The common thread in Trump's defenders

[rambot]

With the intent of covering what crime?! Circular reasoning. What federal crime did Trump commit that warrented a federal case, but conveniently was processed outside a federal court? WHAT WAS HIS FEDERAL CRIME THAT HE WAS HIDING AFTER HIS SUPPOSED atourny

There's no legal requirement that it be identified by a single juror. Each juror can have their answer and he need not be convicted of doing the crime.

 

[rambot]

News just in....Now we are looking at a mistrial. Judge Merchan just said, a post was found, within the court system e-mails, a day before the verdict.....That their cousin was on the jury, and told him Trump was going to be convicted..... Now an investigation into this......and possibly a retrial............

Source? Couldn't find anything just now.


And before you story patting each other on the backs remembe...this is a claim from the internet. Let's make sure it's legitimate and THEN move forward.

 

[Fantine]

Listened to the "Fox" you tube. Sounds like one of those relatives you try to avoid at Thanksgiving dinner decided to try to make trouble because the cousin who loathes him was a juror. Hearsay with nothing to back it up.

 

[ralliann]

Source? Couldn't find anything just now

The news

 

[Fantine]

Fox News, rambot, not "real" news.
All the news that's fit to invent and misinterpret.

 

[Brihaha]

The news

It seems this was a professional online troll. Newsmax apparently fell for this, a true hoax haha.

Newsmax Touts Dubious Trump Trial Facebook Post: ‘This Needs to Be a Mistrial Immediately’

A Newsmax host and guest credulously accepted as fact a random Facebook comment purporting to be the cousin of a juror in Donald Trump's New York criminal trial.

www.mediaite.com

 

[rambot]

This is the news I see.
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/06/07/trump-hush-money-trial-juror-facebook-00162369

Media efforts to locate the poster indicated that the post likely came from an account associated with someone who appears to be a regular troll of the New York court system’s social media pages

im not too concerned how biased you may think it is. You are welcome to put up what you read to come to your conclusions.

 

[Fantine]

Thanks. Unfortunately some will believe it, because flimsy and false as it is, it confirms their bias.

 

[JSRG]

News just in....Now we are looking at a mistrial. Judge Merchan just said, a post was found, within the court system e-mails, a day before the verdict.....That their cousin was on the jury, and told him Trump was going to be convicted..... Now an investigation into this......

If you are going to make a claim like this, it is incumbent to offer a link on it.

Anyway, having looked it up, it is unclear how valid this claim is. From the start of this article on National Review:

Judge Merchan Flags Online Post Claiming Inappropriate Jury Discussion of Trump Hush-Money Trial | National Review

The authenticity of the post was not clear.

www.nationalreview.com

The judge in the Trump hush-money case notified the prosecutor and the former president’s legal team Friday of a social-media post from an individual who suggested that a juror inappropriately discussed the details of the trial with him, but the authenticity of the post was not clear.

I cite this because although National Review doesn't like Trump that much, they've been fairly critical of the trial. So they'd obviously be biased towards criticism of it. Given the fact they instead give a note of caution, that seems a reason to (at least for now) be cautious of this claim.

 

[iluvatar5150]

"With the intent of committing other crimes." WHAT WERE THE OTHER CRIMES!

Is there something wrong with your browser? Are you only reading my comments after hitting the “Insert Quote” button?

Here are those other crimes, for the third time:

“ violation of federal campaign finance limits, unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and tax fraud.[a]”

Even if there were other crimes that influenced the election, that would then be a federal case. So why on earth wad it tried in a state court?

Are you truly interested in the answer to that question or are you just using it as an excuse to complain?

 

[ralliann]

​

​

​

It is also new york post. I heard it first on Fox news

 

[ralliann]

If you are going to make a claim like this, it is incumbent to offer a link on it.

Anyway, having looked it up, it is unclear how valid this claim is. From the start of this article on National Review:

Judge Merchan Flags Online Post Claiming Inappropriate Jury Discussion of Trump Hush-Money Trial | National Review

The authenticity of the post was not clear.

www.nationalreview.com

The judge in the Trump hush-money case notified the prosecutor and the former president’s legal team Friday of a social-media post from an individual who suggested that a juror inappropriately discussed the details of the trial with him, but the authenticity of the post was not clear.

I cite this because although National Review doesn't like Trump that much, they've been fairly critical of the trial. So they'd obviously be biased towards criticism of it. Given the fact they instead give a note of caution, that seems a reason to (at least for now) be cautious of this claim.

I was just watching the news and commented on what They said. It looks like you found that just fine.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

There's no legal requirement that it be identified by a single juror. Each juror can have their answer and he need not be convicted of doing the crime.

Precisely! Nowhere in America has this ever been a thing! Only in Communist China, the Soviet Union, or a third-world banana Republic in South America is this a thing. So please wake up and realize thatn just because the Hudge presiding over involving your most hated person, allowing the jury to just make up whatever federal crime to fit their decision is not just. This was clearly a case looking for a crime. Not a case about a crime that occurred.

 

[ralliann]

It seems this was a professional online troll. Newsmax apparently fell for this, a true hoax haha.
i

Newsmax Touts Dubious Trump Trial Facebook Post: ‘This Needs to Be a Mistrial Immediately’

A Newsmax host and guest credulously accepted as fact a random Facebook comment purporting to be the cousin of a juror in Donald Trump's New York criminal trial.

www.mediaite.com

So did the New York post evidently.....But then again wasn't it the new York post that claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was real??

 

[Fantine]

The person used a pseudonym--Anderson, known to be a troll and spammer.

 

[Brihaha]

So did the New York post evidently.....But then again wasn't it the new York post that claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was real??

You are definitely asking the wrong person this question, as I know little about either Hunter or the NY Post.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Here are those other crimes, for the third time:

“ violation of federal campaign finance limits, unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and tax fraud.[a]”

"Violation of FEDERAL campaign finance limits" = federal offens tried in a federal court. Plus, no evidence was presented in the hearings to suggest that Trump actually did such.

"unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election" = federal offense tried in a federal court. Again, not evidence presented in the case demonstrating this as a fact.

"tax fraud.[a"

Yes, I noticed you forgot to delete the "[a" from the copy/paste you used from your unidentified source. But again. Show me what evidence was presented that demonstrates Trump was hiding "tax fraud," and I will show you that this was a mistral that should have been done in FEDERAL COURT!

 

[Oompa Loompa]

So did the New York post evidently.....But then again wasn't it the new York post that claimed the Hunter Biden laptop was real??

Yes. The New York post confirmed the laptop was real long before the FBI were willing to admit it. Which is why the left strong-armed Facebook, Google, and Twittter to lable it as "false information" or "Russian subversion" so people would stop asking questions. Three years ago, people were literally thrown in jail for suggesting that the Hunter Biden laptop was legitimate and should be investigated. Of course, this was in 2020 where the DNC and the DOJ used their totalerian power to force people to shut up and stop asking questions.

 

[ralliann]

Yes. The New York post confirmed the laptop was real long before the FBI were willing to admit it. Which is why the left strong-armed Facebook, Google, and Twittter to lable it as "false information" or "Russian subversion" so people would stop asking questions. Three years ago, people were literally thrown in jail for suggesting that the Hunter Biden laptop was legitimate and should be investigated. Of course, this was in 2020 where the DNC and the DOJ used their totalerian power to force people to shut up and stop asking questions.

Yep.

 

[rambot]

Precisely! Nowhere in America has this ever been a thing!

Well, it's been a thing since that particular law was written.
When was it written?