NY v. Trump: Judge reveals Facebook post
implying juror discussed guilty verdict
with family ahead of time

You gotta know the sleazy garbage Hack knew all that, prior to the deliberations! God Damn his EVIL Democrat soul!

MISTRIAL!! Jury compromised, tainted, dismiss case and all charges need to be dropped!

If this is for real, it shouldn’t be hard to connect the poster and the juror. And it’s grounds for a mistrial. And the left thinks that we’re the morons.

Just another reason to retry him, causing him to spend another 6 weeks in court, rather than campaigning...

Trump seams to getter milage out of the court room for campaigning.

Censure Merchan (there is NO WAY he didn’t know, and this is a Gigantor CYA.) Arrest Braggart, and disbar “Tish…” TONIGHT.

If this was on Fakebook that means he discussed it with the entire world.

When you set about to steal someones constitutional rights you need to validate with your friends.

This gives some credibility to the assumption that the fix was in from the start.

So much for the idea of a fair and impartial jury.

Merchan intentionally chose not to sequester the jury. He clearly expected them to discuss it, but not on Facebook. Hence his CYA email.

While pondering this incident, please, everyone, keep a thought in your heads as follows: Donald Trump was convicted of intentionally committing 34 felonies, risking life in prison, to cover up a predicate crime that is itself just a misdemeanor. The predicate crime, again, just a misdemeanor, is the New York state statute quoted from by the judge to the jury in his instructions that proscribes "preventing or promoting" a candidate in an election by unlawful means. The "unlawful means" was where the judge gave the jury three choices of unlawful conduct supposedly committed by Trump to commit this predicate crime that elevated the first misdemeanor i.e. the false invoice payments, into a felony per NY Penal Law Section 170.10 which carried the longer Statute of Limitations needed to bring this case. Such Section 170.10 felony, which requires "criminal intent", is typically used in connection with hiding grand larceny or forgeries of some kind that are covered up by the misdemeanor false business records. While some people may in fact put ketchup on their hot dogs, no one, not anyone, intentionally commits a major felony to cover up a minor misdemeanor. So, in other words, this prosecutor and judge would have us believe that Trump intended to cover up a "crime" that carried a lesser penalty than the Section 170.10 felony itself. A much lesser penalty. That is, the man Trump, with conscious criminal intent, risked going to prison for life in an attempt to avoid a minor fine for misleading New Yorkers about the Stormy Daniels imbroglio. I guess the theory of Trump's intent to cover up the "hush money" was so he wouldn't lose by more than 23 points in New York in 2020.

This suggests that not only did this juror brag to their relatives about a guilty verdict before the trial ended and deliberations begun, but that this was also discussed with other jurors. This is the worst miscarriage of justice I’ve seen in my lifetime. It has exposed what New York liberals are. Despicable.

How convenient. The trail was a sham from day one anyway. Which side did this? What a circus. What happened? Did the left take a poll and discover not only is Biden losing, but Trump has coattails? Heaven forbid that people stop listening to the media and start voting with their pocketbooks. Gee, media manipulation worked in 2020 (/s). Did reality finally rear its ugly head?

I remember the announcement that the jury would adjourn for the day, then very shortly afterward, the story changed to there will be a verdict. Then the verdict. Guilty on all counts. They produced the slips of paper with checks for each item, 1-34, all checked in the guilty slot, all of them. It seemed too pat, too uniform. Wouldn’t there have been some reference sheet for this? Or maybe some notes on the answer sheet to differentiate each charge? Just numbers with squares to fill in with a check. How did they keep track of the charges? It all seemed so quick, so rushed, and, unlike other court cases, no interviews with jurors, not even off camera. Did any reporter try to get an interview? No, and this was the story of the century. I think the lawyers like Dershowitz did a disservice, not demanding an answer to these questions from the media reporters, whose job it was to tell the whole story. Why aren’t reporters asked to investigate? They need to uncover the actual process. There’s more to it than accepting what they said. It doesn’t stand up by itself.

Guilty on all 34 counts. Does anyone know what each individual count is? Count 1 Guilty. Count 2 Guilty and so on . Guilty of what?

When was the last time you heard about a lying, cheating, sniveling Democrat ever got what was coming to them? Me neither.

Corrupt judge finds back door out of his problem. Panic call to Zuck to turn his search algorithms loose or had that already been done and held lest a need arose...?