recogitare.com

It really isn't important stuff.
it's a show of wealthy and powerful people behaving badly and getting paid for it.
while there's nations in turmoil.

daytime tv soap opera starring the president.
has 'nothing' written all over it.
great expense, foregone conclusion

why did the dems fold so quickly?
losing had to be the goal from the start.

It's a weird case, because there's no real dispute about what happened. It's just a case of whether what happened was a crime.

In theory, juries don't decide that. The judge tells them what is or is not a crime, and the jury decides whether the defendant did that.

It seemed to me that the judge's instructions would be really important. So I read them. Having read them, I think conviction is impossible. Acquittal is unlikely.

I say that because I know that the jury has been deliberating some hours by now, and has not reached a verdict. They didn't all form an opinion right away in one direction. So, in light of the instructions, I try to imaging what could be said that would persuade someone to change his mind. If a juror is inclined toward innocent, it would mean that he doesn't really think a crime was committed. I've read what they were instructed to consider a crime, and it's not an open and shut case that Trump did anything criminal. It demands some interpretation. If a person has concluded there was no crime, and wasn't immediately persuaded there was, I can't imagine anyone changing that opinion a few hours into discussion.

Likewise, if someone is inclined toward guilty, it would mean they had interpreted things a different way, and I can't imagine them being persuaded to change their minds. However, I think that's a slightly easier sell than the other way around. I can imagine someone being persuaded that "legal fees" covers more than just payments made to lawyers for being lawyers. It might be said to include all expenses that were related to legal matters. If someone is persuaded of that, there's no case at all. Similarly, if they could be persuaded that there was technically a violation of a law, but no ordinary, non-Trump, citizen would be charged with a crime, then the case would be weak. Although jurors aren't really supposed to make a decision like that, I can imagine someone might do so anyway, so that they might change their vote from convict to acquit.

So, I think the most likely outcome is still a hung jury, but I think acquittal is a remote possibility. I can't see a conviction coming out of this.

But...I've been wrong before. We will see.

Oh....my.....God.

Meadmaker wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2024 9:22 pm Oh....my.....God.

Indeed.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/live/trump-v ... 28980.html

He won the popular vote this time.

People are always looking for a politician with real convictions.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!

sparks wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 3:03 am BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!

Be careful what you wish for.

More than anything else, the verdict makes me nervous for the future. Republicans will come out with guns blazing. Hopefully, just metaphorically, but you never know about the fringe.

As for the verdict itself, I think fraud is a way of life for Trump. I think he has a long history of it, always staying just within the bounds of the law, or at least close enough to the bounds that it wasn't considered worthy of prosecution. This time, he made enough enemies that they decided it was worthy of prosecution after all.

now he's got street cred.
he's a legend.
he'll make money from this, no?
otherwise, i predict no effect.

Martyrs are dangerous.

The only good news is that sooner or later it will come up for appeal at a Trump-controlled court, possibly SCOTUS, and the result will be reversed.