edit: I have changed my title to match the new NYTimes headline. Sorry about the all caps, I guess they are really excited about this lol
Also shoutout to @SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone who shared a gift article link in the comments. I hope you don’t mind but I kinda stole it and updated the post
Guilty on all 34 counts!
God damn it, don’t take my job away from me!
Today we’re all flying high, Squid
I was and then I got out-Rikered!
Speaking of Riker’s… Riker’s Island is gonna have to make some room!
We are all sad trombone players on this blessed day.
Ugh, I hated that character, but I guess that was the point.
Speak for yourself
Sorry, couldn’t help it. Still, break out the Andorian ale!
Hey, you stole it in the first place.
Translation: republicans rigged 2016 election to usurp power, stole 3 Supreme Court seats, passed illegitimate tax cuts for ultra rich, and committed violent insurrection when public legitimately tried to remove them from power.
Every. Single. Republican. Is. Guilty. By. Association.
That’s completely incorrect.
Trump was convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records. These were the charges in the NY “hush money” trial only.
Here’s a handy tracker for the other cases from the Associated Press.
falsifying business records
To influence the outcome of the 2016 election.
He didn’t decisively win, it’s not inaccurate to deduce from this conviction that the 2016 election was stolen
It’s true that the contents of this trial can be used for the arguments of the prosecution in the Federal and Georgia election trials, but he was not convicted of any crime other than falsifying business records.
Trump was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records, a class E felony that is punishable by a fine, probation or up to four years in prison per count.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-prison-hush-money-trial-verdict-rcna153963
according to The Guardian, for it to be considered a felony charge they had to prove that Trump did it with the intent to commit another crime; The other crime being a New York state law that says it is illegal for “any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means”
So the election interference charge form part of the existing charges without being separate charges in and of themselves
The main argument from prosecution to this end was that the encounter happened in 2006 (ish, I might be off) but the hush money wasn’t an issue until the election campaign. Therefore, they argued, it was paid (and covered up with false business records) to influence the election.
but he was not convicted of any crime other than falsifying business records.
Cool, but irrelevant as nobody was talking about what laws were technically broken, they were pointing out what being guilty of that means in reality
The felony upcharge requires he falsify in furtherance of another crime, which was argued to be hiding campaign contributions.
Yes. He used campaign funds to pay Cohen for his role as a personal attorney, but the payments were actually reimbursement for Cohen’s initially laid out hush money to Daniels.
All I said was he wasn’t charged with it. It’s absolutely going to be used to address his character in the other cases, but they may not get heard until after November at this rate.
The Federal election is postponed until SCOTUS rules on immunity. The Georgia election is postponed until the state Senate investigates Fani Willis, and the documents case is postponed indefinitely.
I’m surprised so many people think that this proves he’s guilty for all of the cases. We all knew he was before this trial even started. This legally only proves he’s guilty of fraud until he begins another trial.
So what happens now?
Fines? Community service? Jail? Nothing?
He’ll get 34 slaps on the wrist then become our president for a term that doesn’t end until he dies
34 felonies?
Good one. There will be riots in the fucking streets lmao
37?
Hey, try not to commit any crimes on your way to the parking lot!
34*** I’ll correct
I just can’t see the number 37 without thinking of Clerks.
37! When I kiss you I taste 37 other dicks!
Me since 2017:
We’ll come back here in a few years and see which one of us is right
Want to put some money on it? You take tRump, I’ll take Biden. How much?
Oh! Not so willing to take up that bet at this juncture??
Edit:that was for sarln: answer, bro.
crickets lol, so it’s a bot
If you’re that dedicated to proving a point, I’m concerned for you.
It was an admission that you might be right but go off, dude
Either way man, going back to a post from 3+ years ago isn’t exactly ‘normal’ imo haha
Not everything is an attack
Challenge accepted? 😶
Won’t know till July when sentencing happens.
Most likely, fines that he’ll pay for with cultist money.
What I was looking for - thanks
If he is guilty on even a single count, the former president and the presumptive republican nominee for the White House will not be able to vote for himself
What a shit show the Republican party has become.
Apparently, assuming he’s voting in Florida, for an out of state felony they use the other state’s rules to determine if he can vote. For New York, you can vote unless you are in prison for a felony (people on parole can vote). So unfortunately unless he’s thrown in jail, he’ll probably be able to vote for himself in Florida.
But hey maybe he goes to jail for something finally. That’d be nice.
Fuck prisoner disenfranchisement. Adult citizens should be able to vote, full stop. Even a treasonous scumbag fascist racist felon like trump.
Rich people, and politicians, don’t go to jail in America.
Well they certainly have a leg up and don’t go to jail as often as they should, politicians do go to jail sometimes. Easy to find federal politicians that have on this list:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes
But yeah I’ll be surprised if Trump ever actually ends up behind bars.
What a beautiful list, thank you. Oh look who made the list!
#34 out of 34!
Unless there is an appeal before November
Shitshow, definitely.
But apparently he can vote if he is done serving the punishment. So, if the punishment is a fine and he pays the fine, Florida can (and probably will) reinstate his right to vote.
It depends on the punishment and when he’ll be able to complete the punishment.
Guilty on the first count.
Edit: Counts 2~34 guilty.
We got a total sweep.
🧹🧹🧹
Did you make this mockup or has the current state of American legal reporting devolved into a Sportsnet style scoreboard?
American legal reporting devolved into a Sportsnet style scoreboard?
How else are we supposed to understand it? Go away, I’m batin.
Looks just like CSPAN vote charts. You thinking of sports is you.
Has always been, even without the graphics. The adversarial system makes it a competition with a scoreboard
It’s because that’s the level the average American can understand.
This quick must be guilty. I’ll allow myself to hope. Edit:
lock him the fuck up
Lock
herhim up!We even have signs that will work for this occasion with a slight modification.
One way or the other, it will be historic. This is much faster than I expected the Jury to deliberate.
I assume if they have a verdict it’s guilty. Could be wrong.
Edit: update convicted on all 34 counts. From the article’s update:
Mr. Trump was convicted on all 34 counts of falsifying business recordsby a jury of 12 New Yorkers, who deliberated over two days to reach a decision in a case rife with descriptions of secret deals, tabloid scandal and an Oval Office pact with echoes of Watergate. The jury found that Mr. Trump had faked records to conceal the purpose of money given to his onetime fixer, Michael D. Cohen. The false records disguised the payments as ordinary legal expenses when in truth, Mr. Trump was reimbursing Mr. Cohen for a $130,000 hush-money deal the fixer struck with the porn star Stormy Daniels to silence her account of a sexual liaison with Mr. Trump.
Within a day (and likely within 30 minutes at that…), we will know the Jury’s verdict. Might as well wait for it.
But but it’s my justice and I need it now!
(Apparently JG Wentworth is joining the dark side,)
You’re not wrong
Former President and convicted felon, Donald J Trump
In other news, some little-known actor committed multiple felonies. Probably will end up on the front of grocery store tabloids. ;)
More of a cameo, not a star.
Don’t forget “rapist”. He was never convicted, but he was found liable for rape, so you don’t even need to say “alleged”.
Yes. Former President, convicted felon, and rapist, Donald J Trump.
two times popular vote loser, two times impeached, orange scrotum face Donald trump
The Former Guy The Felon Guy
Take your pick
The Felon Former Guy
First time in history a candidate running for president can’t legally vote for themselves?
They passed a constitutional amendment in Florida to let felons vote, a couple years ago. The legislature tried to backpeddle it as much as they could in order to prevent black people from voting, but the main mechanism is forcing the felons to pay a bunch of money, which isn’t a problem for Trump.
Florida also defers to the voting rights in the state where the judgment happened for convictions outside of Florida. And New York lets felons vote. Therefore, Trump can vote in Florida under Florida election law.
The legislature tried to backpeddle it as much as they could in order to prevent black people from voting, but the main mechanism is forcing the felons to pay a bunch of money, which isn’t a problem for Trump.
To be exact, the “backpedaling” was that if the courts assigned you fines and prison time you had to complete both before you had “completed your sentence” and thus could vote.
There may be a component that felons have to have finished their sentence which could exclude Trump.
As long as he’s not incarcerated he can vote in NY
He’s a Florida resident though.
And Florida defers to the state where the conviction occurred. So Florida says he can vote in Florida if he can vote in NY.
I bet some female ran prior to female suffrage.
kagis
Yeah.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_Woodhull
Victoria Claflin Woodhull (born Victoria California Claflin; September 23, 1838 – June 9, 1927), later Victoria Woodhull Martin, was an American leader of the women’s suffrage movement who ran for president of the United States in the 1872 election. While many historians and authors agree that Woodhull was the first woman to run for the presidency,[2] some disagree with classifying it as a true candidacy because she was younger than the constitutionally mandated age of 35. (Woodhull’s 35th birthday was in September 1873, six months after the March inauguration.)
An activist for women’s rights and labor reforms, Woodhull was also an advocate of “free love”, by which she meant the freedom to marry, divorce and bear children without social restriction or government interference.[3] “They cannot roll back the rising tide of reform,” she often said. “The world moves.”[4]
Woodhull twice went from rags to riches, her first fortune being made on the road as a magnetic healer[5] before she joined the spiritualist movement in the 1870s.[6] Authorship of many of her articles is disputed (many of her speeches on these topics were collaborations between Woodhull, her backers, and her second husband, Colonel James Blood[7]). Together with her sister, Tennessee Claflin, she was the first woman to operate a brokerage firm on Wall Street,[8] making a second, and more reputable fortune.[9] They were among the first women to found a newspaper in the United States, Woodhull & Claflin’s Weekly, which began publication in 1870.[10]
Woodhull was politically active in the early 1870s when she was nominated as the first woman candidate for the United States presidency.[8] Woodhull was the candidate in 1872 from the Equal Rights Party, supporting women’s suffrage and equal rights; her running mate (unbeknownst to him) was abolitionist leader Frederick Douglass. Her campaign inspired at least one other woman – apart from her sister – to run for Congress.[8] A check on her activities occurred when she was arrested on obscenity charges a few days before the election. Her paper had published an account of the alleged adulterous affair between the prominent minister Henry Ward Beecher and Elizabeth Richards Tilton which had rather more detail than was considered proper at the time. However, it all added to the sensational coverage of her candidacy.[11]
Heh, and she was in trouble with the law in the runup to the election like Trump, too.
some female
you mean a woman?
I suppose the only questions there are whether or not her state allowed women to vote for president, and whether or not a candidate who cannot legally hold the office counts (since she was under 35). Because it wasn’t just blanket illegal for women to vote prior to the 19th Amendment, it was up to the individual states and like anything up to the individual states it was all over the place depending on which state we’re talking about. For example, New Jersey allowed anyone who had the equivalent of 50 British pounds of wealth to vote regardless of sex (and there are recorded examples of women voting there) - at least until they embraced Jacksonian democracy and removed the wealth requirement and added a sex one. By the time the 19th Amendment passed, women could vote in at least some elections in most states.
I thought of that, but the first state to do so was well after her run.
https://www.history.com/news/the-state-where-women-voted-long-before-the-19th-amendment
When Wyoming sought statehood two decades after its historic vote, the territory’s citizens approved a constitution that maintained the right of women to vote. When Congress threatened to keep Wyoming out of the Union if it didn’t rescind the provision, the territory refused to budge. “We will remain out of the Union one hundred years rather than come in without the women,” the territorial legislature declared in a telegram to congressional leaders. Congress relented, and Wyoming became the first state to grant women the right to vote when it became the country’s 44th state in 1890.
The West continued to be the country’s most progressive region on full women’s suffrage. Colorado approved it in 1893, and Idaho did the same three years later. Congress had disenfranchised women along with outlawing polygamy in Utah in 1887, but women regained the right to vote when the territory became a state in 1896. After 1910, they were joined by Washington, California, Arizona, Kansas, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Dakota and the territory of Alaska. (Even before the passage of the 19th Amendment, Montana elected a woman, Jeannette Rankin, to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1916.) According to the National Constitution Center, by 1919 there were 15 states in which women had full voting rights, and only two of them were east of the Mississippi River. The dozen states that restricted women from casting ballots in any election were primarily in the South and the East.
Wyoming wasn’t the first state to allow women to vote for President. At the very least women could vote in New Jersey as early as 1790, presuming they had the equivalent of 50 British pounds of wealth (because the wealth requirement was the only requirement). Women later lost the right to vote in New Jersey when New Jersey embraced Jacksonian democracy and extended the right to vote to all white men of age, regardless of wealth.
But again, women’s right to vote was a state issue prior to the 19th Amendment and as such it was kinda all over the place with some states allowing women to vote but only in some elections (often different rules for municipal, county, state and federal elections).
Sorry but what is “kagis”? I tried looking it up and found nothing.
The search gone is called “Kagi”, so the action of using it was “kagis”
What is this “looking it up” you speak of? We only do googles and kagis and duckduckgos and altavistas
Funny enough, I tried DDG, then Google, then asked MS Copilot and then ChatGPT (both Bing). 😅
“Searches using Kagi.” Like “googles” for “searches using Google”.
Except she was acquitted.
Now the judge who Trump has been royally pissing off the whole time gets to sentence him. If your justice boner lasts for more than 4 hours, please consult a doctor.
FYI: Sentencing is set for July 11 at 10 a.m.
“Yeah, it’s been this way for about a month now.”
Despite @ummthatguy@lemmy.world doing it first, this is my domain.
Don’t do a Riker on my turf, damn it.
Hey now, on this occasion there’s enough Riker to go around for all of us.
But will they get along?
But Will they get along*
You can never have too much Riker….(the 14 year old girl who was me, waiting impatiently for TNG to come on…for the sci-fi…and the Riker).
I met Jonathan Frakes at a con once and told him I had the biggest crush on him when I was a teenager. He said, “Well what changed?”
Riker gonna Riker lol
Now I want to know the answer.
I really didn’t have an answer because I wasn’t expecting the question, lol, but I kind of managed to come up with something like “Well….the show ended and you went away. You just kinda left.”
It was lame but all I could manage to think of on the fly. He just kind of laughed. It was a good experience, all of the main TNG bridge crew were there except for Jean-Luc and Wesley (who were originally supposed to be, that was a disappointment, but it was still fun).
Time
In character to the end. 😄
I just love that crisp gif and I hadn’t seen your usual response yet.
Er… I mean no worries, friend!
Do you guys think this matters to his voters/supporters?
This is going to give a lot of GOP Senators a fig leaf.
If someone puts a motion in Congress to make it illegal for him to run, a lot of them will vote for it.
I absolutely do not want a ban on felons running for President. In some countries, that is used as a political tool to eliminate political opponents. Putin used that against Navalny.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-42479909
Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny has been formally barred from competing in next year’s presidential election.
The Central Electoral Commission has said Mr Navalny was ineligible because of a corruption conviction which he says is politically motivated.
He has urged his supporters to boycott the March vote.
Mr Navalny, 41, was widely regarded as the only candidate with a chance of challenging President Vladimir Putin.
Not to mention, Trump won’t even be the first person in the USA who could be running for president from jail.
edit: the first from a major party though, sorry Debs
His felonies are related to campaing financing, which could be used to narrow down without banning all felons. While I oppose anyone losing the right to vote, I don’t oppose people who are connvicted of treason, insurrection, or felonies related to campaign finance or abuse of elected positions being banned since they have been proven to have undermined democracy.
I get allowing former felons to run for office - they served time that society said was their punishment. They are done with it.
But a law that bans a felon that has not completed their punishment is a different story.
We’ve banned them from voting for decades.
Also, the USA isn’t Russia and Biden isn’t Putin.
Not running, though. Much harder to use that to eliminate a political opponent.
Also, the USA isn’t Russia
No. But I’d also like to keep it that way.
Then keep Donald out.
This was not the first time Trump has had a run in with the law. When he was building Trump Tower he employed Polish immigrants and treated them so badly that they won a million dollar settlement against him
All the more reason for the Republicans to support it, TBH.
bad law. I’d much rather a law where the candidate has to describe the nature of their past convictions in a written statement submitted with their filing paperwork to run and explain why each one doesn’t affect their ability to run the country.
Aka reflecting on one’s crimes.
Except assholes like trump see themselves as victims of a witch-hunt and he would write that out , sorry: he will have a lawyer write that out for every one of them. I doubt he has the attention span for it.
How do you propose such a bill be advanced through the GOP controlled house?
It’ll probably be good for his campaign somehow
It gives us something new to troll those miserable asshats over. “Interesting argument, but have you considered the fact that your candidate is a convicted felon?”
Before all this started, people did make claims that they wouldn’t vote for him if he was convicted.
But then they also said they wouldn’t vote for him even if Nikki Haley conceded.
So we’ll see, I guess. But I’m not optimistic.
Tucker Carlson responded to today’s verdict in what can only be described as an apocalyptic tone, stating on X that the jury’s decision marked “the end of the fairest justice system in the world.” The former Fox News host said that Trump would still win the election “if he’s not killed first,” and closed by saying that “anyone who defends this verdict is a danger to you and your family.”
Some, but they’ll never tell the others.
Ladies you don’t have to tell your husband you voted for Biden.
Yes: To them this demonstrates that the justice system is corrupt and they think only Trump can fix it.
They will believe this even though Trump isn’t running for any office in New York 🤣
It will most matter for undecided voters who required a guilty verdict to decide, althoigh I’m not sure that is a large number in swing states.
It won’t matter for his base that already ignore reality.
It’s reductive to think of his supporters as a single bloq.
It will certainly matter to at least some of them.
So TIL my parents will be voting for a convicted felon in November 🤦♀️
Oh hey there sibling! We’ve got the same parents! And in-laws!
The GOP could have gotten off this wild ride at so many points in the last 8 years, yet here we are. A republican presidential nominee who has been convicted of felonies.
Edit: And with Biden’s poll numbers they could have run literally anybody else and won.
Today is a very good day.
Now on the downside, convicted felons are still legally allowed to run for office. Not being able to vote for himself is delicious schadenfreude, but this doesn’t suddenly save democracy. However, I would expect Biden’s administration will push this hard, and I don’t think undecided voters want a felon in the White House.
As other have said, Banning felons from voting is a tool that can be used by oppressors to block their political rivals from standing against them.
Which ironically is something the Republicans are probably wanting to do at some point in the future.
There are several countries that won’t approve your visa if you are convicted felon.
It’s an indication that we’re not “sending our best”
