Trump’s New York criminal trial kicked off Monday. It’s the first time a former president is standing trial on criminal charges.

Donald Trump is making history Monday as the first former president to stand trial on criminal charges, a watershed moment for American politics, the presidential election and Trump himself.

Trump — the presumptive Republican nominee for president — is required to be present for the entire trial, which could last as long as eight weeks. He’s pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records, a low-level felony punishable by up to four years in prison. Before the trial kicked off with jury selection Monday, lawyers from both sides argued over some of the more sensational evidence that prosecutors are hoping to use to show why Trump was eager to bury negative stories about himself during the 2016 presidential election.

“The name of this case is the People of the State of New York versus Donald Trump,” Judge Juan Merchan told the initial group of 96 potential jurors in the afternoon. Trump stood and turned around when he was introduced as the defendant, and gave the prospective jurors — some of whom were staring at him intently — a little tight-lipped smirk.

Trump had his eyes closed for a period of time as the judge was reading the potential jurors his instructions, and his eyes looked red and bloodshot when he opened them and peered at the judge.

  • Optional@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    What, the pussy grabbing?

    Yeah. All the pussy grabbing. Hey, don’t wait, just shove your repulsive anal fissure lips on theirs, when you’re “a star” “they let you do it”.

    Is it any wonder republiQans are so supportive of him? Really speaks to their priorities and what kind of country they want.

  • Treczoks@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    “If you disrupt the proceedings we can proceed with the trial in your absence. … Do you understand?” the judge asked. “I do,” Trump replied.

    That might be a problem. If the judge kicks him out, is he free to go campaigning, or does he have to be in reach, e.g. a room in the court house?

    I think it would be better to have him present all the time, so a) he cannot go campaigning and b) he will irritate and annoy everyone in court when he is present as he does not understand when to shup up, and pissing off the jury would be a good thing here.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      They’re usually given some means to watch from a room in which they can’t be heard. Communication is through their defense.

    • catloaf@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      Why not hold him in contempt and jail him for the rest of the day?

      • pete_the_cat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        I was gonna say right before I saw your comment “I would love for them to hold him in contempt” but we all know that won’t happen 😑

        • Transporter Room 3@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          At this point I’m convinced he could scream in front of 10,000 cameras that he wants a mob of his followers to storm the judges homes and tear them down with everyone inside, and leave the courthouse

          And nobody would do anything about it except start an investigation as to whether he’s allowed to do that or not.

          In 3 years.

    • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)@badatbeing.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I think if he is made to leave he is either 1) jailed or 2) fined and reprimanded and back again the next day. Leaving the state to campaign would almost certainly get him found in contempt and jailed for at least a little while.

      • conditional_soup@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yeah, that was in another article I read. The judge basically said “you can be here, or you can be in jail, and we don’t strictly need you here. It’s your choice.”

  • A Phlaming Phoenix@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    “I think the guy who is facing criminal charges ‘vs the people’ is the best candidate to be the president over those people he is against and defrauded.” - My parents, probably, I dunno I don’t speak to them anymore.