Ha I knew it! They have nothing, anyone can find a witness or 150 for something.
“Listen, I need you to find me 151 Witnesses - just enough for me to win…”
That sounds like it has the making to be a perfect phone call!
I wouldn’t be surprised if that were an actual conversation he had with his lawyers.
Does Trump have to be present for the whole thing? My adhd is getting triggered just thinking about sitting still for a 4 month trial. Good luck orange dude 😂
Fuck what Trump has to do. Feel bad for the 14 ish jurors who have to sit there for 4 months getting paid less than minimum wage. I’d say it’s likely they get sequestered at some point, meaning they don’t even see their families.
Those jurors are definitely going to need to be sequestered and will probably need protection too. The GOP is already openly supporting domestic terrorism so I don’t expect them to stop now.
I would love to be one of the jurors. 4 months is way better than 4 more years of Trump.
Being jurors on this case would suck. That being said, not shitty employers often pay your full salary for jury duty. And some states require employers to pay too.
I hope for their sakes that they are, the names and addresses have already been circulating social media according to an article I read last month.
It would suck. But also, you would be a part of history forever.
Some people go overseas and risk their lives in the military and lose family time as well without having as much of an impact on the world. Here, the potential to have a positive impact on society is also profound. To show that all people are equal under the law.
So, yes, it would suck. But it’s still worth it as a society to require people to do this and as a juror it’s better than the equivalent trial that nobody hears about for commercial fraud that takes the same amount of time.
Does Trump have to be present for the whole thing?
That depends on whether the judge orders an appearance. The lawyers for Trump must be present the whole time, but Trump does not necessarily have to be there unless ordered to by the judge.
My adhd is getting triggered just thinking about sitting still for a 4 month trial.
It seriously sounds awful… couldn’t happen to a better person.
I wonder if the lawyers expect to be paid
Being infamous sells books. They’ll come out on top in the end, just not by his tiny grifting hand.
Oh I love this nuclear option. If Trump won’t shut up on social media the judge will just tell him he has to be present the whole time. Lol.
That’s a lot of crisis actors! Soros is going bankrupt!
If you look at all the crimes the 18 defendants are charged with, I’d say that 150 is actually pretty freaking economical! If math is right, that’s like 4.92 indictments per witness.
This is the one that will be televised too. Probably is so long because of all the co-defendents
you just know they’re going to end season 1 with a cliffhanger
I don’t even see how a jury would follow something like that. It’s a college course in the way of information overload.
If Trump and his team could dream it up in far less than a month, mere mortals will be able to follow it. It’s not really all that complex. Just f*** over the election counting process in a variety of ways.
There’s too much search engine garbage to find an original source, but PhDs, scientists, physicians, and attorneys (of course) are basically disqualified from jury duty.
Funny how demonstrating that you’re able to think for yourself with a degree disqualifies you.
I’m a nurse and was on a murder jury trial with a sheriff deputy. They’re not allowed to ask your profession in voir dire. What you cannot do is provide expert testimony as a juror in deliberation. You are, of course, expected to use your experiences in your decision.
They don’t ask your profession.
They ask things like your highest level of education or “if you use math at work”.
That last one got one of my colleagues immediately dismissed.
They don’t want someone to start adding context or outside information during the jury deliberation. If you do, then the defense has no opportunity to argue against you.
They don’t want any additional discussion that could sway the case unfairly one way or the other.
That is my understanding as well.
But that’s “lawyers vs justice”.
The jury is supposed to think for itself.
No, you are supposed to be able to put up a defense.
Who’s to say the jury is correct? What if the specialist made an assumption that was wrong, shared it with the jury, and found a person guilty because they trusted this expert. Now you have no way of challenging this, and rebutting the assumption.
You DON’T want those “independent thinker” jurors you need them to only consider what’s been presented in the case. It’s the only way it can be fair.
Yeah. That’s why I’m disqualified from jury duty.
Everything you have just said (except for being able to put up a defense) insults me and my understanding of justice.
I don’t want the people who may eventually try me to behave like you’re saying.
That’s lawyers vs justice.
I’ve had jury duty twice in NY. I’m educated and use math and programming in my work daily.
I’ve got two jury duty summons so far and haven’t even made it to any form of interview. It may be due to my age at the times, but my job pays me for jury duty so I’ll gladly do my duty.
We all know how much Trump likes those big numbers!
Sounds like winning to me… You think he’s tired of winning yet?
Well, he was literally begging for more indictments during a rally a few weeks ago, so maybe he needs to pad those numbers a bit more.
dude they are going rico hard core
LOL
Who told them this was a good idea? Are they so uncertain of their case that they’re bringing for over a hundred witnesses, in case tons of their testimonies fall through?
Maybe there are 150 witnesses because 150 people witnessed the crimes of the 19 people on trial. Just a thought.
My guess is that they have a sequence of events they want to prove took place, and they also want to prove that Trump knew what he was doing was wrong at each step. So maybe the first thing is that there was a plan in advance to subvert the election, and they get testimony from a few different people who were at a meeting about it, another couple people who were on an email discussion, and someone who Trump spoke to personally. Do that kind of thing for every step in a long chain, and it can add up. But any weakness in the chain could be grounds for reasonable doubt, so they have to make sure it’s all solid.
1 person says you did a crime vs. 150 people saying you did a crime.
Which would you rather defend against?
Wait… You think MORE witnesses mean less guilty?! … bahahahaha holy shit, you removed are truly beyond any ability for logic… Literally, a rock is smarter than you.
No wonder he thinks he could shoot someone on Main St. and you morons would think he’s innocent if MORE witnesses mean less guilty. Again, you are literally too stupid to properly parse reality. Seek help. Preferably a conservatorship, because you are clearly too dumb to take care of yourself.
deleted by creator
LMAO. Wishful thinking, indeed.
