Mitchell Epner: I swear that this piece of stupidity is really currently posted on Former President Donald Trump’s Truth Social account. Since the birth of trials in America, the prosecution has ALWAYS had the last word. The man is an ignoramus. That is a fact, not an opinion.

I swear that this piece of stupidity is really currently posted on Former President Donald Trump’s Truth Social account. Since the birth of trials in America, the prosecution has ALWAYS had the last word. The man is an ignoramus. That is a fact, not an opinion.

“80% of conservative outrage is just finding out how stuff works for the first time”

to be fair, he is also a whiny shithead

Also a fact; not an opinion.

If he were second, he would complain that he doesn’t get to go first.

SO UNFAIR

I think you miss the point. Trump is again asserting he is Wilhoit's axiom personified: he is not bound by any law but is protected by it. All rules should change to protect him because that's how he designs "fair." The Republican Party will be repeating this line tomorrow.

You may be right. We will see what tomorrow brings. [sarcasm alert] Four legs good, two legs better! [end sarcasm alert]

Yup. It's all about a victimhood narrative to slake the base's thirst for self pity and to get low-info voters to feel sorry for him. He doesn't care that he's wrong. bsky.app/profile/did:...

It's not about understanding, it's about sustaining a narrative of victimhood to feed his and his followers' inexhaustible self-pity.

…exactly… the objective is impunity… most don’t get it… actions so far outside collective consciousness we can’t adjust to the threat… crime covered by scandal… scandal covered by buffoonery…

Whoa, hold on there... Person. Woman. Man. Camera. TV. Could an ignoramus do that?

Once again, his problem is with America, and its rules and conventions.

"how dare they treat me like any other defendant" has been at the heart of most of Trump's public statements about his criminal cases from the jump

In GA defense could go last if no evidence introduced for a long while

Thank you for correcting me. I will not make that mistake again.

I’m not sure I understand. If there’s a long delay between close of evidence and summations?

They changed the rule in 2000

How often would that ever come up? Huh. Can you give me a cite so I can take a look? Thanks!

He’s operating on the correct assumption that his supporters are ignoramuses and will not know that that’s how all criminal tries are structured.

crap. *trials*

I wonder how much we can blame scripted drama. I have a sense that in such examples a trial often ends with the defendant's lawyer's impassioned/tricksy/revelatory statement, because that's what's needed for maximum tension. I was somewhat surprised when I learned it wasn't how it works.

You misunderstand him. He's not asking why it's this way in general. He's asking why this rule applies to him, specifically. Why 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘯'𝘵 he get special treatment? Yeah, most of it's an act, but the idea that he's permanently, perpetually unbound by any rules—that's Trump's one core belief.

And his followers go down the rabbit hole with him that he should get special treatment. The problem is America and it's institutions, not Donald J. Trump.

"Why President Trump is right to question this anti-libertarian practice" ~ Robby Soave and Jonathan Turdley.

Wish he would stop pounding on the social media table.

There's a way to force it. Our justice system is just too wimpy.

He knows his audience has no idea how a trial works. This just reinforces their priors, so it’s an effective post.

He’s gaslighting

His tweet is giving temper tantrum 😂

For a guy who has spent most of his life in court for one thing or another, surely this has to be deliberate stupidity?

Moron. Even watching tv shows you would learn that🙄

Oh you want him to sue you now?

Danger is real. Fear is a choice. I have no fear of such a lawsuit. NY has a strong anti-SLAPP law.

I think it's possible Trump doesn't believe this, but knows millions who would. Either option is chilling.

He doesn't know nothing about lawsuits.

Further proof that in fifth grade he was that kid in Social Studies who said, “when will I need to know this junk?” and didn’t read the assignments.

But the other people on trial are guilty. He isn't, so different rules should apply. Verdict first, trial after.

The dementia is leaking out of his ears, I read that in a piece by a psychiatrist, it's scary if you think about it.

Post