Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Recommended Posts

Posted
9 hours ago, RDCanecutter said:

"I try not to think about politics. They are all the same." --SomeoneYouKnow

Someone Sounds Suspicious.

 

Posted
11 hours ago, 'stache said:

That Rudy isn’t the same as today’s Rudy. I seriously think he has dementia, or syphillis, or maybe even a tumor. I honestly can’t think of another famous person whose personality has changed this much in such a public way in such a short period of time without a medical explanation. He might also have been blackmailed. I just don’t understand it otherwise. America’s mayor, famous prosecutor (as you said in the most prominent US Atty position in the country), to the dumbest saddest most pathetic piece of shit imaginable. Just insane.

image.thumb.png.26c1cfe58c3837698cad8514cde39b17.png

11 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

His first wife was also his cousin.

So he’s always made bad decisions. 

Posted
7 hours ago, YGIFS said:

I also like how Trump put "unlimited" in quotation marks like he got cut off from breadsticks at Olive Garden because he left the premises to go to Burger King and then came back for more breadsticks.  There's a John Pinetta joke in there somewhere.  

also, we know he may very well get convicted on a lot of this stuff but will never see the inside of a jail cell.  But to game it out, since the Secret Service never thought this could happen in a thousand years...what would his cell situation be?  Obviously he would not be placed in GenPop, he'd have a solitary cell.  But would an agent be in there with him at all times?  Or would two stand guard outside?  What's the protocol on having non-prison personnel packing heavy weapons inside a federal or state prison?  What's to stop 50 inmates from bum-rushing them all at once to grab their carry?  

He’ll buy a mansion, call it a federal prison, then get a shell company to manage the prison and let himself do whatever the fuck he wants inside

Posted
44 minutes ago, MrBig said:

He’ll buy a mansion, call it a federal prison, then get a shell company to manage the prison and let himself do whatever the fuck he wants inside

He’s no Pablo Esocar. 

  • Like 1
Posted

I could see Trump trying to pull a Pablo Escobar by offering the government of our country or another billions to stay free. 

"Okay, President Trump...We're interested and can do what you need.  As a multi-billionaire, all we ask is $1bn for the trouble and logistics."

-Well you see, I'm between bail bondsman right now.  And I've got a lot tied up in real estate.  Would you take a 2-party out-of-state check from Slovenia?  I'm good for it, I swear.  Just ask my attorneys.  

  • Haha 1
Posted

Apparently he retweeted or retruthed or whatever the fuck it is something from Fox news that should be considered threatening the jury pool earlier tonight.  I'm sure the judge will issue a $14 fine and stern warning in the morning.  

Posted

He posted this earlier:

Donald J. Trump

@realDonaldTrump ·11h Crooked Joe Biden wants PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY to be protected perhaps more than any other living (barely!) individual because if it isn’t, and having absolutely nothing to do with me, he will surely be Indicted and Tried for many of his Dishonest, illegal, or Incompetent Actions (Afghanistan disaster, Southern Border catastrophe!). A President should not be placed in that position - MUST BE FREE TO MAKE DECISIONS, HOPEFULLY CORRECT ONES!
  • Haha 2
Posted
18 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Apparently he retweeted or retruthed or whatever the fuck it is something from Fox news that should be considered threatening the jury pool earlier tonight.  I'm sure the judge will issue a $14 fine and stern warning in the morning.  

This?

“They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury,” Jesse Watters

Posted
3 minutes ago, atomheartbevo said:

This?

“They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury,” Jesse Watters

Yep that's it.  Not huge considering all the nonsense the guy spews and retweets, but the way that reads and implies is threatening.  Though I have no doubt absolutely nothing will come of it.  

Posted
35 minutes ago, BamaATL said:

Yep that's it.  Not huge considering all the nonsense the guy spews and retweets, but the way that reads and implies is threatening.  Though I have no doubt absolutely nothing will come of it.  

The gag order that was entered specifically said he could not make comments about jurors or potential jurors.  some of his violations were dicey because the gag order was not explicit enough and was vague on the issue involved  this ain’t that.

I’m sure he will be hit by some monetary sanction. That’s so small it is not a punishment, but the way contempt sanctions work is they start off slow and then increase in severity.

 

Posted

Just found out a friend of mine was in the jury pool for this damn trial. Crazy shit. Told attys he wouldn’t be able to be unbiased. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted
5 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

The gag order that was entered specifically said he could not make comments about jurors or potential jurors.  some of his violations were dicey because the gag order was not explicit enough and was vague on the issue involved  this ain’t that.

I’m sure he will be hit by some monetary sanction. That’s so small it is not a punishment, but the way contempt sanctions work is they start off slow and then increase in severity.

 

Not Gonna Happen No Way GIF by CBC

Posted

Is retweeting something treated the same as saying it yourself? Considering that jurors have already been seated, that could be interpreted as threatening to them, I would think.

Posted
1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Is retweeting something treated the same as saying it yourself? Considering that jurors have already been seated, that could be interpreted as threatening to them, I would think.

I would think so. By reposting it he is adopting the content as a view he also endorses.  In his 10 billion posts you seldom see him posting things that he does not agree with.

See defamation as an example.  If I make some false negative things up about Twice, even though you don’t know if it’s true, if you pass on what I said, you can be sued for defamation. You have published it just as if it were the first time - even though it was not your idea and you just passed on juicy gossip. 

By someone repeating the thing that is read or heard, they are vouching for the validity of the content.  Not an exact fit, but an analogy.

Posted

His reasoning capability is stronger than ever.  If every defendant got “unlimited” jury strikes, across the tens of thousands of trials taking place all over the country at any one given time…wouldn’t that make even FoxNews?  That there were hundreds of thousands, maybe millions, of Americans just lined up around courthouses all over the country on any given weekday.  Even his minions would think, “I dunno, I drive by the courthouse everyday on my way to work and I ain’t see nothing like that.”  

  • Haha 1
Posted

When will Trump's attorneys argue that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury of white, six-time-bankrupt failed businessmen/reality TV stars who inherited their wealth? Will they seek an emergency stay/mandamus in the federal courts? 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, AnTiM said:

It could be worse, folks.  Let's just hope the jury is nowhere close to being "a jury of his peers".

Most of his peers are in prison on his behalf.  So . . .

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 3
Posted
10 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

This?

“They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury,” Jesse Watters

More projection. Wasn’t a GOP rep telling MAGAs to do that?

Posted
10 hours ago, bluto said:

Just found out a friend of mine was in the jury pool for this damn trial. Crazy shit. Told attys he wouldn’t be able to be unbiased. 

You should beat that motherfucker with reeds. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, AnTiM said:

It could be worse, folks.  Let's just hope the jury is nowhere close to being "a jury of his peers".

Next argument will be that Trump has no peers and therefore cannot get a fair trial. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted
Quote

 

Seated jury down to 6 after juror says aspects of her identity were made public. Here's what happened in court

A juror sworn onto Donald Trump's jury panel Tuesday was dismissed Thursday morning after expressing concerns that part of her identity were made public by the media.

There are now six jurors empaneled. Juror No. 2 told Judge Juan Merchan:

"Aspects of my identity have already been out there in the public, yesterday alone I had friends colleagues and family push things to my phone questioning my identity as a juror," she said.

The juror’s concerns reflected the historic nature of the case and the intense pressure in a polarized political climate that will be on the panel of people who are called to do their civic duty to be fair and impartial.

Merchan then addressed the press in court, telling them "there's a reason this is an anonymous jury."

"We just lost what probably would've been a very good juror," Merchan said. The judge said the juror said she was "afraid" and felt intimated by the press.

Merchan said he agrees with the defense that it's important to obtain information about prospective jurors' employers. But he says he is going to have those answers to questions 3a and 3d redacted from the court record, and he is directing the press in the courtroom and in the overflow not to report those answers.

"It’s become a problem," Merchan says.

Questions 3a and 3d ask: Who is your current employer and who is your previous employer?

While having an empaneled juror excused is not common, the juror's concern about aspects of her identity being revealed is a byproduct of a high profile case with a lot of publicity.

 

 

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-18-24/index.html

april-fools-joke.gif

  • Rage+1 2
Posted
38 minutes ago, C-Man said:

It's just like a high-profile mob trial....except worse.  And the entire GQP pathetically wants a fucking mobster to be our president.  The entire party is a terrorist organization.  If it was based on foreign soil, we'd have destroyed its entire apparatus in drone strikes years ago.

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1
Posted
6 hours ago, Bookman said:

When will Trump's attorneys argue that the Sixth Amendment requires a jury of white, six-time-bankrupt failed businessmen/reality TV stars who inherited their wealth? Will they seek an emergency stay/mandamus in the federal courts? 

never if you would shut up and stop giving them ideas

 

;)

  • Haha 1
Posted
55 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'm sorry, but that should be a crime of some sort.  It may be.  Putting jurors' safety at risk seems incredibly dangerous.

NY Times, CBS, and MSNBC all reported the same information as Fox News. the jurors used that as an excuse to get out of jury duty. 

then the judge told them to all not report that stuff even though it's being stated in open court. 

bottom line is they are going to just have to sequester the jury once this starts.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, The Dog said:

NY Times, CBS, and MSNBC all reported the same information as Fox News. the jurors used that as an excuse to get out of jury duty. 

then the judge told them to all not report that stuff even though it's being stated in open court. 

bottom line is they are going to just have to sequester the jury once this starts.

And then watch some of them get murdered if he's found guilty and gets jail time. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
53 minutes ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Witness tampering

Well, they're not witnesses, so I looked up the federal statute, and you may be right.  One aspect:

(2)cause or induce any person to—

(D)
be absent from an official proceeding to which such person has been summoned by legal process; or
Posted
Just now, SydneyCarton said:

And then watch some of them get murdered if he's found guilty and gets jail time. 

This.  I wouldn't serve on that jury.  No way, no how.  Hold me in contempt, I don't care.  Donald Trump and his minions are doing all they can to get me killed.

That's where we are, by the way.  One of our two parties and a criminal fucking gang are completely indistinguishable.  Shit, the party's even worse.  At least the mafia would try to buy a juror off before they subjected them to threat of death.  The GQP is too stupid (and greedy) to even try the first step.  They just go right to "juror intimidation."  Fucking.  Criminals.

Posted
11 hours ago, RPM said:

This was solid gold.

 

The government winds up... delivers the pitch... Trump swings... and misses!  That brings the count to two and three...

...million five hundred sixty eight thousand four hundred ninety three.

Posted
5 minutes ago, The Dog said:

NY Times, CBS, and MSNBC all reported the same information as Fox News.

They even reported info on the juror's spouse? Why?

Posted
5 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

And then watch some of them get murdered if he's found guilty and gets jail time. 

my point is that it's not just Fox News who was spreading the information and point the finger exclusively at them is disingenuous. not that you specifically were but there's a narrative out there that only Fox was doing this to mess with the jury when all they and other media outlets were doing was reporting things they thought they could report (Waters editorializing aside - he'd say that shit even if he knew nothing about them). 

 

Posted
Just now, The Dog said:

my point is that it's not just Fox News who was spreading the information and point the finger exclusively at them is disingenuous. not that you specifically were but there's a narrative out there that only Fox was doing this to mess with the jury when all they and other media outlets were doing was reporting things they thought they could report (Waters editorializing aside - he'd say that shit even if he knew nothing about them). 

 

Yeah, I'm not sitting here going "WTF Fox News," at least, not about this specific thing. I'm sitting here going "everyone who is letting these details out, including reading them in open court, should be fucking fired/jailed/fined" etc. Why the FUCK wouldn't you read these details out in a closed session with just the teams invovled?

  • Hook 'Em 3


×
×
  • Create New...