Trump supporters call for riots and violent retribution after verdict

Clever girl.

You should rewrite more words without actually responding.

If you're ugly and dishonest enough, you could even run for elections!

 

You want a response? Okay. Your dumb ass seems to think ANYONE who thinks the verdict was correct is being force fed by left-wing news sources. Anyone who thinks the verdict was incorrect thinks for themselves. P.S. I'm not a girl. You're just pissed a guy like me ****ed yours. Cuck.

 

In your mind...

 

lol

 

Sickos and Psychos
Quotes from Trump's supporters

“Judge plus tree plus rope. Assemble in any manner you think is best,” wrote one Donald Trump supporter on site Patriots.win just hours after the former president became the first to be criminally convicted.

“The people applauding this verdict all deserve to be rounded up in concentration camps,” another added. “These f**king losers have destroyed our country.”

One suggested “pay-per-view hangings” of those involved in the trial, starting with the judge, another recommended Trump go “scorched earth” against them if elected for a second term in the White House, and another warned that jurors “won’t be able to walk the streets”.

These are not good people, and Trump eggs them on with his flat out lies and propaganda to stir the pot. It's a toxic brew, and he doesn't care. All he cares about is himself, and pretending to be a victim.

 

No. But would’ve preferred these trials to have happened sooner.

What it looks like to someone who doesn’t follow it closely would by definition not necessarily be the most accurate take.

people can read stuff into it but as someone who lives in the Midwest and did follow this fairly closely it looks like it was prosecuted as quickly as could be given the difficulties of the case.

 

Also to add there was and still is very much a political risk to Democrats form the trial happening now. The argument put forward by Trump and his supporters is that this will empower and increase his support. That is still possible as we’ve seen Trump be able to turn what should be a setback to most politicians into an advantage.

Also there was the possibility of a mistrial or hung jury given it was a complicated case. That likely would’ve been a boost to Trump’s campaign and seen as a failure on the part of Biden fairly or not.

 

Here's a summary on how long it took:

1. August 2018: Following Michael Cohen's admission of guilt, Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr. opens an investigation into the Trump Organization and its executives. The investigation pauses due to a concurrent federal investigation.
   
   
2. August 2019: The Manhattan DA issues a subpoena to the Trump Organization for documents related to the payments and to Mazars USA for eight years of Trump's corporate tax returns. Trump's lawyers sue to block the subpoena.
   
   
3. July 2020: In Trump v. Vance, the U.S. Supreme Court rules 7–2 in favor of the DA, allowing the subpoena to proceed.
   
   
4. Early 2021: Following the 2021 New York County District Attorney election, Alvin Bragg succeeds Vance as the Manhattan DA. Mark Pomerantz, a Manhattan prosecutor, attempts to revive the case under the theory that if Stormy Daniels had extorted Trump, the money would be criminal proceeds, and efforts to conceal its source would constitute money laundering. Upon further examination, Pomerantz finds the money laundering statute inapplicable and faces skepticism that the hush money would qualify as extortion. With no clear path to felony charges, Pomerantz abandons the inquiry and resigns in February 2022.
   
   
5. Early 2022: Alvin Bragg inherits the case and reevaluates the legal approach, focusing on different aspects of the payments and potential charges.
   
   
6. January 2023: Approximately one year after taking over, Bragg's office impanels a grand jury to present evidence of Trump's involvement in the Stormy Daniels payment. Michael Cohen meets extensively with the DA's office and the grand jury, ultimately meeting with the DA 18 times by early March. Other key witnesses, including Kellyanne Conway and Hope Hicks, also testify before the grand jury. This time, the DA's office identifies a viable path to felony charges, focusing on potential campaign finance violations and falsification of business records.
   

The timeline shows that it took around four and a half years from the initiation of the investigation in August 2018 to the significant grand jury actions and anticipated indictment in early 2023.

Alvin Bragg took over the investigation in early 2022 and, within a year, transitioned to grand jury proceedings by January 2023. Initially, the investigation (under other DA) did not find a clear path to felony charges due to limitations in the legal theories pursued, such as money laundering and extortion. However, under Bragg, the focus shifted to potential campaign finance violations and falsification of business records, providing a viable path to felony charges and leading to the grand jury proceedings.

So, in total, it took about 4.5 years under multiple DAs and prosecutors. Under Bragg, it took 1 year. 1 year is quite reasonable.

 

Which reflects badly on them. There are also those who were undecided or leaning, or now open to changing their minds...

But this wasn't about the election. It was assumed from the start that this was as likely to help Trump as it could hurt him. This was about the rule of law.

And whatever one thinks of the crime or whether the case was worth prosecuting, he had his day in court, it was a fair trial, and he was convicted unanimously by his peers.

 

as I said:

And whatever one thinks of the crime or whether the case was worth prosecuting, he had his day in court, it was a fair trial, and he was convicted unanimously by his peers.

 

@AroundTheWorld This is, of course, anecdotal. As expected, most are not changing their minds. A few are changing their minds.

Trump Conviction Gives Some Republicans Pause In Key Pennsylvania County - News18

BANGOR, Pennsylvania: Bronwen Brown, a registered Republican in a bellwether Pennsylvania county, was ready to vote for Donald Trump again in November despite long-held reservations about his character. His conviction by a New York jury has given her pause.

“He’s been found guilty on all 34 counts. Do I want to go with that? Probably not,” the 72-year-old former opera singer told Reuters minutes after Trump became the first former U.S. president convicted of a crime.

“I may be moving over to Biden,” she said, referring to President Joe Biden, Trump’s Democratic opponent in the Nov. 5 election.

Brown is a resident of Bangor, a borough in Northampton County, a mostly rural and white region of 320,000 people which over the decades has become a bellwether of presidential winners in Pennsylvania, a battleground state, and nationwide.

Reuters spoke with 22 women across the county this week, including a dozen Republican-leaning voters and 10 who favor Democrats, to gauge how they were responding to the trial.

Public opinion polling has indicated that women were more likely than men to be swayed by the case, in which Trump was found guilty of falsifying documents to cover up a payment to silence a p*rn star about an alleged affair prior to the 2016 election – a liaison that Trump denies.

Brown was one of two Republican-leaning women interviewed who said a conviction would make them hesitant to support Trump.

The other 10 described the trial as a political witch hunt and said they would back Trump no matter what happened in court.

Trump faces three other criminal trials, including two related to his alleged efforts to overturn his 2020 election defeat, although they are unlikely to go to trial before the November vote.

 

The maga burning man?

 

Trump frequently uses the platform as a megaphone to attack people involved in his legal cases, and keeps doing it over and over bringing the crazy out of his extremist supporters. The MAGA politicians don't discourage or speak out against those making violent and dangerous threats. Nope. They actually encourage it by defending the lies, repeating the lies, and coddling up to a sociopathic criminal.

Here's more threats from the sickos and psychos in the MAGA cult.....

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.

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.

“Now you understand. To save your nation, you must fight. The time to respond is now. Franco Friday has begun,” another Proud Boys chapter wrote, apparently referring to fascist dictator Francisco Franco of Spain.

One Jan. 6 defendant who already served time in prison for his role in the Capitol attack also weighed in on X, posting a photo of Bragg and a photo of a noose. “January 20, 2025 traitors Get The Rope,” he wrote, referring to the date of the next presidential inauguration.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...-jurors-violent-threats-conviction-rcna154882

 

Biggest loser here is Robert Morgenthau , the "no nonsense" Prosecutor who had a Trump-sized blind spot (and a hefty bag of Trump campaign $$$ and charitable contributions) for his 5 decades as US atty/Manhattan DA and let him get away with decades of high and low level criming. Rape, fraud, theft etc. You know, the usual.

To his credit - he realized his mistake late in his life. To his non credit - thanks for nothing Bob.

 

You mean the guy who is about to go on trial?

 

There are several indictments on him like a roulette table that happen to be rolling around at the same time.

Some of these could be quashed at the Federal level if Trump became president, but the fact that Trump is leading in many polls is likely the catalyst rather than a non-factor in these trials.

To claim they aren't is an act of delusion, either self-inflicted and/or projected.

The second half of that Elie Honig article plus @Amiga's timeline does NOT make this sound "Non-Political". at. all.

They bagged and tagged him.

Couldn't happen to a better person...but what goes around comes around goes around comes around

Spoiler: Second half of the Article for those who can't read Xeets

But that doesn’t mean that every structural infirmity around the Manhattan district attorney’s case has evaporated. Both of these things can be true at once: The jury did its job, and this case was an ill-conceived, unjustified mess. Sure, victory is the great deodorant, but a guilty verdict doesn’t make it all pure and right. Plenty of prosecutors have won plenty of convictions in cases that shouldn’t have been brought in the first place. “But they won” is no defense to a strained, convoluted reach unless the goal is to “win,” now, by any means necessary and worry about the credibility of the case and the fallout later.

The following are all undeniable facts.

The judge donated money — a tiny amount, $35, but in plain violation of a rule prohibiting New York judges from making political donations of any kind — to a pro-Biden, anti-Trump political operation, including funds that the judge earmarked for “resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.” Would folks have been just fine with the judge staying on the case if he had donated a couple bucks to “Re-elect Donald Trump, MAGA forever!”? Absolutely not.

District Attorney Alvin Bragg ran for office in an overwhelmingly Democratic county by touting his Trump-hunting prowess. He bizarrely (and falsely) boasted on the campaign trail, “It is a fact that I have sued Trump over 100 times.” (Disclosure: Both Bragg and Trump’s lead counsel, Todd Blanche, are friends and former colleagues of mine at the Southern District of New York.)

Most importantly, the DA’s charges against Trump push the outer boundaries of the law and due process. That’s not on the jury. That’s on the prosecutors who chose to bring the case and the judge who let it play out as it did.

The district attorney’s press office and its flaks often proclaim that falsification of business records charges are “commonplace” and, indeed, the office’s “bread and butter.” That’s true only if you draw definitional lines so broad as to render them meaningless. Of course the DA charges falsification quite frequently; virtually any fraud case involves some sort of fake documentation.

But when you impose meaningful search parameters, the truth emerges: The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever. Even putting aside the specifics of election law, the Manhattan DA itself almost never brings any case in which falsification of business records is the only charge.

Standing alone, falsification charges would have been mere misdemeanors under New York law, which posed two problems for the DA. First, nobody cares about a misdemeanor, and it would be laughable to bring the first-ever charge against a former president for a trifling offense that falls within the same technical criminal classification as shoplifting a Snapple and a bag of Cheetos from a bodega. Second, the statute of limitations on a misdemeanor — two years — likely has long expired on Trump’s conduct, which dates to 2016 and 2017.

So, to inflate the charges up to the lowest-level felony (Class E, on a scale of Class A through E) — and to electroshock them back to life within the longer felony statute of limitations — the DA alleged that the falsification of business records was committed “with intent to commit another crime.” Here, according to prosecutors, the “another crime” is a New York State election-law violation, which in turn incorporates three separate “unlawful means”: federal campaign crimes, tax crimes, and falsification of still more documents. Inexcusably, the DA refused to specify what those unlawful means actually were — and the judge declined to force them to pony up — until right before closing arguments. So much for the constitutional obligation to provide notice to the defendant of the accusations against him in advance of trial. (This, folks, is what indictments are for.)

In these key respects, the charges against Trump aren’t just unusual. They’re bespoke, seemingly crafted individually for the former president and nobody else.

The Manhattan DA’s employees reportedly have called this the “Zombie Case” because of various legal infirmities, including its bizarre charging mechanism. But it’s better characterized as the Frankenstein Case, cobbled together with ill-fitting parts into an ugly, awkward, but more-or-less functioning contraption that just might ultimately turn on its creator.

Trump will appeal, as is his right, and he’s certain to contest the inventive charges constructed by the DA. I won’t go so far as to say an appeals court is likely to overturn a conviction — New York law is broad and hazy enough to (potentially) allow such machinations — but he’s going to have a decent shot at a reversal.

“No man is above the law.” It’s become cliché, but it’s an important point, and it’s worth pausing to reflect on the importance of this core principle. But it’s also meaningless pablum if we unquestioningly tolerate (or worse, celebrate) deviations from ordinary process and principle to get there. The jury’s word is indeed sacrosanct, as I learned long ago. But it can’t fix everything that preceded it. Here, prosecutors got their man, for now at least — but they also contorted the law in an unprecedented manner in their quest to snare their prey.

If anything, whether Bragg claimed this was "Non-Political" was just a hedge in case his Hail Mary lost.