Trump's Trial

"In former president Donald Trump's third criminal indictment - the one recently issued by a District of Columbia grand jury for Trump's attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election - he's charged with a conspiracy to deprive the American voters of their voting rights. Accordingly, the American people are the victims of that particular crime.

The federal law - specifically, the Crime Victims' Rights Act, 18 US Code section 3771 - provides that crime victims have a right "not to be excluded" from the trial. If the trial is not televised, the victims of Trump's crimes WILL BE EXCLUDED FREOM THE TRIAL in violation of federal law."

I think there will be consequences of the trial being televised, or not being televised.
Post Comment

Comments (63)

I agree their will be consequences to the trial
It may result in home detention and Trump would be forced to stay in the White House laugh
Most people want the trial to be televise.
Either way the supporter will be unhappy and conspiracy theories will continue.

Some conservatives are getting back to the laws and policies that govern our country.
Two of them wrote a report that will be published to prevent DT from being a presidential candidate.



That’s good because it’s very scary to allow Trump to run for office because he will win , this is terrible for the people not born in USA who want a weak USA
Are you suggesting that the trial is unecessary with respect to eliminating Trump from from the race, ergo claims that the motive for the trial being election interference is moot?

I agree that supporters will likely complain either way, so why do most people want the trial to be televised?
The trial - if it can even be called that - should absolutely be televised. Trump publicly called for that not long ago. People should be able to witness first hand the weaponized department of justice and partisan DC judges working hand-in-hand to disabuse Trump of his rights. This latest laughable Stalinist indictment intends to argue that in essence Trump was guilty of thought crimes - that he didn't in fact believe the election was stolen - despite countless instances of him claiming it was indeed stolen. More election interference for the upcoming election. In 2020 the false claim that Hunter Biden's laptop was 'a Russian government misinformation operation' - a claim signed off on by 51 former high level intelligence agency officials - was the propaganda used to mislead the American people before the election. This time around the tactic is unrestricted lawfare. Partisan attorneys in various States bringing spurious charges against Trump to tie him up in legal battles, drain resources, and try and smear him ahead of the 2024 election (which he is winning clearly in pretty much every current poll). This is what depraved, power-hungry Marxists do. They have no religion but power. No tactics so low and debased are not justified in their eyes. They are despicable people. But yes, I absolutely agree that it should be televised. And due to the over-eagerness of the partisan prosecutor in question (Jack Smith - who also sabotaged the Trump admin's peace initiative between Serbia & Kosovo) - Trump should be able to (at last) introduce the abundance of evidence indicating election fraud at trial. That is, unless, the judge in question decides to illegally deprive him of this right. We shall see.
Yes makes no sense , he hasn’t been convicted of anything or even charged with sedition, they could have charged but did not
You think it should be televised for the purposes of transparency.
100%
I agree, but perhaps for different reasons.
It is kind of funny to accuse your opponent of what you did yourself.
They did exactly that in November 2020:
"deprived the American voters of their voting rights"
They did it, it was easy too.
Why not proven in state courts.. guess why... hehe.

Televised or not is that, if the is the question
I go with whatever Chancer recommend.


This is my only comment Jac, so please no questions this time, if that's ok.
Thanks for the blog
Gave me the chance to tell what I think.
Super.

tip hat
I'll expand on that.

I don't think it will be particularly transparent for most people because it won't be anything like a TV drama. The legal technicalities will be challenging at least some of the time and the sheer volume of evidence will likely be overwhelming. Jack Smith has presented that the prosecution side will take 4-6 weeks. The defense will give their estimated time frame a week from today, if I remember rightly. Together it could run into months.

I rather think a televised record in the public domain will provide a level of transparency that can be scrutinised long after the tensions of the moment have ebbed...by people who understand the technicalities.
You have no opinon of your own.
I want it to be televised so I can see him slouch down in his chair when he hears the charges against him.

It's amusing to me that he won't be able to rant and shout at his trial unless he testifies. He would cook his own goose if he gets on the stand.

I just want to see him suffer under conditions when he isn't in control in the court room.

If it's not televised, life goes on. Maybe they will televise putting him in ankle bracelets. yay
Negative Jac. DT did the crime and should go through the legal process like any other criminals.
All previous crimes of DT should and will be proceduted. Most people believe the ONLY reason he is a candidate for president is to avoid prosecution.

The filing of section 3 of the 4th amendment is to prohibit DT from being a presidential candidate. It has nothing to do with the legal proceedings.

The Sweep and Force of Section Three
University of Pennsylvania Law Review, Vol. 172, 2024

126 Pages
Posted:
William Baude
University of Chicago - Law School

Michael Stokes Paulsen
University of St. Thomas School of Law

Date Written: August 9, 2023

Abstract
Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids holding office by former office holders who then participate in insurrection or rebellion. Because of a range of misperceptions and mistaken assumptions, Section Three’s full legal consequences have not been appreciated or enforced. This article corrects those mistakes by setting forth the full sweep and force of Section Three.

First, Section Three remains an enforceable part of the Constitution, not limited to the Civil War, and not effectively repealed by nineteenth century amnesty legislation. Second, Section Three is self-executing, operating as an immediate disqualification from office, without the need for additional action by Congress. It can and should be enforced by every official, state or federal, who judges qualifications. Third, to the extent of any conflict with prior constitutional rules, Section Three repeals, supersedes, or simply satisfies them. This includes the rules against bills of attainder or ex post facto laws, the Due Process Clause, and even the free speech principles of the First Amendment. Fourth, Section Three covers a broad range of conduct against the authority of the constitutional order, including many instances of indirect participation or support as “aid or comfort.” It covers a broad range of former offices, including the Presidency. And in particular, it disqualifies former President Donald Trump, and potentially many others, because of their participation in the attempted overthrow of the 2020 presidential election.

Keywords: Constitution, Fourteenth Amendment, Section Three, Insurrection, Rebellion
They want the trial to be televised because of transparency. Even if it is televised the denials will claim most of the broad cast was cut/mend/paste/alter. Criminals and supporters never accept defeat, so their fight goes on.

I hope those fools continue to fund a billionaire's legal bill.
Historically we in the US call this, 'damned if you do, damned if you don't.'

Much of life in the US is like that.
In America, convictions come AFTER a trial and not before.
Did something recently change?
I think you misunderstood my question.

The video you cited suggests that Trump is already disqualified from holding public office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment and that anyone who puts him on the ballot will be breaking the law.

If that's the case, then the trial isn't necessary to disqualify Trump and the argument that the trial is about election interference is irrelevant. I'm not suggesting that Trump isn't also held accountable for his actions via a criminal suit in it's own right.

If, however, it must be proven that Trump is guilty of insurrection, rebellion, or any other action cited in Section 3 of the 14th Amendment before it can be applied, the video you cited bypassed the tenet that Trump is innocent until proven guilty.

I've looked at a number of presentations which explain the law very well, but I'm loathe to repost, or cite them if they imply that a guilty verdict is a foregone conclusion. If we do that, aren't we acting in the manner of which the defendent himsef has been accused?

However much we may believe he is guilty, or innocent, Trump is entitled to a fair trial including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. However well-crafted we may think that the prosecution case, or defense is, a verdict is never guaranteed until it is pronunced.

As members of the public, if we can't uphold the basic principles of the judicial system, should it be televised? I understand the importance of transparency, but maybe not at the risk of a fair trial, or appeals on that basis.

Will the transcripts of, and evidence in the trial be a matter of public record once the trial is over? If so, then there is no need to televise it as a matter of transparency.
Georgia has now indicted FPOTUS 45 (number 4) and if it goes to trial, it will be televised.



The Georgia indictment has 161 criminal acts, 41 counts, and 19 defendants including the FPOTUS with 13 charges. They are accused of pursuing a "criminal enterprise" under Georgia's racketeering laws.

Mayor Rudy, and the Kraken, were among the named defendants.

Not a lawyer, but I do believe the federal prosecutors will get a copy of the indictment so it ain't over
New indictments of Trump tonight from the State of Georgia. Also indicted former NYC Mayor Giuliani and many others. Racketeering, conspiracy, election tampering, etc.
professor
Exactly that’s why it’s silly to say he is now ineligible to be president as conservative republicans (RINOs) are now claiming in friendship 4 ever post.
I

No problem.
Indictment #4 in Georgia that was announced late last night may change some of his calendar appointments. He's got until Friday at noon to voluntarily surrender.
I wonder how much that will boot his poll numbers grin
Boost I assume you meant. If so it says something sinister corrupt and perverted about modern-day America in my opinion.
Nononono.... It means most americans actually understand it's a politically motivated "burn that witch"-hunt.
The guy is innocent mister. Is it hard to see?
As I said 'in my opinion' and I trust my own opinion massively more than I would ever ever ever trust yours, believe me cobber! rolling on the floor laughing It is as absurd an innocence as that of O J Simpson.
thumbs up
Fargo, I'll ask you again- do you not understand
what happened here? It's the accusers who is guilty. Capish? confused
What was your IQ again, is it high enought to understand the deep corruption?
Even Johnny Rotten found out soon a decade ago Trump is the only sensible choice.

What can I do to wake you up from your slumbering state Fargo?
I can send you some red pills in the firm of informative youtube videos if you're interested?
Me above.
It's kinda funny shawn, he think I ate too mcuh mushrooms.

But you know perfactly well what I'm saying. And you as an American you is way closer to the action.
much was a spelloe, but the "is" part was for fun.



beer
What I and a lot of others see is a huge corrupt political force out there that are trying to run up anything as far as trumped up charges go. These people against Trump have an agenda. They know that Trump has a good shot at winning the general election in 2024. A lot of people including myself feel that the numbers in the swing states back in 2020 didn't add up, and there was a lot a suspious activity that went down through the middle of the night with the counting of votes.

A lot of us are seeing the ugliest that these people will go to go after Trump using every source to their advantage while corrupting the justice system for their disposal. What we are witnessing is a two tier justice system.

These people that are all involved in going after Trump that are employed by the government know that if Trump wins in 2024, there will be pay back by Trump. These people are scared that he will win, and with what happened with the 2020 election, was actually a stolen election. It's going to be harder to pull off stealing the 2024 election this time around, and they know it. That's why we're seeing this circus going on with all these charges from this corrupt bunch of people. There's a reason Christie is running. He was encouraged to by Trump's foes. His job is to be a thorn in Trump's side and continue trying to run him down.

Christie is bought and paid for. The more you see these type of people trying to do everything they can to prevent Trump from running, the more Trump's numbers continue to rise in the polls. A lot of people see the injustice being done to Trump. The ones who can't see it is because of their refusal to because of the hatred they have towards Trump.
And all of what I said in my above comment is my opinion.
@ShawnSuperstar,
Yes.
To take him down has always been their self defense, cos he threaten to unmask them
and do something about it too. The drain the swamp.
All of us who'd seen the light here, we see the same. Rest assured.
We are a movement.
Yet you've failed to offer a relevant opinion.

The blog is not about your personal pretrial verdict: Trump is innocent until proven guilty with respect to these J6 related charges.

The topic is about televising the trial.

Although I was rather amused by your comment regarding a two tier judicial system. The possibility of a wealthy white man being held to the same legal standards as everyone else in the US is a bit freaky, eh? laugh
I reckon you're a bit freaky, Jacbanana
I think there will be consequences of the trial being televised, or not being televised.

It was late last night when the news came through about indictment #4, but I believe I heard the trial will be televised.
I feel pretty normal on here, mind. hmmm
Post Comment - Let others know what you think about this Blog.
Meet the Author of this Blog
jac_the_gripper

jac_the_gripper

Tonyrefail, South Glamorgan, Wales, UK

About me...?

All about me is chaos. I'm thinking of promoting myself to the Goddess of Entropy.

It might be fun.

Better fun than being Empress of the Universe, anyway. I abdicated because the tiaras weren't as shiny as I expected for the pos [read more]

About this Blog

created Aug 2023
1,414 Views
Last Viewed: 13 hrs ago
Last Commented: Aug 2023
1 Likes
Last Liked: Aug 2023
jac_the_gripper has 20 other Blogs

Like this Blog?

Do you like this Blog? Why not let the Author know. Click the button to like the Blog. And your like will be added. Likes are anonymous.

Feeling Creative?