Comments by "" (@charlesvan13) on "Donald Trump's guilty verdict isn't going to change the outcome of the election, says Frank Luntz" video.

@PjotrII Trump didn't make the business records. A company comptroller whom Trump had no contact with made those entries. Furthermore, that is a misdemeanor with expired statute of limitations.
17
We don't even know what crime the jury convicted him of. The judge told them they could split their ruling; he gave 3 different crimes, and told them they could each choose a different one. It will not survive appeals.
15
@PjotrII Nice try. The FEC concluded that the payments WERE legal expenses, and NOT campaign expenses. If he had recorded it as a campaign expense, you people would be calling for a prosecution for not recording it as a legal expense. You people are insufferable.
10
@PjotrII 12 jurors voted on unconstitutional jury instructions. The crooked judge instructed them they could rule on different crimes. Case law requires an unanimous jury verdict.
6
@taddow332 Ok. Name what crime he was convicted of covering up, with the "falsified" business record, that was entered by a company comptroller he never talked to.
6
It's not constitutional. Case law says the jury has to be unanimous. The SCOTUS would rule 9-0 against this clown.
3
Watch the discussion Mygan Kelly has with Dan Abrams. Abrams kept saying "He did something wrong." Every corporate news channel makes employees sign an NDA, that you must sign to get your salary.
2
"Even though he was guilty in every single one of them." That means nothing. It was artificially split into 34 charges, one for each retainer check Trump paid Cohen. He was paying him a monthly salary, so a check for each month.
2
This is going to help Trump. The Democrats actually used to have populist leaning, that involved mistrust of government authority. Now they're complete tone deaf. Trump is leading a populist movement. Trying to crush it with the iron fist of bureaucratic state power is energizing it.
1
@tflg3257 Most likely. But it is possible for the SCOTUS to rule quickly. They actually should, as this was blatantly done to interfere in the election. I.e. the Biden administration is cheating. The entire case, and jury instructions, violate the 6th amendment. The prosecution was never specific about what crime the defendant was accused of. That violates the 6th amendment. Split jury decisions are also unconstitutional.
1
@pdg61met The Democrats have become so scuzzy. Russiagate was the destruction of all media norms of evidence and journalistic standards to try to get Trump. Now in 2024 they destroying all legal and constitutional norms in an attempt to get Trump.
1
@cleophusfowler Trump didn't do anything. They convicted him of internal accounting records, made by his company comptroller. His mistake was hiring that low IQ goof, Cohen. Cohen got rich working for Trump. And when he wasn't given a role in Trump administration he acted like a dumped girlfriend. And went to prison for numerous financial crimes.
1
@davyjones7177 Because this wasn't given to the jury until after deliberations were complete!!! You people know nothing about how this rigged process proceeded. Just like Trump's lawyers couldn't bring FEC representatives in to argue against the accusation of election violations.
1
@afrocraft1 How? One shouldn't be convicted of something they didn't do. Trump didn't tell the comptroller what to enter. It wasn't fraud anyways. This is a totally fake case.
1
@PjotrII The jurors didn't "vote clearly". We don't know what crime they convicted him of. The judge gave them unprecedented instructions that they could split their verdict among different crimes.
1
@PjotrII "All data is available" What data? We don't know what crime(s) the jury concluded on. Because the crooked just gave the unprecedented (and unconstitutional) jury instruction that each juror could pick their own crime.
1
@thetruthiest4916 None of that was proved in court. For example, Trump DID NOT make the record, that was his company comptroller who never talked with Trump. Also, we don't know what crime Trump was convicted of. The judge made the unprecedented and unconstitutional instruction that the jurors didn't have to unanimously conclude on a crime.
1
It's a manufactured crime. It was a banana republic move to construct this case. "Show me the man, and I will find the crime." Beria, head of Stalin's KGB. These people went further. They constructed a crime, out of a misdemeanor business record charge (with expired statute of limitations), and vague unspecified election law.
1
@brittanyauckram7457 The people who set up and executed this rigged trial are the criminals. Duh.
1