Posted on 06/03/2024 8:06:55 AM PDT by AnthonySoprano
Juan Merchan instructs the Jury to consider (1) a violation of the FEDERAL Election Campaign Act (FECA).
Now, the FECA Federal Statute takes over completely to determine if it was violated criminally.
When you look at the FECA Act right on Justice.gov website, you see immediately, for a Violation to be a crime, it must meet two criteria, the actions must have been committed willfully and KNOWINGLY.
They reiterate this throughout and explain the accused must have known his/her actions were against the law and this must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Below are Judge Merchan’s full instructions on this other crime (FECA Violation).
Do you see the word “knowingly?”
That’s because it’s not there. He misled the Jury.
He misleads the Jury.
Merchan kept digging. He tells them this “other crime” doesn’t need to be proven, or even committed, or even concealed - only that they believe he intended to violate the FECA - which is 180 degrees in opposition to the FEC Act. 
Reminds me about how people say lying to the FBI is a crime, but in fact the law says the lie must be “material” and “intentional”……ie to cover up an underlying crime.
Beyond all of that an NDA is not a campaign expense.
.
The 34 counts were all misdemeanors.
There is no count on the 3 “other crimes.”
Which means the whole thing needs to be tossed. The menu of 3 mashup is what constitutes the Felony.
You are right.
The supreme court in Bush v. Gore acted on a writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida. It was a normal appeal from the highest court in the State, pursuant to 28 USC 1257. It was normal supreme court procedure. The fact it went through the Florida State Court system faster than normal was of no consequence.
Freeloading foreign refugees from place like Jamaica, Haiti, India and Bogata Columbia have no damn business judging American Citizens. That’s liberal crap and is for the birds.
I cited Bush v Gore not because it lines up exactly with here and now, but because there are ways of approaching the Supreme Court other than long drawn out appeals to a state court system such as New York’s - not that this is identical but there are even different ways than this one way we’re discussing to ask the High Court to rule on this short of waiting until after the election and those ways do exist please see Mark Levin and others for such ways and all the legal lingo involved. I believe John Loo is another - he guested on Mark’s Fox News weekend show and they talked about what is appropriate in this case...
Oops - I misspelled John’s last name I believe it’s YOO.
Mark Levin has said so, and I want to believe him, but I have no idea what those supposed ways are. He’s never said either. Just vague references to “extraordinary writs.”
There’s nothing in the statute on Supreme Court Jurisdiction that provides for any other way to get from State Court to SCOTUS except for appealing from the high court of a state.
When is Bragg going to bring charges against Hillary for false entry? She/her campaign paid “legal fees” to Perkins Coie to pay for the Russian Dossier. The FEC fined her $160,000 for this false campaign expense
I HOPE YOU ARE CORRECT.
THIS WHOLE TRIAL HAS BEEN BIDENS FAULT.
AS A PRESIDENT HES BEEN A DISASTER.
Not so. Levin cited a common law angle.
Like DeNiro and the clown cast of MSDNC, CNN, Morning Joke (which FJB is supposedly a big fan), Merchan has rabid Trump Derangement Syndrome.
As such, he could make democrat history and earn ever-lasting gratitude of fellow sickos by imprisoning President Trump at Rikers, where there’s no shortage of psycho felons to do you-know-what when the Secret Service agent takes a bathroom break.
What is this angle? All I’ve heard him say, either the radio on Friday or on LLL on Sunday night, was an “extraordinary writ” without elaborating.
Listen to his show . . . now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.