The Trump porn star hush money trial is scheduled for tax day. The Indicted Impeached Insult Comedian has done everything he can to delay the trial. Those are not the actions of an innocent man or, as we say at Adrastos World Headquarters, a not guilty guy.
I’ve warmed to this case. It’s a simple story detailing a simple act of desperation by simpletons. The payoff landed during the Access Hollywood mishigas. The goal of the Trump-Cohen scheme was to “catch and kill” the Stormy Daniels story before it delivered a knockout punch to Trump’s 2016 campaign.
Repeat after me: Donald Trump is a pussy. He should grab himself. That goes for likely witness David Pecker as well.
The case has been derided by many as insignificant. If that’s so why was Defendant Trump so anxious to delay the trial? We know why: He’s guilty.
Judge Marchan’s letter and jury instructions can be found in PDF form at this link.
It’s a cliche to say that Voir Dire is the most important part of any criminal trial. Some things are cliches because they’re true. This is one of them.
Voir Dire literally means “to speak the truth,” which is something Team Trump does rarely and grudgingly. Jurors, however, are obliged to do so.
I thought it would be amusing to fill out some of the questionnaire. I don’t think I’d make it on the jury. Trump’s lawyers on this case are competent and paid via the magic of campaign contributions.
The lead mouthpiece is Todd Blanche, no relation to Blanche du Bois as far as I know. His co-counsel is Susan Necheles, which Andrew Weissmann pronounces as necklace. Who am I to question The Puppetmaster? I wonder if the Necheles in question involves pukka shells. Her client makes me wanna pukka, after all…
There are 42 questions, presumably that’s a coincidence that has nothing to do with this biopic:
The Kaiser of Chaos has compared himself to Navalny and Mandela, can Jackie Robinson be far behind? That makes no sense but neither do the other comparisons. Trump is a criminal, not a dissident or a hero.
The first 9 questions are Voir Dire boilerplate. Number 10 deals with media, social and otherwise, including the ironically named Truth Social.
I’ve italicized and bold faced the questions but not my answers. Who needs italicized or bold faced answers? I almost wrote bald faced because that describes Trump’s lies.
11. Do you listen to or watch podcasts? If so, which ones? Jamie O is our podcast correspondent, but I do listen to Prosecuting Donald Trump with the crack legal team of Weissmann and McCord. I get a kick out of her calling him Andy. I call him The Puppetmaster.
12. Do you listen to talk radio? If so, which programs? Hell no. I’d rather stick pins in my eyeballs.
13. Have you, a relative, or a close friend ever been the victim of a crime? If so, please briefly tell us what happened? Yes, yes, and yes,
That brings us to a musical interlude:
Questions 14-17 address employment.
Questions 18-20 deal with criminal cases, the po-po, and such. No, I’m not under indictment in 4 jurisdictions. That’s the defendant.
21. A. Do you have any political, moral, intellectual, or religious beliefs or opinions which might prevent you from following the Court’s instructions on the law or which might slant your approach to this case? I’m as slanted as the floor in a vintage fun house. Trumpers might think they’re immune from this stricture and ask: What’s a moral or intellectual belief? They haven’t a clue
B. Do you have any political moral, intellectual or religious beliefs or opinions that would. I believe that former President* Pennywise is guilty. I’m out.
Let’s skip around. Ruling out questions is boring. I try not to be dull, duller, or Dulles. I certainly think renaming Dulles Airport for Trump is a preposterous idea. Dull too.
25. Do you practice a religion that would prevent you from sitting as a juror on any particular weekday or weeknight? I can be atheist any day of the week. Besides, I don’t need practice, I’m good at it. <rim shot>
Holy Lou Costello joke, Batman.
27. Can you promise to guard against allowing stereotypes or attitudes about individuals or about groups of people, referred to as an implicit bias, influence your decision? Does calling the defendant names count? I have many nicknames for the Kaiser of Chaos. The most insulting is former President* Pennywise. The OG was the Insult Comedian which has grown to Indicted Impeached Insult Comedian. That’s a lotta typing, y’all.
Question 29 is a multiparter aimed at smoking out any Trumpers. If there are any on the panel, they may lie like their hero. Lying is like breathing for him.
Next up, my favorite question of the 42:
30. Have you ever considered yourself a supporter of or belonged to any of the following:
– the QAnon movement
– Proud Boys
– Oathkeepers
– Three Percenters
– Boogaloo Boys
– Antifa
Hell, no. Does Antifa even exist? I’ve mocked the rest as hopeless wankers. The malakatude, it burns.
Questions 31-34 deal with the Trumpy elephant in the room. Hell yes, I’m biased. I want the stupid motherfucker in jail or under house arrest.
It’s former Fixer time:
35. Have you read (or listened to audio) of any of the following books or podcasts by Michael Cohen or Mark Pomerantz? If so, please let us know if what you have heard or read affects your ability to be a fair and impartial juror in this case.
_ Disloyal: A Memoir (2020)
_ Mea Culpa (the podcast)
_Revenge (2022)
_People Vs. Donald Trump (2023)
The last one is Mark Pomerantz’s book criticizing the Manhattan DA’s office for timidity in trying Trump. No help for the defense there.
The only box I can check is Disloyal, which was Cohen’s first book. It was okay but didn’t make me want to read or listen to the rest of his oeuvre. That’s a fancy French way of saying work. Everything sounds fancier in French. Hit it, Gomez:
36. The defendant in this case has written a number of books. Have you read (or listened to audio) of any one or more of those books? If so, which ones? Hell, no. Make that fuck no. I’d rather suffer the fate of Alex in A Clockwork Orange than read that stupid motherfucker’s books.
FYI, A Clockwork Orange isn’t about the man some call Orange Jesus. Ain’t nothing clockwork about the Kaiser of Chaos.
The survey concludes with the money questions:
38. Can you promise to set aside anything you may have heard or read about this case and render your verdict based solely on the evidence presented in this courtroom and the law as given to you by the judge? No fucking way. The stupid piece of shit is guilty, guilty, guilty.
41. The United States Constitution provides that a defendant has no burden to introduce any evidence or to testify in a criminal case. If Mr. Trump chooses not to testify, of to introduce any evidence, can you give us your assurance that you will not hold that against him? Make than WHEN he chooses not to testify. If he does, he loses and may face perjury charges as well.
42. Is there any reason, whether it be a bias or something else, that would prevent you from being fair and impartial if you are selected as a juror for this case? Let me count the ways…
The judge doesn’t need for the jury to be 100% ignorant in this case. It’s impossible when the defendant has 100% name recognition. They need the jury to set aside their biases and be as fair as possible. That’s a fairly achievable goal.
Repeat after me: Donald Trump is a pussy. He should grab himself.
I’m tired of answering questions, so the last word goes to Graham Parker:
