Prosecutors Tell Judge Trump Election Crimes Trial Will Have Whopping 150 Witnesses — Take Four Months
Prosecutors Tell Judge Trump Election Crimes Trial Will Have Whopping 150 Witnesses — Take Four Months
Prosecutor Nathan Wade told Judge Scott McAfee that the RICO trials of Trump and his co-defendants will feature 150 witnesses and take four months.
"Listen, I need you to find me 151 Witnesses - just enough for me to win..."
That sounds like it has the making to be a perfect phone call!
I wouldn't be surprised if that were an actual conversation he had with his lawyers.
Does Trump have to be present for the whole thing? My adhd is getting triggered just thinking about sitting still for a 4 month trial. Good luck orange dude 😂
Fuck what Trump has to do. Feel bad for the 14 ish jurors who have to sit there for 4 months getting paid less than minimum wage. I'd say it's likely they get sequestered at some point, meaning they don't even see their families.
Those jurors are definitely going to need to be sequestered and will probably need protection too. The GOP is already openly supporting domestic terrorism so I don't expect them to stop now.
I would love to be one of the jurors. 4 months is way better than 4 more years of Trump.
Being jurors on this case would suck. That being said, not shitty employers often pay your full salary for jury duty. And some states require employers to pay too.
I hope for their sakes that they are, the names and addresses have already been circulating social media according to an article I read last month.
It would suck. But also, you would be a part of history forever.
Some people go overseas and risk their lives in the military and lose family time as well without having as much of an impact on the world. Here, the potential to have a positive impact on society is also profound. To show that all people are equal under the law.
So, yes, it would suck. But it's still worth it as a society to require people to do this and as a juror it's better than the equivalent trial that nobody hears about for commercial fraud that takes the same amount of time.
Does Trump have to be present for the whole thing?
That depends on whether the judge orders an appearance. The lawyers for Trump must be present the whole time, but Trump does not necessarily have to be there unless ordered to by the judge.
My adhd is getting triggered just thinking about sitting still for a 4 month trial.
It seriously sounds awful... couldn't happen to a better person.
That's a lot of crisis actors! Soros is going bankrupt!
If you look at all the crimes the 18 defendants are charged with, I'd say that 150 is actually pretty freaking economical! If math is right, that's like 4.92 indictments per witness.
This is the one that will be televised too. Probably is so long because of all the co-defendents
you just know they're going to end season 1 with a cliffhanger
I don't even see how a jury would follow something like that. It's a college course in the way of information overload.
If Trump and his team could dream it up in far less than a month, mere mortals will be able to follow it. It's not really all that complex. Just f*** over the election counting process in a variety of ways.
There's too much search engine garbage to find an original source, but PhDs, scientists, physicians, and attorneys (of course) are basically disqualified from jury duty.
Funny how demonstrating that you're able to think for yourself with a degree disqualifies you.
I've got two jury duty summons so far and haven't even made it to any form of interview. It may be due to my age at the times, but my job pays me for jury duty so I'll gladly do my duty.
We all know how much Trump likes those big numbers!
Sounds like winning to me... You think he's tired of winning yet?
Well, he was literally begging for more indictments during a rally a few weeks ago, so maybe he needs to pad those numbers a bit more.
The Cheese does not stand alone
dude they are going rico hard core
LOL
Who told them this was a good idea? Are they so uncertain of their case that they're bringing for over a hundred witnesses, in case tons of their testimonies fall through?
Maybe there are 150 witnesses because 150 people witnessed the crimes of the 19 people on trial. Just a thought.
My guess is that they have a sequence of events they want to prove took place, and they also want to prove that Trump knew what he was doing was wrong at each step. So maybe the first thing is that there was a plan in advance to subvert the election, and they get testimony from a few different people who were at a meeting about it, another couple people who were on an email discussion, and someone who Trump spoke to personally. Do that kind of thing for every step in a long chain, and it can add up. But any weakness in the chain could be grounds for reasonable doubt, so they have to make sure it's all solid.
I'm curious, what country do you live in?
You obviously have no idea how the court system in the US works.1 person says you did a crime vs. 150 people saying you did a crime.
Which would you rather defend against?
Wait... You think MORE witnesses mean less guilty?! ... bahahahaha holy shit, you retards are truly beyond any ability for logic... Literally, a rock is smarter than you.
No wonder he thinks he could shoot someone on Main St. and you morons would think he's innocent if MORE witnesses mean less guilty. Again, you are literally too stupid to properly parse reality. Seek help. Preferably a conservatorship, because you are clearly too dumb to take care of yourself.
LMAO. Wishful thinking, indeed.
[pfft; they have 150 witnesses? Must be a weak case]
Trumpist wishcasting is fucking hilarious.