The Usual #rapidresponse Friday Post, Except Different
Added 2024-04-24 20:05:38 +0000 UTCHey folks, this time you DON'T know the drill. This week's Friday episode is going to be Matt's ultimate guide to the NY Trump trial. And so, this week, if you have any questions whatsoever about the trial, post them here so Matt can answer them on the show!
Also, if you do still want to post episode ideas, that's never a bad idea and we'll always take a look at them!
Also also, we're covering some SCOTUS cases soon, probably the immunity and the homelessness one, so any questions on those are welcome!
Thanks!
Comments
Please cover the BS questions from Gorsuch and from Alito. ‘Say the president lead a peaceful protest that delayed a congressional votes. Could he be prosecuted for that?’ What the fuck? If I could be prosecuted for it or Thomas could be prosecuted for it, why the hell is the President any different?
Michael Rops
2024-04-25 23:05:58 +0000 UTCWe already did this! Check the backlog!
Opening Arguments
2024-04-25 21:38:46 +0000 UTCJust for the record, I strongly disagree that Mueller She Wrote makes us seem right wing, let alone even being to the left of us. Allison Gill is pretty solidly just... a Democrat, right?
Opening Arguments
2024-04-25 21:14:24 +0000 UTCThe criminal case requires a unanimous jury for a guilty verdict right? Was the civil trial (E Jean Carroll) jury verdict a simple majority/do we know how large the majority was?
Fort Teaser
2024-04-25 20:46:58 +0000 UTCIn the other case, the immunity case, Justice Roberts lamented a lack thoroughness by the lower court: "What concerns me is, as you know, the court of appeals did not get into a focused consideration of what acts we're talking about or what documents we're talking about," Roberts said. I'm curious if Matt agrees that the lower court should have gone through each itemized act and deemed it official or personal. On one hand I can see where Roberts is coming from. Had the lower court done so it would have given the SC a way to make as narrow of a judgement as possible. On the other hand, it feels like doing so would have undercut the lower court's finding that there is no immunity for any of the acts presented in the record. Are there any other well known cases where the SC required a lower court to itemize their non-findings as Roberts seems to want?
Drew Vogel
2024-04-25 18:51:23 +0000 UTCRegular Rapid Response topic proposal: An early take on the FTC decision to essentially ban non-competes and Chamber of Commerce's constitutionality arguments against. The rule, the political environment, and the composition of the Supreme Court have me concerned we are ripe for a return to Lochner era jurisprudence.
Professional-Grade In-Car Audio Guy
2024-04-25 14:03:47 +0000 UTCWhat happens if Trump's legal fees exceed his resources? (Say after he loses the election.) Can the lawyers on his criminal cases back out? Does the last one have to remain?
Sean
2024-04-25 13:29:20 +0000 UTCIf you had a client that kept falling asleep, what kind of air freshener do you use to cover up the fart smell?
David Bax (Spinobreaker)
2024-04-25 11:43:19 +0000 UTCWould really like a future deep dive on Project 2025. I’ve dived myself and actually read a slice of it and there are more and more sites breaking it down, and more and more media coverage. But not enough people really understand how horrible it is. This site is doing a good job of getting across the horrors of it - linking one of their topical pages - https://www.stopthecoup2025.org/immigration
M. D. Nova
2024-04-25 10:48:12 +0000 UTCI hear a lot of discussion online about this being the weakest case against Trump and on the face of it it is the easiest to portray as politically motivated (the feds declining to charge, the upgrade from misdemeanor, etc). What's the Uncle Frank angle on this case?
Kevin Duff
2024-04-25 08:29:09 +0000 UTCThis is a question about strategy. Could Blanche and Co. do a strategy of "yes he falsified business records, but the felony enhancement is bogus"? Or can he maintain innocence on the charges while still challenging the felony enhancement?
Xavier Branch
2024-04-24 23:46:32 +0000 UTCAbsolutely have to do this--it may have to wait until the decision though. I really wish this one in particular hadn't been the same week that the ny trial was starting *and* immunity arguments were being heard. Plus grant's pass! Just drowning in the news bucket over here
Matt Cameron
2024-04-24 23:23:47 +0000 UTCI was thinking along the lines of the nyt article too. It just does not seem to be basis for election interference. Suppose Trump paid put of his own pocket. No records, no nothing, just a bank transaction from his own personal account to Daniels. Where is the crime?
Maria Kladaki
2024-04-24 23:10:09 +0000 UTCThe Truth Social thing was wildly misleading. The juror said thar they got their news from a variety of sources, and in addition to seeing Trumps truths, they listened to the Mueller She Wrote, a podcast that makes OA seem right wing in comparison.
Gmork
2024-04-24 21:29:46 +0000 UTChttps://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/23/opinion/bragg-trump-trial.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare&sgrp=c-cb
Lawrence Frank
2024-04-24 21:09:07 +0000 UTCThere was an opinion piece in NYT or WAPO saying NY v Trump is an embarrassment to Alvin Bragg, there is no case or second crime blah blah. I have not read the indictment. I think it is clear that the scheme violated election campaign contribution laws, but I think the author was saying that’s federal law. Does it still count? Why do apparently informed people make this kind of argument.
Lawrence Frank
2024-04-24 21:06:47 +0000 UTCNo suggestion here, just appreciation for all the great info Thomas and Matt are providing!
James Hamblin
2024-04-24 20:57:28 +0000 UTCCan you cover the Supreme Court case Idaho vs United States and the impact to the EMTALA? I don't think people realize how bad it could be if that's overturned.
Kathryn Dittamore
2024-04-24 20:46:52 +0000 UTCIANAL, but I've watched quite a few trials. It seems that they often pre-number the exhibits they know or have a strong suspicion they'll use during the trial, and I believe even submit the list with the numbers to the court and opposing side. But they can introduce other stuff, and usually just number them sequentially after the end of the list. But the jury may not end up seeing all of the exhibits on the list, so you can end up with the actual ADMITTED exhibits being something like 1, 2, 5, 6, 10... And it seems some places use numbers for both sides, but just a different starting sequence (like 101 for plaintiff/state and 501 for defense), or numbers for one side and letters for the other (but the trial I saw that did that, after Z, they went to AA then BB instead of AA then AB then AC like Excel columns, so ended up in triple letters for the 53rd exhibit and so on, which then results in fun ones like KKK and XXX, so that's fun).
Cats are NOT trash!
2024-04-24 20:45:42 +0000 UTCI'm curious about the legality of actually banning TikTok. Are there legal ways to actually do it or is it all political posturing?
We have moral luck at home
2024-04-24 20:45:09 +0000 UTCIn addition to hearing your (collective) takes on it, I mostly want to know where I can go to read the transcripts, as well as who the best reporters are who are "live-tweeting" to get the best sound bites from (summary at the end of the day is fine, doesn't have to be LIVE-live). That's probably a better question for this thread than for RRF, though. Anyone able to point me to any good places, though?
Cats are NOT trash!
2024-04-24 20:39:00 +0000 UTCEpisode suggestion - which will be right in Matt’s back yard, as it comes from Massachusetts - the case of Karen Read - it seems to have a protracted procedural history and it seems a bit complicated
Ruairi Hipkin
2024-04-24 20:33:47 +0000 UTCSerious question - I know it might sound frivolous - but what about a front page NYTimes article (or similar publications) titled "TRUMP TOO AFRAID OF [? anything or anyone... e.g. prosecution lawyer] TO TESTIFY" ... every single thing I've heard about the orange guy makes me think it's the sort of thing that would make him demand to testify? Or has this sort of thing fallen flat when attempted before?
I am a philosophical hole
2024-04-24 20:27:30 +0000 UTCFound this. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-trial-jurors-new-york-hush-money/ Jurors #2 and 5 seem concerning, but there does seem to be some balance in there.
Unlikable Internet Goblin
2024-04-24 20:21:58 +0000 UTCI'm so sure I learned this here - that numbering is so the judge, rest of the court, etc knows what you're referring to... You number your own exhibits... But I don't actually know, I'm just trying to be helpful with vague memories
I am a philosophical hole
2024-04-24 20:18:10 +0000 UTCI saw something (sorry, I don't have a source but I wanna say it was the Times [I know, I know]) about one of the jurors saying in the questionnaire that they got their news from Truth Social. If that's true... How does this not invalidate their claims to impartiality? If we have a jury with a die-hard Trumper in it, what are the odds we get something like a hung jury? Can an obstinate but insensible juror lead to a mistrial?
Unlikable Internet Goblin
2024-04-24 20:17:06 +0000 UTCTrump is alleged to have falsified business records related to real estate transactions and tax filings. Since this is a criminal statute we don't necessarily need to hear from anyone on the other side of those transactions. However it sure seems like the people on the other side of the real estate transactions would have a strong interest in the outcome of this case. So I'm curious why we haven't heard from them, either in the media or on the witness list. Do you have any insight? If the government proves there case here won't the real estate counter parties have an easy time suing for fraud? Is the statute of limitations past because the transactions were too long ago? If these counter parties were called to testify in this case would that in any way affect their ability to bring civil claims afterward?
Drew Vogel
2024-04-24 20:15:52 +0000 UTCDevin Nunes crying about unregulated capitalism happening on trump media and asking Jordan, Comer and the rest of Clown College to fix it. But mostly just because I want Matt to explain the difference between "shorting" and "naked shorting" and for Thomas to make jokes about it being cold.
Cameron Kushwara
2024-04-24 20:14:07 +0000 UTCSomething I’ve seen in a lot of US criminal trials, counsel will refer to “exhibit number [whatever]”, show the item to the witness, then formally adduce (move) it into evidence. Why does something have an exhibit number before it’s been admitted into evidence? Don’t items get exhibit numbers once admitted?
Ruairi Hipkin
2024-04-24 20:10:46 +0000 UTCDarn, I was going to suggest this: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/apr/23/hmrc-loses-marshmallow-case-after-judges-ruling-tax#:~:text=A%20food%20company%20has%20won,because%20they%20were%20not%20confectionery. Yeah, I know its not the UK, but its fun
127dot0dot0dot1
2024-04-24 20:07:39 +0000 UTC
