Judge Merchan unconditionally discharges Trump’s sentence in the “hush money” case
This was expected, but it is still news:
Judge Juan Merchan sentenced President-elect Donald Trump to unconditional discharge.
In New York, an unconditional discharge means the court found someone committed the crime but thinks a punishment doesn’t serve a purpose.
That means Trump won’t serve prison time, fine, or probation supervision.
The sentencing means Trump is a felon. None of us are stupid. We all know the whole point of this circus was to slap Trump with the felon label.
But they’ve been calling him a felon – a convicted felon – ever since the kangaroo court’s verdict. It was repeated over and over during the campaign. It wasn’t technically true till now, but I doubt most people care or cared about such niceties or have even been aware of them.
The lawfare that has been directed at Trump and others on the right has given a new meaning to the phrase “trumped up charges.” Every time someone on the left talked about how Trump was a convicted felon, it served to remind a great many people of the depths to which the left was willing to go – and actually had gone – to try to destroy Trump. It made the Trump opposition look bad, but they didn’t realize it, which was another example of how far they’d gone.
So now they get to continue to call him a felon. They’ve learned, though, that it didn’t much matter; Trump got elected anyway. It is, however, a way to continue to try to defame him and his supporters, by saying that those who voted for him don’t care about the law and are willing and even eager to vote for a criminal. Such arguments must appeal to those on the left, but fortunately that’s not the majority of the American people.
I can’t resist trying to amaturely psychoanalyze people on the left, in particular the ones who are not dumbies. Anyone with a brain in their head has to know all the cases brought against Trump are trumped up shams that wouldn’t be brought up against anyone who isn’t named “Donald Trump”. And they also must know that none of it does anything but make their side look bad at this point. So why do it at all? They gain nothing and arguably even lose whatever credibility they have left. It all seems so stupid and petty and childish. They get to afix the “Convicted Felon” lable to Trump for a few months until it’s inevitably appealed. So what? This isn’t 2016 or 2020 anymore. And denying it is just idiotic.
Idiotic? Who, Democrats? Surely not, no sir! They are Progessives, who, like Stalinists, intend to rule us FOREVER by the laws from which they exempt themselves.Crafty little bastards.
He’s in temporary good standing with Dreyfus, Thoreau, Solzhenitsyn, Mandela and Sharansky.
Talk about shooting blanks!
I wonder if people in the future will incorrectly think that the expression “trumped-up charges” derives from the lawfare against DJT.
Commenter “Mrs. Whatsit” wanted this judgment so it could be appealed. Now the entire New York justice system is on trial.
Hope it gets turned over for the Kangaroo Courts it was. The show trials of the Soviets in the 50s and 60s got only one thing on Marchan, he didn’t get to execute Trump
One reply: “Al Capone was never convicted of murder. Trump was convicted of something. No justice system is perfect.”
From what I understand, the laws in New York would not prevent Trump from voting in New York, as a convicted felon, and thus the laws of Florida allow Trump to vote in Florida.
I have heard many legal opinions that the verdict will be reversed, so why didn’t the judge just reverse the verdict and let Trump get on with living? Was the convicted felon label more important to him than the “stupid and corrupt judge” label?
Well, apparently so….
And, when it is reversed on any of the grounds, Trump should demand retractions from everyone who defamed him. Sue ’em.
Kate, yes, you’re right. Will New York’s state court system redeem itself? I worked in it for years and, outside NYC at least, the appellate courts are not partisan. Inside the city — well, who knows? So I think the court will do the right thing, maybe. I think it will have to. I can’t imagine the contortions you’d have to go through to write a decision upholding what Merchan did. But I don’t know. I wouldn’t have imagined that the contortions that have already taken place would be possible, so I don’t trust myself. I’m holding my breath (especially since the First Department still hasn’t ruled on the civil fraud case, and what are they waiting for?)
Lawfare is a natural part of mankind’s Rule of Law (AKA King’s Law), but just not documented:
Republicans don’t seem to care about the use of lawfare unless it involves one of them or Theirs.
Remember what happened to parents who protested the schools who were Child Grooming their children? Seems the FBI & DoJ were heavily involved in that form of lawfare.
Forms of lawfare happens all the time, e.g.:
Trump was just one of the fortunate ones who was rich enough to stand against such practices…most end up in jail, prison, broke, etc.
It is important to remember that The Donald volunteered for political duty on that momentous day in 2016 when he rode down the Trump Tower escalator and announced his candidacy.
He volunteered.
He has survived the Democrats’ shitstorm, the unprincipled, revolting attacks by them, their obscene lawfare, and the MSM, 95% Democrats, that speaks for them.
I am in awe of the man and his amazing fortitude.
Always right? NO. No human is.
Karmi-
civil courts do not yield incarceration judgements. Only in criminal courts! And we have seen how Fani and Bragg use their D.A. offices.
Cicero
Yes, I know. However, there are may forms of lawfare…Criminal & Civil are two, which I tried to show @ 5:09 pm…
Karmi, if all you were saying is that “the rule of law” is a label being used falsely to describe our system which falls much short of that ideal, you’d have the beginnings of an excellent point. But since instead you are saying that “the rule of law” is bad in itself, you don’t have any point at all.
It’s like if you found a tin labeled “Shinola” that really had shit in it, and so you decided that there’s no difference between shit and Shinola. But the correct thing to do is to make sure that there is really is Shinola in the tin before shining our shoes with it.
Karmi-
First you wrote about SLAPPS: “SLAPPs are often disguised as defamation, breach of contract, or other civil claims”.
Hah! CIVIL CLAIMS.
Civil!
Which you followed with this about the losing party in SLAPPS:
“most end up in jail, prison, broke, etc.”
“BROKE” may apply, but “prison” and “jail” do not.
And “etc.” is meaningless unless you have held something up your sleeve. Can you expand on “etc.”?
P.S.: I am not a lawyer.
Niketas Choniates is back there babbling about “the rule of law” & “Shinola” in ref to my comments about lawfare…Geez.
Cicero is back again saying:
I just double-checked, Cicero, and SLAPPs was a form of lawfare in the last quote at the end. Yes, SLAPPS are “other civil claims” as the ChatGPT stated in that last quote at 5:09 pm. Amazing that you were able to connect SLAPPS, Civil, and broke all together.
Yes, lawfare comes in many forms, as I stated clearly. Here are a few more that would fall under forms of lawfare:
That Judicial Overreach covers a lot of lawfare ground…suicides & divorce would be two more under “etc.”
Cicero @ 5:29: What you said.
Trump’s stamina, fortitude, grit –whatever you call it– is astounding. And vivifying. He is such a tough SOB that, like it or not, he inspires and leads.
This is short term pain for long term gain. The case is going to be reversed.
Frankly, if I were Bragg and Merchan, I would have wanted the SC to delay sentencing. Then the case would have been suspended for four years, at which point Bragg and Merchan could have quietly declined to proceed without any appeal, all the while blaming their failure to bag bad orange man on the Supreme Court.
Now, they’re going to be reversed, probably by the NY appellate courts, and in a way that makes it completely clear that their failure to get Trump was their fault and no one else’s.
A hundred years from now, people will think that “trumped up charges” were named for Trump.
But our view is that real justice will not have occurred unless and until the judges and DA’s/ prosecutors in these cases have been disbarred as a minimum, and if viable, convicted of some sort of civil or criminal infraction.
I gather that just defining lawfare, let alone proving that it was purposefully pursued, is a difficult task. Perhaps under some revision of the laws on slander and libel?
@ Dax & Ladyhobbit: “I wonder if people in the future will incorrectly think that the expression “trumped-up charges” derives from the lawfare against DJT.” & “A hundred years from now, people will think that “trumped up charges” were named for Trump.”
The odds are in your favor.
One of my internet hobbies is looking up idioms and phrases that have become proverbial to see how they originated, and I often find some surprises.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/lose-your-marbles.html
This researcher sort of debunks my favorite theory, that the phrase refers to Lord Elgin’s marble treasures looted from the Greeks in 1806 and lost when the ship transporting them to Britain sank, but to your point, he notes this:
The script, IMO, took advantage of the well-known proverb to show it visually (and the idea may have originally come from Wouk’s book, I don’t recall).
As a corollary, I have noticed that many bloggers and even commercial news pundits (1) misuse or (2) misquote proverbs and idioms, most likely because the users are (1) unfamiliar with their actual meanings, and/or (2) don’t have a clue what “ancient” articles, persons, or activities they derive from, and “make up” something that sounds vaguely like what they remember hearing sometime somewhere.
And of course, the errors propagate until people are using the new, incorrect, version more than the original. That’s why we geezers scratch our heads over things like “a hard road to hoe” (row, as in weeding the ground between crops, not attacking asphalt driving surfaces), and “in like flint” for “in like Flynn” for a more contemporary example.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/in-like-flynn.html
I’m sure that has happened in the past as well, and so proverbs, idioms, and even words evolve in meaning and application; when they are on the borderline of migrating from past to future, those of us in the present can be caught between two stools on which to use.
See also the fate of the Lady Mondegreen, which I think we have discussed here in the past.
https://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/264550.html
AesopFan, Dax and LadyHobbit,
Interesting speculation and information. I’ll bet 20% of Americans would already assume that phrase relates to DJT if asked about it in a poll. Regardless, that’s almost certainly to be the case as time moves forward, as you postulate. I imagine people will also assume “Trump’ing” in card games also comes from a reference to him.
We need an appeal, because we need an SC precedent on this kind of activity. The most frequent kind of tyranny in the English-speaking world since the days of Henry VII has been judicial tyranny. The issue is not whether the President has immunity. I’m not worried about Trump. The question is whether a judge and prosecutor can cook up a felony out of old misdemeanors in a field where they don’t have jurisdiction, find a hostile jury, and use it to target a political enemy. That’s a bigger threat to the Republic than anything Trump has ever done. We need an appeal for the rest of us.
Please keep in mind that most Democratic voters are perfectly content with the travesties we’ve seen in New York, DC, Atlanta, and Minneapolis. They pretend it isn’t happening or they make excuses for it. These are your neighbors. These are your relatives.
A radio host I listen to speaks of the Law being used as a spear against citizens, rather than a shield for their liberties.
—————————————————————
AesopFan, Rufus T. Firefly and LadyHobbit,
Thanks for your replies about ‘trump’ as a verb, especially AesopFan’s (as usual) comprehensive one. If one looks up word derivations, this sort of thing is common. People object to misuses of words, but eventually the mutated words become standardized through usage.
I wasn’t aware of AesopFan’s explanation of “losing one’s marbles”. I always assumed it referred to a child’s game of marbles, where the child lost his marbles (lost the game and his property) and then “lost his mind”.
—————————————————————-
Also, great comment by Art Deco at 10 am today!
The original family name was “Drumph”, until Donald’s immigrant forebears changed it to “Trump”, so it was his family who imitated the card game move, rather than the other way around.