(11-04-2023, 11:39 AM)homebiscuit Wrote:

(11-04-2023, 10:43 AM)NYC4jags Wrote: Lawyer or not. Once a witness under oath testifies for the prosecution - it is a bit more than finger pointing. Sugar coat it if you like. 
The emails between Cheseboro and Guliani, combined with the internal memos admitted into evidence and now apparently Trump's twitter DMs that have been entered into evidence, are all going to lay out who directed whom in this illegal plot to alter a fair election. 

I wouldn't worry too much about any burden of proof being answered on intent and direction. 

From everything I've read the prosecution believes they already have that in hand and these flipped witnesses will merely corroborate it.

I’ve stayed out of this argument because if crimes were committed, this is all appropriate. Trump should be convicted.

With that said, from a legal and political standpoint, they better have this buttoned down. I say this as neutrally as I can: If they can’t convict Trump with these charges, [BLEEP] is going to hit the fan. Big time. It will be labeled, and rightfully so, as a political witch hunt and the blowback will come from all sides because they’re setting a precedence here that is fraught with potential danger.

It's true. 

Whatever they end up doing regarding sentencing (I expect it to be light) they need to make a strong case on the way to a conviction to prevent "x" amount more blowback.

Unfortunately there is already blowback, and there will be more blowback regardless of how convincing the verdict may be. 

When you are up against the cult of "alternate facts" you can prove things convincingly all day long and it still won't matter. I fully expect domestic terrorism in the wake of these verdicts when they come down. The degree will vary according to outcome, but it will happen regardless IMO.

---