A post has been reported and removed:

 

27. You will not post any copyrighted material except as fair use laws apply (as in the case of news articles). Only post a link, the headline and three sentences from the article. Content in the public domain is limited to the same restrictions.

3 hours ago, Berkshire said:

It's not that Trump supporters are angry at the current predicament.  It's that a good number of Trump supporters are certifiably batsht crazy.  So yes, having crazy people out there being encouraged by an even crazier demagogue (read Trump) can create a rather combustible situation.  

I think that nothing much will happen,maybe a few idiots waving guns but they will be dealt with swiftly.

If there is going to be a mass protest with people having guns on them that will be the end of the second amendment.

That is a whole new can of worms but it will be just another popcorn moment for most folks.

 

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agreed.

Anyway, he doesn't seem to get that world opinion is irrelevant in a national election. The world doesn't get to vote for the POTUS.

But the world has to live with the POTUS who is chosen for at least 4 years.

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

While I have no intention of using such a device, if posters want to use such, why bother actually writing anything? Just post whatever a machine said.

Of course, you don't plan on using it.  You seldom post anything that has any source other than IMO.  Between having some factual information and your opinion, I'll go with information.

 

A unattributed quote has been removed.  

 

Poll: Majority of Americans approve of Trump indictment

 

"Sixty percent of Americans approve of the indictment of former President Donald Trump...."

"Independents largely line up in support of the indictment – 62% approve of it and 38% disapprove. "

 

 

Trump makes last-ditch change to legal team to sideline 'loudmouth' lawyer ahead of arraignment

 

"Donald Trump has shaken up his legal team with less than 24 hours to go before his arraignment in New York on criminal charges, amid reported concerns over his former lead attorney who appeared to publicly disagree with the former president in TV interviews."

 

If I may repeat Michael Cohen's advice to all trump attorneys; "RUN!"

45 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Poll: Majority of Americans approve of Trump indictment

 

"Sixty percent of Americans approve of the indictment of former President Donald Trump...."

"Independents largely line up in support of the indictment – 62% approve of it and 38% disapprove. "

 

 

As an independent I agree as I support the Indictment for Trump and anyone else who pulls the same crimes.

Trump arrived for arraignment with thousands of

supporters and demonstrators watching from the streets

and millions watching from home or from work. It was the

most most important courthouse appearance in recent

memory to answer for one of the weakest indictments

in New York history. The Democrats will have heaps

of egg on their faces after this desperate debacle.

 

Just now, talahtnut said:

Trump arrived for arraignment with thousands of

supporters and demonstrators watching from the streets

and millions watching from home or from work. It was the

most most important courthouse appearance in recent

memory to answer for one of the weakest indictments

in New York history. The Democrats will have heaps

of egg on their faces after this desperate debacle.

 

Ya think it was just supporters watching his arraignment? 

And thousands from the streets? Just not many of them on the streets near the courthouse.

And given that the population of the US is over 325 million, this factoids that you offered are significant why exactly?

19 minutes ago, talahtnut said:

Trump arrived for arraignment with thousands of

supporters and demonstrators watching from the streets

and millions watching from home or from work. It was the

most most important courthouse appearance in recent

memory to answer for one of the weakest indictments

in New York history. The Democrats will have heaps

of egg on their faces after this desperate debacle.

 

Please explain why you believe that this is being driven by Democrats as a politically motivated prosecution.  The facts speak for themselves. The man committed crimes and was indicted and arraigned on them.  White collar crime does not go unpunished, and it does not matter whether you are a Republican, Democrat, an Independent or so on. Do you believe that no one has ever Been prosecuted for the same charges Trump is being charged with. It does not matter who the person is, if they did the crime they are prosecuted, do they serve actual time, well that's up to the court, but many high profile folks have, but then you can believe what you want.

All this drama around the case is so ridicolous. The situation is quite simple:

 

Rule of law means no-one is above the law. It means you can get accused of having commited a crime. You then get the chance to defend yourself. If you did nothing wrong then you'll be acquitted. If you did do the crime then you get punished.

 

If Trump is truly convinced that he did nothing wrong then he has nothing to fear. He'll be able to present his defense and get acquitted. In fact it would put him in a pretty good position because *then* he can claim it was politically motived. But why the outrage before the trial even started? This is a rhetorical question.

 

I also find it funny that a few people who are defending Trump seem to think they know all the facts and the law better than a top ranking law enforcement officer of New York.

1 hour ago, talahtnut said:

Trump arrived for arraignment with thousands of

supporters and demonstrators watching from the streets

and millions watching from home or from work. It was the

most most important courthouse appearance in recent

memory to answer for one of the weakest indictments

in New York history. The Democrats will have heaps

of egg on their faces after this desperate debacle.

 

Yet "the crowd was small, by the standards of New York City protests, which routinely draw thousands".

 

Are you getting confused between "debacle" and spectacle?

 

Trump's surrender at courthouse creates New York spectacle | AP News

Now Trump calls his republican allies to defund the Justice Department and FBI in order to pressure them to drop the cases against him. Obviously not going to happen but talk about making the USA a banana republic.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-facing-criminal-charges-calls-defunding-fbi-2023-04-05/

2 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:

Please explain why you believe that this is being driven by Democrats as a politically motivated prosecution.  The facts speak for themselves. The man committed crimes and was indicted and arraigned on them.  White collar crime does not go unpunished, and it does not matter whether you are a Republican, Democrat, an Independent or so on. Do you believe that no one has ever Been prosecuted for the same charges Trump is being charged with. It does not matter who the person is, if they did the crime they are prosecuted, do they serve actual time, well that's up to the court, but many high profile folks have, but then you can believe what you want.

A brief explanation of why I believe this case could be political:

Trump faces: prosecution by a politician who campaigned for

his imprisonment; a judge with familial ties to Biden/Harris;

a jury pool comprised of ~86% Biden voters; and a potential

trial that will coincide with the GOP primary.

This is an abuse of prosecutorial authority one would expect

in third world juntas or tropical revolutionaries.

1 hour ago, talahtnut said:

A brief explanation of why I believe this case could be political:

Trump faces: prosecution by a politician who campaigned for

his imprisonment; a judge with familial ties to Biden/Harris;

a jury pool comprised of ~86% Biden voters; and a potential

trial that will coincide with the GOP primary.

This is an abuse of prosecutorial authority one would expect

in third world juntas or tropical revolutionaries.

Please provide a link to your claim that judge Juan Merchan campaigned for Trump's imprisonment.

 

Joe Tacopina, a criminal defence attorney retained by Mr Trump, told CNN on Sunday: “I have no issue with this judge whatsoever … He has a very good reputation.”

“Do I think the judge is biased? Of course not,” Mr Tacopina added while speaking to George Stephanopolous on ABC News.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/05/donald-trump-judge-juan-merchan-claims-fact-check/

 

Also your claim that the grand jury was 86% Biden voters.

 

edit: I see that the claim was made by Alan Dershowicz. He must be a mind reader.

 

58 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Please provide a link to your claim that judge Juan Merchan campaigned for Trump's imprisonment.

 

Joe Tacopina, a criminal defence attorney retained by Mr Trump, told CNN on Sunday: “I have no issue with this judge whatsoever … He has a very good reputation.”

“Do I think the judge is biased? Of course not,” Mr Tacopina added while speaking to George Stephanopolous on ABC News.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/05/donald-trump-judge-juan-merchan-claims-fact-check/

 

Also your claim that the grand jury was 86% Biden voters.

 

edit: I see that the claim was made by Alan Dershowicz. He must be a mind reader.

 

I think he means Alvin Bragg .

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

Please provide a link to your claim that judge Juan Merchan campaigned for Trump's imprisonment.

 

Joe Tacopina, a criminal defence attorney retained by Mr Trump, told CNN on Sunday: “I have no issue with this judge whatsoever … He has a very good reputation.”

“Do I think the judge is biased? Of course not,” Mr Tacopina added while speaking to George Stephanopolous on ABC News.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/04/05/donald-trump-judge-juan-merchan-claims-fact-check/

 

Also your claim that the grand jury was 86% Biden voters.

 

edit: I see that the claim was made by Alan Dershowicz. He must be a mind reader.

 

Please provide a link to your claim that judge Juan Merchan campaigned for Trump's imprisonment.

 

The poster didnt claim that, . They said:

“Trump faces: prosecution by a politician who campaigned for

his imprisonment; a judge with familial ties to Biden/Harris;”

https://nypost.com/2023/03/23/da-bragg-boasted-during-campaign-about-suing-trump/

5 hours ago, eisfeld said:

Now Trump calls his republican allies to defund the Justice Department and FBI in order to pressure them to drop the cases against him. Obviously not going to happen but talk about making the USA a banana republic.

 

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-facing-criminal-charges-calls-defunding-fbi-2023-04-05/

Perhaps he intends to run on a "Lawless and Disordered" campaign.

2 hours ago, nauseus said:

I think he means Alvin Bragg .

I think he’s on the trajectory of denial as Justice proceeds.

 

The trajectory of denial amongst Trump supporters that I predicted at the beginning of Trump’s investigations and that some took exception to.

 

And yet, here we are.  
 

The Defendant’  supporters will never accept the Defendant being held accountable under the law.

A satirical video has been removed.

I don't care much whether this is the best case to bring or the strongest or the most likely to get him convicted.  I care that he is facing the justice system, which is what happens to the rest of us when we are accused of criminal behavior.   

 

He is a man who has never had to face any consequences for his actions.  He grew up wealthy.  He received special treatment at every turn of his life.  He's always done whatever he wanted without care or consideration of others.   It has been a charmed existence, but not a realistic one and not the kind of life that the US as a nation aspired to have some enjoy but not others.   

He's not being persecuted.  He's being prosecuted.  Sadly for him, it took real consequences some 70+ years to catch up with him.   

... and to the above

 

 

 

 

Will the Defendant be muzzled before his rhetoric continues to involve the possible violence he has now created by his press statement after the arraignment.  He just can not help himself, and his lawyers are not helping him by allowing him to continue to spew false facts.  Maybe they are trying to help bury him without him knowing they are helping him.

To the above court proceedings transcript via NY Times (The Court is the presiding judge):

 

1 minute ago, ThailandRyan said:

Will the Defendant be muzzled before his rhetoric continues to involve the possible violence he has now created by his press statement after the arraignment.  He just can not help himself, and his lawyers are not helping him by allowing him to continue to spew false facts.  Maybe they are trying to help bury him without him knowing they are helping him.

I am sure the judge has faced security issues, but not on the scale he is now.  I suspect precautions are in place.  In my work, I often had to appear in court, although they weren't usually criminal cases.  I was always amazed at how judges could stick to the actual charges, stop extraneous chatter into the proceedings, and keep it focused.   

 

Personally, I'd rather watch paint dry than be on a jury deciding if someone went through a series of machinations that amounted to fraud.   A good judge will keep it to that.  The jury will be judging the actions and if they amount to a crime.  

Off topic posts and replies removed.

6 hours ago, Credo said:

Personally, I'd rather watch paint dry than be on a jury deciding if someone went through a series of machinations that amounted to fraud.   

I think -- should this ever get that far -- the problem for the defense and prosecution would be finding persons who DON'T want be on the jury.

36 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

I think -- should this ever get that far -- the problem for the defense and prosecution would be finding persons who DON'T want be on the jury.

Judge has given a thinly veiled admonishment of Trump’s incitement that has the potential of messing and polluting the jury pool. He will be slapped with court contempt that can result in jail time if he continue to incite that will jeopardize court personnel and jury. He better not test this no nonsense judge. 

20 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

I think -- should this ever get that far -- the problem for the defense and prosecution would be finding persons who DON'T want be on the jury.

I don't know if there are a lot of people who would be interested in being threatened.  People usually get eliminated if they show a major interest in the case.