Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
world

A jury of his peers: A look at how jury selection will work in Donald Trump's first criminal trial

85 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


85 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Jury selection really is the ball game. If the prosecution gets 12 people willing to look at the facts and the law as written, Trump is toast.

If a member of his cult is empaneled, there could be a hung jury.

There is no (rational) universe in which he is acquitted.

10 ( +15 / -5 )

So what are Trump's plans for tomorrow? Fire his own lawyers? Does that even work anymore?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

Fire legal counsel or pull a Weinstein and show up in a wheel chair?

At this point, the judge can refuse to accept a change of counsel and it will be upheld on appeal as it’s clearly a delay tactic.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Jury selection really is the ball game. If the prosecution gets 12 people willing to look at the facts and the law as written, Trump is toast.

It’s all a joke, it’s New York, everyone with a bit of sense knows that NY has never been fair towards Trump, facts or no facts, they will convict him. This entire scam posing at an impartial court is just laughable. The guy is not allowed to defend himself, but the porn star and the former fixture that has a known track record of lying can spout all day. Just a laughable joke. But I get it, the illusion and appearance for the cameras is what matters to the left.

If a member of his cult is empaneled, there could be a hung jury.

There won’t be a hung jury.

There is no (rational) universe in which he is acquitted.

Well, if the trial were in Tennessee or Texas, the outcome would be different and we alll know that.

-17 ( +4 / -21 )

bass4funk

Jury selection really is the ball game. If the prosecution gets 12 people willing to look at the facts and the law as written, Trump is toast.

It’s all a joke, it’s New York, everyone with a bit of sense knows that NY has never been fair towards Trump, facts or no facts, they will convict him.

Are you saying that not one person in New York can't be impartial? There are many Trump supporters and non-political people in New York, that makes that idea ridiculous.

This entire scam posing at an impartial court is just laughable.

Absolutely not. There is no evidence for this at all.

The guy is not allowed to defend himself,

Yes, he is. He has all of his rights in court.

but the porn star and the former fixture that has a known track record of lying can spout all day.

That's outside of court, which doesn't count. The reason why he has a gag order is that he is endangering the lives of innocent people with his remarks. If he stopped doing that, there would be no gag order.

Just a laughable joke.

No. It isn't.

But I get it, the illusion and appearance for the cameras is what matters to the left.

No. Actual impartiality matters. And the court is impartial.

There is no (rational) universe in which he is acquitted.

If he isn't guilty, he will be acquitted.

Well, if the trial were in Tennessee or Texas, the outcome would be different and we alll know that.

If he is guilty, he would be convicted in Tennessee or Texas. You have too little faith in jurors.

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Not guilty as charged. Alvin will have some egg on his face after this.

-15 ( +2 / -17 )

“Have you, a relative, or a close friend ever worked or volunteered for a Trump presidential campaign, the Trump presidential administration, or any other political entity affiliated with Mr. Trump?”

“Have you ever attended a rally or campaign event for Donald Trump?”

“Do you currently follow Donald Trump on any social media site or have you done so in the past?”

“Have you, a relative, or a close friend ever worked or volunteered for any anti-Trump group or organization?”

“Have you ever attended a rally or campaign event for any anti-Trump group or organization?”

“Do you currently follow any anti-Trump group or organization on any social media site, or have you done so in the past?”

“Have you ever considered yourself a supporter of or belonged to any of the following: The QAnon movement, Proud Boys, Oathkeepers, Three Percenters, Boogaloo Boys, Antifa.”

According to MAGA-zealots, these are all pre-requisits for being neutral and impartial, I'd imagine.

12 ( +13 / -1 )

The state of NY is prosecuting Federal laws in State court on campaign "finance" violations - when the Feds didn't.

This is a weak case. Wide open to appeal and restitution.

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

Convict him. Trump's approval rating will go up yet again. Welcome to the Storm which Daniels gave us.

-14 ( +2 / -16 )

Still would like to know how a state can prosecute a supposed election interference in a federal election.

plus, we heard all this before 2016 election anyway. What was interfered with?

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

Still would like to know how a state can prosecute a supposed election interference in a federal election.

Because it's a state statute.

plus, we heard all this before 2016 election anyway. What was interfered with?

No, we didn't hear about this before the elections. That was the whole point of the $130,000 payment.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

There Stormy is in photo 3. Notice the classy attire - shoulders on display with the cutoff top and some necklace with a particular symbol which is jaded like the facial expression.

-11 ( +2 / -13 )

Still would like to know how a state can prosecute a supposed election interference in a federal election. 

plus, we heard all this before 2016 election anyway. What was interfered with?

Thank you, that is exactly my point.

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

Because it's a state statute.

that require a federal crime to be applied to.

so you say we didn’t hear about Stormy before the 2016 election? Oh but we did.

-11 ( +3 / -14 )

Still would like to know how a state can prosecute a supposed election interference in a federal election.

He's not being prosecuted for election interference. He's being prosecuted for falsifying business records with "intent to defraud [which] includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof". That's a felony charge in NY state.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

So Trump says he is going to "take the stand" and testify at this trial...prosecutors everywhere rejoice...

One wonders how much perjury can be accomplished in one setting...

I'm looking forward to such hard-hitting and factual rebuttals as "Bing, Bam, Whoosh, (unintelligible), Ding"....

And the big question, did Trump's lawyers correct their mistake and actually subpoena the right "Jeremy Rosenberg" this time?

https://www.yahoo.com/news/dont-files-man-tells-trumps-165301801.html

Let the clown show begin!

10 ( +11 / -1 )

so you say we didn’t hear about Stormy before the 2016 election? Oh but we did.

Oh, but we didn't. If that's really what you believe then link me an article about the affair prior to the election.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

The infamous Trump will be the first president ever to face a criminal trial.

11 ( +13 / -2 )

Incorrect. Usually, it's a misdemeanor. Bragg has supercharged it into a felony based on a novel legal theory and a mish-mash of state/fed law turned into a Frankenstein case based on a nothingburger.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

Blacklabel

Because it's a state statute.

that require a federal crime to be applied to.

Now, you're getting it.

so you say we didn’t hear about Stormy before the 2016 election? Oh but we did.

No. We are saying that Trump paid Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen to keep her quiet about the affair.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

JJE

Incorrect.

No, it is, in fact, a state statute.

Usually, it's a misdemeanor. Bragg has supercharged it into a felony

Correct.

based on a novel legal theory

It's not based on a novel theory. That's what the law states.

and a mish-mash of state/fed law turned into a Frankenstein case based on a nothingburger.

I'm sure Trump hopes this, but it is false.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Bragg has supercharged it into a felony based on a novel legal theory and a mish-mash of state/fed law turned into a Frankenstein case based on a nothingburger.

This would never happen in Russia.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

A "novel legal theory" is American law-speak for unproven use of law with no precedent. This case meets that. Bragg is mangling state/fed law. Ask any lawyer.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Is anyone denying that Bragg's case hinges on the use of novel legal theory?

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

Incorrect. Usually, it's a misdemeanor. Bragg has supercharged it into a felony based on a novel legal theory and a mish-mash of state/fed law turned into a Frankenstein case based on a nothingburger.

That’s really what this is all about.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

it’s New York, everyone with a bit of sense knows that NY has never been fair towards Trump,

I wonder how any sentient being can believe this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/18/nyregion/donald-trump-tax-breaks-real-estate.html

He should have been locked up like Leona Helmsley long ago.

It is the MAGA cult natch.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

No. We are saying that Trump paid Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen to keep her quiet about the affair.

Which was a private matter. What’s so bizarre about this is that the Dems are trying every conceivable way to squeeze out a squeezed lemon over something that ran it’s statute of limitation.

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

Which was a private matter.

Filing fraudulent documents in order to conceal a crime isn't a "private matter."

What’s so bizarre about this is that the Dems are trying every conceivable way to squeeze out a squeezed lemon over something that ran it’s statute of limitation.

No, the statute of limitations hasn't run out. Wrong again.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

bass4funk

No. We are saying that Trump paid Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen to keep her quiet about the affair.

Which was a private matter.

Sure. But if you are a public figure, wanting people's vote, then they have the right to know about it.

What’s so bizarre about this is that the Dems are trying every conceivable way to squeeze out a squeezed lemon

No lemons here. Election interference is no joke.

over something that ran it’s statute of limitation.

It hasn't ran its statute of limitations.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Which was a private matter.

Filing fraudulent documents in order to conceal a crime isn't a "private matter."

The disingenuousness of our MAGA-friends continues to go off the scale...

After being reminded time after time, it's not the "payoff" that's the crime, it's trying to CONCEAL the payment by falsifying official banking records....

"To pay Daniels covertly, Cohen opened a bank account for a shell company he had created specifically to facilitate the payment. He then transferred $131,000 into that account from a home equity line of credit. On Oct. 27, less than two weeks before the 2016 election, Cohen wired $130,000 to Daniels’ lawyer in exchange for her silence about the alleged tryst with Trump.

After the election, Bragg says, Trump reimbursed Cohen for the payment through a series of monthly checks, processed by the Trump Organization, which recorded them as payments for legal services rendered in 2017 through a retainer agreement."

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/11/trump-to-face-trial-criminal-hush-money-charges-what-to-know.html

If the Moron would have just paid her off, then honestly recorded it in his bank records, he wouldn't be on trial.

Bottom-line - as with all Repub scandals, it's all about the cover-up...

10 ( +11 / -1 )

JJE

A "novel legal theory" is American law-speak for unproven use of law with no precedent.

Sure. Every law is "novel legal theory" the first time they are used in a prosecution.

Bragg is mangling state/fed law.

Combined, which is not a problem. One law is dependent on another crime having been committed. It doesn't have to be a state crime, which is what you would expect.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Think Donald is rattled about his upcoming trial? Just look at his latest rant...

"Gettysburg, what an unbelievable battle that was," Trump said while addressing the crowd in the town and wearing a Make America Great Again hat. "It was so much, and so interesting, and so vicious and horrible, and so beautiful in so many different ways—it represented such a big portion of the success of this country," he continued.

"Gettysburg, wow—I go to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, to look and to watch," he said. "And the statement of Robert E. Lee, who's no longer in favor—did you ever notice it? He's no longer in favor. 'Never fight uphill, me boys, never fight uphill.' They were fighting uphill, he said, 'Wow, that was a big mistake,' he lost his big general. 'Never fight uphill, me boys,' but it was too late," Trump added.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/donald-trump-s-rambling-rally-speech-raises-questions/ar-BB1lASpJ?ocid=windirect&cvid=7b034dea50514cac8793671a5be95c7e&ei=64

Wow....I'm surprised he didn't throw in a couple of "Ding, Whoosh, Boom, Bing"....

He's melting down before our very eyes...

8 ( +9 / -1 )

No. We are saying that Trump paid Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen to keep her quiet about the affair.

And?

Which was a private matter.

Sure.

Thank you.

But if you are a public figure, wanting people's vote, then they have the right to know about it.

So then that means, Swalwell sleeping with a Chinese spy and Bob Menendez with his little escapade shouldn’t be serving, that’s basically what you are saying according to what you are reading over there.

No lemons here. Election interference is no joke.

What law did he break again? This was an ND violation by some insignificant porn star. No one with one brain cell could care less about this trail and see it for what it is. Witch hunt…yaaawwn.

It hasn't ran its statute of limitations.

It did, and the lawyers changed it, just for this case.

https://nypost.com/2024/04/14/opinion/a-serial-perjurer-will-try-to-prove-an-old-misdemeanor-against-trump-in-an-embarrassment-for-the-new-york-legal-system/

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

No. We are saying that Trump paid Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen to keep her quiet about the affair.

An affair that never happened. Per her own letter. Mentioned 2006 and 200011 (lol) and 2016/17/18. 5 different denials (or lies)

Or an affair that your bud says isn’t a crime.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Novel legal theory= we would get thrown out of court for even trying this against anyone but Trump with a biased judge in our favor.

when even Trump hater Sununu tells CNN this case doesn’t have any impact…you should have a clue how weak it is.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

An affair that never happened. Per her own letter. Mentioned 2006 and 200011 (lol) and 2016/17/18. 5 different denials (or lies)

lol This complete and utter nonsense? Hilarious. You're just repeating the same nonsense Trump did. He's on tape strategizing the hush money payment scheme.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Or an affair that your bud says isn’t a crime.

It isn't a crime. Illegal campaign contributions are a crime. As are falsifying business documents to conceal the crime.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Blacklabel

No. We are saying that Trump paid Stormy Daniels through Michael Cohen to keep her quiet about the affair.

An affair that never happened. Per her own letter. Mentioned 2006 and 200011 (lol) and 2016/17/18. 5 different denials (or lies)

All in good time. We'll see what she says on the witness stand. But, sure, more like a one-night stand.

Or an affair that your bud says isn’t a crime.

Sure. That's not what he's being prosecuted for. He's being prosecuted for falsifying business records for election interference.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

So the letter signed by her denying it 5 different years is just “inconvenient” to her story? There is also a signed letter from Cohen lawyers saying Trump knew nothing.

but of course he will be convicted. He was found liable of sexual assault without any proof of that her even met the person in that time frame, no physical evidence, no dat/month/year while wearing a dress from 2 at least years in the future.

no doubt he will be convicted, even without any evidence.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

bass4funk

But if you are a public figure, wanting people's vote, then they have the right to know about it.

So then that means, Swalwell sleeping with a Chinese spy and Bob Menendez with his little escapade

Sure. Those stories are in the public. Nobody was paid hush money.

shouldn’t be serving,

Not at all. The voters decide that based on the knowledge they have about the candidates involved.

that’s basically what you are saying

No, it's not.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

So the letter signed by her denying it 5 different years is just “inconvenient” to her story? 

What's that got to do with Trump falsifying his business records? What's that got to do with Trump discussing the illegal scheme on tape?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

It isn't a crime. Illegal campaign contributions are a crime. As are falsifying business documents to conceal the crime.

Boy, the left are trying so, so very hard.

https://headtopics.com/us/legal-expert-calls-stormy-daniels-hush-money-case-against-50806829

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

But if you are a public figure, wanting people's vote, then they have the right to know about it.

So the same goes for Swalwell and Menendez as well, right? They are public figures in one branch of government.

Sure. Those stories are in the public. Nobody was paid hush money.

Ok, so sleeping with a Chinese spy and entertaining minors is now a small thing????

Not at all. The voters decide that based on the knowledge they have about the candidates involved.

Ahhh, so that’s why Trump continues to gain ground.

No, it's not.

Kind of is.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Boy, the left are trying so, so very hard.

Boy the right are trying so, so very hard.

https://headtopics.com/us/legal-expert-calls-stormy-daniels-hush-money-case-against-50806829

lol

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Blacklabel

So the letter signed by her denying it 5 different years is just “inconvenient” to her story?

Wait for her testimony. Trump's lawyers have full right of cross-examination.

but of course he will be convicted. He was found liable of sexual assault

Sure. But it wasn't without any evidence.

no doubt he will be convicted, even without any evidence.

There is plenty of evidence. But let's wait to see it.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The desperation from the left had reached insanity level. Hush money isn’t a crime. A state regulation doesn’t apply to a federal election.

but somehow the judge and jury will make it work anyway.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

a member of his cult is empaneled, there could be a hung jury.

There won’t be a hung jury.

Then you’d better gird your loins for a conviction because he’s sure not getting acquitted.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

bass4funk

Sure. Those stories are in the public. Nobody was paid hush money.

Ok, so sleeping with a Chinese spy and entertaining minors is now a small thing????

I'm not saying either way. The voters know about it and they can decide.

Not at all. The voters decide that based on the knowledge they have about the candidates involved.

Ahhh, so that’s why Trump continues to gain ground.

Actually, he doesn't.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

The desperation from the left had reached insanity level. 

No. Desperation is when you make up "facts" to try and deflect from the actual facts of the case.

Hush money isn’t a crime.

We know, but illegal campaign violations are a crime, and so is submitting fraudulent documents to conceal that crime.

A state regulation doesn’t apply to a federal election.

Wrong.

but somehow the judge and jury will make it work anyway.

Yes, because you're wrong about every fact of the case. Stop watching Foxnews, Breitbart, and Newsmax, they're misinforming their viewers.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

A jury of his peers? You mean other rich egotistical criminal celebrities? No shortage of them but he might get off then.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

when you make up "facts" 

oh but it is fact she signed a letter saying it never happened. And Cohen lawyers sent a document that Trump knew nothing about the payment. Those documents exist, thus are “fact”

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

Boy the right are trying so, so very hard.

They don’t have to, the left are sinking themselves, but yeah, Trump and abortion, and let’s make the country into California and NY. ROFL

but somehow the judge and jury will make it work anyway.

Of course, it’s New York.

Ok, so sleeping with a Chinese spy and entertaining minors is now a small thing????

I'm not saying either way.

Well, that’s exactly what you’re saying, nothing, just more leftist excuses

The voters know about it and they can decide.

So why keep it a secret? Why the Dems put up such a defense when the information came out?

Not at all. The voters decide that based on the knowledge they have about the candidates involved.

You keep saying this, I get it, you read this across the pond, but more importantly for the debate, why is it OK for one site to bring out the information but in the Republican case when they bring it out, the Democrats opposed it? Put the bias aside, calm down and tell me why it’s OK for one side to bring out a private matter, but not for the other side.

Actually, he doesn't.

Oh, yes he does.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2024/04/03/trump-biden-swing-states-poll/73194316007/

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Yes, because you're wrong about every fact of the case.

the judges daughter doesn’t not have a consulting company for Democrats?

she does.

the judge isn’t a registered Democrat and didn’t donate to the campaign?

he is and he did.

every fact huh? Lol

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

oh but it is fact she signed a letter saying it never happened

So what? Even if it didn't happen, which of course it did, what does that have to do with Trump illegally falsifying his business records?

Those documents exist, thus are “fact”

Yes, I'm sure the letter you're claiming is proof wasn't forced upon her. That would be totally out of character for Trump to do. Right? :)

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Well, if the trial were in Tennessee or Texas, the outcome would be different and we alll know that.

well the crimes were committed in NY so thats why NY has jurisdiction over the case.

They don’t have to, the left are sinking themselves, but yeah, Trump and abortion, and let’s make the country into California and NY. ROFL

and yet those polls you quote so much show Biden now even or higher than Trump, or dont you believe in polls now ROFL

7 ( +8 / -1 )

the judges daughter doesn’t not have a consulting company for Democrats?

I said fact of the case. The judge's daughter isn't a fact of the case. Trump backers are so desperate it's pathetic.

every fact huh? Lol

Yes. Every fact. reeee

5 ( +7 / -2 )

A jury of his peers? You mean other rich egotistical criminal celebrities? No shortage of them but he might get off then.

no a jury that has to be selected by both the prosecution and defense, thats how the judicial system works, Trumps team can exclude any juror they choose

6 ( +8 / -2 )

well the crimes were committed in NY so thats why NY has jurisdiction over the case.

Again, if the trial were moved to either Texas or Tennessee, the Dems know they wouldn’t win this. They know, we all know.

and yet those polls you quote so much show Biden now even or higher than Trump,

In abortion, yes and in giving out free money, yes.

or dont you believe in polls now ROFL

I do, apparently Biden does as well.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/2710699/biden-staring-down-a-five-alarm-fire-with-minority-voters-can-he-win-back-support/

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

Ahhh, so that’s why Trump continues to gain ground.

actually as of April polls its show Biden is surging, and he hasnt even started to spend the 200million hes raised so far. LOL

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Of the case: signed documents exist from both “key witnesses” that say it didn’t happen.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

Sure. Those stories are in the public. Nobody was paid hush money.

this isnt a hush money trial, its election interference, campaign finance fraud. Trump paid Daniels 100k to keep quiet about their affair so the voters wouldn't know Trumps history of infidelity. The 2016 election was decided by less than 100k votes across multiple swing states. If all of Trumps past was know the election could easy have swung towards Clinton

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Not desperate, the judge is bias, that’s a fact.

Yes, everyone who is not actively work to assist Trump is biased.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

actually as of April polls its show Biden is surging,

Trump is beating Biden +0.2 points and this is April.

and he hasnt even started to spend the 200million hes raised so far. LOL

Hillary did, didn’t help, shelling a billion to get rid of Cruz, not helping, tried with DeSantis, didn’t help. So yeah, waste the money, got for it! lol

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Of the case: signed documents exist from both “key witnesses” that say it didn’t happen.

Again, what does that have to do with Trump falsifying business records?

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Of the case: Witness 1 is a convicted felon, for lying.

witness 2 has denied anything happened since 2006 and owes The defendant money.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Not desperate, the judge is bias, that’s a fact.

and ever Trump appeal was struck down by a higher court, Judge isnt bias. maga just manufacture outrage

3 ( +6 / -3 )

falsifying business records?

he didn’t. He paid his personal lawyer for legal work.

you guys keep flip flopping between “business”, “personal” and “campaign”

all of which are different things. gonna be a fun 6 weeks

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

In abortion, yes and in giving out free money, yes.

no across all voters, yes abortion is playing a large part in the womens vote.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Of the case: Witness 1 is a convicted felon, for lying.

Yes. One of the felonies was the is the result of the same incident that Trump is about to go to trial over. Yet somehow you think it didn't happen.

witness 2 has denied anything happened since 2006 and

Yes. Under duress. Trump is on tape discussing the payment. keep talking.

owes The defendant money.

Irrelevant.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

It’s hard to tell if Trump is melting down since what’s left of his frontal lobe is mush, but his cult rubes sure are having a moment.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

bass4funk

Not at all. The voters decide that based on the knowledge they have about the candidates involved.

You keep saying this, I get it, you read this across the pond, but more importantly for the debate, why is it OK for one site to bring out the information but in the Republican case when they bring it out, the Democrats opposed it? Put the bias aside, calm down and tell me why it’s OK for one side to bring out a private matter, but not for the other side.

Did the Dems pay hush money to silence anything and then try to hide it as a regular business expense?

No, they didn't.

There's your answer.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

he didn’t. He paid his personal lawyer for legal work.

He did. They have the records.

gonna be a fun 6 weeks

Not for desperate Trump fans.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Witness 1 is a convicted felon, for lying. 

To protect his boss. Smooth legal defense there. “Your honor, this man who used to be my fixer is a shady character.”

witness 2 has denied anything happened since 2006 and owes The defendant money.

OK then, bring that up in trial. Bring the evidence and let the jury decide. Or is that part of American civil society also worthy of ditching?

You people don’t trust the government, the judiciary, the FBI, the news media, or even the existence of objective truth. Must be pretty bleak.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Blacklabel

Of the case: Witness 1 is a convicted felon, for lying.

For lying on behalf of Donald Trump.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

he didn’t. He paid his personal lawyer for legal work.

wrong he reimbursed Cohen for the hush money payment he paid to Daniels using campaign finances, Cohen went to jail for that, Trump was president at the time so he couldnt be indicted. Cohen is now testifying against Trump,

and now Trumps recent lawyer who quit is also ready to testify against Trump with the notes he took when he was his lawyer. Hes not taking the fall for Trump as so many of his previous lawyers have. LOL

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Blacklabel

falsifying business records?

he didn’t. He paid his personal lawyer for legal work.

It wasn't for legal work. It was hush money. That's what is false about it.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Trump is beating Biden +0.2 points and this is April.

and the margin of error 3-4%, any poll with more than a 6% MOE isnt worth a pinch of poop

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Doesn’t matter how much reason and how many facts are presented, our MAGA friends will refuse to let it enter their brains. That would be too much of a blow to the worldview they’ve invested themselves in since 2015.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

and the margin of error 3-4%, any poll with more than a 6% MOE isnt worth a pinch of poop

Well, it’s not considering Biden last year was beating Trump by 11 points. So yeah, the Biden camp are indeed very worry, this is why the only thing they talk about is abortion, that’s the only thing he can run on.

-7 ( +2 / -9 )

To contend that this not a politically motivated show trail is delusional.

Whether one finds Donald Trump a rather pompous posturing windbag, that is for the electorate to decide in November.

Have trust in the US people to decide.

Not unelected Judges

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

Doesn’t matter how much reason and how many facts are presented, our MAGA friends will refuse to let it enter their brains.

Plastic, now you understand my feelings about the left. Thank you. The struggle is real.

That would be too much of a blow to the worldview they’ve invested themselves in since 2015.

Or the left in 2016 and still think Trump and Vlad Snapchat each other. ROFL?

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

itsonlyrocknroll

Have trust in the US people to decide.

Not unelected Judges

The US people can decide elections, judges can decide legal matters.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

If he is guilty, he would be convicted in Tennessee or Texas. You have too little faith in jurors.

You have too much faith in jurors. Bounce over to the OJ article.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Every methodology is being deployed to remove Donald Trump from standing for office in November

To quote the New York Times

But that payoff is not the only hush-money deal that prosecutors plan to highlight. The prosecutors, from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, have accused Mr. Trump of orchestrating a broader scheme to influence the 2016 presidential election by directing his allies to purchase damaging stories about him to keep them under wraps.

No, 2020hindsights not if Trump is removed from the ballot, by a politically motivated unelected Judge.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

He paid his personal lawyer for legal work.It wasn't for legal work.

It was hush money.

...In the pursuit of election interference.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites