NY vs. Trump - Hush Money Trial

[Grifman]

And after his contempt hearing yesterday, Trump promptly violates his gag order again this morning;

[Smoove_B]

I genuinely don't know anymore if he's incapable of keeping his mouth shut, if he truly believes he's untouchable or if he's intentionally doing all this because he knows that being thrown in a jail cell will boost his likelihood of being elected again.

[TheMix]

My gut says the first.

I don't believe that he ever learned any kind of self-control. Though he also likely believes he's untouchable. I'm just not sure he's aware enough to even understand that what he is doing would require him to be "untouchable".

[LawBeefaroni]

If past results are any indication, he's right. He has seved no jail time for a career built on breaking the law and violating every ethical standard that exists. He was elected president of the United States for fuck's sake. He was vested $1B in a scam company yesterday.

You can blame him for a lot but it's hard to blame him for thinking that he's untouchable when it's been proven time and again. His only punishment has been made to sit in boring courtrooms without fast food. Which he hates so he probably thinks it is total persecution.

[Kraken]

My gut says the first.

I don't believe that he ever learned any kind of self-control. Though he also likely believes he's untouchable. I'm just not sure he's aware enough to even understand that what he is doing would require him to be "untouchable".

Futhermore, if he testifies he is certain to perjure himself. Truth is whatever he believes at a given moment.

[Kurth]

And after his contempt hearing yesterday, Trump promptly violates his gag order again this morning;

Wasn't that segment taped before his contempt hearing yesterday?

Also, while those statements about Cohen certainly seem to fall within the gag order, it's troubling to me that any defendant would be precluded from defending himself in public statements. When Merchan expanded the gag order earlier this month, he said he was doing it to protect witnesses and those participating in the trial from Trump's attacks. But these statements Trump made about Cohen are facts. He is a convicted felon. He is an admitted liar. Feels wrong to me that Trump can't say so in his defense.

Obviously, Trump has a long and tortured relationship with the truth. I don't think he should be able to spew his false bullshit all around Truth Social or to whatever cable news lackey wants to give him air time. And people who have nothing to do with the charges against him - family members of the court or the lawyers or witnesses - should be off limits.

But if Trump wants to attack Michael Cohen by pointing out repeatedly that he's a convicted felon and a liar, that seems like it should be fair game.

All that said, I hope he really does violate the order in some spectacular way that results in him being jailed. That would be outstanding!

[GreenGoo]

It's possible to defend yourself in public without making comments on witnesses, court proceedings, or judges' daughters. If you're not an idiot.

[Zarathud]

Trump can say those things IN COURT. Not in the newspapers and on TV where he can prejudice the jury and inflame the public before testimony is given.

[Pyperkub]

I genuinely don't know anymore if he's incapable of keeping his mouth shut, if he truly believes he's untouchable or if he's intentionally doing all this because he knows that being thrown in a jail cell will boost his likelihood of being elected again.

He blurted out National Security secrets and burned intelligence assets as President. It's definitely the first.

[LordMortis]

He was such a daily fuck up as president with so many things vying for attention, I'd totally forgotten those things. It's such a waterfall of how bad he was and how much damage he's done that it's impossible to keep straight unless you have an exceptional memory or are a biographer. "On this day in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020..." to say nothing of 2016. Ugh. I'm getting triggered. They must love owning me.

[LawBeefaroni]

He was such a daily fuck up as president with so many things vying for attention, I'd totally forgotten those things. It's such a waterfall of how bad he was and how much damage he's done that it's impossible to keep straight unless you have an exceptional memory or are a biographer. "On this day in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020..." to say nothing of 2016. Ugh. I'm getting triggered. They must love owning me.

Relive those halcyon days in real time:

https://octopusoverlords.com/forum/view ... 1#p2438101

[Smoove_B]

It was 4 years ago this week that he was advising us to consider drinking or injecting bleach. And now he's falling asleep in court. Those wheels of justice turn slow...

[Holman]

He was such a daily fuck up as president with so many things vying for attention, I'd totally forgotten those things. It's such a waterfall of how bad he was and how much damage he's done that it's impossible to keep straight unless you have an exceptional memory or are a biographer. "On this day in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020..." to say nothing of 2016. Ugh. I'm getting triggered. They must love owning me.

Relive those halcyon days in real time:

https://octopusoverlords.com/forum/view ... 1#p2438101

It's remarkable how correctly prescient it was possible to be even in the first days of that wretched administration.

And then there's Rip.

[waitingtoconnect]

If past results are any indication, he's right. He has seved no jail time for a career built on breaking the law and violating every ethical standard that exists. He was elected president of the United States for fuck's sake. He was vested $1B in a scam company yesterday.

You can blame him for a lot but it's hard to blame him for thinking that he's untouchable when it's been proven time and again. His only punishment has been made to sit in boring courtrooms without fast food. Which he hates so he probably thinks it is total persecution.

Exactly he and his businesses have had over 1000 cases brought against them and they usually win. He’s teflon Don.

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

That or when the jury retires their names will be leaked and they will in fear refuse to convict. Or the judge will have to call a mistrial to protect them.

[LordMortis]

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

I can't see how there won't be.

[Kurth]

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

I can't see how there won't be.

+1

[Kraken]

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

I can't see how there won't be.

+1

+2. I just assume that the fix is in, because it always is. The best we're going to get is the thousand cuts he's taking while the trial goes on.

It looks like SCOTUS is going to slow-walk the spurious immunity decision long enough to ensure that the most important case can't go forward before the election.

[Kurth]

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

I can't see how there won't be.

+1

+2. I just assume that the fix is in, because it always is. The best we're going to get is the thousand cuts he's taking while the trial goes on.

Just to be clear, that’s not “the fix.”

It’s the system. Feature, not a bug.

Just cause the outcome may not (will likely not) be what we want, it doesn’t mean the justice system has malfunctioned or is rigged.

[Kraken]

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

I can't see how there won't be.

+1

+2. I just assume that the fix is in, because it always is. The best we're going to get is the thousand cuts he's taking while the trial goes on.

Just to be clear, that’s not “the fix.”

It’s the system. Feature, not a bug.

Just cause the outcome may not (will likely not) be what we want, it doesn’t mean the justice system has malfunctioned or is rigged.

Fair enough. Having been through it multiple times myself, I do respect the integrity of the jury selection process. Otherwise I stand by what I wrote: the jury will not convict, but the trial itself will ding trump's support.

[Blackhawk]

It’s the system. Feature, not a bug.

Something can be a feature, but not a bug, and still be a flaw.

[LordMortis]

I fully expect there is a trump loyalist on the jury and it will be deadlocked.

I can't see how there won't be.

+1

+2. I just assume that the fix is in, because it always is. The best we're going to get is the thousand cuts he's taking while the trial goes on.

Just to be clear, that’s not “the fix.”

It’s the system. Feature, not a bug.

Just cause the outcome may not (will likely not) be what we want, it doesn’t mean the justice system has malfunctioned or is rigged.

+1 again. For good or ill. 100 guilty men go free and all that...

[GreenGoo]

It’s the system. Feature, not a bug.

Something can be a feature, but not a bug, and still be a flaw.

Bad design is bad design. Especially obvious if the outcome is accurate to the design, but the design was intended to produce something else. We all know why the electoral college exists. And it might have even made sense at the time of creation. Is it creating reasonable outcomes today? If we assume the purpose was equal representation, I'd say it does not produce reasonable outcomes, despite working as designed.

Yes, looking at a different, but similar, philosophically, situation.

However, I'm with LM with regard to erring on the side of caution when it comes to government punishment of civilians. At the same time, a single corrupt individual shouldn't result in a complete miscarriage of justice. Do I have a solution? No. This is not my field of study.

[Kurth]

It’s the system. Feature, not a bug.

Something can be a feature, but not a bug, and still be a flaw.

Bad design is bad design. Especially obvious if the outcome is accurate to the design, but the design was intended to produce something else. We all know why the electoral college exists. And it might have even made sense at the time of creation. Is it creating reasonable outcomes today? If we assume the purpose was equal representation, I'd say it does not produce reasonable outcomes, despite working as designed.

Yes, looking at a different, but similar, philosophically, situation.

However, I'm with LM with regard to erring on the side of caution when it comes to government punishment of civilians. At the same time, a single corrupt individual shouldn't result in a complete miscarriage of justice. Do I have a solution? No. This is not my field of study.

Why would a single juror refusing to find Trump guilty beyond a reasonable doubt be “corrupt,” or am I misunderstanding your post?

[Unagi]

I believe they are speaking to the idea that a juror goes in, unwilling to hear the evidence and is only there to corrupt the process - not participate in it honestly.

[Kurth]

I believe they are speaking to the idea that a juror goes in, unwilling to hear the evidence and is only there to corrupt the process - not participate in it honestly.

Fair enough. And that’s always a possibility, although the jury selection process is designed to mitigate that risk.

But even in that instance, I’d lean away from calling the justice system rigged or fixed.

[Unagi]

I believe they are speaking to the idea that a juror goes in, unwilling to hear the evidence and is only there to corrupt the process - not participate in it honestly.

Fair enough. And that’s always a possibility, although the jury selection process is designed to mitigate that risk.

But even in that instance, I’d lean away from calling the justice system rigged or fixed.

I agree. It's a weakness, not a rigging or fixing.

I don't know if the mitigation is enough, and so - it may be accurate to say "the fix is in". alas.

[Jaymon]

The ability to find 18 people in New York, or anywhere in the USA who are impartial and have no preexisting bias about Trump seems ...slim.

[Unagi]

But, courts deal with this concept/issue all the time... and they instruct jurors very clearly that broadly speaking; they don't have to have "no pre-existing views" - they need to be able to weigh the evidence in this case and feel like they can weigh it on its merits.

[GreenGoo]

Why would a single juror refusing to find Trump guilty beyond a reasonable doubt be “corrupt,” or am I misunderstanding your post?

In the context of this discussion where a MAGA member has managed to make it onto the jury and refused the reality presented to him.

[Alefroth]

I believe they are speaking to the idea that a juror goes in, unwilling to hear the evidence and is only there to corrupt the process - not participate in it honestly.

That's what I figured when the term 'Trump loyalist' was used.

[Blackhawk]

I believe they are speaking to the idea that a juror goes in, unwilling to hear the evidence and is only there to corrupt the process - not participate in it honestly.

Fair enough. And that’s always a possibility, although the jury selection process is designed to mitigate that risk.

But even in that instance, I’d lean away from calling the justice system rigged or fixed.

That is what I was referring to, the ability of a single individual to sideline the entire system for personal motives. And yeah, while that's a flaw in the system (despite my not knowing the solution), I wouldn't call that rigged. It's not a plan, it's an outside manipulation. The flaw is the system not having a counter for it.

[YellowKing]

The worst thing Trump ever did to this country was to demonstrate that the assumptions society runs on (that people are generally moral and follow the rules) is a house of cards that is easily toppled.

[Carpet_pissr]

The worst thing Trump ever did to this country was to demonstrate that the assumptions society runs on (that people are generally moral and follow the rules) is a house of cards that is easily toppled.

Best, or worst? Better to continue living in the Matrix?

[YellowKing]

Considering I don't think this can be fixed in my lifetime, I'd have rather continued living in the Matrix.

[Blackhawk]

The first step to fixing something is to recognize it. If we ever do manage to fix things, it'll be because Trump showed us what was broken.

If we can't fix things, it doesn't matter.

If he'd never exposed the flaws, they might have gone much further before we saw the problem.

[Alefroth]

Thanks Trump!

[Blackhawk]

Terrible people doing terrible things is often a prerequisite for both recognizing how terrible the thing is, and deciding to stop it from happening again.

[Carpet_pissr]

Considering I don't think this can be fixed in my lifetime, I'd have rather continued living in the Matrix.

Yeah, I should have added that it was a serious, non-snarky question.

Happy and clueless or miserable and informed? Choose!

[YellowKing]

I know it's a problem that needed to be exposed in order to be fixed, but the fact remains that government still functioned somewhat with the house of cards in place. As long as politicians believed that they would be held accountable for their actions, there was some semblance of order. When Trump demonstrated that they, in fact, could get away with anything with his popularity as the umbrella, it all went to hell.

I kind of equate it to shoplifting. One shoplifter knows there are cameras, security guards, etc. so they refrain from stealing most of the time. Trump came along and introduced the flash mob smash and grab technique, and now all of a sudden all those shoplifters that were scared individually have safety in numbers to take whatever they want.

My only glimmer of optimism is that it's entirely possible that this scheme falls apart without Trump. I'm not certain the party gets to enjoy those protections from their voters without someone at the head that has such a devoted cult-like following.

[Carpet_pissr]

I know it's a problem that needed to be exposed in order to be fixed, but the fact remains that government still functioned somewhat with the house of cards in place. As long as politicians believed that they would be held accountable for their actions, there was some semblance of order. When Trump demonstrated that they, in fact, could get away with anything with his popularity as the umbrella, it all went to hell.

I kind of equate it to shoplifting. One shoplifter knows there are cameras, security guards, etc. so they refrain from stealing most of the time. Trump came along and introduced the flash mob smash and grab technique, and now all of a sudden all those shoplifters that were scared individually have safety in numbers to take whatever they want.

My only glimmer of optimism is that it's entirely possible that this scheme falls apart without Trump. I'm not certain the party gets to enjoy those protections from their voters without someone at the head that has such a devoted cult-like following.

I doubt the behavior learned from Trump will go away with him. He showed them a wildly successful model. I doubt people will just ignore that if he were suddenly Thanos snapped out of existence today