Based on the evidence and testimony being presented against Trump

[LiberalFighter]

I don't see how any juror will not vote guilty.

The some of the defense attorney guests on MSNBC are so full of it

[Johnny2X2X]

1. It's always been an easy case to prove

It's going to be about 2 thngs, if the prosecution can get the jury to focus on the actual crimes and not just all the salacious details aaround them. And if the jury was picked well and without a loyal Trumpster who is on the take on it.

[LiberalFighter]

2. I think that will come at the end when each side does their wrapup

[Johonny]

3. There is way more evidence than thought

People that dismissed this case didn't realize how much evidence on paper and recorded there was.

Will that be enough to convict him? These celebrity trials are hard to know how the jury will go.

[LiberalFighter]

4. I think there is because the jury members are seeing and hearing it all themselves

We only have what is being provided on the news. There is a lot just for us. Imagine how it would be if we were jurors?

[Johnny2X2X]

5. But but but

It's all based on the far fetched and exotic legal theory that when people commmit crimes in pursuit of another crime that those crimes can be upgraded to felonies. You know, like what happens in every court every day across the country.

[onenote]

6. Jury cases are never slam dunks. And deciding its over when only one side has presented its case is a risky proposition.