The Trump Criminal Case MEGATHREAD.

[Jersey Girl]

I. die.

[Jersey Girl]

I didn't know this! Matt Gaetz.

What Does it Say that a "Truth Social" Juror Convicted Donald Trump on All 34 Counts in a NY Minute?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYS4pXjbgVU

[Some Schmo]

And yet Trump has never been without a beautiful woman on his arm. Why is that?

Because he pays?

LOL

Anyone with cash can buy a trophy. It's not that impressive.

I've never heard a woman speak fondly of Trump after they broke up. Why is that?

[Moksha]

Donald Trump, convicted of 34 felonies last week, would not be eligible to hold office in Utah for at least ten years, but he can still appear on Utah’s presidential ballot. That might be the case in Washington State.

[Res Ipsa]

Donald Trump, convicted of 34 felonies last week, would not be eligible to hold office in Utah for at least ten years, but he can still appear on Utah’s presidential ballot. That might be the case in Washington State.

I thought it was established that States cannot add requirements to running for President that do not appear in the US Constitution.

[Doctor Steuss]

Incidentally, as the DOJ and Biden controlled and manipulated a State Elected District Attorney, and a jury of 12 people (one of which primarily got their news from Trump's Truth Social), they seem incapable of controlling those who literally work for the DOJ.

Opening statements begin in Hunter Biden trial.

Schrodinger's Biden Deep State. Both infinitely incompetent, and brilliantly nefarious.

[ajax18]

And yet Trump has never been without a beautiful woman on his arm. Why is that?

Because he pays?

Gold diggers, huh?

[ajax18]

Incidentally, as the DOJ and Biden controlled and manipulated a State Elected District Attorney, and a jury of 12 people (one of which primarily got their news from Trump's Truth Social), they seem incapable of controlling those who literally work for the DOJ.

Opening statements begin in Hunter Biden trial.

Schrodinger's Biden Deep State. Both infinitely incompetent, and brilliantly nefarious.

I'm predicting a hung jury in the Hunter Biden case. The case will take place in Delaware where Biden is Lord and master (85% Democrat) and has a reputation of bringing home the federal pork barrels for the Delaware state community. They even have monuments and buildings named after Joe Biden near the courthouse. It would probably benefit Joe politically if Hunter is found guilty in an effort to maintain some semblance of the justice system not being entirely politicized to where guilt depends on party affiliation or race more than whatever the alleged crime is. It's an open and shut case that the Biden administration made every effort to sweep under the rug until a rogue judge noticed the absurdity of the deal to drop Hunter's tax evasion charges thus forcing the Biden DOJ to reneg on it's offer to drop the charges in exchange for Hunter agreeing to go into drug rehab due to the sheer embarrassment of what they were doing potentially being made public. Hunter doesn't really need his law license to continue influence peddling. But he does need Joe to hang on for four more years. What's funny is that Joe Biden has contended for years that his son never did anything wrong and had it not been for the FBI whistleblowers the public would not have known that he was lying. If it comes down to a choice between winning the election or seeing Hunter go to jail what do you think Joe will do? I don't think it will come down to that. There's a million ways to fix all of this and sweep it back under the rug when your party controls the state, local, and federal government.

[honorentheos]

Anyway, Trumpism seems to me to have this cloud-castle, Sauron's Ring vibe of everything actually being far more fragile than it seems: the great and terrible Oz. Perhaps I'm just too optimistic. Or perhaps there is nothing to Trumpism but Trumpism itself?

This is true, but it's also true in a similar way to someone saying that our economic system functions on trust that, if shaken, can tumble down rather quickly.

Trump's rise in 2016 is remarkable for what it took to make it possible. The Republican nomination process allowed him to take full states with a small but loyal block of voters in a race against a divided and huge field of contenders. He almost certainly wouldn't have won had the other more typical Republican candidates seen the threat and gotten behind a consensus candidate. This is how Biden became the Democratic nominee in 2020 when the moderate wing of the party realized they were splitting the moderate vote against Bernie Sanders, then united behind Biden.

Then in 2016 many Republicans who didn't like him voted for him over not voting because the Supreme Court had an opening and was almost certain to have another, and the conservative right wanted the court more than anything. But then something kinda crazy happened - many of these hold-their-nose voters began to see the opposition to Trump as unfair and evidence maybe the political left really was out to get him. The support shifted in no small part because the animosity between the two parties became Trump's political identity. And that evolution brings us to today.

So it is bizarre in how little there is of substance to recommend Trump as the face of the Republican party...unless a person only sees everything through the lense of partisan politics. He's a lightning rod in a violent storm that he does everything in his power to keep energized in that context.

[Chap]

I'm predicting a hung jury in the Hunter Biden case. The case will take place in Delaware where Biden is Lord and master (85% Democrat) and has a reputation of bringing home the federal pork barrels for the Delaware state community.

So you are suggesting that the verdict of a jury in a criminal case may from henceforth be dismissed as merely an expression of the political color of that state, rather than the honest view of 12 ordinary Americans?

Apart from the horrific consequences of such a blow at one of the most ancient and respected pillars of the Anglo-Saxon legal system - it goes right back to Magna Carta - do you realise that if your attack succeeds it will have the following consequences:

(a) The verdict of a jury in a Republican dominated state on an accused known to be a Democratic supporter can similarly be dismissed as no more than an expression of the political color of the state, with no moral significance as expressing the honest view of 12 ordinary Americans.

(b) It will inevitably lead on to calls for the abolition of the jury system as a waste of time, so that the guilt or innocence of the accused is simply decided on the basis of whether or not their politics are the same as the majority of voters in the state in which they are being tried (not guilty) or different from that of the majority of voters in the state in which they are being tried (guilty).

Do you really want to go there?