"After a day of holding its fire, the Biden campaign late Friday blasted Donald Trump as a ‘convicted felon’ — an indication the president’s team has decided to seize upon Trump’s conviction to question his fitness for the White House,” Axios reports.
“The broadside from Biden’s campaign — in a press release chiding Trump for his ‘unhinged’ rant earlier in the day — put President Biden in the same camp as many Democrats who are now mocking the ex-president.”
“It also marked a departure from Biden’s approach in remarks at the White House hours earlier, when he danced around the ‘convicted felon’ label while criticizing Trump’s attack on the U.S. justice system.”
Technically he is not a convicted felon until sentencing. He’s just a guilty felon. But, don’t let that stop you.
Not sure why you’re being down voted so hard, sadly you’re actually correct. But we can call him “felon elect” in the meantime until he’s sentenced on July 11.
I hope Judge Merchan goes heavy on the sentence due to all the shit he’s been spewing since the conclusion of the trial.
Because it’s irrelevant. Nothing can stop sentencing so no matter what the sentence he’s convicted. Conviction desnt require sentencing. The guilty verdict IS THE CONVICTION.
How can you both be so terribly wrong?
Let me start by saying I loathe Trump likely way more than you do. Look at my comment history.
Second, actually, YOU are wrong. Trump is not a felon yet. The Judgment has not been entered yet. The Judgment, which is what essentially under the law means a person has a felony conviction on their record, that happens at the time of entry of Judgment which follows the sentencing. So although colloquially we are referring to him as a convicted felon, and it’s true that he’s been convicted by a jury of 34 felony counts, that judgment doesn’t get entered until after the sentence is applied, which will be on July 11th.
You can disagree with me, but this came from Jessica Roth, a former federal prosecutor, and she covered this on the 538 politics podcast that aired on May 30th. She talks about this at around the 12 minute mark.
I’m betting she knows much more about the law than you or me. So maybe you should back off a bit?
So if you don’t agree with me still, why don’t you put forth evidence to support your claim like I just did?
Fuck donald trump though.
This seems like a semantic “tomatoes are fruits” argument.
Words have multiple definitions and can meet one definition while not meeting the other.
Folks have provided one definition for “convict” that Trump meets and you’re simply arguing that he doesn’t meet a different definition for “convict” that no one else is trying to meet. Seemingly simply so you can be “right”.
It makes sense that a federal prosecutor would use the jargon of the field. Just like a biologist would say “Yes indeed! Tomatoes are fruits!”
Other people are saying that convict is short for convicted felon who is currently serving their sentence.
Nobody refers to convicted felons who have served their sentence and are out walking around as convicts. They are referred to as felons, because they are convicted felons even though they are no longer convicts.
This feels like the argument after his impeachment when people said he hadn’t been impeached until Nancy delivered the paperwork to the Senate.
It feels like it because you don’t understand context.
Someone is a convicted felon when they are convicted of a felony. They aren’t a convict until they start serving their sentence because convict means a convicted felon serving their sentence. Like how someone who is a licensed driver isn’t referred to as a driver outside of the context of driving.
I love how your example proves the exact opposite of what you’re trying to say. Especially when your first sentence is so condescending.
He is a convicted felon but not yet a convict.
You’re a licensed driver even when you’re not actively driving a car.
No one in this thread is saying convict. Everyone is saying convicted felon.
I may have read your post backwards.
Rapidcreek, the op in this comment chain, was trying to use the use of referring to someone as a convict (someone who is currently serving their sentence) to say Trump isn’t a convicted felon until sentencing.
Correct. Not sure why people are too stupid to down vote you. He is not a convicted felon at all yet. And the sentencing will be postponed and the entire thing appealed. Because of course it will be. That’s the standard playbook, draw it out. Maybe the sentencing will go ahead. But it will be appealed. The only chance of this man being held accountable before the election is with contempt charges where the judge could order jailing in addition to the fines.
Im not quite following. So even though he has been found guilty, and convicted, of multiple felonies, hes not a “convicted felon” until hes sentenced? Legal definitions I am finding online only mention conviction, without mention of sentencing.
Isn’t he now a convicted felon, regardless of whatever his sentence is?
Since I am not a criminal defense attorney, I was deferring to Mary McCord, 20 year AUSA, former Acting Assistant Attorney General for National Security, currently a Visiting Professor at Georgetown Law.
She says he is not a convict until sentencing. I am open to being corrected.
https://disq.us/url?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpodcasts.apple.com%2Fus%2Fpodcast%2Fwe-have-a-verdict%2Fid1679657705%3Fi%3D1000657451213%3AL1PvzMrEtpvfC4zwFJUKN_XfAxw&cuid=2386
I would point out Merriam Webster says:
convict noun
Yeah, well Cambridge dictionary makes no mention of sentencing: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/convict
And my own lawyer says that sentencing is not required for someone to be considered a convicted felon under US federal law, it’s a status that applies as soon as a conviction is handed down in a Court.
This is subtle, but it’s actually definitional shift in the word “convict,” which is a shortened colloquialism that sounds like it should mean the same thing as “convicted felon,” but is used in a slightly different way. “Convict” is defined differently because that colloquialism took on the meaning of a person serving or served a sentence when in use.
“Convicted felon” on the other hand is a technical phrase to mean a person convicted of a felony, which is exactly, definitionally what Trump is after the jury… convicted him.
So if you’re arguing in good faith, I suggest conceding that you’re wrong to say he is not a “convicted felon,” if your only support is about “convict.”. Because, sorry, you are incorrect.
It’s funny that there is always someone ready here to tell you that you’re wrong. But, you go further and demand a admission you are right, which I find hilarious.
First, note that technical phases shift definition all the time.
Secondly, if it makes you feel better, I’ll admit that you’re right. I suppose the next thing you’ll do is ask for apology, so I’ll do that too.
Feel better?
“I suggest you concede” was meant empathetically. I’ve been wrong before and will be wrong again. I also see internet debates devolve into digging positional trenches to not be wrong. Again, I’ve done that before too.
Here, I thought you appeared to be falling into that pattern and I was trying to coax you to do the bigger thing, which is admit something difficult but true. Admitting being wrong is a different show of strength - it elevates you and reduces bad feelings all around.
Do the bigger thing?
So, you can’t take yes as an answer then.
Please take juvenile juggling elsewhere. That’s all you get.
It seems reasonable to defer the definition to someone who practices law, as opposed to us randoms online. Thanks for the link
Are you a Russian bot?
No, he has been convicted by a jury
con·vic·tion
noun
a formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.
“she had a previous conviction for a similar offense”