It might be to a millennial waster like you who has no civic values but to anyone interested in democracy and the enlightenment it’s the greatest challenge since WW2.
if trump can't stand because of this or other legal cases, who will the y choose and how? I guess no one knows the gop rule book well enough to answer. does it even allow for this scenario? maybe they just use the same mechanism they must have in case the candidate falls off his perch
This judge might be fine banana, but he clearly shouldn’t be presiding in this case
Why?
Because of his political affiliation? 2/3rds of the supreme court are Republicans, should they be recused from Trump cases?
It might come as a shock to you but most Judges in USA are either appointed by a political party or they stand for election to be judges with the backing of a political party. Defendants don't get to choose which party the judge belongs to.
Merchan also raised the question with the ethics committee to see if he had any conflicts that would mean he should recuse himself.
There’s a difference between appointment processes and pro actively giving money to the direct opponent of the defendant. Its amazing how warped some peoples’ views are on here of what is clearly wrong because of their partisan interests
"I get up as late as I can get away with and am much more successful in life than risky,
Kids off to school shortly and I’m going back to bed"
Rare agree with laz. When I was a broke ass scally I worked very hard. Now I have people to do that, I tend to have lay ins, enjoy time with my kids, take more exercise.
It's a privilege but not one I was born with and not one I will forget
Fox, Newsmax and OAN are doing their best to identify the jurors so that they can unleash the lunatic minions. Or at the very least spend months saying it was a lefty jury that rigged the outcome.
America really needs to get its act together and tackle the gaslighting.
Merchan will have no choice but to impose a custodial sentence. It's the right thing to do, even if Trump will spend the next few months fundraising and campaigning on it.
Worth observing that he wants to be banged up for contempt of the ‘gag’ order, as he will look better in a cell than in court. Marginally. But right now he’ll take anything.
given how hard Trump has worked to denigrate the role of the US justice system, to make life more dangerous for its jurists, and to stack it with biased frauds desperate to make incorrect and damaging politicised decisions that destroy real people’s lives, I am tug fvcking light as to whether it might show some bias against him. Actually, I hope it does.
He’s gone after jurors already. He’s a mobster, ofc, and this trial is just the start of it. When the dust settles it will be interesting to compare the attitudes of those outside the US who consider themselves liberals as broadly defined, becuase it’s already clear on here that people in the desert are markedly more blasé about the threat presented by Trump, Kushner and their associated ‘criminals of the world’ than those of us whose livelihoods are not dependent on oil money and minding our ps and qs so as not to offend the mullahs,
get your calendars out. it's a packed week of Trump legal news.
Today: In a separate (separate to the hush money corruption trial) Manhattan courthouse, there’s a hearing scheduled in Trump’s New York civil fraud case to litigate whether the $175 million bond he put up is legitimate or not. …
Wednesday: In the classified documents case in Florida, the grand jury testimony of Trump aide WALT NAUTA, who was indicted for obstruction of justice, will be publicly released. …
Thursday: And in the biggest event of the week, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on Trump’s claims of presidential immunity from prosecution. How and when that case is decided will determine whether Trump faces any federal criminal trials this year.
Chambers, if he wins, there's very little he can do about this one. It's a state prosecution.
He was (as president) able to get Barr to put pressure on SDNY to back off on their investigation but now, it's far too late. Trial goes ahead today and it would take a minor miracle to delay it now. Presidential Immunity has no bearing on this whatsoever either, the crime was committed before entering office, even if the final payments were made whilst in office.
He's going with "advice of counsel" defence too.... this will fall flat.
He's going with "advice of counsel" defence too.... this will fall flat.
***
I thought if he was going with that he had to announce it a lot sooner.
As that defence waives all legal privilege in the advice of that counsel.. so it has to be disclosed prior to the trial along with all related attorney records?
The advice of counsel defense is based on the common sense principle that a defendant should not be held liable for actions taken based on reasonable reliance on the advice of counsel. Such reliance negates wrongful intent. The defense contains four elements: (1) The defendant made a complete disclosure to counsel concerning the matter at issue, (2) the defendant sought advice as to the legality of his conduct, (3) the defendant received advice that his conduct was legal, and (4) the defendant relied on that advice in good faith.3 A defendant who asserts the defense must, of course, waive the attorney-client privilege, which is why defendants often prefer to allude to the involvement of lawyers without formally asserting the defense. Even those defendants who earnestly want to assert the defense face a difficult hurdle of showing that they made a complete disclosure to counsel concerning the matter at issue.
***
In the election fraud case, although the issue has not yet been the subject of motion practice, challenges to asserting the defense, and the risks of asserting it, are particularly significant. One fundamental challenge is the former president’s public statements that deny any attorney-client relationship with anyone deemed unloyal by him, as occurred most recently with Trump’s statements about Sidney Powell.14 Another is that several of the attorneys have themselves pleaded guilty. Even if the defense could be asserted, any waiver would likely unearth a flood of cautionary communications from other attorneys with whom the former president also consulted, and a defendant cannot pick and choose favorable advice in support of his defense when that advice comes from multiple sources and is a mixed bag.15
… I will properly LMAO is the full disclosure of Trumps discussion with Cohen includes a blow by blow account of the events in question.
yes, because in the US, like in the UK north of Watford and outside the big cities a lot of people are living hand to mouth with very little security or feeling like anyone listens to them
the Appalachia rust belt used to be heavy democrat but was taken for granted and left to rot
the same is true for example of Scotland - which was taken for granted by labour and flipped almost wholesale SNP
the same is true for the current UK government, obsessed with internal vanity projects and imagined culture war issues instead of making life better for people
you govern for a small segment then you create groups who go looking for a voice elsewhere
And the other difference of course is that in the US there is plenty of actual money to be made, whereas in the UK most people’s best hope of wealth is stealing it from the government. Good luck with that for the next decade.
This week's episode of The Daily Show entirely dedicated to the Trump trial.
I had no idea that there's a witness called David Pecker. I'm sure we all agree that, when it comes to the arrangement with Stormy Daniels, Trump did more than that.
To be fair, I indicated it was a question. And having now gone back and looked at the earlier threads, there was clear frothing about the bond effectively being struck out altogether, which clearly hasn’t happened.
That jury is going to be something else. There's bound to be at least one of them who kept quiet on social media and the like who then appears for the deliberation in a MAGA cap and son on.
2
6
Cry harder
https://x.com/lawofruby/status/1780308120713019584?s=61&t=3lWj0RN-4doErPsmOpcvtg
Trump is a crooked pos who is going down.
1
8
Why would I be crying? The obsession some people on this board have with Trump is pretty odd
3
8
It might be to a millennial waster like you who has no civic values but to anyone interested in democracy and the enlightenment it’s the greatest challenge since WW2.
0
4
Is racism a civic value cookie?
1
3
Cry harder
1
7
I don’t think this is really the ‘zinger’ you think it is
1
6
I think you’ll find no “zinger” is needed in the circs. Still eh, Sleepy Don
1
4
wow and wait until you hear who appointed the judge in his florida case, it would make you wonder who she donated to.
If Judge Cannon was a competent judge, I'd have had no problem with it. She's not competent.
Merchan is a very competent Judge, decades of experience and never any problems.
3
2
yes, it is fine
try finding a sane jurist who didn’t support Biden in 2020. Especially in NY.
9
4
’The obsession some people on this board have with Trump is pretty odd’
’Trump trial
Dalek 17 Apr 24 05:35’
^^^^^
2
1
oooh and another, Thomas hasn't recused himself from J6 decisions, yet his wife is up to her eyeballs in it.
0
5
Happy to say that sounds wrong too eddie.
Tom, I get up early, like most people who are successful in life
0
1
if trump can't stand because of this or other legal cases, who will the y choose and how? I guess no one knows the gop rule book well enough to answer. does it even allow for this scenario? maybe they just use the same mechanism they must have in case the candidate falls off his perch
1
1
‘It might be to a millennial waster like you who has no civic values’
I know you are obsessed with millennials but I’m not sure you can accuse risky of being one
0
1
A waster or a millennial?
0
1
millenial is born after 1980 i think. I hate the generational marketing jargon. often used by people who want to be divisive
I always forget if my gen is called z or x
0
1
Jargon which is used mostly ime by millennials keen to “other” people in support of their own, now failed, agenda.
0
1
If risky was best m7s with lettuce Liz he must have been born well before 1980
6
1
Based on the leg photo he posted from his ambient temperature outdoor bathtub I would age risky at around 45 years old.
1
1
Dalek 17 Apr 24 05:35
Apparently it’s fine for the judge to have donated to the Biden/harris campaign in 2020. Bizarre.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
seems tivial, but might have been better to step back given the conservative victim mentality that permeates everything they do these days
3
1
"Based on the leg photo he posted from his ambient temperature outdoor bathtub I would age risky at around 45 years old."
Underrated comment this one.
3
1
"Tom, I get up early, like most people who are successful in life"
at least you have one thing in common with them.
0
1
If you have a system where judges are appointed by politicians or elected you will have judges with declared political leanings.
2
0
Cookie not everyone you don’t agree with is a “millennial”.
2
0
Not sure Risky/Hanners was as vocal about the third raters Trump put into the Supreme Court?
0
0
Ofc he wasn’t. He’s a tit
0
3
This judge might be fine banana, but he clearly shouldn’t be presiding in this case
1
0
Whereas Aileen Cannon?
2
0
Why?
Because of his political affiliation? 2/3rds of the supreme court are Republicans, should they be recused from Trump cases?
It might come as a shock to you but most Judges in USA are either appointed by a political party or they stand for election to be judges with the backing of a political party. Defendants don't get to choose which party the judge belongs to.
Merchan also raised the question with the ethics committee to see if he had any conflicts that would mean he should recuse himself.
DA, ethics panel back judge in Donald Trump hush-money case, finding no evidence of bias | AP News
1
0
Ricky is still at primary law school don’t confuse the poor petal.
0
2
There’s a difference between appointment processes and pro actively giving money to the direct opponent of the defendant. Its amazing how warped some peoples’ views are on here of what is clearly wrong because of their partisan interests
1
0
I really don't know how to respond to that... are you new to how America works?
0
0
Don’t bother Eddie, and I won’t bother replying to you either. You’re not a serious person.
1
0
I get up as late as I can get away with and am much more successful in life than risky,
Kids off to school shortly and I’m going back to bed
0
0
I suppose leeching off relatives is a kind of success
0
0
LOL as if
1
0
And, similarly, needing to buy 2XL shirts
4
1
"Tom, I get up early, like most people who are successful in life"
You work for your mum and she bought you a 3 bed semi in an offshore jurisdiction with a weird outdoor bathtub thing
3
1
"I get up as late as I can get away with and am much more successful in life than risky,
Kids off to school shortly and I’m going back to bed"
Rare agree with laz. When I was a broke ass scally I worked very hard. Now I have people to do that, I tend to have lay ins, enjoy time with my kids, take more exercise.
It's a privilege but not one I was born with and not one I will forget
0
1
My mum’s dead; I have a 5 bed detached house; and a standard hot tub. An outdoor plunge pool too as it happens. The offshore part’s right
0
0
Spending time with your kids generally involves early starts Davis. Unless they’re teens or you be shipped them off to boarding school
7
1
Sorry to hear about your old girl Risky
But at least you got to inherit all her lovely money so you didn't have to achieve anything yourself. That was lucky
1
0
I read that as plunge poo
2
0
Juror stands down over fears they could be identified
Oh but no Trump isn’t a mobster
0
0
Jury all sworn in.
Let’s play Countdown
0
0
Y-T-U-L-G-I
0
1
Bertha,
Fox, Newsmax and OAN are doing their best to identify the jurors so that they can unleash the lunatic minions. Or at the very least spend months saying it was a lefty jury that rigged the outcome.
America really needs to get its act together and tackle the gaslighting.
1
0
The judge is ruling on the gag order breaches Monday I think. Trump is taking his cue from Fox as usual. He’s getting his nappies handed to him.
0
0
Fully loaded
1
0
Merchan will have no choice but to impose a custodial sentence. It's the right thing to do, even if Trump will spend the next few months fundraising and campaigning on it.
4
0
2
0
His name is Killary Hinton
0
0
It’s Tony Clifton.
0
0
It actually looks a lot like Johnny Depp
0
0
have you ever seen them in the same room?
hmmmm, makes you think
2
0
HEH at this courtroom sketch
0
0
Fall Asleep, Find Out
0
0
Worth observing that he wants to be banged up for contempt of the ‘gag’ order, as he will look better in a cell than in court. Marginally. But right now he’ll take anything.
0
0
given how hard Trump has worked to denigrate the role of the US justice system, to make life more dangerous for its jurists, and to stack it with biased frauds desperate to make incorrect and damaging politicised decisions that destroy real people’s lives, I am tug fvcking light as to whether it might show some bias against him. Actually, I hope it does.
1
1
He’s gone after jurors already. He’s a mobster, ofc, and this trial is just the start of it. When the dust settles it will be interesting to compare the attitudes of those outside the US who consider themselves liberals as broadly defined, becuase it’s already clear on here that people in the desert are markedly more blasé about the threat presented by Trump, Kushner and their associated ‘criminals of the world’ than those of us whose livelihoods are not dependent on oil money and minding our ps and qs so as not to offend the mullahs,
0
0
sorry what
0
0
You can read
1
0
I was in the desert.
I’ve always hated Trump with the heat of 1000 suns.
My political views have never been dependent on my paymaster.
0
0
Yes, but you are exceptional.
0
0
heh - epic fail from Bertha here
0
0
0
0
Don Snorleone - The Godfarter
0
1
get your calendars out. it's a packed week of Trump legal news.
0
1
He is simply trying to clog up the US legal system with appeals and delays. The more cases the better, it gives him more to work with.
Then in late summer he'll demand they all be dropped or paused because he"s running for president.
In the unlikely event he wins, he'll quash them all.
If he loses then he's royally screwed. Last chance saloon.
0
1
Pecker up
first.
0
1
Chambers, if he wins, there's very little he can do about this one. It's a state prosecution.
He was (as president) able to get Barr to put pressure on SDNY to back off on their investigation but now, it's far too late. Trial goes ahead today and it would take a minor miracle to delay it now. Presidential Immunity has no bearing on this whatsoever either, the crime was committed before entering office, even if the final payments were made whilst in office.
He's going with "advice of counsel" defence too.... this will fall flat.
0
1
He somehow thinks he should have lifetime immunity from everything Eddie. Past, present and future.
A deranged individual.
0
0
Chambers22 Apr 24 12:48
He somehow thinks he should have lifetime immunity from everything Eddie. Past, present and future.
A deranged individual.
______________________________________________________________________________
considering what Scylla says about his shenanigans he probably needs lifetime immunity
0
1
He definitely needs it, Sumo.
Whether he or not he gets it is the question…
Trump crimes so much he doesn’t even realise he is doing it.. it’s a normal as farting and brewing in his own stench for him.
It’s only everyone else who smells it.
0
1
He's going with "advice of counsel" defence too.... this will fall flat.
***
I thought if he was going with that he had to announce it a lot sooner.
As that defence waives all legal privilege in the advice of that counsel.. so it has to be disclosed prior to the trial along with all related attorney records?
Or is my understand of that defence wrong?
https://www.sewkis.com/publications/client-alert-advice-of-counsel-defe…
0
1
The advice of counsel defense is based on the common sense principle that a defendant should not be held liable for actions taken based on reasonable reliance on the advice of counsel. Such reliance negates wrongful intent. The defense contains four elements: (1) The defendant made a complete disclosure to counsel concerning the matter at issue, (2) the defendant sought advice as to the legality of his conduct, (3) the defendant received advice that his conduct was legal, and (4) the defendant relied on that advice in good faith.3 A defendant who asserts the defense must, of course, waive the attorney-client privilege, which is why defendants often prefer to allude to the involvement of lawyers without formally asserting the defense. Even those defendants who earnestly want to assert the defense face a difficult hurdle of showing that they made a complete disclosure to counsel concerning the matter at issue.
***
In the election fraud case, although the issue has not yet been the subject of motion practice, challenges to asserting the defense, and the risks of asserting it, are particularly significant. One fundamental challenge is the former president’s public statements that deny any attorney-client relationship with anyone deemed unloyal by him, as occurred most recently with Trump’s statements about Sidney Powell.14 Another is that several of the attorneys have themselves pleaded guilty. Even if the defense could be asserted, any waiver would likely unearth a flood of cautionary communications from other attorneys with whom the former president also consulted, and a defendant cannot pick and choose favorable advice in support of his defense when that advice comes from multiple sources and is a mixed bag.15
… I will properly LMAO is the full disclosure of Trumps discussion with Cohen includes a blow by blow account of the events in question.
0
1
Also the defence appears to waive privilege not just in that particular counsels advice … but all counsels advice received on that issue.
Interesting. Wonder if Trump asked anyone legal at the RNC or Rudy about it..
0
1
He doesn't really care about the law, or GAAP or any sound business principles.
He's a populist rabble rouser amongst the uneducated combined with a mafia style boss who can act as he wants.
And they want him to be president?
1
0
Chambers22 Apr 24 14:29
He's a populist rabble rouser amongst the uneducated combined with a mafia style boss who can act as he wants.
And they want him to be president?
______________________________________________________________________________
yes, because in the US, like in the UK north of Watford and outside the big cities a lot of people are living hand to mouth with very little security or feeling like anyone listens to them
the Appalachia rust belt used to be heavy democrat but was taken for granted and left to rot
the same is true for example of Scotland - which was taken for granted by labour and flipped almost wholesale SNP
the same is true for the current UK government, obsessed with internal vanity projects and imagined culture war issues instead of making life better for people
you govern for a small segment then you create groups who go looking for a voice elsewhere
0
0
take a guess at who already dozed off during opening? I bet you'll never guess who..
0
0
Except Trump made everyone poorer except him and his first family of crime.
0
0
And the other difference of course is that in the US there is plenty of actual money to be made, whereas in the UK most people’s best hope of wealth is stealing it from the government. Good luck with that for the next decade.
0
0
Incredibly the thrust of his defence seems to be that
0
0
hmm, he may be going for the appeal that his lawyer was incompetent...
0
0
Massive rant just now from Habbi outside the courtroom to the cameras. She’s swallowed a lot of
cockkool aid.0
0
he also claims that the trial is an attempt to influence the 2024 election and that is BAD
0
0
Well, it’s certainly 2
0
0
Sorry, I didn’t mean that, I meant it was the last paragraph
3
0
Risky thinks illegally influencing a democratic vote is fine, but then again he runs a TikTok dedicated to trashing democracy so this tracks.
0
0
No royalty, I corrected my comment immediately.
0
0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqkf2U5jcE0
This week's episode of The Daily Show entirely dedicated to the Trump trial.
I had no idea that there's a witness called David Pecker. I'm sure we all agree that, when it comes to the arrangement with Stormy Daniels, Trump did more than that.
0
0
I didn’t follow all scylla’s
Foaming about the bond in the other case, but I think it’s all been ruled ok?
0
0
Typical misinformation from Risky.
5 additional conditions have been placed on the bond and agreed to by Trump’s attorneys.
So it’s wasn’t ok… at all.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2024/04/22/trump-attorneys-bond-c…
0
0
Oh dear Ricky, how embarrassing.
0
0
Desperately poor from the Beeb here
Trump trial: Prosecution say hush money was 'pure election fraud' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68877610
They don’t seem to understand the felony element at all. Why is the british so frit ?
0
0
The best part of those 5 conditions is that Trump now has to front $175m in CASH to Knight by Thursday.
Can he do it?
2
0
Trump and Putin lover, risky (45), has once again stepped on a rake. Oh dear.
0
0
To be fair, I indicated it was a question. And having now gone back and looked at the earlier threads, there was clear frothing about the bond effectively being struck out altogether, which clearly hasn’t happened.
0
0
LOL.
The ‘frothing’ was about whether Trump had provided adequate security for the bond.
The court clearly found that he had not.. hence the new conditions.
If he had not agreed these new conditions the bond would have been thrown out.
Let’s just wait and see if he can actually come up with the $$.
0
0
That jury is going to be something else. There's bound to be at least one of them who kept quiet on social media and the like who then appears for the deliberation in a MAGA cap and son on.
Join the discussion