Verdict Wednesday!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Banana Republic....

https://apnews.com/article/fact-check-trump-trial-jury-unanimous-verdict-679053515836

Nope, I'll believe Jonathan Turley, over Melissa Goldin, a hack journalist with zippy bonafides.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Turley

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=melissa+goldin&title=Special%3ASearch&ns0=1

Goldin is part of the fact checking team at AP. But, you don't have to take anyone's word for anything. The instructions are public.

https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/People%20v.%20DJT%20Jury%20Instructions%20and%20Charges%20FINAL%205-23-24.pdf

Yes, and Jonathan Turley is correct.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

I thought Trump was all about different states having their own laws. He should get some better legal advice about the laws in New York. Before he breaks them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

What law was broken?

Campaign finance.
He had an entire media outlet contributing to his campaign with a contribution that is near impossible to calculate in its value.

Which media outlet?

PP is referring to The National Enquirer. They were catching and killing negative stories about Trump, and making up $hit about his opponents.

That isn’t illegal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

They are given the instructions. Not on paper. If they need them again. They ask for them again apparently.

That said... anyone understand why they can't have the instructions on paper to refer to as they need?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

What law was broken?

Campaign finance.
He had an entire media outlet contributing to his campaign with a contribution that is near impossible to calculate in its value.

Which media outlet?

PP is referring to The National Enquirer. They were catching and killing negative stories about Trump, and making up $hit about his opponents.

That isn’t illegal.

The illegal stuff is laid out in the charges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The idea that the Trump campaign conspired with a media outlet to not only bury negative stories about him, but to plant stories about his opponent is insane to me.
Like holy hell that is so corrupt and illegal.
It’s not about the hush money.

What law was broken?

Campaign finance.
He had an entire media outlet contributing to his campaign with a contribution that is near impossible to calculate in its value.

Which media outlet?

PP is referring to The National Enquirer. They were catching and killing negative stories about Trump, and making up $hit about his opponents.

That isn’t illegal.

Didn't say it was, just answering the question of which media outlet they're referring to. Although an argument could be made that what the National Enquirer was doing was contributing to his campaign, and if you put $ figures to it, would exceed legal limits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

I'd like to know where in the constitution it says that jurors should be given paper instructions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

They are given the instructions. Not on paper. If they need them again. They ask for them again apparently.

That said... anyone understand why they can't have the instructions on paper to refer to as they need?

They should have access to the instructions at all times. I don’t understand why this isn’t the case. it’s very shady. Don’t care the reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

They are given the instructions. Not on paper. If they need them again. They ask for them again apparently.

That said... anyone understand why they can't have the instructions on paper to refer to as they need?

They should have access to the instructions at all times. I don’t understand why this isn’t the case. it’s very shady. Don’t care the reason.

Ok. The poster that asked does care to know the reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

I'd like to know where in the constitution it says that jurors should be given paper instructions.

Jurors need to fully understand their job. Not everyone can process information the same way. Some need a more permanent reference. The law is literal. Every word is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Wow. That’s smells unconstitutional. I smell a lawsuit after this trial.

I'd like to know where in the constitution it says that jurors should be given paper instructions.

Jurors need to fully understand their job. Not everyone can process information the same way. Some need a more permanent reference. The law is literal. Every word is important.

That doesn't make not giving the jury the instructions in writing, unconstitutional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I guess not in New York.
Jurors are not given the instructions in New York.

Turley's claim that no juror instructions were made available seems really flaky... because they are right here: https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/press/PDFs/People%20v.%20DJT%20Jury%20Instructions%20and%20Charges%20FINAL%205-23-24.pdf