keep that in mind as Donald Trump claims the system has been politicized against him.
Trump will be sentenced on July 11, five days before the start of the Republican National Convention. There has been a lack of clarity in the reporting about the sentence Trump faces. That’s because of the way New York handles this type of Class E felony, which a friend in a New York DA’s office called “loosey goosey.” As I understand it, the Judge can sentence to a range as high as 1 3/4 to 4 years, but it will be up to the Parole Board to determine how much of that sentence he actually serves. And the Judge does not have to impose a custodial sentence, he can go all the way down to probation if he chooses to. My understanding of how this works is still evolving, and I’ll update you as we learn more.
What we do know is that, like in every other case, the probation department will conduct an assessment of the now-convicted defendant and create a presentence investigation that provides the Judge with the information necessary to arrive at the appropriate sentence. In his press conference this morning, the District Attorney did not say whether he would seek a custodial sentence. There is every reason to ask for one here, including Trump’s repeated, atrocious violations of the gag order in the case. It is a first time, nonviolent offense, so the Judge may not impose custody, but the People have every right to ask for it here.
Even if the Judge imposes a custodial sentence, expect to see Trump remain free on bond during the pendency of the appeal. That would be consistent with the principle that permits a defendant who raises serious issues on appeal to do so. Trump does have some serious issues to raise, whether or not he succeeds. I don’t expect him to, but he is entitled to the same right all defendants have to pursue an appeal. The Judge would be well within his rights to condition an appeal bond on strict adherence to the terms of the gag order.
The issues we will likely see surface on appeal include:
- Whether Stormy Daniels’ testimony exceeded what was permissible and unduly prejudiced Trump. This will be contested, but the Judge let her testimony in to complete the story of the crime, and in any event, defense questions opened the door to her testimony.
- Whether it was error to permit the DA to use a federal campaign finance fraud crime as the object offense that converted the misdemeanor into a felony. This is a pure legal issue, and the weight of the evidence appears to be on the People’s side, but there are some unique issues here that need to be litigated.
- Whether the Judge was correct to permit the jury to return a verdict that was unanimous about the object crime but not the means used to accomplish it. We’ve discussed this previously and again, it’s a legal issue where the DA appears to have a strong argument.
- Whether there was sufficient evidence to support the verdict. Defendants frequently argue this on appeal but only rarely win. The question is whether a reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty, and there was sufficient evidence here to support that conclusion.
There will be others too, but these are some of the main ones to expect. None of this will happen until after Trump is sentenced in July, and the process will take time, so we will deal with it when it happens.
This sentiment, or something akin to it, is circulating widely on social media.
Here’s my response: Trump was convicted by a jury of his peers who heard all the evidence and found him guilty. We should trust the jury.
Trump claims the indictment was a Democratic ploy. There is no evidence to support that. It doesn’t make sense that 12 jurors, picked from a randomly summoned pool with Trump’s lawyers’ full involvement, a jury that included members who claimed Truth Social or the Wall St. Journal as primary news sources, would have unanimously found him guilty if he wasn’t. Occam’s Razor says to look first to the simplest answer. There is no need for conspiracy theories here. The jury convicted Trump because he was guilty.
Trump will spin the verdict, as he did this morning in a long and less than lucid press conference.
Americans should ignore him and use the same common sense the jury did. The jurors saw every piece of evidence first hand; they considered it all together. They decided it met the government’s burden of proving Donald Trump guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In our system of justice, that is their decision to make.
It is well worth making this point with anyone who questions the verdict. What approach would they rather have American justice use? A king? Is it Donald Trump who now metes out justice in America?
A better question: Why aren’t there calls for Trump to step down as the nominee? That is how any other politician would be treated.
Trump said the real verdict on his case will come on November 5. I hope so. I’m ready to get to work on that, and I bet you are too.
We’re in this together,
Joyce
With so many politicians supporting Trump’s candidacy in spite of the ignomy that results from this conviction, we should as good citizens censure the Congressional members of both parties that support his candidacy
Gv:
Unfortunately . . . if the gov. were to censure congressional members supporting the miscreant called trump, we would be feeding the fires supporting it.
As it is told, trump was in charge of his defense and his attorneys followed his wishes. Is it better to win or better to lose and fire up your base in support of your candidacy as a result?
This is all trump hype and what he wanted. It would be nice if some of the congressional leaders would come out of hiding and speak to the issues. And for trump end up in a cell amongst the population of inmates. He needs to be exposed to the reality of life.
You have an interesting name.
True, Trump may be guilty. I think the issue however for most Trump supporters is equal justice. Hillary destroys emails, nothing. Hillary fabricates the Russia-Trump collusion story, nothing. 51 former intelligence officers write a letter saying the Hunter laptop is most likely Russian disinformation, nothing. Even though the FBI had the laptop for over a year, they said nothing. 10% for the Big Guy, nothing, Biden colludes with social media to stomp on the first amnendment, nothing, Biden has top secret documents stored in his garage, nothing Etc,etc,etc…..
Bill:
It is not a “may.” The coward who threatens people was found guilty. What “aboutism” is not an answer to trump’s conviction. Everythimg he did during the trial was to instigate a reaction from people outside of the court room. Everything the judge did was in reaction to trump’s implied threats through his comments.
It should be satisfying to you, he will never spend a day in prison or the lesser jail. Much less be allowed to mingle with the other inmates. Then, let him mouth off and see the reaction when the guards are not there. He can add his conviction to his resume as it will make no difference.
Nonsense on stilts. This was shameful:
1. A misdemeanor, on which the Statute of Limitations had run out, was used to produced 34 felony counts on committing a Federal offense for which he was not charged.
2. Hillary was charged with misclassifying expenses to pay for the Steele Dossier as legal expenses (same crime as alleged here) within the statute of limitations as a misdemeanor and paid a fine and none of your readers know about this.
3. The feds look at the interference claim and declined to prosecute. Alvin Bragg looked at this case and had declined to prosecute, until later pressure by the public.
You should love the constitution and legal principles more than you hate Trump.
@Bob,
LOL! Nonsense on stilts:
1. The fact that a federal offense was not charged doesn’t change NY law. That the misdemeanors were used to conceal an underlying felony was the charge. Don’t like that? Take it up with the NY state legislature.
2. But, but, but . . . Hillary!!! So what? You think that’s some kind of counter-argument?
3. The DOJ declined to prosecute because it was against DOJ policy to charge a sitting president, not because they didn’t think he was guilty of a crime. Bragg didn’t decline to prosecute, he did prosecute. And he won, which vindicates that decision.
You should love the constitution and legal principles more than you love Trump.
1. State court has no jurisdiction to try federal law, which the feds declined to call a crime. Please show me any other example where a non-charged federal crime was used to extend a statute of limitations on a state crime.
2. “but Hillary” – yes, proves that the alleged crime is rightfully a misdemeanor… if proven, within the statute of limitations. Not a specifically engineered confabulation of novel theories such as Braggs’.
3. Can you prove your claim that this was the reason? There was no case. Find me a quote that your claim is correct and I’ll admit error right now in this roomful of partisans. 3b. Bragg declined earlier. Here’s Reuters: “A prosecutor leading that probe, Mark Pomerantz, resigned in February 2022 after Bragg declined to charge Trump himself with financial crimes.”
4. I don’t love trump and you’re willing to burn the legal house down to support selective prosecution of political enemies.
My claims stand.
Bob:
You have no foundation or standing here. Your claims are facetious and lack merit. Joel and I have no reason to establish your credibility. You are making me laugh here. This is not a place for mock or moot trials. Practice elsewhere.
Laugh out loud. Just … Laugh. Out. Loud
Bob:
You are not on TV here.
Powerful argument Bill. I’d be happy to hear substantive rebuttal to Dershowitz claims here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARi38Bqb1DI&ab_channel=HeavilyMuzzled-TheThinkingConservative
Attacking Fox or claiming Dersh is a shill are not substantive. Cue the trolls…
@bob,
“Cue the trolls…”
Don’t bother, they’re here. Look in the mirror.
yes, a polite and demanding one who has no foundation to demand anything.
bob:
When the real bob appears, I will give you the credibility you “may” deserve. You have no basis to question Joel’s or my credentials while masquerading. Joel, I set the ground rules for dialogue, not you.
No sense reasoning with a cult member. No doubt he has purchased thousands of shares of DJT; donated his daughter’s college fund to his cult leader; owns those snazzy golden shoes; has turned over his credit card numbers to the campaign; owns 6 cult bibles inscribed by his cult leader; bought the Trump tokens; has Trump steaks in the deep freeze and got his degree from Trump University.
Cult thinking is why Republicans forget that Trump vowed to “lock her up” when he became president, appointed his Attorney General and had his Senate confirm an array of DOJs all of whom searched high and low for anything to “lock her up.” Crickets because there was no evidence to support criminal charges. There was nothing stopping the DOJ from bringing a case against her for the emails or anything else they could come up with. So why didn’t they bring a case? Because there wasn’t sufficient evidence of criminal activity and they’d look like fools in the courtroom; just as everyone of Trump’s attorneys have proven fools in the courtroom and lost every case and have had all manner of sanctions.
Same thing with the “Biden crime family.” Months of investigation; thousands of bank records and Crickets.
There is no reasoning with cultists; they will hand over their money and follow no matter where it leads. Jim Jones proved that.
Drink the Kool-Aid, and not the cool kind …
Cultists use ad hominem to avoid substantive discussion. If you care to engage on substance, I’m right here.
@bob,
LOL!
Cultists use ad hominem to avoid substantive discussion. Whatever they accuse you of is what they’re doing. If you care to engage on substance, I’m right here.
“But when you impose meaningful search parameters, the truth emerges: The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge.” – Elie Honig, By Elie Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor, now an MSNBC legal analyst.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/trump-was-convicted-but-prosecutors-contorted-the-law.html
Probably no similar situation has ever arisen to be legally evaluated. He will appeal and we’ll see what the New York courts think of your arguments. It will not be decided here.
Ah yes, so you would say; that and having no love of Trump but having only a concern for the rule of law; but still willing to undermine the jury’s judgement and the whole process as illegitimate rather than awaiting the appeals process to play out.
But in any case my comment was not a direct response to your “selective prosecution” allegation” (but one presumes his attorneys filed a motion laying out that theory and preserved it for appeal) but to the inability of Trump supporters to ever admit he did anything wrong, ever and that all the cases are simply political persecution of their beloved leader.
Hi dd:
To be clear. SCOTUS already ruled against trump as far as a state trial and his claiming he was the Pres during the time he made decisions. This was a SCOTUS which has leaned right quite a bit. Commenter (Bob) has been making stuff up and flinging it against the wall hoping it will stick.
Trump’s conviction ‘a triumph for the rule of law,’ but election impact is unclear, Berkeley scholars say – Berkeley News
Thanks for the article. Throwing things against the wall is what they do.
The more they indite, the more the opposition unites.
If you remember, awhile back Christi Whitman stated there was no
longer a Republican party, it was now the party of Trump, it is a CULT…..
Actually, I agree…to the point to old guard was never this bad in
terms of the maga…
While this may provide some emotional validation, if I were a blue politician in a red state I’d be looking over my shoulder.
@Lj,
LOL! The red politicians in red states are all running away from the Dobbs decision.
Oh Bobby. You have a terrible job.
well, you may have scattered the trolls. i will add a personal observation:
in the post-truth era i cannot claim my sources are more true than their sources. but a long lifetime of dealing with pathological liars, scammers, bullies, sadists, distortions by the mainstream news, the Left, the Right, and the “moderates” I would have to change everything I believe in order to believe what our trolls say. can’t do that. i do not live in an AI universe…at least not for the first eighty or so years. so what actually happens when they make their arguments, they validate at least the basic “facts” of the case. leaving me with a choice not so much between facts, as between “spin.” for me their spin does their cause more damage than the spin of their opponents. i know what a liar sounds like. even a second-hand liar.
the vision that Trump is selling is so much worse than what we have now and the vision the left is selling, that I really don’t give a damn about the nuances they claim amount to injustice to Trump. at some point you have to believe your own eyes about who is the mugger and who is he victim.
oh, the point about AI: in order for all the videos I have seen of Trump talking..videos that cnvince me he is a very dangerous liar and bully…to be “Fake News” it would take a massive coordinated disinformation conspiracy that I don’t think today’s AI is up to, nor anything shortof 100% censorship backed by terror, which we manifestly do not have in this country. yet.
And I don’t believe even AI could fake the insane reasoning produced by Fox News stars to keep their true believers riled and ready.
So this means Trump and Trumpists are what they seem to be. And the mystery is what happened to Bill and Bob in their lives that made them ready to believe-in this stuff.