Seth Masket: Hey, perhaps some of the critiques of the Trump prosecution are valid. I propose we have a neutral legal expert look at them, have legal representatives from both the prosecution and the defense make their cases with evidence and testimony, and then have a group of 12 citizens render a judgment.

Hey, perhaps some of the critiques of the Trump prosecution are valid. I propose we have a neutral legal expert look at them, have legal representatives from both the prosecution and the defense make their cases with evidence and testimony, and then have a group of 12 citizens render a judgment.

Heck, the defense can have a say in the selection of those 12 citizens.

Let's make sure they decide unanimously, so the burden of proof becomes really high for the prosecution

Oh wait …

This will never work without some rules in place that everyone agrees on.

Does Trump have 12 peers

We'll never know unless Putin releases the tape.

I guess that is how you would spell it

We'd have to check sources at Russian hotels...

Sounds like socialism.

That sounds interesting, but it needs some stakes. What if someone were to face some kind of punishment based upon the judgement?

We could spice it up for more appeal—make it a TV reality show. Which politicians are working hardest for the mobster, and what has he got on them? Each week, a celebrity panel chooses the candidates, then YOU vote on the blackmail. Fun for the whole family!

That's crazy talk

I cackled so hard I got paint on my pizza. Bless your everything good sir.

And only have tfg supporters, loyalists and employees testify? Oh, wait!

In, say, Tulsa, OK? (Their point, not mine.)

It will never work!

I think we should let the defence appeal to a higher court if they feel the rules weren't followed or there was an error in the procedure. That seems like it would be fair.

Post