The newsletter starts tonight with enormous gratitude to folks in the courtroom, reporters and lawyers, who are live-blogging and tweeting the first criminal trial of Donald Trump.
Thank you Joyce for your comprehensive synopsis of this first day. One of our substack members, Gloria Horton-Young has written a poem for us (posted below) on the topic of Trump's falling asleep in the courtroom today. I'm posting it below. Enjoy!
I mentioned elsewhere that once upon a time I had a client in a PI case who continually fell asleep in front of the jury.
We lost.
A juror later told me that I tried a good case, and the jury liked me, but since my client didn't care enough to pay attention to the facts, they didn't care either.
The orange antichrist is probably sedated and off his Adderall.
I mentioned yesterday about pre-trial intervention. Still a possibility.
Voo doo practitioners would try to rub magic oil or Santeria babaloos would spread "polvos" feathers or smoke in the jury area on behalf of defendants to mesmerize or intimidate the jury.
He's charged with E felonies, which are just one step above a misdemeanor. The jury could find him guilty of Attempted Falsifying, a misdemeanor, and he could most likely not see any jail time. It's just his ego that stopped him from taking a plea to a misdemeanor long ago. Stupid of him.
Are you saying that because he appears to be sleeping, the jury can return a ‘not guilty’ and that would be jury nullification? Would the issue be because the jury thinks he’s not able to participate (possibly because he is too far along in dementia)?
Some folks (psychiatrists) have indicated that they feel he is in dementia and sundowning. This means he is up all night long and then can’t stay awake during the day. I think that’s a real possibility. I don’t know if you’ve seen the big picture Substack, April 11, Jay Kuo’s interview with John Gartner, MD (psychiatrist). I’m not a medical professional so I’m just reporting what medical doctors are saying about him. He may be pretending to sleep because he knows that might be his chance at jury nullification. Can the judge order a medical examination? His doctor needs to do a brain chemistry panel to see what kind of heavy metals might be in him: diet sodas are notorious for having cadmium, lead, mercury. Clean him up and wake him up because we can’t lose a trial because of his falling asleep. Perhaps he could have an IV of mega-vitamins, including a vitamin B shot. And if he is pretending, we need to know that as well. Also, ‘antichrist’ is the operative word in your comment. Indeed, he defines antichrist.
I wish I were clairvoyant. As to a mental exam, someone would have to make a motion. If so it might turn into a battle of experts. Trump is in denial of practically everything in his life, and protests everything, even when they may be inconsequential or irrelevant or even might help his defense.
Depends on his level of fear. If he doesn't have the capacity not to be aware of the consequences, he'd be less motivated to plea bargain.
After reading about his decline into dementia yesterday, you've got him I think. He is an unworthy baboon, and while he deserves the distress he's brought on himself, I can't help but pity him.
I guess that's a manifestation of an excess of empathy, which itself can get you into trouble.
His mania won't let hm sleep, as long as he can rustle about. Reqiured to sit, exhaustion overtakes him.
This man needs to be in long term care, not the White House.
Jen, I appreciate your thoughts as I too feel empathy. I have no pity for him though because of the distress he's brought upon millions. Let's start with separating babies and children from their families.
Also, psychiatrist have stated that he is in dementia, sundowning, which means he stays up all night, so it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s in his manic state.
I do love a good poem about a villain being brought to justice. Especially when everyone but said villain knows what all the words mean! Thank Valere for sharing and Gloria, you have talent! Good start to my day! ♥️
Ha! Well, yes. But Gloria is a cut above. I looked up ‘varlet.’ Indeed he is a blathering, blithering varlet. Wish she could have fit ‘blatherskiting in that string…a bit of difference, but perhaps for the next go-round. He is both. Leave it to the Scots to create blatherskite - one of my own favorite go-to descriptors💙
I couldn't sit on this jury. After years of page six nonsense, I grew tired of him. Never watched or had the desire to watch The Apprentice. I could look away, not bother with it, didn't effect my life in any way. However, when he was President, it did effect me. As a NYer, I knew who this man was, and discovered even more. I would wake up every morning wondering if we avoided a crisis. He is a narcissistic psychopath, and I would NOT have been able to fair and impartial. Maybe 10% fear, but mostly, I just don't like the man
The fact that he has threatened witnesses makes me really scared for jurists. It would be naive to think that he doesn't have thugs among his "friends" who would be happy to find out everything about the jurors --- and respond accordingly.
I want the prosecution to present their case well, and thoroughly. To survive trump's inevitable appeals. I don't want to see the case overturned on appeal.
Exactly what leads you to believe that the attorneys “are like crooked cab drivers!” What indication have you had that they will take “the long road home” - whatever that means in a trial. Like them or not they are professionals - even the defense attorneys. And while one may not necessarily like what they do or the motions they make it is their job as Joyce has pointed out.
Additionally what may look like an easy peasy just get two witnesses up on the stand and it’s all over is to ignore the complexities that exist in any trial. I would not want to be one of the prosecutors on this case. The stakes are high and the pressure is immense. I have a lot of admiration for them.
I don’t know, I loathe the insipid bastard as much as any man alive, but I believe I could sit on a jury and just make my decision on his guilt or innocence based on what was presented at trial. I have sat on a jury and even been it’s foreman, justice based on the law and presented evidence is of paramount importance, so I do think it’s possible to loathe the insipid bastard and still objectively view the evidence, it’s a job our system of justice places upon us, I can’t imagine ignoring that solemn obligation.
I agree. The prosecution has to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense has to plant that seed of doubt. The jury has to objectively decide based on that. I think I could do that whether I thought he was guilty or not, at the start. However, these people will have to contend with the fallout that is inevitable when it's all over. Whoever is chosen will need to be willing to do that.
I loathe him too but if I had to be on his jury I would take lots of notes and refer to them. I hope that's allowed because if not I couldn't be a good juror on any case. I have to organize my mind on paper (or in electrons, but I have to see what I think visually).
Increasing, as reports of Trump failure to stay awake were documented, you see the degenerate intent of the masters of the Republican Party. What better figurehead than one who will willingly - or dementedly - guarantee to accede to whatever policies the donor elite want? A catastrophic prospect.
If they didn’t profit from that maniac surely they would have influenced policy to some degree - I believe that. They considered him their dog more like - supplying them with slave labor after all.
I don’t dispute that Trump and the upper class of America have a mutually beneficial relationship. But I don’t think he is their puppet.
Their support for him is very short sighted. Constitutional democracy has worked very well for our ruling class, and nothing that seriously threats their power or wealth is on the agenda of either party. They are crazy to want to put an irrational autocrat into power. How well did that work out for Germany, Italy or Japan?
Mitchell, first I agree it will not end well if his backers get him in. They’re too isolated in their privacy and suffocating privilege, believe they’re smarter than everyone else (or at least the majority they likely dismiss as rubes they can manipulate). Because of that they’re fixated on what they perceive as threats - a graduated income tax, fair wages they’ll be obliged to pay, too many people of color, too many people who are not in lockstep with an overarching religious leadership they can co-opt, people who know history, read books that put ideas in their heads … any number of bogeymen.
Thank you once again Joyce. I took a peek at some of the headlines today and tuned into a couple of cable channels to get the drift of what happened today.
I have one bone to pick with the Washington Post when it comes to their reporting on the jury selection. I'll name the reporter. It's David Nakamura. There appears to be a newer piece after the problem reporting that I'll discuss in a second. The headline of the newer piece is "Trump comes face-to-face with prospective jurors, anonymous to public". In this piece he seems to take care in describing some of the jurors, noting that "But the opening day of jury selection sounded more like the prospective jurors were reciting their dating app profiles than sounding off about their partisan views of Trump."
However, earlier in the day, as the Washington Post wass doing live updates, some specifically from Mr. Nalamura, he described more than one juror information about the neighborhood where they lived, who they worked for, and what their spouse did for a living. It seemed clear to me to be enough information for a zealous tracker to identify the exact person. One was noted to be a prosecutor in the Bronx and another was noted as working at a bookseller, where the name of the bookshop was shown.
I just went back to find these specific instances, and thankfully, the Post has provided the following statement above all of the live updates and has edited the information to be a bit less specific:
CLARIFICATION
Several posts have been updated to remove specific information about where prospective jurors work, which was detailed in open court.
When I saw what I had seen earlier, I wrote directly to Mr. Nakamura to point out the issue. It seems that through one or more others pointing this out, the Post made the appropriate updates.
But the information Nakamura provided is out there... you can't put the genie back in the bottle. I find his behavior unacceptable. He should be censured, and put on some other beat where lives are not at stake.
Wow! I guess the potential jurors were freaking out when they read Mr. Nakamura's original article. At least he didn't blab their names, addresses, the names of their next of kin, and his email address.
I just sent a letter to WashPo, suggesting they send him back to the Sports Desk . . . or at least take him off this trial, if his judgment is this bad.
More on this just today (Tuesday, Apr 16). I'm watching MSNBC and they discuss a prospective juror that is a woman who lives on the upper east side and is a teacher. She had filmed a celebration in the streets of the moment when Biden was declared the winner in 2020 and posted it on Facebook. Don't you think that her friends or co-workers might be able to tell who it was? She's got friends on Facebook that likely know she's a teacher and might just remember that specific post. I am deeply troubled with the TV media insisting on revealing identifiable characteristics of these prospective jurors.
So I go to Google and search for the phrase "Trump jurors to remain anonymous" and one of the pieces from thehill.com proudly presents a piece titled "Here are the first 7 jurors picked to serve on Trump’s hush money trial". Here's the link with what seems like identifiable information to me:
It was a fascinating day! Thank you for tying it all together this evening!
I will only have three opportunities tomorrow during the school day to check in! I’ll be excited to get in my car and head home so I can catch up on all the highlights!
He’s fucked. In the photos I saw of him today at court in Manhattan he looks old and tired and flaccid and sick. And it’s only day one.
Nowhere to run to, nowhere to hide. Every day. All day. He has to sit through the endless tedium of routine courtroom procedures. With his mouth shut. Three weeks to pick a jury. And then weeks of “betrayal “ by people who once revered him. And he can’t campaign. His physical presence in court is required. He gets 60 seconds to bleat on the courthouse steps about the galactic injustice of it all, but he looks evermore diminished, weak, and powerless. This is shrinking him. G
He’s suddenly The Wizard. Not powerful at all, but a sham, a puny man behind a fearsome fačade.
A popular, cautionary quote recently was “A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.” A corollary is finally emerging. “A clown with a flamethrower is still a clown.”
I saw all that in his face today. He’s hiding it as best he can. But he’s fucked … and he knows it.
Ah...that explains his newly svelte look. I was wondering how he managed to look thinner while still consuming KFC and McD cuisine. I thought he might have just discovered Spanx (and I also couldn't help wondering how that worked with his Depends).
Jack, you paint a beautiful picture. I hope your conclusion is true. And I also wish that he was not allowed to speak on the courthouse steps. That would be one great reason for jailing him…
I am very pessimistic that Trump will be found guilty in this trial or in any of the others. All it takes is for Trump supporters in the jury pool to masquerade as ideal open-minded jurists. They would blatantly lie on the questionnaire and during oral questioning by the attorneys, ensuring at least one of them will be chosen. Then, they would refuse to convict, causing a mistrial and a big political win for Trump. The odds of this occurring for at least one jurist are virtually 100% in my mind. What say you?
As I said before, a courtroom run by a fair, but no nonsense jurist like Merchan has an amazing (and gratifying...) prophylactic effect on juries. Sure there are exceptions over time but, the centuries old jury system is still extraordinarily robust. Ordinary citizens, with all their human frailties, somehow become largely different beings as jurors. That they take their role very seriously and generally don't take kindly to anyone --- especially a defendant --- disrespecting the process of which they are part should be a warning to Orange 1. Something he seems to have ignored in the second E. Jean Carroll defamation proceeding to his peril.
I understand it could happen. But people who are called up to be jurors don’t submit an application form. However, what you said has merit. I was once called to be a juror. I at first lied on my questionnaire. I had once been arrested for weed. But at the last moment , I asked to be dismissed. I would have made however, a very astute juror had I stayed.
It would be gross negligence for the prosecution not to have a large team doing a social media search on every potential juror in real time during jury selection. Anyone with strong political views, or caught lying, would be discovered at that time and dismissed.
Another good point. I only hope that the prosecution pulls out all stops in a deep-dive into the backgrounds of the jury pool. I would think it would be very difficult to establish that anyone is a Trump supporter, though.
I wonder if a cult member is forced to sit thru a trial that reveals the pure grotesque truth close up and in their face, could a little light leak in? 🤷🏻♀️ I agree with Joyce Vance, that we need cameras in that court room. As it is, he gets to just come out of the court room and whine about it being a witch hunt to his cult instead of the long needed accountability to our rule of law.
I think so too. As soon as there is a camera though, it could turn into a free for all that could compromise the entire proceeding. If I was a juror I would not want any chance that my face was on camera.
It takes more than one holdout to get an acquittal. Also I have read that a single holdouts are under extraordinary pressure to explain exactly WHY they do not think that the evidence was compelling. As was stated by another commenter, above & also below--people sworn into a jury become different--more serious, especially in the jury of a no-nonsense judge such as Judge Merchan.
Yes, one needs a majority (I believe) for an acquittal, but only one for a mistrial. MAGAta are cult-like. I think pressure from the other jurors or even the judge would not come close to overriding the hero-like status that other MAGAts would bestow on a hold-out juror.
Not just a majority; acquittal requires that all twelve members agree to acquit. I somehow don't think you could find twelve Noo Yawkers who would agree that the prosecution's evidence ISN'T convincing. Noo Yawkers know the Trumps all too well.
There is no way for MAGA fanatics to stuff the jury pool. There may be some of them out there, but (if I recall what I read recently correctly), Manhattan went 85-15 for Biden. And every Trump voter is not a determined MAGite. Yes, there's a risk of a Trump supporter being on the jury, and determined to acquit him no matter what. But it is far, far from a certainty.
Yes, NYC is predominantly Democratic. However, there will be *hundreds* called for the jury. Certainly you would agree that at least one of those is a TRUMP supporter? Again, it only takes one to force a mistrial.
I agree that there will highly likely be at least one Trump voter in the jury. But I don’t think that necessarily means they will ignore the evidence. We are in uncharted waters.
I was thinking that too but I read some commentary that said there's tremendous pressure in a jury room coming from the other jurors who want to know exactly what your reasoning is. They might ferret out such a person. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.
I think trump should have one of his SS detail bring a nice comfy Mr. Pillow pillow with them each day of the trial. Let him get nice and comfy because the ride is going to get bumpy as soon as the jury is impaneled. Or, they could bring some toothpicks to keep his eyelids propped open, and maybe a napkin to wear under his mouth to catch any droppings during the day. I know, yuck! But, Joyce is correct, not a good look for anyone who desires to run the country into the ground like trump does. Sounds like Judge Merchan is doing is level best to get things underway; I wish him much good will. It will be more difficult once the prosecution starts putting on their case. Btw, if you want to see a scary movie, go see Civil War, which we saw today. It scared us plenty, but all of us who fear a trump Presidency should see it. I yield back my time.
I will simply have to use my imagination. Movies like "Civil War" and "Watch Against All Enemies" would steal my sleep and/or give me nightmares for months.
I’m going in but not now. I need to drive to New Haven from Hartford, the take the Metro North at 4 AM to Grand Central then the number 6 subway to Court then wait. If they approve my photo press credentials I’m in if not, I fight with the spectator class. We’ll see. Maybe I’ll get a few entries for my book. I’m there to promote my book of course.
When the juror questions were made public, I read through them as if I had to answer them. I don't think my answers would thrill trump's side. It would be hard not to have bias when you hate everything about a person as much as I do.
This is going to be so interesting, watching it all play out.
I'm also anxious for the SCOTUS arguments this week and next.
1. How does the judge's decision to deny Trump's renewed motion to recuse align with legal obligations and ethical guidelines for judges in similar situations?
2. In what ways might Trump's lawyers' tactics, such as filing motions they know they are likely to lose, be setting the stage for potential issues on appeal if Trump is convicted?
3. How does the judge's ruling on the admissibility of evidence related to the National Enquirer's "catch and kill" practices and Trump's alleged affairs balance the relevance and potential prejudice of such evidence?
4. What factors might the judge consider when deciding whether to hold Trump in contempt for potential violations of the gag order, and how might the timing of the show-cause hearing impact the trial proceedings?
5. How might the judge strike a balance between holding Trump accountable for his behavior and avoiding the appearance of bias or creating grounds for appeal based on prejudice?
6. What implications might Trump's apparent lack of focus and nodding off during the trial proceedings have on public perception of his fitness for office, and how might this behavior be viewed differently compared to similar actions by other political figures?
7. How does the high number of prospective jurors excused for inability to be fair and impartial reflect the challenges of selecting an unbiased jury in a high-profile case involving a polarizing figure like Donald Trump?
8. What strategies might Trump's lawyers employ when questioning Michael Cohen's credibility based on his prior federal conviction, while avoiding the suggestion that Trump is also guilty of related crimes?
As to question 1...the first time trump asked the judge to recuse himself, the judge asked a state advisory council on ethics for their determination and they saw no conflict that would require refusal. I believe he appealed this and lost as well.
Day One. Delays seem to be over but now his attorneys are looking for appeals if/when they lose.
What a crew!!!!
Thank goodness Judge Merchan “continues to make legal rulings that will be defensible on appeal.”
Next Wednesday will be violation of gag orders. IMO trump will continues his texts and speeches. It is all being recorded. Should be interesting and I’m hopeful it will be a penalty of not just a few thousand dollars.
Just deciding on a jury seems like it will be long. Day one trump had to take a snoozer. Sleepy don trying to impress potential jurists.
Thank you, Joyce for sharing information and your input.
Monica, Day 1 may seem like delay particularly when the Defendant's main tactic is delay, delay, delay. But, as the Professor noted with her info & input the case is off to a good start. I also agree with the Professor that Defendant's Attorneys are seeking "invited error"; error found on appeal is very unlikely with this seasoned Judge who stills sits for his "Mental health Court" cases on Wednesdays.
Pre-trial motions particularly Pre-trial rulings on what evidence can be admitted on direct, rebuttal or not at all can & should control the rest of the trial. It's a little like 3 Dimensional Chess . Trial Judges & trial counsel are wired into deductive reasoning where one piece of evidence leads to 5 to 20 steps down the evidentiary trail to get the desired Judgment.
Tuesday Morn' Annotation via LISA RUBIN who was in the DAY 1 Courtroom: Lisa confirms that most of the Day 1 was consumed with Pre-Trial Motions. Lisa reports the courtroom- mart Prosecutor sought "clarification" from the Judge on multiple evidentiary points & essentially gave a Mini Opening Statement:
Per Lisa, the Prosecution will submit evidence there was a 2015 media agreement between Trump & AMI-David Pecker:
Yes, Bryan, now it’s all about setting the case up for appeal, with one eye on finding the one holdout juror. Such is the stuff of criminal trials. Thank God for the judge with years of experience in handling such cases. I wonder why the heck NY law allows the defendant’s presence at sidebar conferences during jury selection. The purpose of bringing the potential juror up to the bench is to allow discussion of sensitive issues outside the presence of other potential jurors. Trump will be there at every turn giving the potential juror the stink eye. And I’ll bet he won’t be able to keep his trap shut, either.
Y'all have to cut the guy some slack on the sleepy thing; first of all, there are the late night tweets. Maybe the muse doesn't strike until after midnight, no? Then, there's the early morning wake-up call to renew the make up, the spray-on tan and the famous comb-over, choosing the costume (Shall I wear this red, or no, that red tie?) before heading out the door. Then, depending on where he's staying, there could be a commute into Manhattan as well. I know I'd be bleary-eyed if I had to keep up that kind of schedule.
And when is he going to have time for golf? The word is that he is taking Ozempic, lost 20 pounds, has a new haircut and is curtailing the orange makeup…the way all criminals gussy up for their court appearances.
I don’t know about him curtailing the orange. He has, seemingly, switched to brown. If he goes any darker, he’s going to have to have himself deported.
I don't see the effects of Ozempic. 20 pounds off his obesity # is chump change. Who's prescribing it, Dr. Ronnie? Agree with Marla that he's switched makeup from orange to brown. A lateral move, not an improvement. And when he walks away from the camera in the courthouse hall, from the back you can clearly see his big ol' bald spot.
Thank you Joyce for your comprehensive synopsis of this first day. One of our substack members, Gloria Horton-Young has written a poem for us (posted below) on the topic of Trump's falling asleep in the courtroom today. I'm posting it below. Enjoy!
Freefall
by Gloria Horton-Young, 4-15-2024
Oh, the irony! The man
who once mocked "Sleepy Joe"
Now can't keep his own
eyes open, don't you
know?
"Sleepy Don," they'll call him,
as he dozes off in
court
While facing charges for
his sleazy Stormy payoff,
the wart
•
He's nodding off, his jaw
goes slack, his mind's a
blur
Can't even focus on his
lawyer's notes, the cur
If he can't stay awake
when his own fate is on
the line
How can we trust him with
the nation's fate, the
swine?
•
But wait, there's more!
The moron speaks
in tongues
Spewing gibberish on the
campaign trail, his brain's unstrung
"Adlinthin," he says, a
word that's not a word at
all
Just like his presidency, a
farce, a
freefall
•
And let's not forget his
blatant disregard
For the gag order, calling
witnesses "sleazeballs,"
the lard
He can't control himself,
his ego knows no bounds
The prosecutors seek to
hold him in contempt, the
clown
•
The judge must find a way
to make him pay
Without fueling his cries
of "political foul play"
Hit him where it hurts,
right in his bloated wallet
That'll shut him up, the
babbling, blithering varlet
•
Day one, and Trump's
already in a world of
trouble
Creating chaos, making
his own bubble
But for the rest of us,
it's a glimmer of hope
Watching the Orange
Menace finally on the rope
•
So, let the trial unfold, let
justice have its day
As "Sleepy Don" faces the
music, the price he'll pay
For his lies, his greed, his
utter lack of grace
A fitting end for a man
who's a disgrace.
Thank you, Valere, and of course Gloria. This important intro is on the mark.
Thank you, Ransom.
I mentioned elsewhere that once upon a time I had a client in a PI case who continually fell asleep in front of the jury.
We lost.
A juror later told me that I tried a good case, and the jury liked me, but since my client didn't care enough to pay attention to the facts, they didn't care either.
The orange antichrist is probably sedated and off his Adderall.
I mentioned yesterday about pre-trial intervention. Still a possibility.
His defense looks like "jury nullification" which worked for defendants several times in Baghdad By the Sea. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jury_nullification
Voo doo practitioners would try to rub magic oil or Santeria babaloos would spread "polvos" feathers or smoke in the jury area on behalf of defendants to mesmerize or intimidate the jury.
He's charged with E felonies, which are just one step above a misdemeanor. The jury could find him guilty of Attempted Falsifying, a misdemeanor, and he could most likely not see any jail time. It's just his ego that stopped him from taking a plea to a misdemeanor long ago. Stupid of him.
Daniel,
Are you saying that because he appears to be sleeping, the jury can return a ‘not guilty’ and that would be jury nullification? Would the issue be because the jury thinks he’s not able to participate (possibly because he is too far along in dementia)?
Some folks (psychiatrists) have indicated that they feel he is in dementia and sundowning. This means he is up all night long and then can’t stay awake during the day. I think that’s a real possibility. I don’t know if you’ve seen the big picture Substack, April 11, Jay Kuo’s interview with John Gartner, MD (psychiatrist). I’m not a medical professional so I’m just reporting what medical doctors are saying about him. He may be pretending to sleep because he knows that might be his chance at jury nullification. Can the judge order a medical examination? His doctor needs to do a brain chemistry panel to see what kind of heavy metals might be in him: diet sodas are notorious for having cadmium, lead, mercury. Clean him up and wake him up because we can’t lose a trial because of his falling asleep. Perhaps he could have an IV of mega-vitamins, including a vitamin B shot. And if he is pretending, we need to know that as well. Also, ‘antichrist’ is the operative word in your comment. Indeed, he defines antichrist.
I wish I were clairvoyant. As to a mental exam, someone would have to make a motion. If so it might turn into a battle of experts. Trump is in denial of practically everything in his life, and protests everything, even when they may be inconsequential or irrelevant or even might help his defense.
Depends on his level of fear. If he doesn't have the capacity not to be aware of the consequences, he'd be less motivated to plea bargain.
My thoughts from this morning on trump.
https://substack.com/home/post/p-143604905?source=queue
The Judge advised him—“If you do not show up there will be an arrest.” No wiggle room there..........
After reading about his decline into dementia yesterday, you've got him I think. He is an unworthy baboon, and while he deserves the distress he's brought on himself, I can't help but pity him.
I guess that's a manifestation of an excess of empathy, which itself can get you into trouble.
His mania won't let hm sleep, as long as he can rustle about. Reqiured to sit, exhaustion overtakes him.
This man needs to be in long term care, not the White House.
Jen, I appreciate your thoughts as I too feel empathy. I have no pity for him though because of the distress he's brought upon millions. Let's start with separating babies and children from their families.
The list is long, and starts in boyhood. Where he still is.
I loath the man.
Knowing his nature makes me wonder how much damage empathy can do to the empathetic.
Excellent observation!
"They have eyes full of adultery, insatiable for sin. They entice unsteady souls. They have hearts trained in greed and are accursed children"
2 Peter 2:14
Lovely. "Accursed children"
Taking his usual Adderall would make him unable to sit still and shut his piehole.
Also, psychiatrist have stated that he is in dementia, sundowning, which means he stays up all night, so it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s in his manic state.
This is another "Gloria gem", eh? she's a gifted poet.
Thank you!
Hey there. At least it warmer now while waiting to get in. But not until the actual trial begins.
Isn't she amazing?! I see her verses as top of the line hip hop lyrics!
Loved the poem👏👏👏
Thank you!
Thank you, Gloria! I find it helps to laugh sometimes to avoid utter despair, so here's one for you I wrote a few weeks back.
PAY TO PRAY
Trump's Bible is so fine and nifty
Buy now to keep or send as gift--The
Greatest Story Ever Told
Now has Trump at centerfold!
On Easter Don was far too busy
Tweeting a torrential tizzy
While other folks all went to church
God's Pal was out there moving merch.
So don't forget to send your pennies
And your fives, and tens, and twennies
Because the Trinity is so passe
Trump says it's FOUR--so buy today!
Connie Kite 4/16
Brilliant and spot on poem 👏👏👏
Jury Duty Questioning:
Court: Bill Katz, are you well read on current events?
Yes ma’am I am.
Court: Do you think that you will make an impartial juror?
Yes sir, I do.
Court: Mr Katz, have you written anything on the topic of former President Orange Fat Baby?
No ma’am.
Court: You are confirmed as juror number 1.
Valere, Seuss worthy. I can picture the illustrations in my mind
Credit to our poet in residence, Gloria Horton-Young:)
I do love a good poem about a villain being brought to justice. Especially when everyone but said villain knows what all the words mean! Thank Valere for sharing and Gloria, you have talent! Good start to my day! ♥️
Ha! Well, yes. But Gloria is a cut above. I looked up ‘varlet.’ Indeed he is a blathering, blithering varlet. Wish she could have fit ‘blatherskiting in that string…a bit of difference, but perhaps for the next go-round. He is both. Leave it to the Scots to create blatherskite - one of my own favorite go-to descriptors💙
Nice bit of haiku.
Gloria! Hip hop artist extraordinaire!!
Some of those who said they couldn’t be fair may be people who actually were just afraid to be jurors on a Trump trial.
I couldn't sit on this jury. After years of page six nonsense, I grew tired of him. Never watched or had the desire to watch The Apprentice. I could look away, not bother with it, didn't effect my life in any way. However, when he was President, it did effect me. As a NYer, I knew who this man was, and discovered even more. I would wake up every morning wondering if we avoided a crisis. He is a narcissistic psychopath, and I would NOT have been able to fair and impartial. Maybe 10% fear, but mostly, I just don't like the man
The fact that he has threatened witnesses makes me really scared for jurists. It would be naive to think that he doesn't have thugs among his "friends" who would be happy to find out everything about the jurors --- and respond accordingly.
I couldn't imagine having that creeps beady eyes looking at me every day for five weeks.
Does it really require five weeks? Are the issues that complicated after Stormy and Cohen testify?
I want the prosecution to present their case well, and thoroughly. To survive trump's inevitable appeals. I don't want to see the case overturned on appeal.
Fair enough - but I sometimes think lawyers are like crooked can drivers, and take you the LONG way home.
Exactly what leads you to believe that the attorneys “are like crooked cab drivers!” What indication have you had that they will take “the long road home” - whatever that means in a trial. Like them or not they are professionals - even the defense attorneys. And while one may not necessarily like what they do or the motions they make it is their job as Joyce has pointed out.
Additionally what may look like an easy peasy just get two witnesses up on the stand and it’s all over is to ignore the complexities that exist in any trial. I would not want to be one of the prosecutors on this case. The stakes are high and the pressure is immense. I have a lot of admiration for them.
I have to believe that Jack Smith knows what he’s doing.
I’m sure he knows more about it than I do
Jack Smith is not the prosecutor in this case.
Interesting how many people impute the evils of their clients to attorneys.
Well, the prosecution does have to convince the jury they are telling the truth. And the defense does get to put on their evidence.
Shutters*
And shudders
I think every juror should carry a silver cross....
I don’t know. The scumbag is guilty as sin. I couldn’t put my disdain aside and sit in that jury box. He belongs in jail.
I don’t know, I loathe the insipid bastard as much as any man alive, but I believe I could sit on a jury and just make my decision on his guilt or innocence based on what was presented at trial. I have sat on a jury and even been it’s foreman, justice based on the law and presented evidence is of paramount importance, so I do think it’s possible to loathe the insipid bastard and still objectively view the evidence, it’s a job our system of justice places upon us, I can’t imagine ignoring that solemn obligation.
I agree. The prosecution has to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The defense has to plant that seed of doubt. The jury has to objectively decide based on that. I think I could do that whether I thought he was guilty or not, at the start. However, these people will have to contend with the fallout that is inevitable when it's all over. Whoever is chosen will need to be willing to do that.
I loathe him too but if I had to be on his jury I would take lots of notes and refer to them. I hope that's allowed because if not I couldn't be a good juror on any case. I have to organize my mind on paper (or in electrons, but I have to see what I think visually).
My exact thought! While I would happily obfuscate to get on that jury, I understand why others would be afraid!
Both/and
Favorite quip from Xitter:
“Don Snorleone”
Also: “The Nodfather”
😂😂
You made my day with these names. Thank you for a good laugh.
Benedict Yawnold.
Al Napone.
Bernie Nodoff.
Yawn Wilkes Booth.
Priceless!! Still laughing.
😆😆😆
Love it! I needed a good laugh today!
😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣
🤣
Hah!
😂😂
Increasing, as reports of Trump failure to stay awake were documented, you see the degenerate intent of the masters of the Republican Party. What better figurehead than one who will willingly - or dementedly - guarantee to accede to whatever policies the donor elite want? A catastrophic prospect.
Dream on (so to speak)!
Just like the industrialists of Germany thought they could control Hitler?
If they didn’t profit from that maniac surely they would have influenced policy to some degree - I believe that. They considered him their dog more like - supplying them with slave labor after all.
I don’t dispute that Trump and the upper class of America have a mutually beneficial relationship. But I don’t think he is their puppet.
Their support for him is very short sighted. Constitutional democracy has worked very well for our ruling class, and nothing that seriously threats their power or wealth is on the agenda of either party. They are crazy to want to put an irrational autocrat into power. How well did that work out for Germany, Italy or Japan?
Mitchell, first I agree it will not end well if his backers get him in. They’re too isolated in their privacy and suffocating privilege, believe they’re smarter than everyone else (or at least the majority they likely dismiss as rubes they can manipulate). Because of that they’re fixated on what they perceive as threats - a graduated income tax, fair wages they’ll be obliged to pay, too many people of color, too many people who are not in lockstep with an overarching religious leadership they can co-opt, people who know history, read books that put ideas in their heads … any number of bogeymen.
People can start by boycotting every company that tries to prevent the unionisation of the workforce - to me that is pretty awful.
Couldn’t agree more. Union family. Not one of us ever crossed a picket line.
Thank you Joyce. We are lucky to have your explanation every evening🙏🏼⚖️☮️
Thank you once again Joyce. I took a peek at some of the headlines today and tuned into a couple of cable channels to get the drift of what happened today.
I have one bone to pick with the Washington Post when it comes to their reporting on the jury selection. I'll name the reporter. It's David Nakamura. There appears to be a newer piece after the problem reporting that I'll discuss in a second. The headline of the newer piece is "Trump comes face-to-face with prospective jurors, anonymous to public". In this piece he seems to take care in describing some of the jurors, noting that "But the opening day of jury selection sounded more like the prospective jurors were reciting their dating app profiles than sounding off about their partisan views of Trump."
However, earlier in the day, as the Washington Post wass doing live updates, some specifically from Mr. Nalamura, he described more than one juror information about the neighborhood where they lived, who they worked for, and what their spouse did for a living. It seemed clear to me to be enough information for a zealous tracker to identify the exact person. One was noted to be a prosecutor in the Bronx and another was noted as working at a bookseller, where the name of the bookshop was shown.
I just went back to find these specific instances, and thankfully, the Post has provided the following statement above all of the live updates and has edited the information to be a bit less specific:
CLARIFICATION
Several posts have been updated to remove specific information about where prospective jurors work, which was detailed in open court.
When I saw what I had seen earlier, I wrote directly to Mr. Nakamura to point out the issue. It seems that through one or more others pointing this out, the Post made the appropriate updates.
But the information Nakamura provided is out there... you can't put the genie back in the bottle. I find his behavior unacceptable. He should be censured, and put on some other beat where lives are not at stake.
James, the judge should revoke his E ticket
Wow! I guess the potential jurors were freaking out when they read Mr. Nakamura's original article. At least he didn't blab their names, addresses, the names of their next of kin, and his email address.
I just sent a letter to WashPo, suggesting they send him back to the Sports Desk . . . or at least take him off this trial, if his judgment is this bad.
It is appalling that no one at WAPO checked his work before that was released. Or did they?
I had the exact same concern and am glad you raised it as well. (I commented on it too, before seeing yours)
Bob Monsour, thank you for sharing that. Jurors must be protected!
More on this just today (Tuesday, Apr 16). I'm watching MSNBC and they discuss a prospective juror that is a woman who lives on the upper east side and is a teacher. She had filmed a celebration in the streets of the moment when Biden was declared the winner in 2020 and posted it on Facebook. Don't you think that her friends or co-workers might be able to tell who it was? She's got friends on Facebook that likely know she's a teacher and might just remember that specific post. I am deeply troubled with the TV media insisting on revealing identifiable characteristics of these prospective jurors.
So I go to Google and search for the phrase "Trump jurors to remain anonymous" and one of the pieces from thehill.com proudly presents a piece titled "Here are the first 7 jurors picked to serve on Trump’s hush money trial". Here's the link with what seems like identifiable information to me:
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4598403-here-are-the-first-7-jurors-picked-to-serve-on-trumps-hush-money-trial/
I find this sickening.
It was a fascinating day! Thank you for tying it all together this evening!
I will only have three opportunities tomorrow during the school day to check in! I’ll be excited to get in my car and head home so I can catch up on all the highlights!
I’m thankful to everyone on here that indeed
we ARE indeed in this together! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Haaaaa, too many indeeds! That means that it is, indeed, time for me to go to bed!
💤💤💤💤💤💤
It would be anyway. Not to worry.
ROFL - love this Irene:))
Sleep tight!
Sweet dreams, Irene!
❣️😁 Self-editing is a scarce talent. Brava, my cohort, indeed.
He’s fucked. In the photos I saw of him today at court in Manhattan he looks old and tired and flaccid and sick. And it’s only day one.
Nowhere to run to, nowhere to hide. Every day. All day. He has to sit through the endless tedium of routine courtroom procedures. With his mouth shut. Three weeks to pick a jury. And then weeks of “betrayal “ by people who once revered him. And he can’t campaign. His physical presence in court is required. He gets 60 seconds to bleat on the courthouse steps about the galactic injustice of it all, but he looks evermore diminished, weak, and powerless. This is shrinking him. G
He’s suddenly The Wizard. Not powerful at all, but a sham, a puny man behind a fearsome fačade.
A popular, cautionary quote recently was “A clown with a flamethrower still has a flamethrower.” A corollary is finally emerging. “A clown with a flamethrower is still a clown.”
I saw all that in his face today. He’s hiding it as best he can. But he’s fucked … and he knows it.
Actually, it is the Ozempic that is shrinking him!
Ah...that explains his newly svelte look. I was wondering how he managed to look thinner while still consuming KFC and McD cuisine. I thought he might have just discovered Spanx (and I also couldn't help wondering how that worked with his Depends).
He looks thinner?? Looks like the same lard-ass to me!
KFC and McD “cuisine”!🥰
Jack, you paint a beautiful picture. I hope your conclusion is true. And I also wish that he was not allowed to speak on the courthouse steps. That would be one great reason for jailing him…
For a blowhard like him, your second paragraph sounds out a fitting punishment before the fact.
I am very pessimistic that Trump will be found guilty in this trial or in any of the others. All it takes is for Trump supporters in the jury pool to masquerade as ideal open-minded jurists. They would blatantly lie on the questionnaire and during oral questioning by the attorneys, ensuring at least one of them will be chosen. Then, they would refuse to convict, causing a mistrial and a big political win for Trump. The odds of this occurring for at least one jurist are virtually 100% in my mind. What say you?
As I said before, a courtroom run by a fair, but no nonsense jurist like Merchan has an amazing (and gratifying...) prophylactic effect on juries. Sure there are exceptions over time but, the centuries old jury system is still extraordinarily robust. Ordinary citizens, with all their human frailties, somehow become largely different beings as jurors. That they take their role very seriously and generally don't take kindly to anyone --- especially a defendant --- disrespecting the process of which they are part should be a warning to Orange 1. Something he seems to have ignored in the second E. Jean Carroll defamation proceeding to his peril.
Good point, for "ordinary citizens." As you know, MAGAts are NOT ordinary citizens but instead are members of a cult.
Good point - Dale's solid belief in the jury system is charming, but might not apply when you get one Trump cult member in play.
No. New York isn’t red neck ford pick-uo p confederate sticker on back fender country.
Please see my reply to Mitchell Zimmerman.
I understand it could happen. But people who are called up to be jurors don’t submit an application form. However, what you said has merit. I was once called to be a juror. I at first lied on my questionnaire. I had once been arrested for weed. But at the last moment , I asked to be dismissed. I would have made however, a very astute juror had I stayed.
It would be gross negligence for the prosecution not to have a large team doing a social media search on every potential juror in real time during jury selection. Anyone with strong political views, or caught lying, would be discovered at that time and dismissed.
Another good point. I only hope that the prosecution pulls out all stops in a deep-dive into the backgrounds of the jury pool. I would think it would be very difficult to establish that anyone is a Trump supporter, though.
Yes - harder than striking them as a fair-minded person.
I wonder if a cult member is forced to sit thru a trial that reveals the pure grotesque truth close up and in their face, could a little light leak in? 🤷🏻♀️ I agree with Joyce Vance, that we need cameras in that court room. As it is, he gets to just come out of the court room and whine about it being a witch hunt to his cult instead of the long needed accountability to our rule of law.
I think so too. As soon as there is a camera though, it could turn into a free for all that could compromise the entire proceeding. If I was a juror I would not want any chance that my face was on camera.
One thing I've concluded about MAGAts is that they are unpersuadable, so no, I don't think "a little light" could leak in.
I agree - it only takes one MAGA nut to scrape in by lying, and not having any social media history behind them, and Trump can get off.
Agreed.
You can read my thoughts about it here.
https://ki6mnk.substack.com/p/jury-selection-day-let-justice-prevail
I agree - firstly the case for felony convictions isn't a slam dunk, and secondly, it only takes one Trumpy jury member to bring it all undone.
It takes more than one holdout to get an acquittal. Also I have read that a single holdouts are under extraordinary pressure to explain exactly WHY they do not think that the evidence was compelling. As was stated by another commenter, above & also below--people sworn into a jury become different--more serious, especially in the jury of a no-nonsense judge such as Judge Merchan.
Yes, one needs a majority (I believe) for an acquittal, but only one for a mistrial. MAGAta are cult-like. I think pressure from the other jurors or even the judge would not come close to overriding the hero-like status that other MAGAts would bestow on a hold-out juror.
Not just a majority; acquittal requires that all twelve members agree to acquit. I somehow don't think you could find twelve Noo Yawkers who would agree that the prosecution's evidence ISN'T convincing. Noo Yawkers know the Trumps all too well.
There is no way for MAGA fanatics to stuff the jury pool. There may be some of them out there, but (if I recall what I read recently correctly), Manhattan went 85-15 for Biden. And every Trump voter is not a determined MAGite. Yes, there's a risk of a Trump supporter being on the jury, and determined to acquit him no matter what. But it is far, far from a certainty.
Yes, NYC is predominantly Democratic. However, there will be *hundreds* called for the jury. Certainly you would agree that at least one of those is a TRUMP supporter? Again, it only takes one to force a mistrial.
I agree that there will highly likely be at least one Trump voter in the jury. But I don’t think that necessarily means they will ignore the evidence. We are in uncharted waters.
I was thinking that too but I read some commentary that said there's tremendous pressure in a jury room coming from the other jurors who want to know exactly what your reasoning is. They might ferret out such a person. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.
Please see my reply to T L Mills.
No…
Every time I read your closing Joyce, "we are in this together," I feel a calm come over me 💙
I think trump should have one of his SS detail bring a nice comfy Mr. Pillow pillow with them each day of the trial. Let him get nice and comfy because the ride is going to get bumpy as soon as the jury is impaneled. Or, they could bring some toothpicks to keep his eyelids propped open, and maybe a napkin to wear under his mouth to catch any droppings during the day. I know, yuck! But, Joyce is correct, not a good look for anyone who desires to run the country into the ground like trump does. Sounds like Judge Merchan is doing is level best to get things underway; I wish him much good will. It will be more difficult once the prosecution starts putting on their case. Btw, if you want to see a scary movie, go see Civil War, which we saw today. It scared us plenty, but all of us who fear a trump Presidency should see it. I yield back my time.
I will simply have to use my imagination. Movies like "Civil War" and "Watch Against All Enemies" would steal my sleep and/or give me nightmares for months.
Oh, I totally understand. That aside, it was very well done, especially if the intent was to wake us the hell up.
Watch Against All Enemies on YouTube or Apple. That one is scary.
I understand that is the case. Thanks.
I’m going in but not now. I need to drive to New Haven from Hartford, the take the Metro North at 4 AM to Grand Central then the number 6 subway to Court then wait. If they approve my photo press credentials I’m in if not, I fight with the spectator class. We’ll see. Maybe I’ll get a few entries for my book. I’m there to promote my book of course.
Maybe you could make some handouts of Gloria’s poem and pass them out in line…:)
Ha ha not in court.
Pooh! She wants published
Good luck!
I didn't know that this court allowed spectators. Is that actually true?
I don’t know. I went o E. Jean last October and they did. Pictures show this courtroom to be smaller.
Of course!
Of course!
Thank you Joyce.
When the juror questions were made public, I read through them as if I had to answer them. I don't think my answers would thrill trump's side. It would be hard not to have bias when you hate everything about a person as much as I do.
This is going to be so interesting, watching it all play out.
I'm also anxious for the SCOTUS arguments this week and next.
I couldn't even lie well enough to get on that jury. My contempt would belie me.
You need to be a latent thespian
Same here
I have questions.
1. How does the judge's decision to deny Trump's renewed motion to recuse align with legal obligations and ethical guidelines for judges in similar situations?
2. In what ways might Trump's lawyers' tactics, such as filing motions they know they are likely to lose, be setting the stage for potential issues on appeal if Trump is convicted?
3. How does the judge's ruling on the admissibility of evidence related to the National Enquirer's "catch and kill" practices and Trump's alleged affairs balance the relevance and potential prejudice of such evidence?
4. What factors might the judge consider when deciding whether to hold Trump in contempt for potential violations of the gag order, and how might the timing of the show-cause hearing impact the trial proceedings?
5. How might the judge strike a balance between holding Trump accountable for his behavior and avoiding the appearance of bias or creating grounds for appeal based on prejudice?
6. What implications might Trump's apparent lack of focus and nodding off during the trial proceedings have on public perception of his fitness for office, and how might this behavior be viewed differently compared to similar actions by other political figures?
7. How does the high number of prospective jurors excused for inability to be fair and impartial reflect the challenges of selecting an unbiased jury in a high-profile case involving a polarizing figure like Donald Trump?
8. What strategies might Trump's lawyers employ when questioning Michael Cohen's credibility based on his prior federal conviction, while avoiding the suggestion that Trump is also guilty of related crimes?
Great questions Gloria, I wish had the answers.
Me too
As to question 1...the first time trump asked the judge to recuse himself, the judge asked a state advisory council on ethics for their determination and they saw no conflict that would require refusal. I believe he appealed this and lost as well.
I know nothing about your other questions.
I don't know the answers but I do wonder if Fox News viewers will even find out about his sleeping in court.
Day One. Delays seem to be over but now his attorneys are looking for appeals if/when they lose.
What a crew!!!!
Thank goodness Judge Merchan “continues to make legal rulings that will be defensible on appeal.”
Next Wednesday will be violation of gag orders. IMO trump will continues his texts and speeches. It is all being recorded. Should be interesting and I’m hopeful it will be a penalty of not just a few thousand dollars.
Just deciding on a jury seems like it will be long. Day one trump had to take a snoozer. Sleepy don trying to impress potential jurists.
Thank you, Joyce for sharing information and your input.
Monica, Day 1 may seem like delay particularly when the Defendant's main tactic is delay, delay, delay. But, as the Professor noted with her info & input the case is off to a good start. I also agree with the Professor that Defendant's Attorneys are seeking "invited error"; error found on appeal is very unlikely with this seasoned Judge who stills sits for his "Mental health Court" cases on Wednesdays.
Pre-trial motions particularly Pre-trial rulings on what evidence can be admitted on direct, rebuttal or not at all can & should control the rest of the trial. It's a little like 3 Dimensional Chess . Trial Judges & trial counsel are wired into deductive reasoning where one piece of evidence leads to 5 to 20 steps down the evidentiary trail to get the desired Judgment.
Tuesday Morn' Annotation via LISA RUBIN who was in the DAY 1 Courtroom: Lisa confirms that most of the Day 1 was consumed with Pre-Trial Motions. Lisa reports the courtroom- mart Prosecutor sought "clarification" from the Judge on multiple evidentiary points & essentially gave a Mini Opening Statement:
Per Lisa, the Prosecution will submit evidence there was a 2015 media agreement between Trump & AMI-David Pecker:
1. 'Bury' negative stories on Trump
2. 'Accentuate' Trump's Talking Lies
3. 'Denigrate' Trump's Human targets
Buckle Up.
Yes, Bryan, now it’s all about setting the case up for appeal, with one eye on finding the one holdout juror. Such is the stuff of criminal trials. Thank God for the judge with years of experience in handling such cases. I wonder why the heck NY law allows the defendant’s presence at sidebar conferences during jury selection. The purpose of bringing the potential juror up to the bench is to allow discussion of sensitive issues outside the presence of other potential jurors. Trump will be there at every turn giving the potential juror the stink eye. And I’ll bet he won’t be able to keep his trap shut, either.
Good question Laura; I have never seen that in California Courts.
Nor in Texas courts.
Thanks for the clarification Bryan.
What amazes me is that trump can find lawyers willing to debase themselves in this way.
🐑 🐑🐑🐑🐑
Y'all have to cut the guy some slack on the sleepy thing; first of all, there are the late night tweets. Maybe the muse doesn't strike until after midnight, no? Then, there's the early morning wake-up call to renew the make up, the spray-on tan and the famous comb-over, choosing the costume (Shall I wear this red, or no, that red tie?) before heading out the door. Then, depending on where he's staying, there could be a commute into Manhattan as well. I know I'd be bleary-eyed if I had to keep up that kind of schedule.
And when is he going to have time for golf? The word is that he is taking Ozempic, lost 20 pounds, has a new haircut and is curtailing the orange makeup…the way all criminals gussy up for their court appearances.
I don’t know about him curtailing the orange. He has, seemingly, switched to brown. If he goes any darker, he’s going to have to have himself deported.
Good one!
I don't see the effects of Ozempic. 20 pounds off his obesity # is chump change. Who's prescribing it, Dr. Ronnie? Agree with Marla that he's switched makeup from orange to brown. A lateral move, not an improvement. And when he walks away from the camera in the courthouse hall, from the back you can clearly see his big ol' bald spot.
For a man with money(haha) he has crap taste in clothing.
Where is Melania in all this?