Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

Republicans: Do you know where your political donations are?
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 6:12 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (9 comments) [381 views]

The Oval Office Oaf calls for "Four more years. Pause."
Entertainment by HatetheSwamp     April 24, 2024 2:56 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (6 comments) [108 views]

Trump, Giuliani, Meadows are unindicted co-conspirators in Michigan fake elector case, hearing reveals
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 4:53 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [63 views]

Turley: The "haymaker" in Supreme Court arguments. Chief Justice Roberts. "Openly mocking of DC Circuit."
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 5:59 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (8 comments) [189 views]

pb's Legal Goobers #s 2 & 3: The NY v Trump case is collapsing
Law by HatetheSwamp     April 26, 2024 3:43 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (4 comments) [27 views]

The latest general election polls from this weekend reveal something interesting.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 22, 2024 11:03 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (10 comments) [423 views]

So Ukraine got money.
Military by oldedude     April 24, 2024 3:58 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (6 comments) [92 views]

Donna may be getting her wish granted: Gateway Pundit to file for bankruptcy
Law by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:28 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (1 comments) [37 views]

James Comer hopes for divine intervention to save him from embarrassing impeachment fiasco.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 24, 2024 7:05 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (2 comments) [81 views]

Russia is even more furious over vote by Congress to support Ukraine than MTG.
Politics by Curt_Anderson     April 21, 2024 6:09 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (11 comments) [643 views]

Law selectors, pages, etc.
pb's Legal Goober #3 on Clay and Buck
By HatetheSwamp
November 6, 2023 9:57 am
Category: Law

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

He says that the DC J6 trial is the one most likely to produce a conviction of Trump because of the biased judge and the overwhelming Dem makeup of the jury pool...

...but that appeals to higher courts may very likely keep the trial from happening in 024.

He says that Trump's most vulnerable to the documents charges in Florida but that the judge and jury pool are markedly in Trump’s favor there. He thinks that only one Trump trial will actually happen in 024.

Andy McCarthy, Legal Goober #3, is a former federal prosecutor and knows the practicalities of this stuff. Interestingly, Clay, a lawyer, mentioned that Alan Dershowitz, pb's Legal Goober #1, thinks four trials will take place in 024.

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "pb's Legal Goober #3 on Clay and Buck":

  1. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 10:11 am
    Your favorite lawyers must have a very low opinion of average citizens and their ability as jury members to consider the evidence and testimony, then make an honest and fair decision.

    Not to mention, with the stakes this high, both legal teams will scrutinize perspective jurors during the voir dire process. So if the jurors are biased for or against Trump that's on the prosecution or defense team.

    Incidentally, Trump seems to be losing it in his NY state fraud case. See court updates below.




    nydailynews.com

  2. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 10:23 am

    Well, #3 was on the prosecution side of federal cases for decades. Voir dire is a prisoner of the jury pool, which, in DC which voted 92-5, for the Flatulent Fool in 020. Demented Judge Chutkan ain't granting a change of venue.

    Regarding the NY fraud case. Ho hum. #s 1 and 3 have been saying that it's inevitable:

    1. Trump will lose at trial.
    2. The judgment will be reversed in the end.

    Now, I ain't po. I don't teach in a law school so I'm a prisoner of the opinions of the informed. We'll see.

  3. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 10:31 am
    Trump was asked about his involvement in his [false] 2021 financial statement and responded, "I was busy in the White House."

    "My threshold was China, Russia and keeping our country safe.”

    AG attorney Kevin Wallace then reminded Trump: "Just to clarify the record, you weren’t president in 2021."
    nypost.com

  4. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 10:42 am

    Well. He was for part of January...and for the rest of the year, he believed that he was. Baha.

  5. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 10:49 am
    I haven't heard the word "threshold" used to mean concern before. During his final couple of weeks in office I doubt that "China, Russia and keeping our country safe" was his major concern. He should have said, "I was busy trying to overturn the results of the election!"

  6. by oldedude on November 6, 2023 11:31 am
    Your favorite lawyers must have a very low opinion of average citizens and their ability as jury members to consider the evidence and testimony, then make an honest and fair decision.

    Honestly, You have faith of average citizens? This is a political blog and people don't have a clue what their own laws are or how they're applied. You really think isle or jjpo could put their issues aside and be impartial in a trial? Perhaps Donna or you, but I'm pretty skeptical of that also. If you were part of the jury for any of the trumpster trials could you say that you would honestly be neutral and look at only the evidence presented in the trial?

  7. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 12:27 pm

    FYI, #3's on with that gay Guy Curt never heard of at 3:35 EST.

    x.com

  8. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 12:53 pm

    Wow, Curt. I hope you heard #3 and the gay Guy you never heard of. Guy called the case "rigged." #3 agreed and added that, according to polls, it's winner for Trump politically.

    Before you go there, #3 is as far from being MAGA as a GOP can be. Same with the gay Guy.

  9. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 12:59 pm
    OD,
    This forum is not a cross-section of the population. We are all more opinionated than average. In voir dire we might be asked about our political opinions in social media. Not admitting to our posts could result in mistrial and grounds for an appeal. Most voters are not so politically attuned as us. Polls show that a lot voters are undecided.

    I was summoned a few years ago for jury duty in a cold case murder trial. There were a couple hundred of us prospective jurors. After a couple hours I was dismissed and never even questioned in the voir dire. In Trump’s trials they just need to find a dozen people who could render a fair decision. I could be fair with Trump as the defendant. The evidence is all that matters, not my personal opinion of the defendant.

  10. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 1:37 pm
    HtS,
    The case against Trump is hardly "rigged".

    Trump's defense is self-implicating. Trump claimed that a disclaimer clause, which he adds to his contracts/statements, which he calls a “worthless clause,” absolved him of any responsibility if valuations were wrong, claiming the disclaimer said the numbers could be wrong and banks shouldn’t trust them. Since when is "don't believe me, I am a liar" any sort of defense?

    Trump's other "defense" is the claim that the statute of limitations expired. In other words, he admits he's guilty, but that the prosecution is too late.

    None of Trump's defense arguments present evidence that he's innocent.

  11. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 1:38 pm

    I suspect that you could be fair with Trump but I'm sure, for instance, that neither po nor isle could be, and probably not Donna, neither.

    I'd add that few people are neutral on Trump.

  12. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 1:48 pm

    BTW, the "rigged" observation was connected to the fact that the summary judgment we discussed earlier before was made before evidence was presented.

  13. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 2:19 pm
    HtS,
    Evidence was presented that's how the judge made his decision. There were inconsistent numbers that Trump used depending on the situation.

    Judge Engoron, in a partial summary judgment, found that Trump made false and misleading valuations for multiple real estate assets in statements to insurers and banks for years as he sought more favorable terms on insurance coverage and loans. Trump is not disputing that--although his sons blamed accountants.

    Trump said today that his valuations are high because somebody might pay whatever inflated dollar amount Trump dreams up. In reality people in real estate look at the rental revenue, taxes, comparables and other non-subjective considerations in determining value.

    I suspect that this is a little like showing up in court to fight a parking ticket. The question isn't over whether the car wasn't parked illegally, but you might argue that someone else parked your car there. Or maybe you'd argue the no-parking zone wasn't marked. Or you might present some extenuating circumstances or other rationale that the judge should lower the fine. Of course, if you don't show up in court to fight the fine, you will be mailed a letter directing you to pay the fine.

  14. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 2:37 pm

    Take it up with distinguished and respected former federal prosecutor, pb's Legal Goober #3. Guy and he guffawed through that part of the convo.

  15. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 2:42 pm
    I won’t have to take it with anybody. I am leaving it in the capable hands of Judge Engoron. Trump can try for an appeal if he chooses.

  16. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 3:10 pm

    "try," baha!

  17. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 3:30 pm
    Sure, Trump can try for an appeal, but no guarantees. He's had some bad luck in his recent appeals.

    An appeals court has rejected Donald Trump’s bid to delay a civil trial in a lawsuit brought by New York’s attorney general,

    Trump request to halt New York fraud trial rejected by appeals court.

    An appeals court denied Ivanka Trump's request to postpone her testimony.

    An appeals court found Donald Trump's appeal in E. Jean Carroll case "frivolous".




  18. by HatetheSwamp on November 6, 2023 4:36 pm

    I think it's gunna take until the appeals get out of New York until sanity kicks in. It still strikes me as significant that E still can't remember what year this all supposedly happened.

  19. by Curt_Anderson on November 6, 2023 4:51 pm
    E=he?

    I don’t think Trump will have any grounds for an appeal. Do you see any?

  20. by HatetheSwamp on November 7, 2023 1:36 am

    E is short for E Jean.

    I only know that pb's Legal Goober #1 is confident that it'll be reversed on appeal.

  21. by oldedude on November 7, 2023 8:27 pm
    This forum is not a cross-section of the population. We are all more opinionated than average. In voir dire we might be asked about our political opinions in social media. Not admitting to our posts could result in mistrial and grounds for an appeal. Most voters are not so politically attuned as us. Polls show that a lot voters are undecided.

    I don't think this is valid at all. I believe that you (above all) is naive about the political process and they would use you as a "useful idiot" in a trial. You realize they have access to your posts here, right?

  22. by Curt_Anderson on November 7, 2023 10:28 pm
    "You realize they have access to your posts here, right?" --OD

    Why would you ask me that question? You just quoted me as saying:
    In voir dire we might be asked about our political opinions in social media. Not admitting to our posts could result in mistrial and grounds for an appeal.

    Since I use my real name, it wouldn't be too difficult to find my posts here, not that I would hide or deny it. Others here are anonymous so they would be difficult to detect by the juror selection experts.

Go To Top

Comment on: "pb's Legal Goober #3 on Clay and Buck"


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page