aggiehawg said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

What's the downside of trying to go the 1983 route?

---

Merchan goes full prison time? Consecutive and not concurrent? Merchan knows he will be reversed, so the time for his impact on the election is time limited as well. Federal court shuts him down but then doesn't shut him down with no TRO?

Merchan is that dumb that he would order Trump sent to Rikers for three or six months?

---

I actually think he's going to issue a 6 month house arrest to keep him from campaigning.

GenericAggie said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

What's the downside of trying to go the 1983 route?

---

Merchan goes full prison time? Consecutive and not concurrent? Merchan knows he will be reversed, so the time for his impact on the election is time limited as well. Federal court shuts him down but then doesn't shut him down with no TRO?

Merchan is that dumb that he would order Trump sent to Rikers for three or six months?

---

I actually think he's going to issue a 6 month house arrest to keep him from campaigning.

---

The more I am delving into this, the more I think the federal courts would stop him from implementing that.

aggiehawg said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

What's the downside of trying to go the 1983 route?

---

Merchan goes full prison time? Consecutive and not concurrent? Merchan knows he will be reversed, so the time for his impact on the election is time limited as well. Federal court shuts him down but then doesn't shut him down with no TRO?

Merchan is that dumb that he would order Trump sent to Rikers for three or six months?

---

Unless Merchan is a complete idiot, you have to be spot on here. Merchan was brought in for one reason and for one reason only, to attach the words "convicted felon" to Trump. Tying him up in court so he couldn't go out and hold rallies and putting him under a gag order, while Brandon flounders, was icing on the cake. By the time November rolls around, every voter in the nation will have heard that term thousands of times. Even after whatever conviction and punishment he metes out is overturned. People are stupid.

The FBI just admitted in court that Hunter Biden's laptop is real.

Here are 20 minutes of Joe Biden, U.S. intelligence officials, and the American media claiming that Hunter Biden's laptop was "Russian disinformation."

The FBI has had possession of Hunter's laptop since… pic.twitter.com/5lzQaXitwq

— KanekoaTheGreat (@KanekoaTheGreat) June 5, 2024

aggiejayrod said:

---

GenericAggie said:

---

What's the downside of trying to go the 1983 route?

---

The state bar could disbar or suspend them? Im half kidding but I'm willing to bet that Trumps attorneys have probably had many (frivolous) bar complaints filed against them for the crime of representing literally Hitler

---

Is it a serious concern that Trump's lawyers could face disbarment?

Rules note:

A TRO ruling cannot be appealed as by its very nature it expires after 14 days.

It would need to be the granting or denial of an injunction.

Quote:

---

How did Clinton report the campaign cash he was spending on a lowlife to smear his sexual conquests? How did Edwards report the million-plus dollars in campaign donations he received from Fred and Bunny to cover up an ongoing affair?

---

Quote:

---

Clinton laundered the campaign's payments to Palladino through a law firm and listed them on Federal Election Commission forms as "legal expenses." Unlike Trump's personal business records, these entries were being submitted to the FEC. Those entries had to be perfect!

---

Quote:

---

But wait a second! How come when Trump lists his payment to squelch a single "bimbo eruption" as a "legal expense," he's committed "profoundly serious" crimes?
According to the legal eagles in the D.A.'s office, Cohen's payment of $130,000 to Daniels reimbursed by Trump was actually a "loan" to the Trump campaign that should have been listed on his federal campaign finance report.
How did Edwards explain the million bucks he got from campaign donors gratis, no reimbursement expected or paid? His elegantly simple solution was not to report those contributions to the FEC. His reports included not the briefest mention of these gargantuan sums that were used to conceal a mistress and love child from the voters. (And he was definitely using the money to hide the affair from voters, not his wife: Elizabeth Edwards knew about the affair since at least March 2007.)

---

Quote:

---

In Edwards' case, Obama's Justice Department did bring a prosecution for campaign finance violations, but it ended with one acquittal and a hung jury on all other counts. The DOJ declined to retry the case.
The Times finally deigning to speak of Edwards' love child hush money reported on the failed prosecution, noting that the case "had no precedent" and would not "help politicians better interpret the labyrinth of campaign finance law."
But now, an even more "unprecedented" legal case, based on the "labyrinth of campaign finance law," is a hanging offense.

---

LINK

It's (D)ifferent. These types of cases almost always happen in East Coast Urban enclaves where there's a good chance you won't find a juror sympathetic to Republicans and almost zero chance you won't have one who is sympathetic to Democrats. Democrats know there's very little chance they'll face a jury that won't have at least one die hard lefty willing to hang the jury in these areas, so they can get away with almost anything.

👀 Justice MERCHAN has notified the parties in Trump's case that a stray comment was posted on the NY court system's Facebook page on May 29, a day before Trump's conviction. pic.twitter.com/EszX3HClLN

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) June 7, 2024

Wow!

POS NY juror.

Oopsie!

Uh oh! It looks like there was juror misconduct in the #TrumpTrial!

We knew these jurors would not be able to avoid telling their friends and relatives that were going to get Trump

It’s time for a mistrial “with prejudice” and no retrial!

But will Merchan do the right thing? pic.twitter.com/HyfnlUVFlZ

— Phil Holloway ✈️ (@PhilHollowayEsq) June 7, 2024

aggiehawg said:

---

Oopsie!

---

If this case didn't involve Trump, what should happen now (if anything)?

Find out who posted it.

Find out if they have a cousin on the jury.

If so Find out when he/she/zhe told cousin

StandUpforAmerica said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Oopsie!

---

If this case didn't involve Trump, what should happen now (if anything)?

---

In Merchan's court? Nothing.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Find out who posted it.

Find out if they have a cousin on the jury.

If so Find out when he/she/zhe told cousin

---

Yeah, this is a "proceed with caution" situation big time.

I 100% DISAGREE with Phil Holloway on this. You cannot just up and declare a mistrial over a random social media post like this without doing a thorough investigation to confirm it's validity. Otherwise, our judicial system will be turned completely on its collective head if any Tom, Dick, or Harry could cause a mistrial simply by posting an unsubstantiated claim.

And honestly, what's the probability they can track this person down?

If true I would assume the person didn't mask where he was. He was probably pissing himself with excitement. He didn't think twice about it.

Notice liberals I said if true. I by no means am saying it is but it has to be investigated

Tramp96 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Find out who posted it.

Find out if they have a cousin on the jury.

If so Find out when he/she/zhe told cousin

---

Yeah, this is a "proceed with caution" situation big time.

I 100% DISAGREE with Phil Holloway on this. You cannot just up and declare a mistrial over a random social media post like this without doing a thorough investigation to confirm it's validity. Otherwise, our judicial system will be turned completely on its collective head if any Tom, Dick, or Harry could cause a mistrial simply by posting something an unsubstantiated claim.

And honestly, what's the probability they can track this person down?

---

Judicial system has already been turned on it's collective head.

usmcbrooks said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Find out who posted it.

Find out if they have a cousin on the jury.

If so Find out when he/she/zhe told cousin

---

Yeah, this is a "proceed with caution" situation big time.

I 100% DISAGREE with Phil Holloway on this. You cannot just up and declare a mistrial over a random social media post like this without doing a thorough investigation to confirm it's validity. Otherwise, our judicial system will be turned completely on its collective head if any Tom, Dick, or Harry could cause a mistrial simply by posting something an unsubstantiated claim.

And honestly, what's the probability they can track this person down?

---

Judicial system has already been turned on it's collective head.

---

Touche.

I should've said, "...on its collective head even more than it already has..."

There is no way they can't investigate.

Tramp96 said:

---

backintexas2013 said:

---

Find out who posted it.

Find out if they have a cousin on the jury.

If so Find out when he/she/zhe told cousin

---

Yeah, this is a "proceed with caution" situation big time.

I 100% DISAGREE with Phil Holloway on this. You cannot just up and declare a mistrial over a random social media post like this without doing a thorough investigation to confirm it's validity. Otherwise, our judicial system will be turned completely on its collective head if any Tom, Dick, or Harry could cause a mistrial simply by posting an unsubstantiated claim.

And honestly, what's the probability they can track this person down?

---

100%, if they want to. Now, the Supreme Court leaker? J6 bomber? Will never find them.

Sorry - can't see your pics. Anyone else?

I can see it. Just a repost of the letter in the tweet.

backintexas2013 said:

---

There is no way they can't investigate.

---

I don't disagree, and I hope they do.

My response is to the author of the tweet demanding the judge go ahead and declare a mistrial. Now don't get me wrong, I think there are plenty of other reasons to either declare a mistrial or throw the case out completely, but THIS post cannot be the reason unless it's confirmed that the poster did in fact receive this information from a juror.

boulderaggie said:

---

Sorry - can't see your pics. Anyone else?

---

Showing up for me. It is the letter from Merchan that is in the Holloway tweet. Maybe you can access it from the tweet?

boulderaggie said:

---

Sorry - can't see your pics. Anyone else?

---

I can see them.

They can track down some Russian trolls who made some FB ads during the 2016 election years later. Shouldn't be an issue to find this guy…if FB is playing by the same rules.

Here is “Michael Anderson” who seems to be the account Judge Merchan references commenting that he is a Trump juror’s cousin. Seems a bit trolly since he self-describes as a professional shit poster but judge for yourselves: https://t.co/FVICvcYqtJ pic.twitter.com/vtFRW0r6p7

— Jacqueline Sweet (@JSweetLI) June 7, 2024

note that there is no post on May 29th; there is a similar post from May 20th (more than a week before the verdict). maybe the entire May 29th post was deleted.

As much as I want this to be true, pretty sure if that is the guy in question, there's not much validity to it.

Transabled = mentally ill

I would be extremely surprised if they are able to trace him as a cousin or relative to any of the jurors.

Nvm see it now

This definitely needs to be looked into, but Holloway is wish casting, not doing a legal analysis