NY: Trump on Trial!

[mjba257]

https://twitter.com/aweissmann_/status/1780266112036331671
https://twitter.com/bradmossesq/status/1780269764591391226

www.dontgiveableep.com

Seriously, we are arguing over paperwork? From almost ten years ago!

Meanwhile, an old lady just got mugged in Manhattan, somebody just got pushed onto a subway track, a homeless man is defecating on the sidewalk, etc. But the Manhattan DA is more concerned about paperwork from 10 years ago. Give me a break!

[Redban]

AP-NORC .. only 35% say Trump acted illegally in the Bragg case,  which is 10-12% lower than the GA + Jack Smith cases

https://apnorc.org/projects/as-trumps-hush-money-case-begins-about-a-third-believe-he-has-done-something-illegal/

[GeorgiaModerate]

Meanwhile, an old lady just got mugged in Manhattan, somebody just got pushed onto a subway track, a homeless man is defecating on the sidewalk, etc. But the Manhattan DA is more concerned about paperwork from 10 years ago. Give me a break!

You are repetitive and tiresome with this.  The NYPD (which has 36,000 officers and another 19,000 civilian employees) and the Manhattan DA's office are capable of doing more than one thing at once.  Give it a rest.

[mjba257]

Meanwhile, an old lady just got mugged in Manhattan, somebody just got pushed onto a subway track, a homeless man is defecating on the sidewalk, etc. But the Manhattan DA is more concerned about paperwork from 10 years ago. Give me a break!

You are repetitive and tiresome with this.  The NYPD (which has 36,000 officers and another 19,000 civilian employees) and the Manhattan DA's office are capable of doing more than one thing at once.  Give it a rest.

[/b]

Well apparently not because they keep releasing violent offenders back onto the streets within hours of apprehension.

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://twitter.com/aweissmann_/status/1780266112036331671
https://twitter.com/bradmossesq/status/1780269764591391226

www.dontgiveableep.com

Seriously, we are arguing over paperwork? From almost ten years ago!

Meanwhile, an old lady just got mugged in Manhattan, somebody just got pushed onto a subway track, a homeless man is defecating on the sidewalk, etc. But the Manhattan DA is more concerned about paperwork from 10 years ago. Give me a break!

Putin: America isn't a real democracy because my good friend Donald Trump is prosecuted for his political beliefs.

[Farmlands]

It's a bit funny that because the other three trials got delayed for one reason or another, the 2024 election might really come down to an affair in 2006, which was already public knowledge in 2020. I expect a substantial boost for either Biden or Trump based on the jury's verdict here.

[Landslide Lyndon]

https://twitter.com/prchovanec/status/1779942097380057341

[Yoda]

https://twitter.com/aweissmann_/status/1780266112036331671https://twitter.com/bradmossesq/status/1780269764591391226

Cool cool so just take the f*****g stand, put your hand on the Bible and testify in these exact words then.

[President Johnson]

https://twitter.com/bradmossesq/status/1780255946096165154

Sleepy Don!

[GeorgiaModerate]

Three jurors have been seated so far.  They need 12 plus 6 alternates, so that's decent progress.

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/1780271859646206129https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1780319498626535481

Three jurors have been seated so far.  They need 12 plus 6 alternates, so that's decent progress.

Incredible of Merchan that he's already empaneling 6 jurors from just the first panel of 96 prospectives when they summoned 500 to show up just in case & then over half of those 96 immediately self-DQed for bias, clearly wants to be done with jury selection by end-of-week.

And he's been ruling quite fairly for the defense:

https://twitter.com/klasfeldreports/status/1780302477188808845https://twitter.com/normeisen/status/1780306598696522101https://twitter.com/bradmossesq/status/1780310704651682213

[emailking]

That's a wrap on day 2!

6 jurors selected, wow!

This could go much faster than anticipated!

[brucejoel99]

That's a wrap on day 2!

6 jurors selected, wow!

This could go much faster than anticipated!

Even better!

https://twitter.com/TylerMcBrien/status/1780349737670971860

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1780355971442692389

[Ljube]

Seven jurors selected.

Not too bad for Trump. One nurse, one teacher (probably both anti-Trump), one who had no clue how long the trial will last (probably bad for Trump, could be easily swayed), two lawyers (a lifeline for Trump, would not be convinced by weak evidence), one older IT training consultant who prioritizes his family (probably good for Trump and his defense that he paid the hush money to protect his family) and the foreman who is probably anti-Trump.

Trump only needs one stealth MAGA juror. So far, he didn't get that, but he got a decent jury.

[emailking]

I think we have no idea if there's a stealth Maga juror nor could we unless they come forward after the trial.

[wbrocks67]

https://twitter.com/hugolowell/status/1780355971442692389

Once again getting away with something that no other normal person would.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

I haven’t followed the details of each individual juror, but I’m surprised the prosecution is letting lawyers onto the jury.  I had thought it was common knowledge that lawyers were generally good for the defendant.  I myself was once seated as a potential juror in a criminal trial (I think a drug sale case), but was dismissed by the prosecution when I told them I had a law degree.

[mjba257]

I haven’t followed the details of each individual juror, but I’m surprised the prosecution is letting lawyers onto the jury.  I had thought it was common knowledge that lawyers were generally good for the defendant.  I myself was once seated as a potential juror in a criminal trial (I think a drug sale case), but was dismissed by the prosecution when I told them I had a law degree.

Once someone is seated on the jury, is that set in stone? I know jurors constantly are dismissed during trial (hence why you need alternates), but could the prosecution motion to have someone already seated be dismissed before jury selection is complete? Or the defense for that matter?

[emailking]

I suppose one way to look at it is they're going to insist on going over every piece of evidence with a proverbial microscope (à la the doctor/lawyer Scott Peterson jury that ground deliberations to a halt). Another way to look at it is they're highly educated and this statistically likely to have disdain for Trump.

[SteveRogers]

I haven’t followed the details of each individual juror, but I’m surprised the prosecution is letting lawyers onto the jury.  I had thought it was common knowledge that lawyers were generally good for the defendant.  I myself was once seated as a potential juror in a criminal trial (I think a drug sale case), but was dismissed by the prosecution when I told them I had a law degree.

Lawyers usually get struck. As do engineers. Really anyone with an advanced degree. But each side only gets so many strikes, and sometimes there are just worse jurors in the pool that are a higher priority to use your strikes on.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

one older IT training consultant who prioritizes his family (probably good for Trump and his defense that he paid the hush money to protect his family)

ROFLMAO

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

I haven’t followed the details of each individual juror, but I’m surprised the prosecution is letting lawyers onto the jury.  I had thought it was common knowledge that lawyers were generally good for the defendant.  I myself was once seated as a potential juror in a criminal trial (I think a drug sale case), but was dismissed by the prosecution when I told them I had a law degree.

Lawyers usually get struck. As do engineers. Really anyone with an advanced degree. But each side only gets so many strikes, and sometimes there are just worse jurors in the pool that are a higher priority to use your strikes on.

Part of the issue with the peremptory challenges is that they are not first questioning ALL the prospective jurors and then doing the peremptory challenges, but instead each side has to decide whether or not to use a permeptory challenge sequentially after each individual prospective juror is interviewed.

The result of doing it this way is that whichever side runs out of peremptory challenges first might end up being stuck with a SUPER unfavorable/biased juror against them which they would have wanted to use one of their peremptory challenges on, but then have no challenge left because they used them on someone who was not as bad for them.

Ideally, it seems to me that it would be better to examine ALL the potential jurors first, and then each side would know all the potential jurors and then use their challenges, because this would eliminate that additional element of randomness that comes only as a result of the ORDER in which potential jurors are questioned.

[Ferguson97]

one older IT training consultant who prioritizes his family (probably good for Trump and his defense that he paid the hush money to protect his family)

Yeah, if there’s one thing family men love, it’s men who cheat on their wives with porn stars.

[emailking]

I haven’t followed the details of each individual juror, but I’m surprised the prosecution is letting lawyers onto the jury.  I had thought it was common knowledge that lawyers were generally good for the defendant.  I myself was once seated as a potential juror in a criminal trial (I think a drug sale case), but was dismissed by the prosecution when I told them I had a law degree.

Lawyers usually get struck. As do engineers. Really anyone with an advanced degree. But each side only gets so many strikes, and sometimes there are just worse jurors in the pool that are a higher priority to use your strikes on.

Part of the issue with the peremptory challenges is that they are not first questioning ALL the prospective jurors and then doing the peremptory challenges, but instead each side has to decide whether or not to use a permeptory challenge sequentially after each individual prospective juror is interviewed.

The result of doing it this way is that whichever side runs out of peremptory challenges first might end up being stuck with a SUPER unfavorable/biased juror against them which they would have wanted to use one of their peremptory challenges on, but then have no challenge left because they used them on someone who was not as bad for them.

Ideally, it seems to me that it would be better to examine ALL the potential jurors first, and then each side would know all the potential jurors and then use their challenges, because this would eliminate that additional element of randomness that comes only as a result of the ORDER in which potential jurors are questioned.

This video suggests, as a general principle, that statistically you should look at 37% of the possibilities before making a decision (using a challenge). But I haven't tried to figure out how this is affected by having the ability to make multiple challenges.

(go to 12:03)