Quote:

---

Go back and read the jury selection portion of this thread. I do not specifically remember what happened with the lawyers.

---

Gosh, even I can't remember how many pages in before there were any meaningful posts about voir dire. Maybe 12 or 13 pages in? But it was the CNN feed and other than the Ag in NY who was on the panel and promptly tossed, things were pretty chaotic.

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He wasn't randomly selected. He got the case because of the other cases in Trump's orbit that he'd presided over.

---

I would say that is even worse. Stalinist.

A Biden donor judge. A DOJ prosecutor. In Manhattan. Two lawyers "randomly" on the jury.

---

I agree but didn't the defense have the opportunity to take them off the jury?

---

The defense was only allowed so many strikes. In Manhattan, that voted 85% for Biden. The odds were heavily against them. By design.

So, not exactly.

---

Wouldn't they have at least tried to remove 1 of the 2? I understand your point and think this process was a complete sham, inexcusable, and embarrassing beyond pale.

---

Go back and read the jury selection portion of this thread. I do not specifically remember what happened with the lawyers.

---

My memory was that there wasn't mention of them during voir dire, but I could have missed it.

Hawg - do you happen to remember?

Are there betting odds on Trump actually going to jail? I thought I couldn't fathom that happening but not so sure anymore. This is just surreal.

BenFiasco14 said:

---

Are there betting odds on Trump actually going to jail? I thought I couldn't fathom that happening but not so sure anymore. This is just surreal.

---

Liberals double-down on everything. Everything.

I fully expect this "judge" to give Trump the maximum sentence possible.

shiftyandquick said:

---

why isn't Trump attacking the jurors? He attacks the DA, attacks the judge. He must think it is a losing argument. Because his lack of attacking them is not because he thinks it is morally wrong, or incorrect, the man has no morals or honesty after all, we can agree to that.

---

I know of a guy. Thinks he's shifty and quick. Is represented by the emboldened.

And Trump is threatened with jail if jurors are verbally ridiculed by Trump.

Lucky that you have free rein.

Tex117 said:

---

Rockdoc said:

---

So Trump is a convicted felon right now and until the appeal (probably until it reaches the Supreme Court and is out of New York). We all know this commie judge is gonna incarcerate him for some length of time. I'm finding it hard to see how Trump can run for the presidency. Can he do it from a jail cell?

---

That dude is not going to Rikers.

---

Whoopi peed herself when Trump was found guilty.

That crazy B will lose her bowels when Trump is transported from Rikers to the White House.

This is Gary Gensler

He was the Hillary official who oversaw filing payments for the fake Steele Dossier as 'legal expenses'

He is now the Chairman of the SEC pic.twitter.com/RwT6eT5f6V

— Jack Poso 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) June 1, 2024

No one is above the law.

— Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) May 31, 2024

Heck yeah LAW AND ORDER

GenericAggie said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

He wasn't randomly selected. He got the case because of the other cases in Trump's orbit that he'd presided over.

---

I would say that is even worse. Stalinist.

A Biden donor judge. A DOJ prosecutor. In Manhattan. Two lawyers "randomly" on the jury.

---

I agree but didn't the defense have the opportunity to take them off the jury?

---

The defense was only allowed so many strikes. In Manhattan, that voted 85% for Biden. The odds were heavily against them. By design.

So, not exactly.

---

Wouldn't they have at least tried to remove 1 of the 2? I understand your point and think this process was a complete sham, inexcusable, and embarrassing beyond pale.

---

Go back and read the jury selection portion of this thread. I do not specifically remember what happened with the lawyers.

---

My memory was that there wasn't mention of them during voir dire, but I could have missed it.

---

Best I can tell from transcript…

Both lawyers are "big law" attorneys. One is a civil litigator at firm called Andrews Kurth and one is does venture capital and start-up corporate law at a firm named Gunderson Dettmer.

The corporate lawyer was Juror B381. Takes a seat on page 22 of the Day 2 transcript. (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24594682-2024-04-16-transcript) Trump's lawyer asked them one question on page 103 about whether they follow the news around the trial. The juror said not really. That's all that happened with that juror.

The civil litigator was Juror B269, first comes up at page 181 of the transcript. The State questioned them starting bottom of page 195. Trump's team questioned them on page 206. Blanche asked the juror about his opinion of Trump and how being a lawyer would affect their ability to be impartial. That's all that happened.


There were at least two other lawyers who came up on day 1, both were struck on day 2. One was a antitrust litigator (B193) and one was a prosecutor at the Bronx DA (the transcript is a bit confusing as to their juror number). Another lawyer that didn't make the jury came up on Day 3, another on Day 4 who was married to another lawyer.

Just so everyone understands:

The theory that Bragg's Office ultimately pushed the most aggressively in the latter stages of the case and at closing was that the false business records were intented to cover up a NY state law crime of "conspiracy to promote the election of any…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) May 31, 2024

The utter absurdities here are mind bottling.

pic.twitter.com/JLNON57hw3

— Sherry Stambaugh (@sherstam) June 1, 2024

drcrinum said:

---

pic.twitter.com/JLNON57hw3

— Sherry Stambaugh (@sherstam) June 1, 2024

---

Where is Vlad Putin?

CNN senior legal analyst got honest.
Explains the joke trial
https://anncoulter.substack.com/p/cnn-senior-legal-analyst-da-bragg

Quote:

---

Most importantly, the DA's charges against Trump push the outer boundaries of the law and due process. …
The district attorney's press office and its flaks often proclaim that falsification of business records charges are "commonplace" … That's true only if you draw definitional lines so broad as to render them meaningless. …
But when you impose meaningful search parameters, the truth emerges: The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge.

Standing alone, falsification charges would have been mere misdemeanors under New York law, which posed two problems for the DA. First, nobody cares about a misdemeanor, and it would be laughable to bring the first-ever charge against a former president for a trifling offense that falls within the same technical criminal classification as shoplifting a Snapple and a bag of Cheetos from a bodega. Second, the statute of limitations on a misdemeanor two years likely has long expired on Trump's conduct, which dates to 2016 and 2017.

---

nortex97 said:

---

Just so everyone understands:

The theory that Bragg's Office ultimately pushed the most aggressively in the latter stages of the case and at closing was that the false business records were intented to cover up a NY state law crime of "conspiracy to promote the election of any…

— Shipwreckedcrew (@shipwreckedcrew) May 31, 2024

The utter absurdities here are mind bottling.

---

Rest of Tweet

Quote:

---

Just so everyone understands:

The theory that Bragg's Office ultimately pushed the most aggressively in the latter stages of the case and at closing was that the false business records were intented to cover up a NY state law crime of "conspiracy to promote the election of any person to public office by unlawful means."

The unlawful means was the filing of the false records to hide the NDA payments.

The "filing of false records" charge -- standing alone -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

The "conspiracy to promote the election" -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

It is only by COMBINING two misdemeanors -- neither of which could be prosecuted -- that the Democrat machine could create a felony charge that was within the longer statute of limitations.

That's the extremes to which the Dems are willing to go in order to keep Trump from returning to the White House.

This case was the first case filed of the 4 now pending. It was filed before Trump announced that he was running again. It was intended to be a "warning shot across his bow" to prevent him from running.

There is now the very real possibility that exactly the opposite of the intended outcome is now going to happen.

By the way -- this week Joe Biden went from DC to Philly to Wilmington to DC to Rehoboth Beach.

---

Quote:

---

The unlawful means was the filing of the false records to hide the NDA payments.

The "filing of false records" charge -- standing alone -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

The "conspiracy to promote the election" -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

It is only by COMBINING two misdemeanors -- neither of which could be prosecuted -- that the Democrat machine could create a felony charge that was within the longer statute of limitations.

---

And illegally extended an extra year due to NY state's inability to function during covid. Or so they said.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The unlawful means was the filing of the false records to hide the NDA payments.

The "filing of false records" charge -- standing alone -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

The "conspiracy to promote the election" -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

It is only by COMBINING two misdemeanors -- neither of which could be prosecuted -- that the Democrat machine could create a felony charge that was within the longer statute of limitations.

---

And illegally extended an extra year due to NY state's inability to function during covid. Or so they said.

---

That is something I've been wondering about. Is a backlog of cases in a region a valid reason to toll? Have there been other cases across the state of New York that were tolled for the same reason or was this another novel application?

SwigAg11 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The unlawful means was the filing of the false records to hide the NDA payments.

The "filing of false records" charge -- standing alone -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

The "conspiracy to promote the election" -- is a misdemeanor, barred by the statute of limitations.

It is only by COMBINING two misdemeanors -- neither of which could be prosecuted -- that the Democrat machine could create a felony charge that was within the longer statute of limitations.

---

And illegally extended an extra year due to NY state's inability to function during covid. Or so they said.

---

That is something I've been wondering about. Is a backlog of cases in a region a valid reason to toll? Have there been other cases across the state of New York that were tolled for the same reason or was this another novel application?

---

I was curious about that too...

What about STOGNER v. CALIFORNIA? Does that not apply here?

Quote:

---

That is something I've been wondering about. Is a backlog of cases in a region a valid reason to toll? Have there been other cases across the state of New York that were tolled for the same reason or was this another novel application?

---

I have not seen where any other state extended criminal SOLs due to covid. Maybe they have as to civil SOLs but criminal? If I missed some other state doing so, I'd be happy to be corrected.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

That is something I've been wondering about. Is a backlog of cases in a region a valid reason to toll? Have there been other cases across the state of New York that were tolled for the same reason or was this another novel application?

---

I have not seen where any other state extended criminal SOLs due to covid. Maybe they have as to civil SOLs but criminal? If I missed some other state doing so, I'd be happy to be corrected.

---

Sorry for the confusion, but my question was more about if any other criminal case in NY had been tolled for those reasons? Or if Trump's trial was the only 1.

Quote:

---

Sorry for the confusion, but my question was more about if any other criminal case in NY had been tolled for those reasons? Or if Trump's trial was the only 1.

---

My understanding was it was statewide. Then again they changed the SOL in civil case just for E. Jean Carroll so have no idea if this tolling was pushed by Bragg or Colangelo, perhaps?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Sorry for the confusion, but my question was more about if any other criminal case in NY had been tolled for those reasons? Or if Trump's trial was the only 1.

---

My understanding was it was statewide. Then again they changed the SOL in civil case just for E. Jean Carroll so have no idea if this tolling was pushed by Bragg or Colangelo, perhaps?

---

Since I live in upstate NY, I can provide a little more info on the change to SOL for civil cases. It wasn't just Carroll that was affected. Several Catholic diocese are in bankruptcy after victims and their lawyers refused to reach settlement. The Albany diocese is the most recent to file bankruptcy.

JD Vance is quite impressive. Wolf is a D bag

Quote:

---

Since I live in upstate NY, I can provide a little more info on the change to SOL for civil cases. It wasn't just Carroll that was affected. Several Catholic diocese are in bankruptcy after victims and their lawyers refused to reach settlement. The Albany diocese is the most recent to file bankruptcy.

---

I understand that the Adult Survivors Act applied to more people other than Carroll. But the one year sunset provision within that law still sucked.

aggiehawg said:

---

Jack Boyette said:

---

This is an absolutely hilarious. These ****ing idiots cried for YEARS about how the FBI investigation into Hillary for "muh emails" hurt her election chances and was an attack by Republicans to damage a political opponent. These ****ing hypocrites do this over and over and over again, and it ALWAYS comes back to bite them. Harry Reid changes the rules re: appointing federal judges, MCConnell tells him he'll regret it, just 3 years later McConnell refuses to take up Garland's ***** ass for a vote, and then puts in Gorsitch, Kavanaugh and Barrett (in an election year).

Can't wait for this to play out.

---

Although DOJ has a policy about not indicting a sitting President, Texas does not. So what is Paxton going to pull out of his bags of tricks? (half joking.)

---

Biden should be prosecuted as an accomplice to the human, drugs and sex trafficking occurring on the Texas Border

War: GOP Senators vow not to assist/work with Xiden regime further on nominations.

Quote:

---

The fight escalated when Thursday's verdict against Trump was announced in the Manhattan courtroom. Eight Republican senators vow to no longer vote on any legislation for non-security funding or judicial and political nominations. They will not vote in favor of "expedited consideration and passage" of Democrat legislation.

Quote:

---

"We are unwilling to aid and abet this White House in its project to tear this country apart," the senators wrote.
Signatories of the letter include Lee and fellow Republicans J.D. Vance (Ohio), Tommy Tuberville (Ala.), Eric Schmitt (Mo.), Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.), Rick Scott (Fla.), Roger Marshall (Kan.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.). Both Vance and Rubio are thought to be on Trump's running mate short-list.

---

The senators posted their letter on social media to get their message out. Senator Mike Lee is leading the effort.

---

This is actually a bigger deal than it sounds, imho.

Lawfare Against Caesar Started a Civil War That Ended the Roman Republic https://t.co/8ZzTEdHQ4t pic.twitter.com/fY9umUa40g

— Grace Chong 🇺🇸 (@gc22gc) June 1, 2024

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1796553762032820497.html


The Rubicon has been crossed. History says the outlook is not good.
"Political prosecutions are what brought down the Roman Republic."

Short interesting threadreader.

Yeah, the dem monkeys howling with glee are so shortsighted. This is a horrible week for our republic. I dont care what you think about Trump. These charges were an absolute joke and proof they are willing to concoct anything to take down a political opponent. It's twisted.

MLK Jr was jailed 29 times. All on trumped up charges. Sound familiar? pic.twitter.com/ysGXgpSvif

— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) June 1, 2024

"How dare you support a convicted felon!"

- every Democrat voter.

Also Democrats ... pic.twitter.com/aXxJiwq93x

— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) June 1, 2024

The judge who presided over Donald Trump’s fraud case closed off many avenues of appeal, leaving him few ways to escape his felony conviction. https://t.co/jXY7FLz0iT

— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 1, 2024

Trial transcripts.

https://pdfs.nycourts.gov/PeopleVs.DTrump-71543/transcripts/