Today's Brian & Glenn

I think I get it - gotta be careful about setting precedent, and you don't wanna hand the bad guys a weapon they can use against you later (assuming of course we actually find our way outa this fucked up mess), and we have to interpret the law, and apply the law, and not try to make the law on the judiciary side - etc etc etc. I'm there. I get it.

But goddammit - I'm so fucking sick of rich people stomping around in smarmspace manufacturing loopholes - using and abusing the courts to duck responsibility.

Here's a thought: Obey the fucking law. Could we try that for a while?

Go Judge Go

District Judge Matthew Barrett roasted Tina Peters at her sentencing hearing.

9 years in the big house, and many thousands in fines.

Judge Barrett:

“You are no hero. You abused your position – and you’re a charlatan who used, and is still using your prior position to peddle a snake oil that’s been proven to be junk time and time again. Your lies are well-documented and these convictions are serious. I’m convinced you’d do it all over again if you could. You’re as defiant a defendant as this court has ever seen.”

Tina Peters was the county clerk (Mesa Cnty) in western Colorado who started criming and just couldn't stop herself.

She's headed for the Colorado State Penitentiary in Cañon City.

It's a bit long - Barrett had a lot to slam her with.

By Design

One of the little maneuvers that Trump is using is tried-n-true.

1. Fuck something up
2. Wait
3. Point at it and say, "Oh look - it's fucked up - lemme fix that for ya."

Among my favorite examples is when Manuel Noriega needed to do an election, and he knew it wouldn't go well for him, and he knew one of the consequences was that he'd be in prison for a good long time.

So he sent his goons out on election day to steal &/or stuff ballot boxes, and harass voters, etc. When all this was reported, he claimed the election was bad and the outcome couldn't be trusted, and that he, being all patriotic and very interested in justice and blah blah blah - he would stay on as president to get the whole thing straightened out, and maybe we can do another election sometime down the road.

 With Trump, I think I see the same kind of game being played in his Election Interference (Jan6) case before Tanya Chutkan in DC.

He petitions the court for various things in order to delay the trial. Now that certain issues have been resolved, and Smith has filed a superseding indictment, and the thing seems to be back on track, Trump is beefing about how it's too close to election day, and going forward with it would be - say it with me now - Election Interference.

I truly hope all of that is as obvious - and as boring - to everybody as it seems to me.

Further, on a slightly different note, there are at least 77 witnesses referenced in Smith's new filing, along with 6 co-conspirators.

That's a whole big bunch of witnesses.

Read the full filing here

A question: If Trump claims to have been acting in his official capacity, and he was working on his campaign stuff from the oval office, then maybe he can smarm his way out of the main charges because of immunity, but wouldn't he be smarming his way into a shitload of Taft Act violations?

Read Jack Smith’s unsealed court filing that says Trump ‘resorted to crimes’ after 2020 election

Donald Trump laid the groundwork to try to overturn the 2020 election even before he lost, knowingly pushed false claims of voter fraud and “resorted to crimes” in his failed bid to cling to power, according to a newly unsealed court filing from prosecutors that offers new evidence from the landmark criminal case against the former president.

The filing from special counsel Jack Smith’s team offers the most comprehensive view to date of what prosecutors intend to prove if the case charging Trump with conspiring to overturn the election reaches trial.

Though a months-long congressional investigation and the indictment itself have chronicled in stark detail Trump’s efforts to undo the election, the filing cites previously unknown accounts offered by Trump’s closest aides to paint a portrait of an “increasingly desperate” president who while losing his grip on the White House “used deceit to target every stage of the electoral process.”

“So what?” the filing quotes Trump as telling an aide after being advised that his vice president, Mike Pence, had been rushed to a secure location after a crowd of violent Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021 to try to prevent the counting of electoral votes.

“The details don’t matter,” Trump said, when told by an adviser that a lawyer who was mounting his legal challenges wouldn’t be able to prove the false allegations in court, the filing states.

The brief was made public over the Trump legal team’s objections in the final month of a closely contested presidential race in which Democrats have sought to make Trump’s refusal to accept the election results four years ago central to their claims that he is unfit for office.

The issue surfaced as recently as Tuesday night’s vice presidential debate when Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, lamented the violence at the Capitol while a Republican opponent, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, refused to directly answer when asked whether Trump had lost the 2020 race.

The filing was submitted, initially under seal, following a Supreme Court opinion that conferred broad immunity on former presidents for official acts they take in office, a decision that narrowed the scope of the prosecution and eliminated the possibility of a trial before next month’s election.

The purpose of the brief is to persuade U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan that the offenses charged in the indictment were undertaken in Trump’s private, rather than presidential capacity, and can therefore remain part of the case as it moves forward. Chutkan permitted a redacted version to be made public even though Trump’s lawyers argued that it was unfair to unseal it so close to the election.

Though the prospects of a trial are uncertain, particularly in the event that Trump wins the presidency and a new attorney general seeks the dismissal of the case, the brief nonetheless functions as a roadmap for the testimony and evidence prosecutors would elicit before a jury.

“Although the defendant was the incumbent President during the charged conspiracies, his scheme was fundamentally a private one,” Smith’s team wrote, adding, “When the defendant lost the 2020 presidential election, he resorted to crimes to try to stay in office.”

Trump campaign spokesman Steven Cheung called the brief “falsehood-ridden” and “unconstitutional” and repeated oft-stated allegations that Smith and Democrats were “hell-bent on weaponizing the Justice Department in an attempt to cling to power.” Trump, in a separate post on his Truth Social platform, said the case would end with his “complete victory.”

The filing alleges that Trump “laid the groundwork” for rejecting the election results before the contest was over, telling advisers that in the event he held an early lead he would “declare victory before the ballots were counted and any winner was projected.”

Immediately after the election, prosecutors say, his advisers sought to sow chaos in the counting of votes. In one instance, a campaign employee, who is also described as a Trump co-conspirator, was told that results favoring Democrat Joe Biden at a Michigan polling center appeared accurate. The person is alleged to have replied: “find a reason it isnt” and “give me options to file litigation.”

Prosecutors also alleged that Trump advanced claims of fraud despite knowing they were false, describing how he told others that allegations of election regularity made by attorney Sidney Powell were “crazy” and referenced the science fiction series “Star Trek.” Even so, days later, he promoted on the platform then known as Twitter a lawsuit she was about to file.

In demonstrating his apparent indifference to the accuracy of the election fraud claims, prosecutors also cite an account of a White House staffer who after the election overheard Trump telling his wife, daughter and son-in-law on Marine One: “It doesn’t matter if you won or lost the election. You still have to fight like hell.”

The filing also includes details of conversations between Trump and Pence, including a private lunch the two had on Nov. 12, 2020, in which Pence “reiterated a face-saving option” for Trump, telling him, “Don’t concede but recognize the process is over.”

In another private lunch days later, Pence urged Trump to accept the results of the election and run again in 2024.

“I don’t know, 2024 is so far off,” Trump told him, the filing states.

Prosecutors say that by Dec. 5, the defendant was starting to think about Congress’ role in the process.

“For the first time, he mentioned to Pence the possibility of challenging the election results in the House of Representatives,” it says, citing a phone call.

But Trump “disregarded” Pence “in the same way he disregarded dozens of court decisions that unanimously rejected his and his allies’ legal claims, and that he disregarded officials in the targeted states — including those in his own party — who stated publicly that he had lost and that his specific fraud allegations were false,” prosecutors wrote.

Pence chronicled some of his interactions with Trump, and his eventual split with him, in a 2022 book he wrote called “So Help Me God.” He also was ordered to appear before the grand jury investigating Trump after courts rejected claims of executive privilege.

Prosecutors also argue Trump used his Twitter account to further his illegal scheme by spreading false claims of election fraud, attacking “those speaking the truth” about his election loss and exhorting his supporters to travel to Washington for the Jan. 6, 2021, certification.

They intend to use “forensic evidence” from Trump’s iPhone to provide insight into Trump’s actions after the attack at the Capitol.

Of the more than 1,200 Tweets Trump sent during the weeks detailed in the indictment, prosecutors say, the vast majority were about the 2020 election, including those falsely claiming Pence could reject electors even though the vice president had told Trump that he had no such power.

That “steady stream of disinformation” in the weeks after the election culminated in his speech at the Ellipse on the morning of Jan. 6, 2021, in which Trump “used these lies to inflame and motivate the large and angry crowd of his supporters to march to the Capitol and disrupt the certification proceeding,” prosecutors wrote.

His “personal desperation was at its zenith” that morning as he was “only hours from the certification proceeding that spelled the end,” prosecutors wrote.

At some point, Trump will be gone - but once he's gone, this shit ain't over.

Vance was picked for a reason. Stay sharp.

To The Big House

The Federal Prison in Danbury CT isn't exactly Super Max, but it's not a country club either.

It's listed as 'low security', so it's played host to several celebrity inmates.

Steve Bannon has to report for intake by tomorrow - Monday, July 1.

Steve Bannon says he has no regrets as he heads to prison

Ex-Trump White House adviser spoke with ABC "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl.

On Monday, Steve Bannon will be behind bars in federal prison, but the ex-Trump White House adviser said Friday he's feeling great and has no regrets about defying Congress to avoid talking about his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol by a pro-Trump mob.

In fact, Bannon told ABC "This Week" co-anchor Jonathan Karl that he considers himself a "political prisoner" and that his four-month sentence will only make his influence grow.

"I'm a political prisoner ... It won't change me. It will not suppress my voice. My voice will not be suppressed when I'm there," he told Karl.

Bannon is set to report to federal prison on Monday after the Supreme Court denied a request Friday to remain out of prison while he continues to appeal his contempt of Congress conviction.

Bannon was sentenced to four months in prison in October 2022 after being found guilty of defying a subpoena from the House select committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

After Bannon was sentenced, U.S. District Judge Carl Nichols agreed to postpone the jail term while Bannon appealed the conviction. Last month the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his conviction and Nichols ordered Bannon on June 6 to report to prison on July 1.

Watch more of Jonathan Karl's interview with Steve Bannon on Sunday's episode of "This Week."

Bannon told Karl he still has no regrets about defying the House Jan. 6 committee's subpoena and is looking to appeal the court decision.

"If it took me going to prison to finally get the House to start to move, to start to delegitimize the illegitimate J6 committee, then, hey, guess what, my going to prison is worth it," he said.

The January 6th committee was established by a House resolution that passed along party lines in 2021 by a vote of 222-190. Two Republicans, Illinois' Adam Kinzinger and Wyoming's Liz Cheney, joined Democrats in supporting the measure and later served on the committee.

On the brighter side - the guy will get at least one shower. But now the image of a cavity search is stuck in my stoopid little brain, and it may take several days, dozens of Margaritas, and good scrubbing to forget it.

Today's Dual Purpose

Give your adversary a dilemma

instead of a problem.

He can solve problems, but give him a dilemma, and he can be wrong no matter what he does or how he addresses it.

In politics, it's basically the same, but you want to set it up for yourself so you can benefit no matter the outcome.

Roger Stone:

Evidence Trump has Judge Cannon in his pocket: Lauren Windsor secretly recorded Roger Stone during a March 19 event at Mar-a-Lago. And he commented, "We are beating them. I think the judge is on the verge of dismissing the charges against him in Florida." pic.twitter.com/spHhgAAgeo

— Bill Madden (@maddenifico) June 21, 2024

By playing the guy in the know (whether he actually knows anything or not), Stone gets the upfront benefit of perpetuating his "insider" status.

If Cannon blows off the charges against Trump, then Stone can nod knowingly - wink wink nudge nudge - because his reputation and credibility have been burnished. He can claim he's still relevant, and go on collecting fat stacks for being a top-shelf rat-fucker.

If he's "wrong", &/or Cannon gets bumped from the case, then he pivots to Outraged Victim Mode - I hope to fuck we all know what that formula looks like by now - which again includes Stone collecting paychecks, although they may not be quite as heavily gilded.

BTW, none of this should distract from the probability that Judge Cannon really is dirty. There's something at work with her that doesn't jibe.

Just Desserts, - Part - uhm Something

If it was possible, I'd erase Alex Jones like he tried to erase 20 kids, 6 adults and their families in Sandy Hook. Just scrape him off the bottom of the cosmic shoe. Maybe we could leave a small plaque nailed to a fence out east of BumFuck Nowhere:

There was a total jackass named Alex Jones who was such a god-awful shitty guy that the universe should never have made him possible. The only reason he rates any mention at all is that he had a lot power, and a lot of money, and he thought that gave him the right to do whatever the fuck he wanted. But then decent people stood up and slapped his fool mouth clean around to the other side of his beachball-lookin' head.

And now that you've read this plaque, go ahead and spit on it - and then forget you ever had the misfortunate of hearing that asshole's name.

Alex Jones’ personal assets to be sold to pay $1.5B Sandy Hook debt. Company bankruptcy is dismissed

HOUSTON (AP) — A federal judge on Friday ordered the liquidation of conspiracy theorist Alex Jones′ personal assets but dismissed his company’s separate bankruptcy case, leaving the immediate future of his Infowars media platform uncertain as he owes $1.5 billion for his false claims that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a hoax.

Judge Christopher Lopez approved converting Jones’ proposed personal bankruptcy reorganization to a liquidation. But Lopez threw out the case of his company, Austin, Texas-based Free Speech Systems, after failed attempts by Jones to reach an agreement with Sandy Hook families on his proposals to reorganize and keep operating the company while paying them millions of dollars.

It wasn’t immediately clear what will happen in the coming weeks to Free Speech Systems, Infowars’ parent company, which Jones built into a multimillion-dollar moneymaker over the past 25 years by selling dietary supplements and other products. But both Jones and lawyers for the Sandy Hook families said they expect Infowars to cease operating at some point because of the huge debt.

A trustee appointed Friday in Jones’ personal bankruptcy case to oversee the liquidation now has control over his assets, including Infowars, according to lawyers for Sandy Hook families.

Dismissal of Free Speech Systems’ case means the families can now move immediately to collect on the $1.5 billion in state courts in Texas and Connecticut where they won defamation lawsuits against Jones and the company. It’s possible Infowars will continue operating during the collection efforts, which could include selling off the company’s assets.

Jones, who smiled as the judge dismissed the company’s case, called in to Infowars after the court hearing and predicted more battles in the state courts. “The bizarre political attempts to hijack the operation have failed,” he said, and added that he would find another way to broadcast his shows if he loses Infowars.

Outside the courthouse, he railed about the families not accepting his reorganization proposals and alleged that they were being used by political groups in a conspiracy to silence him. He said he would try to maximize revenues at Infowars to make money for creditors and then wind down the business in a way that takes care of its 44 employees.

“This is about taking me off the air,” Jones said. “Understand that what you’ve seen in the corporate media about me, or what I said about Sandy Hook or any of this, has no bearing on reality.”

Chris Mattei, a lawyer for the Sandy Hook families, called Infowars “soon-to-be defunct” as his clients move to collect on the debt in state courts. He said the families will also pursue Jones’ future earnings.

“Today is a good day,” Mattei said in a text message after the hearing. “Alex Jones has lost ownership of Infowars, the corrupt business he has used for years to attack the Connecticut families and so many others. ... Alex Jones is neither a martyr nor a victim. He is the perpetrator of the worst defamation in American history.”

Lopez had been asked to either convert Free Speech Systems’ bankruptcy reorganization to a liquidation or dismiss the case. He said his sole focus was what would be best for the company and its creditors. He also said Free Speech Systems’ case appeared to be one of the longest running of its kind in the country, and it was approaching a deadline to resolve it.

“I was never asked today to make a decision to shut down a show or not. That was never going to happen today one way or another,” Lopez said. “This case is one of the more difficult cases I’ve had. When you look at it, I think creditors are better served in pursuing their state court rights.”

Many of Jones’ personal assets will be sold off, but his primary home in the Austin area and some other belongings are exempt from bankruptcy liquidation. He already has moved to sell his Texas ranch worth about $2.8 million, a gun collection and other assets to pay debts.

In the lead-up to Friday’s hearing, Jones had been telling his web viewers and radio listeners that Free Speech Systems was on the verge of being shut down because of the bankruptcy. He urged them to download videos from his online archive to preserve them and pointed them to a new website of his father’s company if they want to continue buying the dietary supplements he sells on his show.

Jones has about $9 million in personal assets, according to the most recent financial filings in court. Free Speech Systems has about $6 million in cash on hand and about $1.2 million worth of inventory, according to J. Patrick Magill, the chief restructuring officer appointed by the court to run the company during the bankruptcy.

During Friday’s hearing, lawyers for the Sandy Hook families repeated claims that Jones illegally diverted millions of dollars both before and during the bankruptcies, and questioned his sending his audience to his father’s website. The families have a pending lawsuit in Texas accusing Jones of illegally diverting money, which he denies, and said they will continue efforts to claw it back.

Jones and Free Speech Systems filed for bankruptcy protection in 2022, when relatives of many victims of the 2012 school shooting that killed 20 first graders and six educators in Newtown, Connecticut, won lawsuit judgments of more than $1.4 billion in Connecticut and $49 million in Texas.

The relatives said they were traumatized by Jones’ comments and his followers’ actions. They have testified about being harassed and threatened by Jones’ believers, some of whom confronted the grieving families in person saying the shooting never happened and their children never existed. One parent said someone threatened to dig up his dead son’s grave.

Jones is appealing the judgments in the state courts.

The families in the Connecticut lawsuit, including relatives of eight dead children and adults, had asked that Free Speech Systems’ bankruptcy case also be converted to a liquidation. But the parents in the Texas suit — whose child, 6-year-old Jesse Lewis, died — wanted the company’s case dismissed, saying it would speed up collection of Jones’ debt to them.

Lawyers for the company filed documents indicating it supported liquidation, but attorneys for Jones’ personal bankruptcy case wanted the judge to dismiss the company’s case.

Boebert Bombs Again

Lauren Boebert fails in effort to get defamation lawsuit against her thrown out

A lawsuit against U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert can move forward on some of its claims, a federal magistrate judge in Colorado recommended Sunday.

The lawsuit comes from political activist David Wheeler of North Carolina and the super PAC American Muckrakers, of which he is president. Filed a year ago in U.S. District Court of Colorado, it alleges that Boebert made “maliciously false statements” about Wheeler and American Muckrakers on multiple occasions in 2022, when Boebert was running for reelection and Wheeler, citing sources close to Boebert, published unflattering information about her.

Boebert sought to have the case dismissed under Colorado’s anti-SLAPP law, which protects Coloradans who exercise free speech rights from meritless lawsuits.

In a recommendation that dealt with Boebert’s motion to dismiss the case, as well as a motion from Wheeler to amend his original complaint, U.S. Magistrate Judge Kathryn A. Starnella said that Boebert potentially could be found liable for threatening to sue American Muckrakers donors. But Starnella found that Wheeler’s claim that Boebert defamed him was not likely to succeed.

As Wheeler published negative material about Boebert in 2022, Boebert appeared in various media outlets to rebut his allegations. In a statement to Fox News in June of that year, for example, Boebert said, “Muckrakers’ sloppy, reckless, and wildly irresponsible actions have created substantial legal liability for Muckrakers, David Wheeler in his personal capacity, and each donor to the organization who chose to fund the effort knowing it would result in defamation,” with Boebert’s lawyer adding, “This will be a costly miscalculation for Muckrakers, Wheeler, and Muckrakers’ donors.”

Boebert never followed through by filing a lawsuit against Wheeler or donors, but Wheeler told the court that his organization saw a 92% drop in donations due to Boebert’s remarks.

“Defendant’s threats to sue Plaintiffs’ sponsors and donors are unprotected because they were neither made in good faith nor in serious contemplation of litigation,” Starnella wrote. “While Defendant has an interest in protecting her reputation, even through litigation, Plaintiffs’ donors and sponsors have a weightier interest in exercising their First Amendment right to engage in political speech (in the form of financial donations to political action committees) without fear of retaliation.”

Starnella added, “The Court finds no social value in allowing elected officials to silence speech they dislike by threatening gadfly journalists’ donors, who have not themselves engaged in any unlawful or tortious activity.”

She said that Wheeler is “reasonably likely to prevail” in court on his claim that Boebert improperly interfered with American Muckrakers’ ability to work with previous and future donors and supporters.

Starnella also said that other portions of Wheeler’s original complaint, including defamation allegations, should not move forward. She wrote that both parties have two weeks to ask a U.S. district judge assigned to the case to reconsider her recommendation. Federal magistrate judges are appointed by district judges to oversee certain judicial proceedings.

Reached by email a spokesperson for Boebert did not immediately comment.

Wheeler declined to comment.

Boebert represents Colorado’s 3rd Congressional District, which covers the western part of the state, but this year she moved to Windsor to run in the 4th District, which covers the eastern part of the state.

She is competing in the June 25 Republican primary election against five other candidates.

This Is Justice?

Guilty on ALL charges!!!  All - uh - all 2 of 'em.

"Conservatives" are ridiculous people.

And some of the comments are kinda sad, and a little sadly comical.

zuk86
And Joe will pardon him. Anything for family.

woailyx
Probably not before the election

zuk86
Agree that Joe Biden wanted to make the justice system work as attended. If he pardoned his son, it will looked real bad for his reelection chances. If he's wins/loses, he will pardoned his son.

Neat-Celebration2721
Right after the election he will.

RedBaronsBrother
He might wait. Hunter goes to trial on tax charges in California next, and there was just a criminal referral for perjury for lying under oath to Congress.

My guess is he will wait as long as possible, so as to pardon Hunter for as many crimes as possible in one shot, without Hunter actually going to prison, where he might decide to flip on Joe to get out.

What remains to be seen is whether there will be a deal for Joe to announce that he is not running for re-election in exchange for a promise to pardon him and his family from the new Democrat nominee.

Convicted Felon Donald Trump

He can be president but he can’t be a nurse: The jobs Trump can’t get with felony convictions

Trump’s power and influence will help him avoid major hurdles facing millions of Americans with felony convictions trying to get back to work, Alex Woodward reports

• He cannot legally bartend in Florida, but he can be president of the United States.
• He can be legally denied certain public housing, but he could soon live at the White House.
• He cannot legally possess a firearm in any state, but he could soon command the country’s nuclear arsenal.

Donald Trump joined the nearly 20 million Americans with felony convictions when a jury in New York found him guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree on May 30.

But unlike the millions of Americans re-entering society after conviction and incarcerations, who face countless barriers to decent jobs, housing, healthcare, childcare, and the ability to vote, among other hurdles, Trump can rely on his immense wealth, influence and potential path to the presidency to avoid them.

It is unlikely he will face any jailtime (Manhattan prosecutors are not seeking any), and if he wins the 2024 presidential election, the terms of a probationary sentence – the most likely outcome – could be jammed up by his challenges in federal courts to allow him to do the kinds of things one would need to do as president, like travel out of state.

“It’s a completely different world,” according to Wanda Bertram, communications specialist with the nonpartisan nonprofit research organization Prison Policy Initiative.

“He’s not even going to think about the kind of barriers that people who are coming out of prison are going to face,” she tells The Independent.

“Donald Trump is going to be able to avoid not just the immediate consequences of a felony conviction, as they apply to most people, but also the downstream consequences,” she says. “This thing that tends to happen to people where, because of their felony conviction, they can’t get a job, they can’t get housing, they can’t get healthcare, and then, because of the combination of those things, then they’re reincarcerated or convicted for something else.”

The heaps of contradictions facing Trump’s post-conviction life – can’t have a gun but can control the nation’s military, can’t hold certain occupational licenses but can be president, can’t vote in certain states but can be the thing people are voting for – were probably not the dilemmas that the nation’s founders considered.

But they expose the wild gaps between a powerful billionaire navigating the criminal justice system and the rest of us.

Nearly four out of every 10 people in state prison were jobless in the month leading up to their arrest, according the Prison Policy Initiative. Black people (46 per cent) and women (53 per cent) in state prisons were more likely to have not had a job in that time, the group found.

More than half a million Americans return to their communities each year after incarceration, but most face job rejection and long streaks of unemployment thanks to discriminatory hiring practices, occupational license restrictions and short-term and unstable, low-paying positions.

“If you’re Donald Trump, you can kind of make your own work,” Bertram says. “That’s the privilege of having a lot of money – you can gin up some new venture.”

Many state licensing laws include blanket disqualifications for people with criminal records, meaning that state boards don’t have to scrutinize applications or think twice about revoking licenses if they come from a person with certain felony convictions.

Other state boards may have more discretion to grant licenses to applicants with a criminal conviction, but for millions of people with records, “they’re just one more applicant,” Bertram says.

“They’re just a number,” she says. “They can try to appeal the decision, and they don’t hear anything. … Trump and so many billionaires and millionaires have so many other avenues of recourse to try to pull strings. … If you’re formerly incarcerated, you probably don’t have access to even the kind of legal assistance that might be able to help you overcome this.”

Trump can be president again, but state-level occupational licensing restrictions would block any other person with felony convictions from a range of jobs across the country.

Some of those restrictions, according to the Prison Policy Initiative and the National Conference of State Legislatures: Trump can’t work for a casino in Illinois or a vet in Indiana, in pest control in North Carolina, he can’t sell a car in Mississippi, or work in any healthcare setting in Virginia.

Even in New York, if he wanted a real estate brokers license, he would need permission from the secretary of state.

In Florida, he can’t be a firefighter or legally tend bar at his Mar-a-Lago compound; Florida law prohibits bars from employing bartenders who have been convicted of a felony within five years.

And unlike many people with felony convictions, Trump will still probably be able to vote for himself in the upcoming election, as long as he is not behind bars.

He can still vote from New York or his home in Florida if he is on probation.

Voting laws in Florida – where Trump is registered to vote – defer to the rules in the state where a person was convicted. The state’s Republican Governor Ron DeSantis even announced he would personally ensure Trump could vote, despite rolling back voting rights for thousands of Florida residents with felony convictions.

In 2018, Florida voters overwhelmingly supported a measure to restore voting rights for most Floridians with convictions who had completed the terms of their sentence. But in 2019, DeSantis signed a law mandating that certain people with felony convictions can only regain their voting rights after they pay all related fines, fees and restitution.

“That would be easy for [Trump] to do,” Bertram says. “For most people who are coming out of prison, in Florida or elsewhere, they are saddled with a lot of criminal justice-related fees that are hard for them to pay off because they get in the way of other things that they need to do to get back on their feet right. … There’s a magnitude of difference between the fines that he’s paying, or the amount of money that he has, versus the amount of money that the average formerly incarcerated person or person with a felony conviction has and how much money they have to pay.”

Buying "Loyalty"

Once is a fluke

Twice is a coincidence

Three times is a crime spree

Another long one from ProPublica.

Multiple Trump Witnesses Have Received Significant Financial Benefits From His Businesses, Campaign

Witnesses in the various criminal cases against the former president have gotten pay raises, new jobs and more. If any benefits were intended to influence testimony, that could be a crime.

Nine witnesses in the criminal cases against former President Donald Trump have received significant financial benefits, including large raises from his campaign, severance packages, new jobs, and a grant of shares and cash from Trump’s media company.

The benefits have flowed from Trump’s businesses and campaign committees, according to a ProPublica analysis of public disclosures, court records and securities filings. One campaign aide had his average monthly pay double, from $26,000 to $53,500. Another employee got a $2 million severance package barring him from voluntarily cooperating with law enforcement. And one of the campaign’s top officials had her daughter hired onto the campaign staff, where she is now the fourth-highest-paid employee.

These pay increases and other benefits often came at delicate moments in the legal proceedings against Trump. One aide who was given a plum position on the board of Trump’s social media company, for example, got the seat after he was subpoenaed but before he testified.

Significant changes to a staffer’s work situation, such as bonuses, pay raises, firings or promotions, can be evidence of a crime if they come outside the normal course of business. To prove witness tampering, prosecutors would need to show that perks or punishments were intended to influence testimony.

White-collar defense lawyers say the situation Trump finds himself in — in the dual role of defendant and boss of many of the people who are the primary witnesses to his alleged crimes — is not uncommon. Their standard advice is not to provide any unusual benefits or penalties to such employees. Ideally, decisions about employees slated to give evidence should be made by an independent body such as a board, not the boss who is under investigation.

Even if the perks were not intended to influence witnesses, they could prove troublesome for Trump in any future trials. Prosecutors could point to the benefits to undermine the credibility of those aides on the witness stand.

“It feels very shady, especially as you detect a pattern. … I would worry about it having a corrupt influence,” Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, said after hearing from ProPublica about benefits provided to potential Trump witnesses.

But McQuade said these cases are difficult to prove, even if the intent were actually to influence testimony, because savvy defendants don’t explicitly attach strings to the benefits and would more likely be “all wink and a nod, ‘You’re a great, loyal employee, here’s a raise.’”

In response to questions from ProPublica, a Trump campaign official said that any raises or other benefits provided to witnesses were the result of their taking on more work due to the campaign or his legal cases heating up, or because they took on new duties.

The official added that Trump himself isn’t involved in determining how much campaign staffers are paid, and that compensation is entirely delegated to the campaign’s top leaders. “The president is not involved in the decision-making process,” the official said. “I would argue Trump doesn’t know what we’re paid.”

Campaign spokesperson Steven Cheung said in a statement that “the 2024 Trump campaign is the most well-run and professional operation in political history. Any false assertion that we’re engaging in any type of behavior that may be regarded as tampering is absurd and completely fake.”

Trump’s attorney, David Warrington, sent ProPublica a cease-and-desist letter demanding this article not be published. The letter warned that if the outlet and its reporters “continue their reckless campaign of defamation, President Trump will evaluate all legal remedies.”

It’s possible the benefits are more widespread. Payments from Trump campaign committees are disclosed publicly, but the finances of his businesses are mostly private, so raises, bonuses and other payments from those entities are not typically disclosed.

ProPublica did not find evidence that Trump personally approved the pay increases or other benefits. But Trump famously keeps close watch over his operations and prides himself on penny-pinching. One former aide compared working for the Trump Organization, his large company, to “a small family business” where every employee “in some sense reports to Mr. Trump.” Former aides have said Trump demands unwavering loyalty from subordinates, even when their duties require independence. After his Attorney General Jeff Sessions decided to recuse himself against then-President Trump’s wishes, paving the way for a special counsel to investigate his campaign’s ties to Russia, Trump fumed about being crossed. “Where’s my Roy Cohn?” Trump asked, referring to the notorious former aide to Sen. Joseph McCarthy who later served as Trump’s faithful fixer long before Trump became president.

Some Noteworthy Witnesses Who Received Benefits

Boris Epshteyn
Trump campaign adviser

Benefit: Pay more than doubled

Susie Wiles
Head of Trump campaign

Benefit: Payments to firm spiked, campaign hired her daughter

Margo Martin
Trump aide

Benefit: Received a roughly 20% raise

Dan Scavino
Trump aide

Benefit: Appointed to board of Trump Media

Jennifer Little
Trump attorney

Benefit: Payments to her law firm dramatically increased

Evan Corcoran
Trump lawyer

Benefit: Payments to his law firm dramatically increased

Allen Weisselberg
Trump Organization executive

Benefit: Lucrative severance package

In addition to the New York case in which Trump was convicted last week, stemming from hidden payments to a porn star, Trump is facing separate charges federally and in Georgia for election interference and in another federal case for mishandling classified documents.

Attempts to exert undue influence on witnesses have been a repeated theme of Trump-related investigations and criminal cases over the years.

Trump’s former campaign manager and former campaign adviser were convicted on federal witness tampering charges in 2018 and 2019. The campaign adviser had told a witness to “do a ‘Frank Pentangeli,’” referencing a character in “The Godfather Part II” who lies to a Senate committee investigating organized crime. Trump later pardoned both men in the waning days of his presidency. (He did not pardon a co-defendant of the campaign manager who had cooperated with the government.)

During the congressional investigation into the storming of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, a former White House staffer testified that she got a call from a colleague the night before an interview with investigators. The colleague told her Trump’s chief of staff “wants me to let you know that he knows you’re loyal and he knows you’ll do the right thing tomorrow and that you’re going to protect him and the boss.” (A spokesperson for the chief of staff denied that he tried to influence testimony.)

Last year, Trump himself publicly discouraged a witness from testifying in the Georgia case. Trump posted on social media that he had read about a Georgia politician who “will be testifying before the Fulton County Grand Jury. He shouldn’t.”

One witness has said publicly that, when he quit working for Trump in the midst of the classified documents criminal investigation, he was offered golf tournament tickets, a lawyer paid for by Trump and a new job that would have come with a raise. The witness, a valet and manager at Mar-a-Lago, had direct knowledge of the handling of the government documents at the club, the focus of one of the criminal cases against the former president. “I’m sure the boss would love to see you,” the employee, Brian Butler, recalled Trump’s property manager telling him. (The episode was first reported by CNN.)

In an interview with ProPublica, Butler, who declined the offers, said he looked at them “innocently for a while.” But when he added up the benefits plus the timing, he thought “it could be them trying to get me back in the circle.”

One Trump aide who plays a key role in multiple cases is a lawyer named Boris Epshteyn, who became an important figure in Trump’s effort to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

A college classmate of one of Trump’s sons who worked on the 2016 campaign and briefly in the White House, Epshteyn was involved in assembling sets of false electors around the country after Trump lost the 2020 election, and Epshteyn’s emails and texts have come up repeatedly in investigations.

In 2022, he testified before the Georgia grand jury that later indicted Trump on charges related to attempts to overturn the election. The FBI seized his phone, and in April 2023 he was interviewed by the federal special counsel.

In early August 2023, the special counsel charged Trump with conspiracy to defraud the United States and conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding as part of an effort to overturn the 2020 election. A couple weeks later, the Georgia grand jury handed down an indictment accusing Trump of racketeering as part of a plot to overturn the election results in the state. From November 2022 to August 2023, the Trump campaign had paid Epshteyn’s company an average of $26,000 per month. The month after the indictments, his pay hit a new high, $50,000, and climbed in October to $53,500 per month, where it has remained ever since.

Epshteyn is a contractor with the campaign and the payments go to his company, Georgetown Advisory, which is based at a residential home in New Jersey. The company does not appear to have an office or other employees. Campaign filings say the payments are for “communications & legal consulting.”

Kenneth Notter, an attorney at MoloLamken who specializes in white-collar defense, said that a defendant should have a good explanation for a major increase in pay like Epshteyn’s. “Any change in treatment of a witness is something that gets my heart rate up as a lawyer.”

Already in early 2023, months before the pay bump, a Trump campaign spokesperson described Epshteyn to The New York Times as “a deeply valued member of the team” who had “done a terrific job shepherding the legal efforts fighting” the investigations of Trump. The Times reported then that Epshteyn spoke to Trump multiple times per day.

Timothy Parlatore, an attorney who left Trump’s defense team last year citing infighting, found Epshteyn’s large raise baffling. He questioned Epshteyn’s fitness to handle high-stakes criminal defense given his scant experience in the area. “He tries to coordinate all the legal efforts, which is a role he’s uniquely unqualified for,” Parlatore said.

The Trump campaign official told ProPublica that Epshteyn got a pay raise because Trump’s legal cases intensified and, as a result, Epshteyn had more legal work to coordinate. The official declined to say if he started working more hours: “All of us are working 24/7, ... every second of the day.” Epshteyn declined to comment on the record.

Even after the major pay increase, Epshteyn has not devoted all of his working time to the Trump campaign. He has continued to consult for other campaigns in recent months, disclosure filings show. And in November, he got a new role as managing director of a financial services firm in New York called Kenmar Securities, regulatory filings show.

Other employees in Trump’s political orbit have followed a similar pattern — including his top aide.

Trump campaign head Susie Wiles, a Florida political consultant, was present when Trump allegedly went beyond improperly holding onto classified documents and showed them to people lacking proper security clearances.

When Trump was indicted on June 8, 2023, over his handling of the documents, the indictment described Wiles as a “PAC representative.” It described Trump allegedly showing her a classified map related to a military operation, acknowledging “that he should not be showing it” and warning her to “not get too close.”

That June, Right Coast Strategies, the political consulting firm Wiles founded, received its highest-ever monthly payment from the Trump campaign: $75,000, an amount the firm has equaled only once since.

Wiles had been a grand jury witness before the indictment. News reports indicated Wiles had told others that she continued to be loyal to Trump and only testified because she was forced to. (And, according to Wiles, Trump was told she was a witness sometime before the indictment’s June release.)

The Trump campaign official told ProPublica that the spike in payments was largely because Wiles was billing for previous months.

She also got a 20% raise that May, from $25,000 to $30,000 per month. “She went back and redid her contract,” the official said, adding that her role as a witness was not a factor in that raise.

A few months later, the Wiles family got more good news. Wiles’ daughter Caroline, who had done some work for Trump’s first campaign and in the White House, where she reportedly left one job because she didn’t pass a background check, was hired by his campaign. Her salary: $222,000, making her currently the fourth-highest-paid staffer. (The Trump campaign official said her salary included a monthly housing stipend.)

Susie Wiles said she and another campaign official were responsible for hiring her daughter, who she said has an expertise in logistics and was brought on to handle arrangements for surrogates taking Trump’s place at events he couldn’t attend. Wiles said Trump wasn’t involved in the hire.

Caroline Wiles told ProPublica her mother’s position in the campaign played no role in her getting a job, but she declined to describe the circumstances around the job offer. “How did I get the job? Because I have earned it,” she said. “I don’t think it has anything to do with Susie.”

The indictment suggests Susie Wiles herself has been aware of efforts to keep potential witnesses in the fold. Soon after the FBI found classified documents at Mar-a-Lago, a Trump employee was asked in a group text chat that included Wiles to confirm that the club’s property manager “was loyal.”

Wiles told ProPublica she couldn’t talk about the details of the case, but she called the text message exchange “a nothing.”

More generally, she said she was unaware of the need to ensure employees who are witnesses do not appear to be receiving special treatment. “It’s the first time I’ve heard that’s best practice,” she said. “I don’t mind telling you I conduct myself in such a way that I don’t worry about any of that.” Trump, she said, had never talked to her about her role as a witness.

Less powerful aides who are witnesses have also enjoyed career advances.

Margo Martin, a Trump aide who, like Wiles, allegedly witnessed Trump showing off what he described as a secret military document, got a significant raise not long after the classified documents case heated up with the search at Mar-a-Lago.

According to the indictment, Trump told Martin and others the military plan was “secret” and “highly confidential.” “As president I could have declassified it,” he allegedly told the group. “Now I can’t, you know, but this is still a secret.”

A few months before her grand jury appearance, she moved from the payroll of a Trump political committee to a job with the campaign as it was launching. Martin was given a roughly 20% pay raise, from $155,000 to $185,000 per year, according to the Trump campaign. Campaign finance filings show a much larger pay increase for Martin, but the Trump campaign said the filings are misleading because of a difference in how payroll taxes and withholdings are reported by the two committees.

Because of that quirk, it’s impossible to know who else got raises and how big they were. The campaign official said that at least one other witness also got a pay raise but did not provide details about how much and when.

Dan Scavino is a longtime communications aide who Trump once called the “most powerful man in politics” because he could post for Trump on the president’s social media accounts. Scavino was among the small group of staff who had an up-close view of Trump during the final weeks of his presidency — a focus of the congressional inquiry into the Jan. 6 insurrection and the criminal probe into election interference.

In August 2021, a month after the congressional investigation began, securities filings show that the parent company behind Truth Social, Trump’s social media company, gave Scavino a consulting deal that ultimately paid out $240,000 a year.

The next month, lawmakers issued a subpoena to Scavino to ask him what the White House knew about the potential for violence before the attacks and what actions Trump took to try to overturn the election results. The panel gave Scavino a half-dozen extensions while negotiating with him, but he ultimately refused to testify or turn over documents and was held in contempt.

In September 2022, Scavino received a subpoena to testify before the criminal grand jury in the federal election interference probe. This time, he wasn’t able to get out of it and was seen leaving the Washington, D.C., courthouse in May 2023.

Bits of Scavino’s testimony were reported by ABC News, citing unnamed sources. Though his recollections of Trump from Jan. 6 painted the former president unfavorably, his reported testimony didn’t include significant new information. He testified Trump was “very angry” that day, and, despite pleas from aides to calm the Capitol rioters, Trump for hours “was just not interested” in taking action to stop it. When the testimony was reported, Trump’s spokesperson said Scavino is one of the former president’s “most loyal allies, and his actual testimony shows just how strong President Trump is positioned in this case.”

Between getting the subpoena and testifying, Scavino was given a seat on the board of the Trump social media company.

Scavino was also granted a $600,000 retention bonus and a $4 million “executive promissory note” paid in shares, according to SEC filings. The company’s public filings do not make clear when these deals were put in place.

As one of the few aides who Trump was with on Jan. 6, Scavino is likely to be called if Trump’s election interference cases go to trial.

Reached by ProPublica, Scavino declined to answer questions about how he got the board seat and other benefits from the Trump media company. “It has nothing to do,” he said, “with any investigation.”

A Trump Media spokesperson declined to answer questions about who made the decision to give Scavino the benefits and why, but said, “It appears this article will comprise utterly false insinuations.”

When Atlanta attorney Jennifer Little was hired to represent Trump in his Georgia election interference case, it marked the high point of her career.

A former local prosecutor who started her own practice, she had previously taken on far more modest cases. Highlights on her website include a biker who fell because of a pothole, a child investigated for insensitive social media comments and drunk drivers with “DUI’s as high as .19.” Little had made headlines for some higher profile cases, like a candidate for lieutenant governor accused of sexual harassment, but everything on her resume paled in comparison to representing a former president accused of plotting to reverse the outcome of an election.

Then in May 2022, her job got even more complicated when Trump pulled her into his brewing showdown with the Justice Department over classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. Despite multiple requests, Trump had not returned all of the documents he had brought with him from the White House to his Florida club. The Justice Department had just elevated the matter by subpoenaing Trump for the records, and Trump wanted her advice.

Little told him, according to news reports, that unlike the government’s prior requests, a subpoena meant he could face criminal charges if he didn’t comply.

When Trump ultimately did not turn over the records and the criminal investigation intensified, Little’s involvement in that pivotal meeting got her called before a grand jury by federal prosecutors.

Some of her testimony before that grand jury, which determines whether someone will be indicted, may have been favorable for Trump. In one reported instance, Little’s recollections undermined contemporaneous documentary evidence that was damaging to Trump. Investigators had obtained notes from another lawyer at the May 2022 meeting indicating Trump suggested they not “play ball” with federal authorities: “Wouldn’t it be better if we just told them we don’t have anything here?”

Little told the grand jury she remembered the question more benignly, according to an ABC News story that cited anonymous sources, and said she couldn’t recall Trump recommending they not “play ball.”

Trump has since been indicted over his handling of the classified documents. If the case goes to trial, Little’s testimony could prove crucial as the two sides try to make their case about Trump's consciousness of guilt and whether he purposely withheld documents. (Trump has pleaded not guilty in that case and has said he did nothing wrong.)

Just after Little was forced to testify before the grand jury in March 2023, a Trump political action committee paid her $218,000, by far the largest payment she’d received while working for Trump. In the year after she became a witness, she has made at least $1.3 million from the Trump political committee, more than twice as much as she had during the year prior.

Little told ProPublica the large payment she received soon after she was compelled to testify was due to a lengthy motion she filed around then to block the release of the Georgia grand jury’s findings and prevent Trump from being indicted. Her hourly rate did not change, she said, the workload increased. The elevated payments in the year after she became a witness did coincide with the Georgia case heating up and Trump getting indicted.

The Trump campaign official said the spike in payments to Little after she became a witness was the result of her billing for multiple time periods at once.

A similar pattern played out for the other Trump lawyer present at the Mar-a-Lago meeting about the subpoena.

Evan Corcoran, a former federal prosecutor who specializes in white-collar criminal defense, was new to the team at the time. And it was his notes, obtained by investigators, that memorialized Trump suggesting they not “play ball.” His notes also included a description of Trump seeming to instruct him to withhold some sensitive documents from authorities when the former president made a “plucking motion.”

“He made a funny motion as though — well okay why don’t you take them with you to your hotel room and if there’s anything really bad in there, like, you know, pluck it out,” Corcoran’s notes read, according to the indictment.

Like Little, Corcoran tried to fight being forced to testify before a grand jury, asserting that as Trump’s lawyer, their communications were protected. But prosecutors were able to convince a judge that the protection didn’t apply because their legal advice was used to commit crimes.

Corcoran’s notes from his conversations with Trump formed the backbone of the eventual indictment, and his descriptions of those meetings are expected to be a critical component at trial. The lawyer made an initial appearance before the grand jury in January 2023 and appeared again in another session in March.

Around the time he was forced to be a witness, Corcoran recused himself from the classified documents case, but he continued to represent Trump on other matters. Nevertheless his firm’s compensation shot up for a few months.

Just days after his March grand jury testimony, the Trump campaign sent two payments to his firm totaling $786,000, the largest amount paid in a single day in his almost two years working for Trump. The firm brought in a total of $1.4 million in that four-week span, more than double its payments from any other comparable period during Corcoran’s time working for Trump.

Corcoran did not respond to questions from ProPublica. The Trump campaign official said the spike in payments came because the firm was billing for more hours of work as Trump’s cases ramped up. The official added that the number of lawyers from the firm working on the case may have increased but could not provide specifics.

The issue of witnesses who have received financial rewards from Trump has already come up at both of the former president’s New York trials.

In the civil fraud case last year, prosecutors questioned the Trump Organization’s former controller about the $500,000 in severance he had been promised after retiring earlier in the year. During his testimony, the former controller broke down in tears as he complained about allegations against an employer he loved and defended the valuations at the center of the case as “justified.” At the time of the testimony, he was still receiving his severance in installments.

Former chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg got a $2 million severance agreement in January 2023, four months after the New York attorney general sued Trump for financial fraud in his real estate business. The agreement contains a nondisparagement clause and language barring Weisselberg from voluntarily cooperating with investigators.

It came up in Trump’s hush money trial last month when prosecutors told the judge that the severance agreement was one of the reasons they would not call Weisselberg . He was still due several payments.

“The agreement seems to preclude us from talking to him or him talking to us at the risk of losing $750,000 of outstanding severance pay,” one prosecutor said.

In last year’s fraud trial, the judge wrote of the severance agreement, “The Trump Organization keeps Weisselberg on a short leash, and it shows.”

A Trump Organization spokesperson said in a statement that after Weisselberg and the controller announced their retirement plans, “the company agreed to pay them severance based on the number of years they worked at the company. President Trump played no role in that decision.” Weisselberg’s severance agreement was signed by Trump’s son Eric.

Another witness from the civil trial last year, longtime Trump friend and real estate executive Steve Witkoff, was called as an expert witness by Trump’s defense team, and he defended the Trump Organization real estate valuations at the heart of the case.

Two months after Witkoff’s testimony, Trump’s campaign for the first time started paying his company, the Witkoff Group, for air travel. The payments continued over several weeks, ultimately totalling more than $370,000.

The Trump campaign official confirmed the campaign used Witkoff’s private jet for multiple trips, including Trump’s visit to a stretch of the Texas border in February, saying it “appropriately reimbursed” him for the flights. The official said it sometimes used commercial charter jet services but opted for Witkoff’s plane because of “availability, space, and convenience.”

Witkoff and The Witkoff Group did not respond to requests for comment.

No Go Zones

As a convicted felon (assuming a supremely fucked up Supreme Court doesn't ride to his rescue), Trump won't be able to enter these countries without some kind of "special accommodation" afforded him by the host nation:

1. Argentina
2. Australia
3. Brazil
4. Cambodia
5. Canada
6. Chile
7. China
8. Cuba
9. Dominican Republic
10. Egypt
11. Ethiopia
12. Hong Kong
13. India
14. Indonesia
15. Iran
16. Ireland
17. Israel
18. Japan
19. Kenya
20. Malaysia
21. Macau
22. Mexico
23. Morocco
24. Nepal
25. New Zealand
26. Peru
27. Philippines
28. Singapore
29. South Africa
30. South Korea
31. Taiwan
32. Tanzania
33. Tunisia
34. Turkey
35. Ukraine
36. United Arab Emirates
37. United Kingdom

Now What?

Will Trump go to jail? Can he be president? What’s next after guilty verdict?

Donald Trump was convicted Thursday on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in his New York state hush money case.

Donald Trump was convicted Thursday on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in his New York state hush money case, becoming the first former U.S. president to be tried and found guilty of a crime.

Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.
The 12-person jury unanimously agreed on the verdict after deliberating for two days, finding that Trump falsified records to cover up a $130,000 payment before the 2016 election to an adult-film actress to keep her quiet about an alleged sexual encounter with him years earlier.

Trump is the presumptive Republican nominee in this year’s presidential race.

New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan scheduled Trump’s sentencing for July 11. Trump is required to report to the New York City Department of Probation for an interview about his background, his mental health and the circumstances of his case that will be used to help compile a presentencing report.

Will Trump go to jail?

The charges against Trump are nonviolent Class E felonies, the lowest level in New York, and they are punishable by 16 months to four years in state prison. Legal experts said it is unlikely that Trump, 77, would be incarcerated, given that he had not previously been convicted of a crime.

Other options for Merchan include sentencing Trump to probation, which would mean he would need approval from a parole officer to travel outside the state. Trump also could be fined or granted a conditional discharge pegged to the requirement that he stay out of further legal trouble, legal experts said.

Can Trump still become president after being convicted?

Trump remains eligible to campaign for the presidency and serve if elected. The U.S. Constitution requires that presidential candidates be at least 35 years old, a natural-born U.S. citizen and a resident in the country for at least 14 years. The 14th Amendment, passed by Congress after the Civil War, bars anyone who participated in an insurrection from running for the presidency, but Trump has not been charged with insurrection in the three other criminal prosecutions that remain active against him.

If I may, and IMHO: the 14th amendment doesn't require the guy to be charged with, tried for, or convicted of insurrection. A Colorado court has judged him to have engaged in insurrection, and both the Colorado Supreme Court and SCOTUS have let that judgement stand.

Trump is an insurrectionist,

so he can't serve as POTUS.

And also too:

A convicted felon can't get

security clearance.

We have some serious shit we have to work out.

Can Trump appeal?

Trump’s legal team will have 30 days from the New York verdict to file notice of appeal and six months to file the full appeal. Any appeals process would probably extend beyond the Nov. 5 presidential election. Legal experts said it is plausible that an appeals court would agree to stay Trump’s sentence until after the appeal is adjudicated.

How does this verdict impact his candidacy?

Polls before the guilty verdict Thursday had shown an often small but potentially decisive drop in Trump’s support if he were to be convicted of a crime. As of late 2023, polls showed that a conviction would shift the margins by between five and 14 points in President Biden’s favor. A recent Reuters-Ipsos poll last month showed just a two-point shift toward Biden if Trump is convicted, with a larger six-point shift if Trump is incarcerated as a result.

Say It With Me, Kids

1. Guilty
2. Guilty
3. Guilty
4. Guilty
5. Guilty
6. Guilty
7. Guilty
8. Guilty
9. Guilty
10. Guilty
11. Guilty
12. Guilty
13. Guilty
14. Guilty
15. Guilty
16. Guilty
17. Guilty
18. Guilty
19. Guilty
20. Guilty
21. Guilty
22. Guilty
23. Guilty
24. Guilty
25. Guilty
26. Guilty
27. Guilty
28. Guilty
29. Guilty
30. Guilty
31. Guilty
32. Guilty
33. Guilty
34. Guilty