pipistrelle wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 6:12 am
Just like when the home team wins the Super Bowl.
It looks remarkably similar to a sports ball win. Same bar/pub from several years past. Same everything except the video on the main TV. Fakery?
Any reason to think that other than the fact that the watch party was held in a sports bar?
Every sports win celebration I've ever seen usually has a sea of clothing in whatever the team colors are.
It is fake. I thought it looked like the mugshot celebration video, which is also fake. This article explains everything:
neonzx wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 6:35 am
It looks remarkably similar to a sports ball win. Same bar/pub from several years past. Same everything except the video on the main TV. Fakery?
Any reason to think that other than the fact that the watch party was held in a sports bar?
Every sports win celebration I've ever seen usually has a sea of clothing in whatever the team colors are.
It is fake. I thought it looked like the mugshot celebration video, which is also fake. This article explains everything:
A little off topic to the upcoming press rant but here goes.
I keep reading how this will be reversed because some defense expert was not allowed to testify to whatever he wanted to say. What I never heard was whether any offer of proof was made, (thereby a record for the higher courts). So, to the NY lawyers, do offers of proof exist and if not , how do you show the higher courts a mistake was made not allowing in certain evidence.
A PS here, also off topic. My husband says Alcatraz should be remodeled and named Mar e lockup.
Fiascoist wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 10:42 am
A little off topic to the upcoming press rant but here goes.
I keep reading how this will be reversed because some defense expert was not allowed to testify to whatever he wanted to say. What I never heard was whether any offer of proof was made, (thereby a record for the higher courts). So, to the NY lawyers, do offers of proof exist and if not , how do you show the higher courts a mistake was made not allowing in certain evidence.
A PS here, also off topic. My husband says Alcatraz should be remodeled and named Mar e lockup.
That was discussed upthread as it occurred. It's back there someplace. The defense wanted to let their expert use the witness stand as a lecturn to lecture the jury. That's not how it works. The defense atty's asks their witness questions. The witness answers. Afterwards the prosecution cross exam. Again the witness answers. The defense can redirect if they think a point needs to be clarified. Both sides can object at any time if they think the questions or the testimony are improper. There was plenty of opportunity for their expert to explain everything he knows through a series of well crafted questions. He's just not allowed to give a speech.
tfg asserted that Biden approved the Russian oil pipeline in return for $3.5M being paid to his family. Actionable?
What a liar. All lies.
Venezuela has experienced a 72% drop in crime due to releasing all their criminals into the US. Also the Congo released all their criminals into the US.
Senator Susan Collins, famous for her bullshit tut tutting while supporting MAGA at all important points, wrung her hands as she made the following statement:
It is fundamental to our American system of justice that the government prosecutes cases because of alleged criminal conduct regardless of who the defendant happens to be. In this case the opposite has happened. The district attorney, who campaigned on a promise to prosecute Donald Trump, brought these charges precisely because of who the defendant was rather than because of any specified criminal conduct.
The political underpinnings of this case further blur the lines between the judicial system and the electoral system, and this verdict likely will be the subject of a protracted appeals process.
Josh Marshall has pointed out that her accusations about Bragg's campaign appear to be completely false
Josh Marshall
@joshtpm
As far as I can tell this claim from Collins, that Bragg promised to prosecute Trump, is simply false. She seems to be confusing him with Tish James. I didn’t remember him doing this. But I couldn’t be certain. But in a humorous kind of way the proof that he didn’t comes …
2/ in the form of an article from Byron York from a year ago. The article headline claims the charges were a promise kept. But if you read the actual article it’s entirely made up of trying to contort Braggs words into such a promise. York also made a lot of hay about …
3/ other people who promised this. But remember that in reality other people are not Alvin Bragg. It’s inherently hard to prove a negative with a google search but Byron actually provides a great service. Because he clearly scoured the record for everything Bragg ever said …
4/ about Trump and he didn’t come up with jack. Read the article here.
Back in the good old days I remember when courts would prohibit some felons from making money off their conviction. This generally applied to writing books. Do they do that anymore? Perhaps the higher courts have baned such practices.
zekeb wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2024 2:15 pm
Back in the good old days I remember when courts would prohibit some felons from making money off their conviction. This generally applied to writing books. Do they do that anymore? Perhaps the higher courts have baned such practices.
The current law simply requires that victims be notified of income over $10,000 (I think) so they can sue for the money.
Crime in New York City
Trump repeated his familiar claim that, while Manhattan prosecutors have been focusing on him, New York City has been experiencing record-high violent crime. He said this time that “you have violent crime all over this city at levels that nobody’s ever seen before.”
Facts First: Trump’s claim is not even close to true. Violent crime in New York City – and violent crime in Manhattan in particular – has plummeted since the early 1990s and is today nowhere near record levels.
Michael Cohen’s crimes
Facts First: Trump’s claim that Cohen got into trouble simply because of his non-Trump-related activities, such as those related to taxis and loans, is not true. First, Cohen’s case was referred to federal prosecutors in New York by the special counsel, Robert Mueller, who was appointed to investigate any connections between the Trump campaign and Russia. Second, Cohen’s three-year prison sentence in 2018 was for multiple crimes, some of which were directly related to Trump.
Biden and the case
Trump repeated his frequent claim that the Manhattan case in which Trump was convicted “is all done by Biden and his people” and “in total conjunction with white house and the DOJ,” the federal Department of Justice.
Facts First: There is no basis for Trump’s claim. There is no evidence that President Joe Biden, his White House aides or the federal Justice Department had any role in launching or running Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecution – and Bragg, a Democrat, is a locally elected official who does not report to the federal government. The indictment in the case was approved by a grand jury of ordinary citizens.
The judge and an expert in election law
Trump claimed that, because of Judge Juan Merchan, “we weren’t allowed to use our election expert under any circumstances.” He claimed that this expert on election law was ready to testify “and the judge knocked him out, said you can’t testify.”
Facts First: Trump’s claim that Merchan refused to allow Trump’s team to use this witness “under any circumstances” is false. Merchan did not prohibit the potential witness, former Federal Election Commission chairman Bradley Smith, from testifying. Rather, Merchan limited what Smith was allowed to testify about. Merchan decided in March that Smith could provide background information about the FEC and define certain terms relevant to this case but could not opine on whether Trump broke federal election laws or offer opinions about how to interpret or apply those laws. After Merchan refused last week to change his mind, Trump’s defense decided not to call Smith as a witness.
Trump supporters try to doxx jurors and post violent threats after his conviction
On social media and web forums, users called for jurors, judges and prosecutors to be killed after the former president was found guilty on 34 felony counts.
Advance Democracy, a non-profit that conducts public interest research, said there has been a high volume of social media posts containing violent rhetoric targeting New York Judge Juan Merchan and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, including a post with Bragg’s purported home address. The group also found posts of the purported addresses of jurors on a fringe internet message board known for pro-Trump content and harassing and violent posts, although it is unclear if any actual jurors had been correctly identified.
The posts, which have been reviewed by NBC News, appear on many of the same websites used by Trump supporters to organize for violence ahead of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. These forums were hotbeds of threats inspired by Trump’s lies about the 2020 election, which he lost, and that the voting system was “rigged” against him. They now feature new threats echoing Trump’s rhetoric and false claims about the hush money trial, including that the judicial system is now “rigged” against him.
“Dox the Jurors. Dox them now,” one user wrote after Trump’s conviction on a website formerly known as “The Donald,” which was popular among participants in the Capitol attack. (That post appears to have been quickly removed by moderators.)
“We need to identify each juror. Then make them miserable. Maybe even suicidal,” wrote another user on the same forum. “1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to washington and hang everyone. That’s the only solution,” wrote another user. “This s--- is out of control.”
“I hope every juror is doxxed and they pay for what they have done,” another user wrote on Trump’s Truth Social platform Thursday. “May God strike them dead. We will on November 5th and they will pay!”
“War,” read a Telegram post from one chapter of the Proud Boys, the far-right group whose former chair and three other members were convicted of seditious conspiracy because of their actions at the Capitol on Jan. 6, just a few months after Trump infamously told the group to “stand back and stand by“ during a 2020 debate.
