@nbcsnl The sound to this episode was terrible! You could not hear anything, the noise of the public and the band was so loud, we could not hear the skits and poor Elton John was totally somethered… what happened?
Falsifying Business Records:
You were convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree in New York. This conviction was based on evidence that you mischaracterized payments as legal expenses to conceal their true purpose, which was to suppress potentially damaging information during your 2016 presidential campaign. This act of falsification was found by a jury to be done with intent to commit or conceal another crime, elevating the charge to a felony.
Claims of Judicial Corruption and Bias:
Accusations against Judge Juan Merchan regarding bias or corruption are serious but require legal substantiation beyond mere assertion. Judges are bound by judicial ethics and subject to review and appeal. Merchan's gag order was a standard judicial practice to prevent influencing the jury or public opinion during the trial, not to silence political speech.
Accountant's Testimony:
The testimony you refer to does not align with the trial's public records. The accountant involved, Allen Weisselberg, and Michael Cohen testified about how payments were disguised, not that everything was "above board" as you claim. The jury's decision was based on this evidence.
Legal Scholars' Opinions:
Your claim that every legal scholar agrees there's no case is an overstatement. Legal experts have expressed varied opinions on the case's strength, complexity, and legal theory, but many acknowledge that the case was within the scope of prosecutable offenses under New York law.
Mar-a-Lago Valuation:
In a different case, Judge Arthur Engoron found that you and your organization inflated asset values, including Mar-a-Lago, for financial gain. This was part of a broader civil fraud case where the valuation of Mar-a-Lago was deemed significantly overstated on your financial statements.
E. Jean Carroll Case:
In the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit, you were found liable for sexual abuse and defamation, leading to a significant damages award. This case was adjudicated based on evidence presented, including your own public statements, not merely on judicial bias.
Jack Smith Case:
Your claim of "winning" against Jack Smith refers to legal motions or appeals in ongoing cases. These cases are still in process, and outcomes are not final. The assertion that these are all politically motivated lacks direct evidence linking the Biden/Harris administration to these judicial proceedings in a manner that overrides legal due process.
Your narrative paints a picture of systemic corruption without providing legal or factual backing for these specific claims. The judicial system in the U.S. has mechanisms for appeal and review to address concerns of bias or legal errors. However, personal attacks on the judiciary without substantiation undermine public trust in legal institutions. The outcomes of these cases were determined by juries or judges based on the evidence presented, which is the foundation of the legal system, regardless of political affiliations.
@JoeBiden@DrBiden@AFSCME Joe, we love you but you need to elegantly step out for the future of the country, we cannot take this risk with Trump in front of us. Do wath is right for this country... You had say you were a bridge to the future the TIME IS NOW
@SenatorCollins I hope you are happy now, you ARE responsible for what just happen by you inaction on forbidding AR15, you should QUIT now, and leave your spot to a young and efficient leader who will do something !!
@JimCameron Thank you, thank you, you are true genius and you are bringing us an experience, which is one in a lifetime. Your movie (s) is just pure art and emotions. Please keep transforming us with your magic…