Political Roundtable Part XXXII

[doclinkin]

My guess is the NY porn star hush money case ends in a mistrial. That at least one juror has been threatened or paid off to scuttle the whole thing.

[AFM]

Who amongst us hasn't paid off a porn star to keep her from talking? Let him cast the first stone

[pancakes3]

it ain't the act, it's the coverup. it's always the coverup.

[dobrojim]

Agreed but that said, he would have been unlikely to have won in '16 but for the coverup.
Just imagine, no 3 Federalist Society tRump SCOTUS justices. The world, or our country at
least, would be a much kinder and gentler place.

[Zonkerbl]

If I were a juror, I would not be convinced by the defense attacking Stormy Daniels incessantly - whether she told the truth or not is immaterial to the case. In fact, the hysterical objection to her story from Trump proves to me that he cares deeply about her story not getting out.

Furthermore, focusing all your attention on Michael Cohen is a waste of time - the prosecution has corroborating evidence. The defense's assertion that it was impossible to classify "legal retainer" as a reimbursement is preposterous. Also, if Michael Cohen is a liar, he was Trump's liar. The while organization was built around lies - if anything, that also supports the prosecution's case.

I mean, the hurdle is high and if there's any Trump sympathizers on the jury they might use that as an excuse to acquit, despite the overwhelming evidence of his guilt. I trust the jury, I guess. We made the hurdle high for a reason. Not so that billionaires could get away with manipulating our elections but still.

[dobrojim]

Ailito is making an incredibly strong case for reform of SCOTUS and abolishing lifetime tenure.

My opinion - a justice should serve an 18 (max) term but could be re-nominated and re-confirmed.
And obviously there should be explicit and firm rules as to judicial ethics. It's notable that this
is the first time (I'm not a SCOTUS historian so maybe there have been other examples) of
really needing these reforms.

[Zonkerbl]

I think the SCOTUS should be expanded to 100 seats with panels selected at random

[pancakes3]

If I were a juror, I would not be convinced by the defense attacking Stormy Daniels incessantly - whether she told the truth or not is immaterial to the case. In fact, the hysterical objection to her story from Trump proves to me that he cares deeply about her story not getting out.

Furthermore, focusing all your attention on Michael Cohen is a waste of time - the prosecution has corroborating evidence. The defense's assertion that it was impossible to classify "legal retainer" as a reimbursement is preposterous. Also, if Michael Cohen is a liar, he was Trump's liar. The while organization was built around lies - if anything, that also supports the prosecution's case.

I mean, the hurdle is high and if there's any Trump sympathizers on the jury they might use that as an excuse to acquit, despite the overwhelming evidence of his guilt. I trust the jury, I guess. We made the hurdle high for a reason. Not so that billionaires could get away with manipulating our elections but still.

The weakest point of the prosecution's case is that it's really hard to prove that Trump directed the payment scheme in a direct manner. A competent defense would focus on how busy Trump was at the time, and how it was Cohen, Weisselberg, et al, who made the decisions about the practical logistics specific to the falsification of business records, not Trump himself.

It's actually not that difficult of a defense. You just need to present enough evidence that the jury can say "well, beyond a reasonable doubt? it's reasonable to think that Trump isn't giving out granular commands, especially when he was just elected and at the white house and all of this took place in NYC..." and boom, acquittal.

But the strategy was a mess, focusing on contesting things that really isn't being contested, and discrediting witnesses without providing witnesses of their own.

But that's the real problem, Trump doesn't have any witnesses. Cohen flipped, Weisselberg seemingly is refusing to take any more heat for Trump, and Trump himself is refusing to testify. Couldn't find a jr accountant to say "yeah, all the emails and instructions I got were directly from Cohen and Weisselberg, and Trump never contacted me directly." And that introduces reasonable doubt. Didn't get Don Jr or Eric on the stand saying "we were the trustees at the time and my father had very limited oversight over the finances of the company, and this was done by Cohen/Weisselberg."

Not only was Defense not able to find a patsy witness, prosecution brought in a former Trump Org employee to say that Trump signed all the checks. Dummy signs all the checks, EVEN THE ONES HE KNOWS IS GOING FOR ILLEGAL HUSH MONEY PAYMENTS. Complete unforced error dating back decades. Make Weisselberg sign those.

[Pointgod]

Ailito is making an incredibly strong case for reform of SCOTUS and abolishing lifetime tenure.

My opinion - a justice should serve an 18 (max) term but could be re-nominated and re-confirmed.
And obviously there should be explicit and firm rules as to judicial ethics. It's notable that this
is the first time (I'm not a SCOTUS historian so maybe there have been other examples) of
really needing these reforms.

What bull is Alito spewing now?

[pancakes3]

I think the SCOTUS should be expanded to 100 seats with panels selected at random

It really should. Political bias capture aside, the idea that 9 lawyers have sufficient baseline knowledge to competently rule on every legal issue imaginable, ranging from antitrust to prison sentencing to maritime law is laughable.

Roberts, Kavannaugh, and Coney-Barrett were election law lawyers before they got elevated to the bench.
Sotomayor was a prosecutor, and then worked some as an IP litigator.
Gorsuch did white collar defense for a stint.
Kagan was a 1A attorney, left the law for 5 years to be dean of Harvard Law, and worked as the Solicitor General for a year before being elevated to the bench.
Brown-Jackson worked a solid 10 years (longest stretch as an actively practicing litigator by my estimation) in criminal defense.
Thomas worked for 3 years as a prosecutor before moving to DC to bounce around various government agencies, not as a litigator
Alito worked for 9 years as a federal prosecutor before being elevated to the bench.

It's all very narrow, not to mention shallow. Gorsuch, a self-styled indian-law expert, did so in part due to his own curiosity and in part because being a judge in the 10th Circuit (Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, NM, Kansas, Oklahoma) forced him to preside over disproportionately more indian law cases than most.

Most subject-matter expertise, is gleaned by virtue of having already been tapped to be a judge, and not as a practicing attorney.

Roberts - History major.
Thomas - English lit
Alito - History and political science
Sotomayor - History
Kagan - History, masters in politics
Gorsuch - Political science
Kavanaugh - History
Coney-Barrett - English lit and minor in French
Brown-Jackson - Government

Not a lot of diversity in collegiate training either. No economics or STEM backgrounds.

John Paul Stevens, an antitrust attorney, the go-to economics guy on the court for decades who authored several very influential opinions re: the commerce clause and eminent domain that significantly affected how US domestic economics functioned, was an English major. I guess he went to UChi for law school and that's good enough. And he was a good justice! Probably the best justice since Earl Warren.

[Zonkerbl]

Ailito is making an incredibly strong case for reform of SCOTUS and abolishing lifetime tenure.

My opinion - a justice should serve an 18 (max) term but could be re-nominated and re-confirmed.
And obviously there should be explicit and firm rules as to judicial ethics. It's notable that this
is the first time (I'm not a SCOTUS historian so maybe there have been other examples) of
really needing these reforms.

What bull is Alito spewing now?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/29/supreme-court-alito-recuse-flag-jan-6/

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=5TC5f3g1PdJWZkRwcrzQlQ&s=19

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

34-0

Guilty on all counts!

Yeah, baby!

[Zonkerbl]

Crook. Disgusting criminal. Also technically a rapist.

[closg00]

This Trump guilty verdict will not impact the election IMO, the more dangerous cases for Trump are the Jan 6 and documents cases, and Trump is getting an assist from Judge Cannon and SCOTUS.

[Zonkerbl]

This Trump guilty verdict will not impact the election IMO, the more dangerous cases for Trump are the Jan 6 and documents cases, and Trump is getting an assist from Judge Cannon and SCOTUS.

There's polling from a few weeks ago that a significant chunk of undecideds would vote against Trump if he were to be convicted. And to be honest this is exactly the kind of case that a low info voter would be influenced by - illegally conspiring to cover up fornicating a porn star. I mean dayum. I don't think even the dems could screw this up. "Donald Trump has been convicted for conspiring to cover up fornicating with a porn star." That's it. That's the ad.

[doclinkin]

34-0

Guilty on all counts!

Yeah, baby!

I swore his people would flip one juror with bribes or intimidation. But New Yawk is too tough. Too much honor and won't be backed down. I love New York.

[closg00]

This Trump guilty verdict will not impact the election IMO, the more dangerous cases for Trump are the Jan 6 and documents cases, and Trump is getting an assist from Judge Cannon and SCOTUS.

There's polling from a few weeks ago that a significant chunk of undecideds would vote against Trump if he were to be convicted. And to be honest this is exactly the kind of case that a low info voter would be influenced by - illegally conspiring to cover up fornicating a porn star. I mean dayum. I don't think even the dems could screw this up. "Donald Trump has been convicted for conspiring to cover up fornicating with a porn star." That's it. That's the ad.

I predict there will be a temporary dip for Trump, but voters have very short memories, and things will go back to "normal"
Also, the Democrat's are pathetically weak at messaging against Trump and his legal problems, the statement they put out today was lame, they don't know how to fight against someone like Trump.

[Pointgod]

This Trump guilty verdict will not impact the election IMO, the more dangerous cases for Trump are the Jan 6 and documents cases, and Trump is getting an assist from Judge Cannon and SCOTUS.

There's polling from a few weeks ago that a significant chunk of undecideds would vote against Trump if he were to be convicted. And to be honest this is exactly the kind of case that a low info voter would be influenced by - illegally conspiring to cover up fornicating a porn star. I mean dayum. I don't think even the dems could screw this up. "Donald Trump has been convicted for conspiring to cover up fornicating with a porn star." That's it. That's the ad.

I predict there will be a temporary dip for Trump, but voters have very short memories, and things will go back to "normal"
Also, the Democrat's are pathetically weak at messaging against Trump and his legal problems, the statement they put out today was lame, they don't know how to fight against someone like Trump.

Enjoy that actual justice was served for someone who’s escaped accountability all of his life. Don’t be a downer….54 more guilty counts to go!

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

?t=wYwNjzjuUkesQ3czZ4iIgQ&s=19