Dozens of felony convictions, the jury agreed with the prosecution.

Lying under oath was also what got Bill Clinton impeached, and that too is "just words".

That said, the claim that this unduly influenced the previous election is, IMO, probably incorrect: that Trump is a philanderer was known in 2016, and his conviction for these offences was known by the 2024 election, and yet he still won.

AIUI Bill Clinton did not lie:

The way I heard it, the government used a specific language for "have sexual relations with" (hereinafter HSRW):

A HSRW B if the mouth, hands, or genitals of A touch the genitals of B.

Any hackernews regular would notice that HSRW is not associative - as in it is entirely possible for A HSRW B to be true, but B HSRW A to be false; in fact this was the case for if A's mouth touches B's genitals; A HSRW B but !(B HSRW A).

You can whine and plead and ask the question 4,000 times, but at the end of the day, if one don't understand logic, you might be a Republican Senator in the 1990's.

Clinton's claim was effectively that he believed the definition was not associative for that specific statement. There was also the later statement which he described Monica's statement about having not had a sexual relationship as true.

The trial court disagreed that these statements truthfully responded to the deposition, and fined him for his misleading answer.

You know in the 'bad guy countries' where political enemies are imprisoned by the political establishment? They also still generally hold trials for them, and convict them, while still offering them the rights and liberties afforded to any other defendant.

For instance in Russia, their Supreme Court actually threw out the first conviction of Navalny on embezzlement charges. The local case itself was a shit show, but what else would you call a conviction in a case based largely on the words of a serial liar of undoubtedly near zero character, who also had a financial and vindictive motivation to lie? And I'm not talking about Navalny's case there, but imagine I was. Your opinion should not change if you're being logically consistent.

This is the reason that these trials sent Trump's popularity surging, and very possibly being the reason he won the popular vote. It seems that not only were they shit shows, but because they are seen as being motivated by the person being charged, rather than by the acts alleged.

FWIW, this does not mean he's innocent. It just means that if he wasn't who he is, none of these cases, all launched just in time to try to interfere with the election, would have happened.

What did Hitler do besides speak words?

Is this really what’s going on at HN this morning?

One of the fastest examples of Godwin’s law I’ve seen

The trouble with avoiding Hitler analogies because of Godwin's law is that it allows the particularly cynical to emulate Hitler and avoid criticism.

Lmgtfy

Try: Traudl Junge

New York convicted him for his pre-presidential criminal activity documented in paperwork. It has nothing to do with his criminality as president.