Started By
Message

re: Both sides have rested their case in Trump trial...jury now dismissed for a week

Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:35 am to
Posted by theCrusher
Slidell
Member since Nov 2007
1167 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:35 am to
1 week to track them down and force them to vote guilty.
Posted by DaBike
Member since Jan 2008
9561 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:35 am to


As expected, MSM will be making the case for conviction. The judge knows this and wanted the juryimpacted by this.
Posted by SCLibertarian
Conway, South Carolina
Member since Aug 2013
36962 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:37 am to
Judge Merchan's henchmen attempting to "convince" the jurors how to vote.

Posted by Lsuhoohoo
Member since Sep 2007
95473 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:39 am to
quote:

but what changed his mind about "ready & willing to tell the truth?" or was all that just bullshite?


The state brought a weak as shite case and didn't prove anything. Plus the judge has proven a hostile bias toward the defense witnesses and questioning. There's no need to put Trump on the stand of a hate filled Judge.
Posted by I20goon
about 7mi down a dirt road
Member since Aug 2013
13895 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:39 am to
Hoping time will fade the shock of multiple impeachments of their sole witness with relevant testimony.

I'm waiting to hear about the walking indictment of Cohen on perjury, larceny, and extortion charges.
Posted by cgrand
HAMMOND
Member since Oct 2009
39661 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:46 am to
quote:

The state brought a weak as shite case and didn't prove anything.
thats for the jury to decide
quote:

Plus the judge has proven a hostile bias toward the defense witnesses and questioning
they only called one witness who immediately proceeded to show contempt for the court
quote:

There's no need to put Trump on the stand of a hate filled Judge.
there was never any "need" for anyone to testify for the defense...they are not required to present any case at all. so why did the donald repeatedly, himself and through others, promise (nay, demand) to testify? it's a simple question
Posted by Warboo
Enterprise Alabama
Member since Sep 2018
2627 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:49 am to
quote:

what happened?


What is he going to testify about? They have not even told him what he is charged with. This is a abomination and lawfare to the max.
Posted by cgrand
HAMMOND
Member since Oct 2009
39661 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:51 am to
quote:

They have not even told him what he is charged with
the indictment clearly "tells him" what he is charged with, you should read it.
quote:

What is he going to testify about?
the same thing everyone else testified about...
Posted by Warboo
Enterprise Alabama
Member since Sep 2018
2627 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:52 am to
quote:

immediately proceeded to show contempt for the court


Care to elaborate on how he "proceeded to show contempt". Cannot wait to see how a simp like you tries to spin it. Congrats on being smooth brained though.
Posted by Robin Masters
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2010
30577 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:52 am to
quote:

again, his right just like every other criminal defendant. but what changed his mind about "ready & willing to tell the truth?" or was all that just bullshite? he stood out on the steps of the courthouse and said he "couldnt testify because of the gag order" which, as we know, was untruthful. what's his excuse now for not testifying when he said repeatedly that he was anxious to do
so?


We get it, you’re upset because your best chance to finally get the orange man is crumbling before your eyes.
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
49244 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:53 am to
quote:

thats for the jury to decide


Well, the appellate court will make some decisions too. Amazing you support such a clearly biased court. All because OMB. Weak-minded simpleton.
Posted by MikeyWM97
Pineville
Member since Aug 2022
225 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:54 am to
quote:

quote:
judge’s instructions


Find him guilty no matter what.


LOL, exactly. I would say deliberations would take 30 seconds, but they have to pretend they "reviewed" the evidence before the guilty comes down.

I do feel bad for any normal person on the jury. Imagine having to either find him guilty, or have your life upended and have to go into hiding after getting doxxed by CNN. I assume all the jurors were hand selected knowing they would vote as instructed, but if one slipped by, that poor fella has one heck of a decision in front of him.
Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
49244 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:54 am to
quote:

the indictment clearly "tells him" what he is charged with, you should read it.


The crimes listed in the indictment are time-barred. It relies upon an unknown other crime which was never introduced. Clearly you are ignorant to what this case is all about. Perhaps you shouldn’t be opining from a place of complete ignorance.
This post was edited on 5/21/24 at 10:58 am
Posted by Warboo
Enterprise Alabama
Member since Sep 2018
2627 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:55 am to
quote:

the indictment clearly "tells him" what he is charged with, you should read it.


Well why did they not try to prove it during the trial? Basically, the prosecution did the opposite. Hell Trump may have to put the prosecution on his pay role as they did just as good of a job of proving his innocence than the defense did.
Posted by SCLibertarian
Conway, South Carolina
Member since Aug 2013
36962 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:55 am to
quote:

the indictment clearly "tells him" what he is charged with, you should read it.

You obviously haven't. Cite me the felony statute that is being used to toll the misdemeanor crimes for which Trump has been charged. In order to toll the SOL on the misdemeanors, they have to show said misdemeanors were committed in furtherance of a felony. Cite the felony statute from the indictments.
Posted by GRTiger
On a roof eating alligator pie
Member since Dec 2008
64003 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:56 am to
Guessing he wanted prosecutors to ask Trump about his dick or something. It was their big chance to get Trump in front of a hostile prosecutor and hostile judge to bring up any and everything to tear him down politically.

It's clear there is no need for Trump to defend himself at this point, especially since nothing has been proven that requires a defense. Most leftists probably don't understand any of that, though.
This post was edited on 5/21/24 at 10:57 am
Posted by BamaMamaof2
Atlanta, GA
Member since Nov 2019
2432 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:56 am to
He doesn't need to testify!
After the s$show with Cohen, why would he?
Posted by KiwiHead
Auckland, NZ
Member since Jul 2014
28622 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:58 am to
It's somewhat odd that he's taking a week off. But, in a trial like this he's probably trying to formulate jury instructions to at least on his end blunt any appeal that would hinge on instruction to the jury as to what legally under the statute they should consider in deliberation.

Behind closed doors, of course, individual jurors can assume whatever they want and depending your side you hope that they follow it as tightly as the instruction given. If you are the defense on this trial you want the jury tightly adhering to the statute because if you follow the statute the state really has not made their case. Trump was entitled to spend his personal money however he wanted and if he was reimbursing Cohen who was his lawyer.....who cares.

That being said, given the venue in Manhattan, I expect a conviction even though the charges are ridiculous and opaque.
Posted by cgrand
HAMMOND
Member since Oct 2009
39661 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:58 am to
did he lie to you or not? did he ever have any intention to testify in his defense?

i dont care if he does or doesnt, and i dont care what happens in this case or any of the other cases against him. who is or isnt president of the US doesnt affect me in the slightest, nor does the outcome of a business records falsification case in NYC. what does affect me is when otherwise smart people that we all depend on to keep society sane (most of the posters on this board) are artificially enraged by a con man

Posted by BBONDS25
Member since Mar 2008
49244 posts
Posted on 5/21/24 at 10:59 am to
quote:

It's somewhat odd that he's taking a week off. But, in a trial like this he's probably trying to formulate jury instructions to at least on his end blunt any appeal that would hinge on instruction to the jury as to what legally under the statute they should consider in deliberation.


this judge has shown he doesn’t care about getting turned over on appeal…at all. He has made so many breathtakingly awful rulings. He isn’t taking this time to work on jury instructions.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 6Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram