In the opinion of the author, getting a unanimous guilty verdict for Trump would impossible. I know we’ve discussed here and there before, but I kind of agree. Although I’m not a lawyer, so I’m not sure how easy or hard it would be to make sure that everyone on the jury could be impartial, i.e., avoiding at least a diehard partisan Trumpist. However, it seems like getting 1 out of 12 members to be secretly in the “I will never vote against Trump” seems hard. Any thoughts? Is Trump effectively immune from prosecution? If so, why do you think the NYC DA is pursuing it? They have to know that an acquittal or hung jury will embolden Trump further. Do you think this is a case of “we prosecute people who break the law, regardless of whether we think we can win”? But then what about all of Trump’s other crimes?
I don’t buy it. Impossible? No way. Maybe this case isn’t the strongest, and there’s no conviction here. (Fuck, there aren’t even charges yet.) But never impossible.
I live in a bubble, so I don’t know how many die hard Trumpers are still die hard. Seems like they’re losing interesting, from my vantage point. Plus, sitting a jury with a majority of non-crazies tends to moderate the worst impulses of some people. I think one or two trump voters who are not full blown MAGA would convict without hesitation.
Remember, many of the trumpers have not heard the evidence against him. One of the members of the Georgia Grand Jury stated something like “If the whole country could see the evidence we wouldn’t be do divided.”
According to cohen the gentleman in question was never his lawyer.
I doubt a diehard Trumper, however many of those there even are in NYC, would even bother responding to a jury summons (remember; they don’t tell you what the trial is until you’re in the courtroom), let alone survive voir dire.
GOP does what the GOP does.
This cracks me up.
“You are reportedly about to engage in an unprecedented abuse of prosecutorial authority: the indictment of a former President of the United States and current declared candidate for that office,” the letter reads.
There is absolutely nothing that protects “a former President of the United States and current declared candidate for that office”. Nothing. A person in that role has the same immunity from prosecution that I do.
My assumption is that this grandstanding is purely because it’s a novelty. I believe that they’re hoping that they can trick people into thinking that just because something hasn’t been done before, that it isn’t allowed. The fact is that people have just done a better job of electing presidents before Trump. (Well, and after, at least so far.)
Suppose for a minute there is an indictment and a trial. Even if there is a hung jury or an acquittal, the testimony will be public, unlike the grand jury. That alone may be enough to sour some potential Trump voters. While I doubt that is the ultimate goal of the DA, at least we will know the details of what the investigation turned up. The media will have field day if the case is strong one. Much would depend on the judge and skill of the DA and I guess, Trump’s lawyers. The whole “former President” thing isn’t a legal argument and ought not be allowed. Cases are supposed to be decided on the evidence.
At the very least, an orange jumpsuit would make the Dumpster harder to see.
Who’s gonna tell him that Congress has no oversight or authority over a district attorney?
Certainly not members of Congress, according to recent news:
When does the judicial branch tell them to fuck off? In latin, of course.
Tell who?
House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, House Oversight Committee Chair Jim Comer, R-Ky., and House Administration Committee Chair Bryan Steil, R-Wis.,
Congress has no authority over the New York Manhattan DA’s office. Alvin Bragg can safely file this nonsense away and ignore it.
Sure, on Earth-One. But as 2016 and 2020 revealed, we’re not on Earth-One any more. 
Well, no argument from me on that point!
However, Congress has no law enforcement arm to act on their jackbooted arrest wishes except to appeal to the DOJ. I’m pretty sure DOJ isn’t going to help them out. It’s not Trump’s DOJ anymore.
They are so far out of their area of oversight it’s not even funny. Well, it’s a little funny, but it’s also batshit nuts.
I envy you your bubble. I live in the Deep South, and the cognitive dissonance that the people around me wrap themselves in is truly astounding. They can explain and hand wave away just about anything negative they hear about any Republican, but Trump in particular. And they could turn a Democrat saving a baby and a litter of kittens from a burning building into kidnapping, beastiality, and being a Woke radical left climate change lunatic.
You know the progression-- he never did any such thing, it’s a Democrat lie and a witch hunt, Deep State! Well, maybe he did something, but it’s perfectly fine, you’re just trying to make it look bad. Well, it’s not great, but whatabout xxx, Hunter Biden, Deep State… Rinse, repeat.
They are threatening to defund his office.
We’ll see what happens. ‘Threaten’ may be as far as they are able to get.