Official Trump Lawsuit Watch Thread

[NastyWoman]

Does the nitwit even know that Columbia is just as much a part of Mexico as Canada is part of the US?

[thyme4change]

May 22, 2024 12:47:53 GMT -5 NastyWoman said:

Does the nitwit even know that Columbia is just as much a part of Mexico as Canada is part of the US?

I have my doubts he knows Canada is not part of the US?

[Tennesseer]

Prosecutors seek to bar Trump from statements endangering law enforcement in classified records case

WASHINGTON (AP) — Federal prosecutors on Friday asked the judge overseeing the classified documents case against Donald Trump to bar the former president from public statements that “pose a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger to law enforcement agents” participating in the prosecution.

The request to U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon follows a distorted claim by Trump earlier this week that the FBI agents who searched his Mar-a-Lago estate in August 2022 were “authorized to shoot me” and were “locked & loaded ready to take me out & put my family in danger.”

The presumptive Republican presidential nominee was referring to the disclosure in a court document that the FBI, during the search, followed a standard use-of-force policy that prohibits the use of deadly force except when the officer conducting the search has a reasonable belief that the “subject of such force poses an imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to the officer or to another person.”

The Justice Department policy is routine and meant to limit, rather than encourage, the use of force during searches. Prosecutors noted that the search of the Florida property was intentionally conducted when Trump and his family were out of state and was coordinated in advance with the U.S. Secret Service. No force was used.

Prosecutors on special counsel Jack Smith’s team said in court papers late Friday that Trump’s statements falsely suggesting that federal agents “were complicit in a plot to assassinate him” expose law enforcement — some of whom prosecutors noted will be called as witnesses at his trial — “to the risk of threats, violence, and harassment.”

“Trump’s repeated mischaracterization of these facts in widely distributed messages as an attempt to kill him, his family, and Secret Service agents has endangered law enforcement officers involved in the investigation and prosecution of this case and threatened the integrity of these proceedings,” prosecutors told Cannon, who was nominated to the bench by Trump.

“A restriction prohibiting future similar statements does not restrict legitimate speech,” they said.

Rest of article here: Prosecutors seek to bar Trump from statements endangering law enforcement in classified records case

[Tennesseer]

Let's hope so.

The New York team prosecuting Trump began this trial with the end in mind
Alvin Bragg's prosecutors have been systematically building toward their grand finale.

Begin with the end in mind.

That’s good advice for most things in life, but it’s particularly true for prosecutors who are trying a criminal case. At the end of the trial comes the closing argument, which for Donald Trump begins Tuesday in Manhattan. The evidence Alvin Bragg’s prosecutors have elicited during the trial has set them up well for a grand finale.

Even before the case was filed, prosecutors were clearly thinking about the evidence they would need to prove that Trump falsified business records with the intent to conceal election and tax crimes. During seven weeks of trial, every exhibit and every witness is building toward this finale. Even jury selection was conducted with the end in mind. When prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked prospective jurors if they could accept the legal concept that a person can be convicted for murder by hiring a hit man to kill his wife, he was advocating for his theory of the case against Trump, who allegedly directed others do his dirty work in order to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. You can expect prosecutors to return to that theme in their closing argument.

The law is a little tricky in this case, with its 34 counts prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. But overall, the law is favorable to the prosecution.

First, the New York statute regarding business records requires proof that Trump knowingly caused business records to be falsified. Each of the 34 records, consisting of invoices, ledger entries and checks signed by Trump, will be considered separately. The jury need not find that Trump himself falsified the records, just that he caused someone else to do so.

Just like hiring that hit man.

Rest of article here: The New York team prosecuting Trump began this trial with the end in mind

[djAdvocate]

remember: this is the weakest case against him.
the others are fairly easy, by comparison.

if he loses this one, the odds of him losing them all is considerable.

[swamp]

I saw that the Twitter bots are all out in force again. 

One of the things that they're getting their panties in a twist about are the jury instructions:

The opening and closing statements are not evidence.
The lawyers statements are not evidence. 
The jury is the sole trier of fact 
The judge tells the jury what the law is, and the jury applies it to the facts. 

Marchon needs to be arrested and disbarred.  He's a despot.  He has no right to tell the jury that.  Oy vey.  

Those are standard freaking jury instructions.  They are given in every. single. criminal. jury. trial. in. new. york. state.    There is a book (now in electronic form on the NY courts website) that is actually called New York Pattern Jury Instructions.    Judges use them so juries are given consistent instructions all through the state.      They adjust regularly to fit changing laws. 

[happyhoix]

I can’t guess how this trial turns out, but I’m wondering, if Trump does get convicted, will civil unrest break out?

I’ve heard a lot of stories that if Trump loses, many minions have claimed they won’t support him anymore, because supporting a felon is a line they won’t cross. So do you think a loss would impact his poll numbers? (I don’t).

[billisonboard]

I am thinking the prosecutors should work to finish their closing argument today so the jury doesn't go home with defense questions unaddressed

[billisonboard]

May 28, 2024 15:19:24 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I can’t guess how this trial turns out, but I’m wondering, if Trump does get convicted, will civil unrest break out?

I’ve heard a lot of stories that if Trump loses, many minions have claimed they won’t support him anymore, because supporting a felon is a line they won’t cross. So do you think a loss would impact his poll numbers? (I don’t).

Opinion: Would a guilty verdict doom Trump at the ballot box? www.cnn.com/2024/05/25/opinions/trump-guilty-verdict-2024-vote-mellman/index.html

Excellent article that agrees not.

Some one or two idiots going off? Probably. Don't see it qualifying as "civil unrest"

[Opti]

Not sure if this should be in a separate thread.


www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/stormy-daniels-reads-out-violent-death-threats-from-donald-trump-supporters/ar-BB1n9hKO?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=51de444b6eb8429c8be586568db28190&ei=17


Stormy Daniels reads out 'violent' death threats from Donald Trump supporters

People have become so angry at her role in Trump’s potential downfall, that they have convinced themselves their beliefs and actions are valid.

So much so, most are not even hiding their identities. “They’re not even using bot accounts, they’re using their real accounts,” she says.

During a car ride, Stormy reads out some of the vile messages she has received including: “Even if you’d have been raped, you should have kept your mouth quiet for the greater good” and “You’re nothing but a fat hillbilly, Trump would never touch you, stop lying, before I’m forced to shut you up myself”

Greater good? 

[djAdvocate]

i can guess.

he is LIKELY to be found guilty.
the second most likely thing is a hung jury.
he is unlikely to be acquitted.

[happyhoix]

May 29, 2024 6:06:22 GMT -5 Opti said:

Not sure if this should be in a separate thread.


www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/stormy-daniels-reads-out-violent-death-threats-from-donald-trump-supporters/ar-BB1n9hKO?ocid=msedgntp&pc=DCTS&cvid=51de444b6eb8429c8be586568db28190&ei=17


Stormy Daniels reads out 'violent' death threats from Donald Trump supporters

People have become so angry at her role in Trump’s potential downfall, that they have convinced themselves their beliefs and actions are valid.

So much so, most are not even hiding their identities. “They’re not even using bot accounts, they’re using their real accounts,” she says.

During a car ride, Stormy reads out some of the vile messages she has received including: “Even if you’d have been raped, you should have kept your mouth quiet for the greater good” and “You’re nothing but a fat hillbilly, Trump would never touch you, stop lying, before I’m forced to shut you up myself”

Greater good? 

Well, good thing they are dumbasses and don’t hide their identities. Easier for the cops to find them. Are death threats misdemeanors, hopefully?

How mentally unstable do you have to be to threaten violence on behalf of a misogynist, violent, tax cheating grifter billionaire?

[thyme4change]

May 29, 2024 6:25:08 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

i can guess.

he is LIKELY to be found guilty.
the second most likely thing is a hung jury.
he is unlikely to be acquitted.

I hope you are right.

An acquittal would be pretty disastrous.

[seriousthistime]

I agree he is unlikely to be acquitted on all counts.  

I think a hung jury is most likely.

[djAdvocate]

May 29, 2024 9:34:19 GMT -5 seriousthistime said:

I agree he is unlikely to be acquitted on all counts.  

I think a hung jury is most likely.

i think a hung jury is not UNLIKELY.  but it is far more likely than acquittal.

it should be noted that a hung jury doesn't mean he won't be convicted.

[swamp]

The Jury has just asked for a readback of testimony:

Pecker's phone call with trump
Story rights to Mcdougall
Pecker's testimony about the meeting at trump tower 
Cohen's testimony about the meeting at trump tower. 


I read this as they are trying to figure out what the underlying crime is. 

[Pink Cashmere]

May 29, 2024 13:26:05 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

May 29, 2024 9:34:19 GMT -5 seriousthistime said:

I agree he is unlikely to be acquitted on all counts.  

I think a hung jury is most likely.

i think a hung jury is not UNLIKELY.  but it is far more likely than acquittal.

it should be noted that a hung jury doesn't mean he won't be convicted.

I will embarrass myself and admit that I didn’t know that a conviction would still be possible. I went to Google to see what happens after a hung jury. I learned something new today, thanks to you.

[pulmonarymd]

May 29, 2024 14:25:16 GMT -5 swamp said:

The Jury has just asked for a readback of testimony:

Pecker's phone call with trump
Story rights to Mcdougall
Pecker's testimony about the meeting at trump tower 
Cohen's testimony about the meeting at trump tower. 


I read this as they are trying to figure out what the underlying crime is. 

Do you think they do not believe a crime was committed, or that they do believe one was, and they are just trying to figure out what it was?

[swamp]

I don't know.   

[happyhoix]

May 29, 2024 14:47:24 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 29, 2024 14:25:16 GMT -5 swamp said:

The Jury has just asked for a readback of testimony:

Pecker's phone call with trump
Story rights to Mcdougall
Pecker's testimony about the meeting at trump tower 
Cohen's testimony about the meeting at trump tower. 


I read this as they are trying to figure out what the underlying crime is. 

Do you think they do not believe a crime was committed, or that they do believe one was, and they are just trying to figure out what it was?

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

[ripvanwinkle]

May 29, 2024 21:29:12 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

May 29, 2024 14:47:24 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

Do you think they do not believe a crime was committed, or that they do believe one was, and they are just trying to figure out what it was?

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

[tallguy]

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

May 29, 2024 21:29:12 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

Ignorance and illogic are not virtues.

[Opti]

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

May 29, 2024 21:29:12 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

Maybe its the sham coverage you keep listening to that is the problem. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

May 29, 2024 21:29:12 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

You probably believe Trumps nonsense that the prosecution going last in closing arguments is unfair. You also probably believe that it is unfair that witnesses that could exonerate Trump also weren’t called.

Font conservatives believe that if someone is innocent they don’t need to worry about going to court. If so, then Trump should be exonerated if he is innocent.
Although, there is the old saying, “if you meet one asshole, he is the asshole. If everyone is an asshole, maybe you should look in the mirror.” Time for Trump and conservatives to look in the mirror.

[Tennesseer]

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

May 29, 2024 21:29:12 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

Rip - question for you:

Stormy Daniels states she and donald trump engaged in sex in 2006.

donald trump states he did not have sex with Stormy Daniels.

So who is telling the truth: Stormy Daniels or donald trump?

[pulmonarymd]

May 30, 2024 7:03:42 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

Rip - question for you:

Stormy Daniels states she and donald trump engaged in sex in 2006.

donald trump states he did not have sex with Stormy Daniels.

So who is telling the truth: Stormy Daniels or donald trump?

Too hard a question for him. We need to give him a hint- only one of them said it under oath

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

May 30, 2024 7:03:42 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

Rip - question for you:

Stormy Daniels states she and donald trump engaged in sex in 2006.

donald trump states he did not have sex with Stormy Daniels.

So who is telling the truth: Stormy Daniels or donald trump?

And this is why Linda Tripp convinced Monica to save her dress.

[swamp]

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

May 29, 2024 21:29:12 GMT -5 happyhoix said:

I heard this AM that two of the jury members are attorneys. That made me hopeful because this is kind of an abstract case for laymen, I think. Hopefully the lawyers can help navigate .

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

Trump bangs a porn star in 2006.  Not illegal. 
Trump has paid people for their silence in the past.  Not illegal. 
Trump runs for president in 2016.   
Trump gets some bad press about his prior bad acts/payments to get people to shut up.  Trump worries this will affect the election. 

in 2016 there is a meeting about how to stop these stories from coming up.    There are conversations, emails, and texts that tie trump to this meeting. 

Trump has his cronies pay money to the porn star he banged in 2006.  Not a crime if he reported the payments as campaign expenses. 

Trump has his cronies falsify his business records to hide these payments to shut up the porn star to change the outcome of the election.   We've false business records to cover up campaign finance fraud.    There are your felonies.   

[swamp]

May 30, 2024 6:30:44 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

May 30, 2024 0:29:24 GMT -5 ripvanwinkle said:

Hopefully the 2 attorneys can see this is a sham trial and convince the others of it.

You probably believe Trumps nonsense that the prosecution going last in closing arguments is unfair. You also probably believe that it is unfair that witnesses that could exonerate Trump also weren’t called.

Font conservatives believe that if someone is innocent they don’t need to worry about going to court. If so, then Trump should be exonerated if he is innocent.
Although, there is the old saying, “if you meet one asshole, he is the asshole. If everyone is an asshole, maybe you should look in the mirror.” Time for Trump and conservatives to look in the mirror.

I don't understand those comments about witnesses that could exonerate trump werent' called.   

Trump could have called any witness he wanted, including himself. 

[pulmonarymd]

May 30, 2024 9:16:30 GMT -5 swamp said:

May 30, 2024 6:30:44 GMT -5 pulmonarymd said:

You probably believe Trumps nonsense that the prosecution going last in closing arguments is unfair. You also probably believe that it is unfair that witnesses that could exonerate Trump also weren’t called.

Font conservatives believe that if someone is innocent they don’t need to worry about going to court. If so, then Trump should be exonerated if he is innocent.
Although, there is the old saying, “if you meet one asshole, he is the asshole. If everyone is an asshole, maybe you should look in the mirror.” Time for Trump and conservatives to look in the mirror.

I don't understand those comments about witnesses that could exonerate trump werent' called.   

Trump could have called any witness he wanted, including himself. 

Trump isn't talking to people like you. You are too smart. He is talking to the morons who believe the shit that comes out of his mouth. Anyone with half a brain knows how trials work. And these are the people who will decide the election.

Someone asked a group of people if a law should be passed to give a president immunity. They then asked if a law should be passed to give Trump immunity. The number of conservatives who wanted a law doubled when Trump's name was used. That is who is he is talking to.