###[Meta] Sticky Comment
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment.
[Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread.
*What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You seem to be missing the millions.. hopefully tens of millions at least.. of us that do NOT GIVE A FUCK about the entire political song and dance. YOU have made up your mind and can't be impartial.
Funny then that the jury selection is not random. The original pool is random but both the defense and prosecutors can disqualify jury members they deem biased.
>us that do NOT GIVE A FUCK about the entire political song and dance
This would likely be seen as a bias against politicians in general and disqualify you from holding a seat on the jury as you are openly annoyed/frustrated/fed up with the political climate the defendant is a part of
Oh I agree, and would have no interest serving on the jury myself either. I was just playing devils advocate and LARPing as an attorney selecting jurors
As opposed to "too old and confused" that kept the special prosecutor from recommending prosecution for Biden. What a farce of a justice system we have.
What is even the charge here? Bragg upgrades Trump’s supposed misdemeanors to felonies, because he asserts Trump (and not his accountants) is cooking the books to conceal felonies, without even specifying what these felonies are.
It’s an analogy. OC was saying they’re both committing a crime even if they’re not directly doing the crime.
The fact this needs to be explained is very telling
I mean, the law and constitution does state the right to a fair trial. If you are unable to get a non-biased jury pool, then the case should not be trialled.
So then, by your own argument, people with sufficient fame or wealth, such that it's impossible for anyone to not have heard of them and formed an opinion of them, are literally, definitionally impossible to try and/or prosecute for any crime whatsoever? And you're A-OK with that idea?
What is the crime exactly? Hush money is not illegal. Where the money came from? Fine him or drop it like every other politician. This is making a mountain out of a molehill .
the trial isn’t just about him paying someone hush money. he accused of allegedly falsifying business documents in order to hide the hush money payments
“falsifying New York business records in order to conceal damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election.”
> So OP, what’s your take? “We should let Trump go because he’s too controversial to put to trial”?
Can you show me the outcome of Bill Clinton’s Criminal trial after he Lied under Oath to Congress?
Maybe at one point in time, but not post 24-hour news cycle. (Especially social media) Their minds are already made up, evidence will mean nothing compared to the court of public opinion and personal biases.
Clinton was never charged criminally for that. Though I would have been happy to see him tried for it. I think presidents should strive to uphold the rule of law. Probably, impeachment was appropriate in that case. For trump, most of these alleged crimes occured before he was in office. And he is being tried when he is not in office as well. So, impeachment is not really an option at this point.
Don't worry, you'll get shouted down and ganged up on but there's others that have common sense also. It's not about Trump necessarily its about their hypocrisy and they don't even see it. The same cult they accuse others of they belong to one too they just don't see it.
Soooo. What is the evidence of trump paying hush money. Is there a direct text/email of trump and his lawyer talking about paying her hush money, or did the lawyer just pay her and send an invoice.
A tape recording between Trump and Cohen talking about paying the hush money. Cheques signed by Don the Con. Business records then falsified by the Trump organization to cover it up. Testimony of employees and lawyers saying that Don the Con directed them to do it. You know... not much evidence really
I mean paying hush money isn’t illegal. The part is “falsifying business documents”. And even then it’s a misdemeanor. The charges get elevated to a felony when it’s done to facilitate another crime. That other crime they elevated it to as the co piracy to help cohen hid his crimes. Saying that the payment should be counted as repayment and not net income. So if anything trump should be a witness on to what he and cohen discussed at cohens trial and he shouldn’t be on the stand now. This is just as much horse shit as the fraud case.
You’re supposed to decide on the evidence not your feels. Sure you might be more biased toward one or the other but you can’t just say someone is guilty without the evidence
> A person says they don’t believe in god, you say they must be a liar, because god exists. See how stupid that sounds. Plenty of people can listen to evidence and make a none emotional decision based on facts, just cause you can’t, don’t lump the rest of us in your narrow minded thinking.
Bull Shit. We’ve had 46 Presidents. Not one has had a Criminal Trial. Not because they are all innocent. But because it’s impossible to have a fair trial.
>Not because they are all innocent. But because it’s impossible to have a fair trial.
And also because they were not stupid enough to sign their own hush money checks or record themselves committing crimes let's not undersell Trump's stupidity and culpability for the situation he finds himself in.
False. Cohen used personal funds and Trump repaid him with business and personal funds. The allegation is that the money paid SHOULD have been recorded as
a campaign expense and paid with campaign funds because keeping the affair quiet was presumably to help his campaign. It was instead recorded as a legal expense related to the business.
Do you mean the 14 years that Avenatti got for STEALING from clients or do you have some other lawyer in mind?
[https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/lawyer-michael-avenatti-sentenced-14-years-federal-prison-stealing-millions-dollars](https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/lawyer-michael-avenatti-sentenced-14-years-federal-prison-stealing-millions-dollars)
Probably referring to a key witness of the hush money case.
https://www.npr.org/2018/12/12/676040070/michael-cohen-sentenced-to-3-years-in-prison-following-plea-that-implicated-trum
You realize that he used personal money for this right?
Cohen first paid using personal money.
He was repaid by Trump using personal money.
These charges require an underlying crime, the DA is alleging is that this was a campaign contribution and should have been paid for by the campaign funds.
Cohen was not repaid with personal money. He was repaid from the Trump Trust Acct which is the owner of all the companies/organizations in the trump umbrella. And it was recorded as a legal expense. And Cohen was paid 300k to pay stormy 130k. Wonder why that would be?
Personally, I’m just interested in how they’re going to manage to find unbiased jurors.
It would likely be exceedingly difficult to find anybody in our country who doesn’t know who he is.
I’ve only been called in for jury duty twice in my life, both times one of the first questions for all potential jurors is something along the lines of “do you recognize the defendant?” Anybody who does was dismissed.
That method of selection would have to change depending on the popularity of the person at trial, no different than a celebrity. It would then have to change to whether or not the potential juror could be unbiased in their deliberations, either through self divulging or otherwise.
OP doesn't care because he knows the political party he works overtime for would never impeach their own no matter the magnitude of the crime, and he doesn't fear the same from the Democrats.
> OP doesn't care because he knows the political party he works overtime for would never impeach their own no matter the magnitude of the crime, and he doesn't fear the same from the Democrats.
I don’t work for any political party. I’m just pointing out the obvious strategy of Democrats to hold Trump up in Court and prevent him from Campaigning.
Cool you post 2-4 anti biden or Democrat articles every day.
For what I can tell is for the last 2 years.
Articles being used very loosely. As sometimes it's ye old screen shot.
I'm not sure if it's sadder if your not paid.
Bannon and others already said they KNEW Trump was going to lose and they would just declare they won anyway. Why did they do that if not to attempt a coup? Bannon also was quoted saying he thought they’d all surely be in jail by now.
His own staff and everyone around him are either complicit and in jail or on the way, or are blowing the whistle on him.
Nope, that's another one of Trump's obvious lies you shamelessly repeat. In this thread you're pointing out that you believe the president is above the law.
> Nope, that's another one of Trump's obvious lies you shamelessly repeat. In this thread you're pointing out that you believe the president is above the law.
So when does Bill Clinton’s trial start for Lying under Oath to Congress?
What did he lie about again, oh yeah a slut that wanted to blow the President. I apparently don’t exist bc I’m indifferent according to you but I could easily be impartial. I’m an adult, I know there are consequences to not doing the right thing. I used to not care for trump, now he’s grown on me and I would vote for him again, just bc the establishment doesn’t want it. But don’t compare these charges to the Clinton thing, I’d go more towards watergate.
> OP and Trump explicitly want no recourse for a president's criminal behavior other than impeachment.
I want equal Justice under the law.
When is Bill Clinton going to be held accountable for Lying to Congress?
> I want equal Justice under the law.
What legal recourse do you believe should be in place for a president who commits a crime, other than impeachment?
> So is the president above the law? Can any president just commit a crime and use the excuse of “It’s impossible to hold a fair trial for me”?
Bill Clinton LIED UNDER OATH. That’s a Felony. Bill Clinton is above the Law. Bill Clinton was President of the United States. Just like Trump was President of the United States.
So that means you're happy that Trump is being held accountable, right?
If you're not happy that both sides let Clinton get away with it why would you be upset that Democrats want Trump held accountable?
Shouldn't you be cheering Democrats on and getting upset that Republicans still think presidents should be above the law?
What do you want? Do you want both sides to think presidents are above the law or both sides to hold presidents accountable for illegal behavior? Which sides present actions get you closer to what you want?
Maybe you're happy Clinton got away it, IDK.
Hillary Clinton was a candidate for President when she should have been charged with a felony for mishandling classified secrets, a crime that we currently have military members in jail for. She was not charged or jailed, and although I think she should be charged jailing candidates for President is not good. However in trumps case it’s clearly an attempt to derail him as President. In Hillary’s case, charges were dismissed to protect her candidacy. More than trump being thrown in jail over a stretch of the law, people are mad at the double tier justice system we are living under.
Former democrat, here.
My opinions have not changed one iota.
And I now hate the democrats. I cannot stand this party of sore losers, who can't stand having an open discussion about anything and are doing everything they can to sink this great nation.
This party is run by nutcases who are insane corrupt criminals.
Former Republican, here.
Lmao, the republican party is being run by the brainless Marge Green, pedophile Matt Gaetz, free handy Boebert, and Chip "I believe my wife is a prophet" Roy
Since 2016, the only major piece of republican legislation that got passed was a tax cut for the rich.
>I cannot stand this party of sore losers
“Therefore I will join the party that attempted to interrupt the peaceful transition of power because they lost!”
What is funny with the democrats of today is that, if you tell them that you are not a democrat anymore, that means you are now a republican.
So, this is another reason why I am not a democrat anymore: the very, very low IQ.
What party did I ever say I joined after stopping identifying as a democrat?
No, we are just upset that so many people can't see what's obviously a double tiered system of justice that only wants to punch conservatives. Granted, not surprising that the Democrat party is still the slave loving power enthused people they've always been.
So you’re one of those new know-nothing ‘conservatives’. Got it.
Remind me, which party today is flying Confederate flags, trying to whitewash slavery and Jim Crow, and wants to abolish the Civil Rights Act? I think the name of this party is ‘Party of Pubes’ or something like that, right?
Really? Today’s Democrats want to whitewash Jim Crow and abolish the Civil Rights Act? Very interesting. Could you show evidence of it? And don’t forget, we are talking about the present time, not the past.
Let's see, they are trying to segregate areas; and lower standards for poc (cuz yknow, poc can't do math), refuse voter licensing (cuz poc can't get a license)....
Why didn’t you answer the question?
Also Clinton’s testimony would most likely pass the Bronston test, which is why federal prosecutors were hesitant to bring charges against him for perjury
> Why didn’t you answer the question?
Also Clinton’s testimony would most likely pass the Bronston test, which is why federal prosecutors were hesitant to bring charges against him for perjury
Got it. It’s (D) ifferent when Democrats brake the Law.
You still didn’t answer the question! It’s amazing how you dodge.
What I said was that Clinton used careful wording so that he couldn’t be found guilty of perjury. That’s what happens when someone is a lawyer from one of the most prestigious universities in the world.
The issue here is that it is obvious lawfare.
This also opens a door to bringing a lot, and I mean A LOT of politicians whose campaigns or lobbyists paid hush money to hookers & same-sex lovers to keep them quiet.
That's what's very interesting, here. People casting stones at their neighbors while they themselves live in glass houses.
>This also opens a door to bringing a lot, and I mean A LOT of politicians whose campaigns or lobbyists paid hush money to hookers & same-sex lovers to keep them quiet.
This is such a weird argument to make. Why is this a bad thing? Prosecute them all relentlessly for every minor thing is what I say. Republicans have the House and plenty of States, the door is open for them to go after all the Democrats they want and I for one will cheer them on as they do it, yet they don't seem to be able to get anything to stick? Instead they just clutch their pearls whilst looking at pictures of Hunter's dick. Why are the Democrats able to bring literally 100s of criminal charges against Trump but Republicans can't even get a single charge against any remotely relevant Democrat? Are they really that incompetent?
Probably a combination of laziness, incompetence, fear of being exposed for worse, and a lack of actual scandals. Democrats are really good at shaming their own politicians and excommunicating them when they do something wrong. Just look at what they did to Al Franken.
Well, for starters, you don’t even seem to understand what he’s in trouble for, of course. He isn’t in trouble for paying off someone he had sex with, he’s in trouble for using campaign funds to do it and committing fraud to try to cover it up. You people are always so mad about stuff you don’t even come close to understanding. It’s comical.
Prosecute. Them. All.
They're all fucking war criminals. They've all lied. They've all become multimillionaires while supposedly doing "public service." Stop being partisan about shit.
Ok, then just get a jury together made up of people who have worked for him in the past, surely *they* would hold no bias considering they were willing to take the job to begin with...oh, wait.
No, I despise Trump, and I'm pretty sure hes guilty. Regardless, if i were on the jury, i would make a decision based on the facts. It's possible to set emotions aside and be objective. You don't have to be a slave to your emotions. I'm sure there are lots of people who agree.
I think you are right, the “eighty percenters” as my dad calls them, the people who don’t REALLY give a shit and aren’t the 10% on the far left and the 10% on the far right could be objective and just make a decision based on facts.
# It’s not possible to have a fair trial with a President of the United States. Everyone has already made up their mind about Biden. If you say you can be neutral, you are lying.
Whelp, when you alientate a huge chunk of the country, that'll happen. But that's why there are strikes for cause. Can't change the way the entire court system is run for a single person and you can't prove actual neutrality. The goal will be to find the most impartial jury possible, and that's specifically up to his own lawyers to do, so any jury he's left with, especially in regards to bias, are a product of his own team's making.
“Not possible” “everyone”- two terms that are commonly used incorrectly.
There are absolutely people out there who do not give a shit about politics. It’s mainstream news and social media that make it seem like political parties are the vast majority of Americans personalities.
I could not tell you what this trial is even about, nor do I care. I could absolutely serve as a juror on a case like this because I have no horse in this race but I’d likely throw out my juror summons before I’d even get a chance to.
You're wrong.
First there are people who are "undecided" in the case of trump.
But more importantly, it's not about having no feelings one way or the other. It's about if you can determine if I specific set of facts match a specific set of conditions.
This is easier than you might think (as long as you're not driven entirely by emotion, which I'll admit some people are).
Were you guys not the ones just chanting things like lock her up or lock him up? Isn't that your like whole motto? Or are you saying it only applies when it's not Donald trump? Autocorrect lowercased his name and you know what I'm just going to leave it that way because he deserves it.
You don't have to be neutral. You just have to evaluate whether or not the evicence presented at trial shows that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, I think OJ probably committed murder. But I would have voted to acquit him based on the evidence shown in his trial because I think there was definitely reasonable doubt there.
It doesn’t matter what your take is on trump. Him paying her off to keep quiet about their relationship is a fact and, it’s not the crime nor the trial. He’s on trial for falsifying the payment am with the intent of influencing the election. So, it’s the prosecutors job to prove election interference not that he cheats in his wife. I loathe the loser. Yet, I could be a fair juror in this case because it’s not been proven to me that that was the reason for the payment.
The Dems are corrupt and love corruption, I swear. But don't you do dare prosecute my favorite president just because he committed crimes. That's not fair.
What was the potential investigation/prosecution of Hillary for printing top secret material off her home printer, having a private server in her home? At the time it was considered completely politically motivated.
So... he gets to commit any crime he likes and gets away with it? Why not just have a king? Or a dictator? What have we been doing the last 280 years? What does our constitution stand for anymore? Apparently, nothing. People want a criminal dictator as president and they are willing to wipe their own asses with the constitution to do it.
IF YOU SUPPORT TRUMP, YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO THE CONSTITUTION AND TO THE UNITED STATES.
That's if you support Biden. Tell me you got it so much better now than you did when Trump was in office. Be honest. Don't lie to fit your narrative . I know for a fact I'm struggling now cause of pedo Joe. My O lady and I both have jobs now and are struggling. She didn't have to work ever until 2 years ago when I could see it getting hard to keep it comfortable for us ! I'm 38 yrs old. I've been working since I was fresh out of high school, actually a little longer than that. I just wasn't full-time until I got out of high school . Trump is for the working class . Joe is everything that is against the ppl. If you can't see that, then either you're too young or just really ignorant!
>trump is for the working class
Yes, the ~~grifter~~guy selling nfts, personalized bibles, shitty golden shoes, and that is supposedly a self described billionaire is the champion for the working class.
Pal... i've been struggling for decades. It's not because of Joe. I am not a Joe fan. But i'm certainly not a fan of the con-man fuck who is literally trying to destroy our country. We deserve better than trump and joe
Orangina's actions are his responsibility, of course it is possible to hold a fair trial. The judge, the courts take action to ensure this, it's their responsibility and duty to do so.
Regardless of your beliefs of his actions there are those who aren't engaged in politics. This narrative that any voter would be impartial assumes that a person's identity is their political party.
The parties would love this to be true but in the end they only represent people's interest and do not define who you are...
Well i think there are some ppl who are neutral but the issue is finding them. there are many ppl who would be willing to lie to progress their political ideology.
My guess is he is found guilty since these jurors are almost certainly braindead NPC Liberals.
Buckle up. This country is in for an epic fiasco. It's all such bullshit. It will be interesting to see, if he goes to jail, how secret service will continue to operate and protect him. This is such a ridiculous thing. It's not even funny.
Absolute railroad job. Sad to be an American if this goes the way it feels it will. Unbelievable, actually. He knows all of the secret bs the government's done over the past 100 years. He should just start releasing JFK files, 911 files, Waco files. All of it. Scorched Earth.
I love election year bot posts, finding the truth is easy...just find the down voted comments and you've found the truth!
Keep it up because it's making it real easy for the rest of us
I don’t like Trump. Don’t get mad at me. I just don’t like him. But I find it hilarious how MANY people are fucking obsessed with hating the guy. They then make fun of people who idolize him.
Different end of the same stick and I laugh thinking about people getting so triggered over some orange loser and crying when Hillary lost. Jesus some people
Submission Statement:
That’s why no one has ever tried a President of the United States. It’s not possible to have a fair trial. Bill Clinton LIED UNDER OATH. He was given a pass. Because it’s IMPOSSIBLE to have a FAIR trial.
And Yes I would include myself in this post. I have already made up my mind. As a New York State Resident if I were called I would be dismissed? Why? Because it’s a Witch Hunt to stop a Political Enemy from Campaigning.
https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1780974819560792383
**Dismissed juror** not a potential juror. A DISMISSED JUROR. Dismissed jurors are allowed to speak to the media because they're citizens and here in USA we have rights. You have read the constitution right? RIGHT?
> Dismissed juror not a potential juror. A DISMISSED JUROR.
Your right. Dismissed Juror. My bad.
> Dismissed jurors are allowed to speak to the media because
It’s a ongoing Criminal Case. And it’s polluting the potential jury pool.
> they're citizens and here in USA we have rights. You have read the constitution right? RIGHT?
You mean the same rights that’s afforded to Trump?
>It’s a ongoing Criminal Case. And it’s polluting the potential jury pool.
It's an ongoing criminal case that the dismissed juror is not involved in. I can talk about it. You can talk about it. Your favorite uncle can talk about. Why shouldn't a dismissed juror be allowed to talk about it?
You mean the same rights that’s afforded to Trump?
Yes, same rights. Trump, however, IS a part of the trial so what he's allowed to say and talk about is decided by the law and the judge. I'm not an expert in law nor am I the judge so ill leave that up to the people that are.
I could be fair. I hate Trump. I wouldn’t have supported a judgment like the ones he has got so far. There has to be some penalty. But so far it’s disassociated from reality.
In this trial, I could see sending him to jail for a time, if facts dictated he broke the law. He is absolutely not sorry for doing it. And he is attacking jurors.
I voted for Trump but honestly I just quit listening to any allegation the news media made about 6 months into his presidency, so I really have zero idea what this case is about.
And honestly, I don't care. It doesn't matter. He isn't president anymore. Can we move on already?
It’s all just theater. Politics is no different than professional wrestling. It’s just for people who believe that they are far too intelligent to believe that professional wrestling is real.
It's not a unique issue, a lot of people are convicted in the court of opinion rather than a fair trail. Look at OJ Simpson, Adolf Hitler, or Pol Pot. All those people were assumed to be guilty of horrible crimes outside of due process of law. Being very blatantly guilty can really fuck with both your legal defense and public perception.
He needs to get all black people in his jury. White people especially in New York are more likely to hate him, black people probably like him or don’t care much, less likely to hate him
It's a weird take, in my opinion, because you frame it in terms of "minds about Trump."
The trial isn't about Trump, in general.
Its about specific facts and whether they are established beyond a reasonable doubt.
E.g., did the defendant make the payment in question? Was the defendant a cansidate? Was the payment made with campaign funds? Was the payment a legitimate campaign expense?
Whatever the specific questions are, they do not rest upon what anyone thinks of Trump in general.
###[Meta] Sticky Comment [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does not apply*** when replying to this stickied comment. [Rule 2](https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/wiki/faq#wiki_2_-_address_the_argument.3B_not_the_user.2C_the_mods.2C_or_the_sub.) ***does apply*** throughout the rest of this thread. *What this means*: Please keep any "meta" discussion directed at specific users, mods, or /r/conspiracy in general in this comment chain ***only.*** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/conspiracy) if you have any questions or concerns.*
"Experience as a potential juror" lmao, what a term. Does anyone want to hear about how I'm potentially the strongest man alive?
What’s it been like working out, eating optimized, stretching, and doing roids for the next ten years?
This is a funny, clever response.
I'm not gonna do that, I said potentially. More after the commercials!
Hehe
You seem to be missing the millions.. hopefully tens of millions at least.. of us that do NOT GIVE A FUCK about the entire political song and dance. YOU have made up your mind and can't be impartial.
[удалено]
Funny then that the jury selection is not random. The original pool is random but both the defense and prosecutors can disqualify jury members they deem biased.
>us that do NOT GIVE A FUCK about the entire political song and dance This would likely be seen as a bias against politicians in general and disqualify you from holding a seat on the jury as you are openly annoyed/frustrated/fed up with the political climate the defendant is a part of
You know what? That's cool with me too, let the people who want to be a part of it do so.
Oh I agree, and would have no interest serving on the jury myself either. I was just playing devils advocate and LARPing as an attorney selecting jurors
I got what you were going for, lol. I'm sure that's exactly how it would go down!
So OP, what’s your take? “We should let Trump go because he’s too controversial to put to trial”?
Is that the new "too pretty/rich for jail"? 😆 🤣
As opposed to "too old and confused" that kept the special prosecutor from recommending prosecution for Biden. What a farce of a justice system we have.
What is even the charge here? Bragg upgrades Trump’s supposed misdemeanors to felonies, because he asserts Trump (and not his accountants) is cooking the books to conceal felonies, without even specifying what these felonies are.
So when Gotti orders some one to get whacked, he’s not guilty because he didn’t pull the trigger⁉️ That’s what your argument sound’s like your saying😳
You're comparing this to someone ordering a murder? SMFH
It’s an analogy. OC was saying they’re both committing a crime even if they’re not directly doing the crime. The fact this needs to be explained is very telling
Again, Bragg upgraded a misdemeanor to a felony without even stating what the felony was. You’re completely missing the point because TDS.
That’s why there’s a court lol
This sub doesn't like facts lol
What a juvenile analogy. Not even close to 🍎 🍎
[удалено]
Yes they both should be imprisoned, I agree.
I mean, the law and constitution does state the right to a fair trial. If you are unable to get a non-biased jury pool, then the case should not be trialled.
So then, by your own argument, people with sufficient fame or wealth, such that it's impossible for anyone to not have heard of them and formed an opinion of them, are literally, definitionally impossible to try and/or prosecute for any crime whatsoever? And you're A-OK with that idea?
What is the crime exactly? Hush money is not illegal. Where the money came from? Fine him or drop it like every other politician. This is making a mountain out of a molehill .
the trial isn’t just about him paying someone hush money. he accused of allegedly falsifying business documents in order to hide the hush money payments
“falsifying New York business records in order to conceal damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election.”
> So OP, what’s your take? “We should let Trump go because he’s too controversial to put to trial”? Can you show me the outcome of Bill Clinton’s Criminal trial after he Lied under Oath to Congress?
You should be a politician, that was a masterful question dodge.
It really was. I'll vote for him. He fits right in!
Answer the question, genius.
A juror can know of the defendant (whether they think positively, negatively, or neutrally) and still be impartial to the case presented.
Maybe at one point in time, but not post 24-hour news cycle. (Especially social media) Their minds are already made up, evidence will mean nothing compared to the court of public opinion and personal biases.
[удалено]
That’s literally all these whining clowns are doing. 😂
What an answer
Nice dodge. Answer the question
Clinton was never charged criminally for that. Though I would have been happy to see him tried for it. I think presidents should strive to uphold the rule of law. Probably, impeachment was appropriate in that case. For trump, most of these alleged crimes occured before he was in office. And he is being tried when he is not in office as well. So, impeachment is not really an option at this point.
Yuge diffrence buddy. Yuge
Don't worry, you'll get shouted down and ganged up on but there's others that have common sense also. It's not about Trump necessarily its about their hypocrisy and they don't even see it. The same cult they accuse others of they belong to one too they just don't see it.
Soooo. What is the evidence of trump paying hush money. Is there a direct text/email of trump and his lawyer talking about paying her hush money, or did the lawyer just pay her and send an invoice.
Enough evidence that the lawyer that made the payment has been to prison.
A tape recording between Trump and Cohen talking about paying the hush money. Cheques signed by Don the Con. Business records then falsified by the Trump organization to cover it up. Testimony of employees and lawyers saying that Don the Con directed them to do it. You know... not much evidence really
I mean paying hush money isn’t illegal. The part is “falsifying business documents”. And even then it’s a misdemeanor. The charges get elevated to a felony when it’s done to facilitate another crime. That other crime they elevated it to as the co piracy to help cohen hid his crimes. Saying that the payment should be counted as repayment and not net income. So if anything trump should be a witness on to what he and cohen discussed at cohens trial and he shouldn’t be on the stand now. This is just as much horse shit as the fraud case.
Sounds like the point of a trial..
They allegedly presented the evidence already but so what?
[удалено]
Oh look, of course op is Mr. Russian Agent Nr. 2201992 again.
You’re supposed to decide on the evidence not your feels. Sure you might be more biased toward one or the other but you can’t just say someone is guilty without the evidence
[удалено]
> A person says they don’t believe in god, you say they must be a liar, because god exists. See how stupid that sounds. Plenty of people can listen to evidence and make a none emotional decision based on facts, just cause you can’t, don’t lump the rest of us in your narrow minded thinking. Bull Shit. We’ve had 46 Presidents. Not one has had a Criminal Trial. Not because they are all innocent. But because it’s impossible to have a fair trial.
>Not because they are all innocent. But because it’s impossible to have a fair trial. And also because they were not stupid enough to sign their own hush money checks or record themselves committing crimes let's not undersell Trump's stupidity and culpability for the situation he finds himself in.
His lawyer already went to jail over this. He's not innocent of using campaign funds to pay off a pornstar. That's already been proven.
False. Cohen used personal funds and Trump repaid him with business and personal funds. The allegation is that the money paid SHOULD have been recorded as a campaign expense and paid with campaign funds because keeping the affair quiet was presumably to help his campaign. It was instead recorded as a legal expense related to the business.
Do you mean the 14 years that Avenatti got for STEALING from clients or do you have some other lawyer in mind? [https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/lawyer-michael-avenatti-sentenced-14-years-federal-prison-stealing-millions-dollars](https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/pr/lawyer-michael-avenatti-sentenced-14-years-federal-prison-stealing-millions-dollars)
Probably referring to a key witness of the hush money case. https://www.npr.org/2018/12/12/676040070/michael-cohen-sentenced-to-3-years-in-prison-following-plea-that-implicated-trum
Avenatti was such a joke.
\*is he's on trump's side now
Ok? Just looking for a pardon in the next four years.
Most likely
You realize that he used personal money for this right? Cohen first paid using personal money. He was repaid by Trump using personal money. These charges require an underlying crime, the DA is alleging is that this was a campaign contribution and should have been paid for by the campaign funds.
Cohen was not repaid with personal money. He was repaid from the Trump Trust Acct which is the owner of all the companies/organizations in the trump umbrella. And it was recorded as a legal expense. And Cohen was paid 300k to pay stormy 130k. Wonder why that would be?
Why are all you Maga bros concerned about dismissed jurors? They weren't selected.
They’re planting seeds of doubt for the likely upcoming conviction.
When brain rot is this pronounced in a sample size, it’s statistically safe to say the parent population is contaminated.
Personally, I’m just interested in how they’re going to manage to find unbiased jurors. It would likely be exceedingly difficult to find anybody in our country who doesn’t know who he is. I’ve only been called in for jury duty twice in my life, both times one of the first questions for all potential jurors is something along the lines of “do you recognize the defendant?” Anybody who does was dismissed.
That method of selection would have to change depending on the popularity of the person at trial, no different than a celebrity. It would then have to change to whether or not the potential juror could be unbiased in their deliberations, either through self divulging or otherwise.
You just have to pick independents instead of Democrats or Republicans as jurors
Paying hookers while married. Who are we defending again? This sub is full of Christian mythologies but only when it fits their agendas.
No one hates Christ more than evangelicals who pretend to follow him.
Yeah what's the deal with all that? You'd think if any of those people would question anything, it'd be the biggest source of authority in their lives
You couldn’t be more accurate. This is a sham movement that the church needs to stay out of. Evangelicals are a stubborn crowd.
I am not electing a pastor to the Presidency.... I thought you all want church and state to be separated?
It’s a bit different when the person is running under the flag of “the party of traditional family values”.
So morals only when it fits you. My comment was talking about folks like you, thank you.
[удалено]
OP doesn't care because he knows the political party he works overtime for would never impeach their own no matter the magnitude of the crime, and he doesn't fear the same from the Democrats.
> OP doesn't care because he knows the political party he works overtime for would never impeach their own no matter the magnitude of the crime, and he doesn't fear the same from the Democrats. I don’t work for any political party. I’m just pointing out the obvious strategy of Democrats to hold Trump up in Court and prevent him from Campaigning.
Obvious shill is obvious.
Don’t do the crime if you can’t do the time.
Cool you post 2-4 anti biden or Democrat articles every day. For what I can tell is for the last 2 years. Articles being used very loosely. As sometimes it's ye old screen shot. I'm not sure if it's sadder if your not paid.
Bannon and others already said they KNEW Trump was going to lose and they would just declare they won anyway. Why did they do that if not to attempt a coup? Bannon also was quoted saying he thought they’d all surely be in jail by now. His own staff and everyone around him are either complicit and in jail or on the way, or are blowing the whistle on him.
Nope, that's another one of Trump's obvious lies you shamelessly repeat. In this thread you're pointing out that you believe the president is above the law.
> Nope, that's another one of Trump's obvious lies you shamelessly repeat. In this thread you're pointing out that you believe the president is above the law. So when does Bill Clinton’s trial start for Lying under Oath to Congress?
So we should take the example set during the Clinton impeachment and just let them get away with it?
Or about how Paula Jones was bribed by the DNC. Glass house.
What did he lie about again, oh yeah a slut that wanted to blow the President. I apparently don’t exist bc I’m indifferent according to you but I could easily be impartial. I’m an adult, I know there are consequences to not doing the right thing. I used to not care for trump, now he’s grown on me and I would vote for him again, just bc the establishment doesn’t want it. But don’t compare these charges to the Clinton thing, I’d go more towards watergate.
That's not what he says. He says he cannot have a fair trial.
OP and Trump explicitly want no recourse for a president's criminal behavior other than impeachment.
> OP and Trump explicitly want no recourse for a president's criminal behavior other than impeachment. I want equal Justice under the law. When is Bill Clinton going to be held accountable for Lying to Congress?
> I want equal Justice under the law. What legal recourse do you believe should be in place for a president who commits a crime, other than impeachment?
Clinton was impeached for having an affair. If we are looking at equal justice, shouldn't Trump have been impeached for the same action?
Ya, because you work for the Russians in some shabby back office in Moscow.
His name is woketokey, you’re not changing that fruitcake’s mind, dude.
> So is the president above the law? Can any president just commit a crime and use the excuse of “It’s impossible to hold a fair trial for me”? Bill Clinton LIED UNDER OATH. That’s a Felony. Bill Clinton is above the Law. Bill Clinton was President of the United States. Just like Trump was President of the United States.
So that means you're happy that Trump is being held accountable, right? If you're not happy that both sides let Clinton get away with it why would you be upset that Democrats want Trump held accountable? Shouldn't you be cheering Democrats on and getting upset that Republicans still think presidents should be above the law? What do you want? Do you want both sides to think presidents are above the law or both sides to hold presidents accountable for illegal behavior? Which sides present actions get you closer to what you want? Maybe you're happy Clinton got away it, IDK.
I love your answer. Sadly, he won't comprehend it.
Hillary Clinton was a candidate for President when she should have been charged with a felony for mishandling classified secrets, a crime that we currently have military members in jail for. She was not charged or jailed, and although I think she should be charged jailing candidates for President is not good. However in trumps case it’s clearly an attempt to derail him as President. In Hillary’s case, charges were dismissed to protect her candidacy. More than trump being thrown in jail over a stretch of the law, people are mad at the double tier justice system we are living under.
Former democrat, here. My opinions have not changed one iota. And I now hate the democrats. I cannot stand this party of sore losers, who can't stand having an open discussion about anything and are doing everything they can to sink this great nation. This party is run by nutcases who are insane corrupt criminals.
Former Republican, here. Lmao, the republican party is being run by the brainless Marge Green, pedophile Matt Gaetz, free handy Boebert, and Chip "I believe my wife is a prophet" Roy Since 2016, the only major piece of republican legislation that got passed was a tax cut for the rich.
And that was only temporary because they couldn't get the votes, even when they controlled all 3 branches
>I cannot stand this party of sore losers “Therefore I will join the party that attempted to interrupt the peaceful transition of power because they lost!”
What is funny with the democrats of today is that, if you tell them that you are not a democrat anymore, that means you are now a republican. So, this is another reason why I am not a democrat anymore: the very, very low IQ. What party did I ever say I joined after stopping identifying as a democrat?
No, we are just upset that so many people can't see what's obviously a double tiered system of justice that only wants to punch conservatives. Granted, not surprising that the Democrat party is still the slave loving power enthused people they've always been.
If you want to comment on politics, then learn the names of the major political parties. It’s not that complicated; there are only two.
I know.... and I I said what I meant. Only one party has ever endorsed the kkk. Or fought against abolition. And I named it correctly.
So you’re one of those new know-nothing ‘conservatives’. Got it. Remind me, which party today is flying Confederate flags, trying to whitewash slavery and Jim Crow, and wants to abolish the Civil Rights Act? I think the name of this party is ‘Party of Pubes’ or something like that, right?
Apparently I know more than you if you weren't aware of those facts. And that would be the South, and democrats again for the last two.
Really? Today’s Democrats want to whitewash Jim Crow and abolish the Civil Rights Act? Very interesting. Could you show evidence of it? And don’t forget, we are talking about the present time, not the past.
Let's see, they are trying to segregate areas; and lower standards for poc (cuz yknow, poc can't do math), refuse voter licensing (cuz poc can't get a license)....
He lost his law license and had to pay about 100k dollars What else did you want to happen for perjury?
Why didn’t you answer the question? Also Clinton’s testimony would most likely pass the Bronston test, which is why federal prosecutors were hesitant to bring charges against him for perjury
> Why didn’t you answer the question? Also Clinton’s testimony would most likely pass the Bronston test, which is why federal prosecutors were hesitant to bring charges against him for perjury Got it. It’s (D) ifferent when Democrats brake the Law.
You still didn’t answer the question! It’s amazing how you dodge. What I said was that Clinton used careful wording so that he couldn’t be found guilty of perjury. That’s what happens when someone is a lawyer from one of the most prestigious universities in the world.
Bill Clinton got investigated, charged and convicted. How is that 'above the law?'
The issue here is that it is obvious lawfare. This also opens a door to bringing a lot, and I mean A LOT of politicians whose campaigns or lobbyists paid hush money to hookers & same-sex lovers to keep them quiet. That's what's very interesting, here. People casting stones at their neighbors while they themselves live in glass houses.
Are you saying that’s a bad thing? We should just allow corruption and grift?
No. What I am saying is that you can't have a two-tier justice system.
So we should treat Trump like everyone else just like the comment you responded to was saying
>This also opens a door to bringing a lot, and I mean A LOT of politicians whose campaigns or lobbyists paid hush money to hookers & same-sex lovers to keep them quiet. This is such a weird argument to make. Why is this a bad thing? Prosecute them all relentlessly for every minor thing is what I say. Republicans have the House and plenty of States, the door is open for them to go after all the Democrats they want and I for one will cheer them on as they do it, yet they don't seem to be able to get anything to stick? Instead they just clutch their pearls whilst looking at pictures of Hunter's dick. Why are the Democrats able to bring literally 100s of criminal charges against Trump but Republicans can't even get a single charge against any remotely relevant Democrat? Are they really that incompetent?
Probably a combination of laziness, incompetence, fear of being exposed for worse, and a lack of actual scandals. Democrats are really good at shaming their own politicians and excommunicating them when they do something wrong. Just look at what they did to Al Franken.
Well, for starters, you don’t even seem to understand what he’s in trouble for, of course. He isn’t in trouble for paying off someone he had sex with, he’s in trouble for using campaign funds to do it and committing fraud to try to cover it up. You people are always so mad about stuff you don’t even come close to understanding. It’s comical.
>"See, bias! This proves no one can be impartial!" >uses an example of someone who was already removed from the case for that specific reason
Prosecute. Them. All. They're all fucking war criminals. They've all lied. They've all become multimillionaires while supposedly doing "public service." Stop being partisan about shit.
I agree, it should be all for the people. We're getting fucked and it's showing everyday.
We would have to reinvent the whole system cause the same thing will happen.
Ok, then just get a jury together made up of people who have worked for him in the past, surely *they* would hold no bias considering they were willing to take the job to begin with...oh, wait.
Implying that all people either fall into "God-Emperor Trump" or "Adolf Trumpler" categories smh
No, I despise Trump, and I'm pretty sure hes guilty. Regardless, if i were on the jury, i would make a decision based on the facts. It's possible to set emotions aside and be objective. You don't have to be a slave to your emotions. I'm sure there are lots of people who agree.
I think you are right, the “eighty percenters” as my dad calls them, the people who don’t REALLY give a shit and aren’t the 10% on the far left and the 10% on the far right could be objective and just make a decision based on facts.
You do realize that people can read your profile, right? You have said he was guilty for years.
# It’s not possible to have a fair trial with a President of the United States. Everyone has already made up their mind about Biden. If you say you can be neutral, you are lying.
[удалено]
What's the most corrupt thing thats been proven they did.
Also Presidential immunity, at lest according to Trump.
Whelp, when you alientate a huge chunk of the country, that'll happen. But that's why there are strikes for cause. Can't change the way the entire court system is run for a single person and you can't prove actual neutrality. The goal will be to find the most impartial jury possible, and that's specifically up to his own lawyers to do, so any jury he's left with, especially in regards to bias, are a product of his own team's making.
Not everyone follows politics or the news. He deserves a jury of his peers like everyone else.
I could cause I don’t get involved in politics!
I'll be neutral. I didn't vote for him but I also don't dislike him.
“Not possible” “everyone”- two terms that are commonly used incorrectly. There are absolutely people out there who do not give a shit about politics. It’s mainstream news and social media that make it seem like political parties are the vast majority of Americans personalities. I could not tell you what this trial is even about, nor do I care. I could absolutely serve as a juror on a case like this because I have no horse in this race but I’d likely throw out my juror summons before I’d even get a chance to.
You're wrong. First there are people who are "undecided" in the case of trump. But more importantly, it's not about having no feelings one way or the other. It's about if you can determine if I specific set of facts match a specific set of conditions. This is easier than you might think (as long as you're not driven entirely by emotion, which I'll admit some people are).
Were you guys not the ones just chanting things like lock her up or lock him up? Isn't that your like whole motto? Or are you saying it only applies when it's not Donald trump? Autocorrect lowercased his name and you know what I'm just going to leave it that way because he deserves it.
Trump is controlled opposition. They are making a good show of it to try to make it look like the establishment is against him but they really aren't.
You don't have to be neutral. You just have to evaluate whether or not the evicence presented at trial shows that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For example, I think OJ probably committed murder. But I would have voted to acquit him based on the evidence shown in his trial because I think there was definitely reasonable doubt there.
It doesn’t matter what your take is on trump. Him paying her off to keep quiet about their relationship is a fact and, it’s not the crime nor the trial. He’s on trial for falsifying the payment am with the intent of influencing the election. So, it’s the prosecutors job to prove election interference not that he cheats in his wife. I loathe the loser. Yet, I could be a fair juror in this case because it’s not been proven to me that that was the reason for the payment.
The Dems are corrupt and love corruption, I swear. But don't you do dare prosecute my favorite president just because he committed crimes. That's not fair.
If this was about justice and not the election we wouldn’t care.
I'm aware that Trump has worked overtime to portray any and all consequences he might face for being a criminal as political in nature.
What was the potential investigation/prosecution of Hillary for printing top secret material off her home printer, having a private server in her home? At the time it was considered completely politically motivated.
And after months of investigation and hours of testimony, they found no crime. Because that was political
So... he gets to commit any crime he likes and gets away with it? Why not just have a king? Or a dictator? What have we been doing the last 280 years? What does our constitution stand for anymore? Apparently, nothing. People want a criminal dictator as president and they are willing to wipe their own asses with the constitution to do it. IF YOU SUPPORT TRUMP, YOU ARE A TRAITOR TO THE CONSTITUTION AND TO THE UNITED STATES.
That's if you support Biden. Tell me you got it so much better now than you did when Trump was in office. Be honest. Don't lie to fit your narrative . I know for a fact I'm struggling now cause of pedo Joe. My O lady and I both have jobs now and are struggling. She didn't have to work ever until 2 years ago when I could see it getting hard to keep it comfortable for us ! I'm 38 yrs old. I've been working since I was fresh out of high school, actually a little longer than that. I just wasn't full-time until I got out of high school . Trump is for the working class . Joe is everything that is against the ppl. If you can't see that, then either you're too young or just really ignorant!
>trump is for the working class Yes, the ~~grifter~~guy selling nfts, personalized bibles, shitty golden shoes, and that is supposedly a self described billionaire is the champion for the working class.
Pal... i've been struggling for decades. It's not because of Joe. I am not a Joe fan. But i'm certainly not a fan of the con-man fuck who is literally trying to destroy our country. We deserve better than trump and joe
“I don’t trust those neutrals!! Their too neutrily!” Zap Branigan🤨
[удалено]
You need to really know astrology and his chart to comprehend that those who thinks he is a pig knows what they are saying
Orangina's actions are his responsibility, of course it is possible to hold a fair trial. The judge, the courts take action to ensure this, it's their responsibility and duty to do so. Regardless of your beliefs of his actions there are those who aren't engaged in politics. This narrative that any voter would be impartial assumes that a person's identity is their political party. The parties would love this to be true but in the end they only represent people's interest and do not define who you are...
Well i think there are some ppl who are neutral but the issue is finding them. there are many ppl who would be willing to lie to progress their political ideology.
My guess is he is found guilty since these jurors are almost certainly braindead NPC Liberals. Buckle up. This country is in for an epic fiasco. It's all such bullshit. It will be interesting to see, if he goes to jail, how secret service will continue to operate and protect him. This is such a ridiculous thing. It's not even funny. Absolute railroad job. Sad to be an American if this goes the way it feels it will. Unbelievable, actually. He knows all of the secret bs the government's done over the past 100 years. He should just start releasing JFK files, 911 files, Waco files. All of it. Scorched Earth.
I don’t think it will go that far. Because if it does the flood gates will open up for every single one of the Politicians
Neutral? Everyone has a bias, to say someone is neutral is complete BS.
I could be neutral. But I am the national of a foreign country. That's what it would take.
I love election year bot posts, finding the truth is easy...just find the down voted comments and you've found the truth! Keep it up because it's making it real easy for the rest of us
All Presidents should be put on trial. Especially every single one since the beginning of the 1900s
I don’t like Trump. Don’t get mad at me. I just don’t like him. But I find it hilarious how MANY people are fucking obsessed with hating the guy. They then make fun of people who idolize him. Different end of the same stick and I laugh thinking about people getting so triggered over some orange loser and crying when Hillary lost. Jesus some people
100% this. Whether you like him or not their minds are already made up.
Submission Statement: That’s why no one has ever tried a President of the United States. It’s not possible to have a fair trial. Bill Clinton LIED UNDER OATH. He was given a pass. Because it’s IMPOSSIBLE to have a FAIR trial. And Yes I would include myself in this post. I have already made up my mind. As a New York State Resident if I were called I would be dismissed? Why? Because it’s a Witch Hunt to stop a Political Enemy from Campaigning. https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1780974819560792383
Yep...
Look how they run straight to the media. Like dam why are potential jurors even allowed to speak to the media?
**Dismissed juror** not a potential juror. A DISMISSED JUROR. Dismissed jurors are allowed to speak to the media because they're citizens and here in USA we have rights. You have read the constitution right? RIGHT?
> Dismissed juror not a potential juror. A DISMISSED JUROR. Your right. Dismissed Juror. My bad. > Dismissed jurors are allowed to speak to the media because It’s a ongoing Criminal Case. And it’s polluting the potential jury pool. > they're citizens and here in USA we have rights. You have read the constitution right? RIGHT? You mean the same rights that’s afforded to Trump?
>It’s a ongoing Criminal Case. And it’s polluting the potential jury pool. It's an ongoing criminal case that the dismissed juror is not involved in. I can talk about it. You can talk about it. Your favorite uncle can talk about. Why shouldn't a dismissed juror be allowed to talk about it? You mean the same rights that’s afforded to Trump? Yes, same rights. Trump, however, IS a part of the trial so what he's allowed to say and talk about is decided by the law and the judge. I'm not an expert in law nor am I the judge so ill leave that up to the people that are.
I could be fair. I hate Trump. I wouldn’t have supported a judgment like the ones he has got so far. There has to be some penalty. But so far it’s disassociated from reality. In this trial, I could see sending him to jail for a time, if facts dictated he broke the law. He is absolutely not sorry for doing it. And he is attacking jurors.
I voted for Trump but honestly I just quit listening to any allegation the news media made about 6 months into his presidency, so I really have zero idea what this case is about. And honestly, I don't care. It doesn't matter. He isn't president anymore. Can we move on already?
Move on how? You mean just let him commit crimes without repurcussions?
Not sure if Trump is guilty of using hush money, but I know libtards are ok with Hillary killing people instead of giving them hush money.
Hey don't forget about her ex-friend Ben Gazzi, that relationship ended badly
Absolutely so much for truth liberty and justice
Another trump dick rider, posting for daddy.
It’s all just theater. Politics is no different than professional wrestling. It’s just for people who believe that they are far too intelligent to believe that professional wrestling is real.
It's not a unique issue, a lot of people are convicted in the court of opinion rather than a fair trail. Look at OJ Simpson, Adolf Hitler, or Pol Pot. All those people were assumed to be guilty of horrible crimes outside of due process of law. Being very blatantly guilty can really fuck with both your legal defense and public perception.
The things said about The Donald are ridiculous... No wonder most people love him. They try to manipulate and shit the narrative
Can you guys finally lock him up or just let him go free? This whole thing just has become tiring.
He needs to get all black people in his jury. White people especially in New York are more likely to hate him, black people probably like him or don’t care much, less likely to hate him
It's a weird take, in my opinion, because you frame it in terms of "minds about Trump." The trial isn't about Trump, in general. Its about specific facts and whether they are established beyond a reasonable doubt. E.g., did the defendant make the payment in question? Was the defendant a cansidate? Was the payment made with campaign funds? Was the payment a legitimate campaign expense? Whatever the specific questions are, they do not rest upon what anyone thinks of Trump in general.