Jump to content

Trump criminal case: Full 12-person jury seated in Manhattan


Social Media

Recommended Posts

On 4/20/2024 at 10:49 PM, BigStar said:

 

So naive. It's all about money & power. The threats came from Dim party and their thugs. 

amazing how those dems are able to convince life long trumper maga morons to testify against dear leader...must be some powerful "thugs" to pull that off especially knowing that the magas will threaten their fellow trumpers along with their families who dare to testify......enjoy the cult and the kool aide.

  • Love It 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, pomchop said:

amazing how those dems are able to convince life long trumper maga morons to testify against dear leader.

It's called a subpoena:

 

He’s the first person ever to testify at a criminal trial of a former U.S. president, and David Pecker is doing so under subpoena, with his lawyer in the courtroom.

 

https://apnews.com/live/trump-trial-updates-opening-statements

 

Or maybe as in Jimmy Durante's famous line:

 

 “Everybody wants to get into the act!”

 

 

Edited by jerrymahoney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

It's called a subpoena:

 

He’s the first person ever to testify at a criminal trial of a former U.S. president, and David Pecker is doing so under subpoena, with his lawyer in the courtroom.

 

https://apnews.com/live/trump-trial-updates-opening-statements

 

Or maybe as in Jimmy Durante's famous line:

 

 “Everybody wants to get into the act!”

 

 

There are many many more beyond pecker involved in the variety of charges....trumper after trumper has come forth from jan 6 on to share what they saw and heard....very easy to say..."i don't recall" but few did....bottom line is the same old tired line of a dem witch hunt that has been the cult motto  for years is simply yet another lie spun to try and protect dear leader.

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

Sure. After receiving a subpoena.

subponea or not their testimony has the potential to fry donnie and the dunces as most of it is backed by extensive documentation as well as audio and video and much of it compliments of donnie and his big flapping mouth...

 

As stated before to call it a witch hunt is yet another lie to convince trumpers that everybody is picking on donnie boy and he has done nothing wrong.  If he is innocent then by all means drop the disrupt delay deny and get on with the trials so he can once and for all show what fools those of us who think he is a crook a criminal and a conman truly are.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, pomchop said:

subponea or not their testimony has the potential to fry donnie and the dunces as most of it is backed by extensive documentation as well as audio and video and much of it compliments of donnie and his big flapping mouth...

 

As stated before to call it a witch hunt is yet another lie to convince trumpers that everybody is picking on donnie boy and he has done nothing wrong.  If he is innocent then by all means drop the disrupt delay deny and get on with the trials so he can once and for all show what fools those of us who think he is a crook a criminal and a conman truly are.

Come forth? they didn't volunteer.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2024 at 1:13 PM, Danderman123 said:

Nothing in your post helps Trump prove his innocence.

 

A DA promising to convict a perp doesn't make the perp innocent.


And his promise doesn’t make a person guilty.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Influencing or attempting to influence an election is not a crime. 

"Catch and kill", whereby an "exclusive" is paid for and the story never run, is not a crime.  

Reimbursing your lawyer payments for an NDA and calling it legal expenses is not a crime. 

 

And of course, it's just a coincidence that Matthew Colangelo, that served in the Obama Administration and who was one of Merrick Garland’s top guys in the Biden DOJ ended up as the lead prosecutor on the case.

 

Nothing to see here.... 

 

 

 

This trial will be a big surprise for you.

 

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, pomchop said:

amazing how those dems are able to convince life long trumper maga morons to testify against dear leader...must be some powerful "thugs" to pull that off

 

You dunno? So innocent. The DOJ, FBI, and local AG thugs have unlimited funds at their disposal to intimidate, bankrupt, prosecute & jail.  

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BigStar said:

 

You dunno? So innocent. The DOJ, FBI, and local AG thugs have unlimited funds at their disposal to intimidate, bankrupt, prosecute & jail.  

if you do not want to be charged with crimes then it might be a good idea not to commit crimes and leave massive piles of evidence behind....whether magas like it or not it is the job of doj fbi and ag to investigate and gather evidence when crimes are alleged and then present that evidence to a grand jury of regular citizens who then determine whether the evidence warrants indictments.....that is what has happened.  I doubt trump will be bankrupted as he seems to have a lot of delusional fools willing to keep sending him $$ to pay the army of lawyers who are trying to defend the indefensible.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, pomchop said:

if you do not want to be charged with crimes then it might be a good idea not to commit crimes and leave massive piles of evidence behind.

 

Sad. That's not at all how it works with political persecution. "Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime," Lavrentiy Beria famously said. What wasn't a crime, becomes a crime (with law enacted retroactively if necessary) or is simply alleged to be possibly a crime that'll have to be defended at ruinous cost, possibly (even probably) before biased jurors. Ruination of a career may be threatened:

 

Jay Bratt, the special counsel’s lead prosecutor, allegedly threatened Trump staff member Walt Nauta’s attorney, Stanley Woodward, with sabotaging his judicial nomination to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia if he could not get Nauta to turn on Trump, according to a newly unsealed motion originally filed in June 2023.

     --https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/24/here-are-the-3-most-shocking-discoveries-just-unsealed-in-trump-classified-docs-case/

 

Indictments, to which our more feminine members cling religiously, don't mean a lot, as a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted. No defense is presented.

 

I'll leave it at that, because you're too naive for this discussion, and it's the usual waste of time attempting to educate.

Edited by BigStar
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Sad. That's not at all how it works with political persecution. "Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime," Lavrentiy Beria famously said. What wasn't a crime, becomes a crime (with law enacted retroactively if necessary) or is simply alleged to be possibly a crime that'll have to be defended at ruinous cost, possibly (even probably) before biased jurors. Ruination of a career may be threatened:

 

Jay Bratt, the special counsel’s lead prosecutor, allegedly threatened Trump staff member Walt Nauta’s attorney, Stanley Woodward, with sabotaging his judicial nomination to the Superior Court of the District of Columbia if he could not get Nauta to turn on Trump, according to a newly unsealed motion originally filed in June 2023.

     --https://thefederalist.com/2024/04/24/here-are-the-3-most-shocking-discoveries-just-unsealed-in-trump-classified-docs-case/

 

Indictments, to which our more feminine members cling religiously, don't mean a lot, as a good prosecutor can get a ham sandwich indicted. No defense is presented.

 

I'll leave it at that, because you're too naive for this discussion, and it's the usual waste of time attempting to educate.

The political persecution in this case has moved into a criminal trial.

 

Political persecution can refer to political repression, which is when a state entity controls a citizenry by force for political reasons. This can include:

Fear tactics like torture, extrajudicial killings, forced disappearances, and political imprisonment

Restricting civil liberties like freedom of movement, association, speech, and assembly

Internet censorship

Unfair administrative hurdles for registering demonstrations

Ban on political parties

Restricting access to information

Tracking the political opposition

Acts of violence 

Edited by earlinclaifornia
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, BigStar said:

 

Has continued into a politically-motivated trial, yes. Happens when the victim can't be intimidated into silence or capitulation.

 

 

Yup, that's some of what the Biden admin, cronies, and thugs are continuing to try to do, and more, with additional subtleties to add in. And no, I'm not going to get into one your bickering loops, as you'll end in silence only to try a different one. It's a religion. 🙂 

 

 

 

 

Just more for you to add to your denials:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/arizona-grand-jury-indicts-11-232335673.html

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2024 at 1:39 PM, Danderman123 said:

This trial will be a big surprise for you.

 

 

Nothing about any of these trials would surprise me, except Trump being found not guilty. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Nothing about any of these trials would surprise me, except Trump being found not guilty. 

Trump still might beat the rap in the NY case, or be found guilty of misdemeanors, if that's a possibility.

 

Also, the Georgia case is complicated, and he's up against a county DA, not the Feds.

 

In the Federal cases, he's dead meat, if they happen.

Edited by Danderman123
  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

Trump still might beat the rap in the NY case, or be found guilty of misdemeanors, if that's a possibility.

 

Also, the Georgia case is complicated, and he's up against a county DA, not the Feds.

 

In the Federal cases, he's dead meat, if they happen.


Switching sides?

  • Confused 1
  • Love It 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

In the Federal cases, he's dead meat, if they happen.

Headline NY Times 25 April EDT:

 

U.S. Supreme Court Majority Seems Ready to Limit Election Case Against Trump

Such a ruling in the case, on whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution, could delay any trial until after the November election.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...