>>20762513

repost from last bread.

ARCHIVING - ARTICLE POSTED ON 22ND APRIL 2024 ON TRUMP TRIAL IN CHICAGO NYC - THE QUESTION IT PROPOSES IS AMERICA READY TO ELECT A JAILBIRD !!!

Note: This is a disgusting as it gets. they are literally enjoying putting everyone through this shit on trump and the people of the usa. take your time to read this carefully as this is the view from the top below the central banksters, the hedgefund criminals and syndicates or as they like to call it Stakeholders and shareholders of your money used to enslave the masses.

>>20761524, >>20761583, >>20761591, PROJECT SYNDICATE - GLOBALIST HEDGEFUND SITE plus article on trump trial and jailing of djt - project syndicate

==

What to Look for in Trump’s First Trial

https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/what-will-first-trump-trial-mean-for-independent-voters-by-eric-posner-2024-04

---—-

written on Apr 22, 2024 by ERIC POSNER

Eric Posner ERIC POSNER Writing for PS since 2019

30 Commentaries

Eric Posner, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, is the author of How Antitrust Failed Workers (Oxford University Press, 2021).

------------

The intricate legal issues and colorful characters in Donald Trump's criminal trials will undoubtedly keep the media and the viewing public enraptured for months to come. But when it comes to the 2024 election, all that really matters is how the defendant appears to a narrow sliver of undecided voters.

CHICAGO – As the first criminal case against Donald Trump gets underway in New York City, the media have forgone their customary practice of declaring the “trial of the century.” Trial of the month is more like it, since three more are set to follow. The sheer number of criminal trials involving different allegations – hush money payments, retention of confidential documents, and election interference – would seem to guarantee a conviction and Trump’s final ejection from public life.

A conviction is indeed possible, even likely. But neither a conviction nor even jail time would disqualify Trump from running for the presidency. The important question is what impact a conviction might have on voters’ choices on election day. Given that most people have already made up their minds about Trump, we are talking about a small, obscure group of undecided voters in a handful of swing states. And given that most of these people seem to have little interest in, or knowledge of, politics, they likely know very little about the accusations against Trump. The media deluge from the trials may finally end their ignorance.

The trial in New York is about business records, not insurrections or national security. The indictment accuses Trump of violating a New York statute under which a person who, with fraudulent intent, “makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise” is guilty of a felony if he intended to conceal or commit another crime.

The “other crime” is not clearly identified in the indictment, but the focus of the trial is likely to be a federal campaign-finance violation (or possibly a violation of New York election law). Trump’s then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, paid hush money to the adult-film actress Stormy Daniels, who had threatened to disclose to a tabloid a sexual encounter with Trump. Paying money to someone to help a campaign is a campaign expenditure, and Cohen admitted to violating the law both by making a payment in excess of legal limits and failing to report it. Trump is accused of orchestrating this scheme, though he has not been indicted for the alleged campaign-finance violations.

The legal issues and the facts of the case are weirdly intricate. The US government did investigate Trump for violating federal campaign-finance law, but government lawyers probably feared that a jury would find that he concealed the hush-money payoff because it was personally embarrassing, not because it helped his campaign. That is what happened when the government prosecuted but failed to convict John Edwards in connection with the coverup of an extramarital affair during his 2008 Democratic presidential primary campaign.

continued

>>20762521

Alvin Bragg, the New York district attorney, is not required to prove that Trump violated the campaign-finance law, only that he intended to do so. The federal government’s failure to indict Trump for campaign-finance violations suggests that Bragg may need to prove to a jury that Trump intended to commit a crime that the jury won’t think he actually committed. In making the journey into Trump’s brain to discover what exactly the man was thinking eight years ago, Bragg’s Virgil will be Cohen, an ex-con and admitted perjurer. Daniels will also testify.

You might think that this circus of seedy characters and events would end Trump’s electoral chances for good, just as Edwards’s dalliance destroyed his political career. But that would be a mistake, one that has been made a thousand times before. For Trump’s supporters, every new disclosure about his shocking behavior and repulsive character merely confirms the malevolence of the disclosers. In their view, Bragg’s prosecution of Trump for a business-records violation is actually an attempt to derail Trump’s campaign for the presidency by distracting him and exposing him to public embarrassment.

Exhibit A for this theory may be that Bragg has styled his business-records case as an election interference case rather than as a minor financial peccadillo. Bragg argues that Trump is a threat to New York’s reputation for business probity and to US democracy, bridging this yawning gulf by pointing out that the false business records concealed a campaign-finance violation that would have persuaded people to vote against Trump back in 2016 if they had learned of it. Hence, minor financial fraud is transmuted into major election interference. But the logic assumes that a substantial number of voters would not have supported Trump if they had known about the Daniels affair – an unknowable and perhaps implausible proposition. It also stumbles on the inconvenient fact that the business-records falsification occurred after the election, not before it. Trump may have attempted to interfere with the election by depriving voters of information about (parts of) his scandalous past, but it is not clear that it affected the outcome.

So, how much will this trial matter? It won’t change Trump voters’ support and may be too confusing to influence those independent voters who have not been paying attention to electoral politics. Maybe all that matters is the symbolism of the thing. If Trump is thrown in jail, he will surely present himself as a political prisoner in the mold of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn or Alexei Navalny. But the image of Trump being led off in handcuffs, or the (mental) image of him being strip-searched upon his reception into jail, will probably have more impact on people than anything that is revealed at the trial. Are Americans ready to elect a jailbird?

Well, that possibility cannot be ruled out.

end

p.s anon had to register to the site to get the full article.

so put in a email

Qteam@lasershark.com

for those anons who want to get articles but do not want to give their email address, remember to use a vpn and a fake email which only lasts a hour. see link below

https://www.guerrillamail.com/inbox

>>20762539

>>20762521

ERICK POSNER, THE AUTHOR IF THIS ARTICLE - VERY CONNECTED BTW

Image found of him on another article that he penned.

Sure anons can find him on X aka twitter and let him know what you think of his opines.

----

https://muckrack.com/eric-a-posner/articles

https://www.arabnews.com/node/2493091

>>20762614

so much bigger..