Trump supporters try to doxx jurors and post violent threats after his conviction
Trump supporters try to doxx jurors and post violent threats after his conviction
On social media and web forums, users called for jurors, judges and prosecutors to be killed after the former president was found guilty on 34 felony counts.
“We need to identify each juror. Then make them miserable. Maybe even suicidal,” wrote another user on the same forum. “1,000,000 men (armed) need to go to washington and hang everyone. That’s the only solution,” wrote another user. “This s--- is out of control.”
“I hope every juror is doxxed and they pay for what they have done,” another user wrote on Trump’s Truth Social platform Thursday. “May God strike them dead. We will on November 5th and they will pay!”
-
Get their IP addresses. Jail them. Easy. You prevent terrorist attacks. But I guess that's too much to ask from police.
-
Grizzled police-chief: get me those IP addresses
Nerd: setting up the back-trace now, wait, the ip is 127.0.0.1
Grizzled police-chief: don't give me that geek-talk poindexter, speak english
[Zoom in]
Nerd: the post was coming from inside the station.
[No one is shocked]
fin.
-
Here is the problem: These people very carefully choose their words. It’s not illegal to “wish” all the jurors are outed, tortured, maimed, and drawn and quartered over a bed of coals- along with their families, neighbors and first grade teachers.
See that’s all okay to say apparently. This is our legal system. It’s not until they actually say, “I’m going to […],” that LE gets involved. Because none of that other stuff was a direct threat, or intended to incite violence, or intended to instill fear. They were just harmless wishes. Super okay, and nothing to worry about, you see?
-
Yes and no.
There are no "magic words" that make a threat legal. It's always a question of context.
For example if Don Corleone came to your business and said "Nice place you got here, would be a shame if it burned down. By the way I happen to sell fire protection", that would absolutely be illegal even though he never said he would do anything wrong. The intent is clear to all.
So it doesn't really matter if someone says "I wish that guy was dead!" vs "I'm going to kill that guy!" Either one can be an illegal true threat, or not, depending on the context.
-
Didn't they arrest some little 4chan Nazi for saying he wanted to kill a cop in Minecraft? Turned out the trick didn't work for him.
-
We really need better enforcement of laws on threatening civil servants.
These jurors did a job that I might even struggle to take due to the likelihood of these assholes might fuck my life up. Imo, they should be given at least a year of Secret Service or US Marshall protection.
I personally don't trust the local PD to protect them.
-
Conservatives make up over 90% of police in the U.S. Conservatism should be a diaqualifier for positions of authority. It is unsafe to give such dangerous people power over others.
-
Gee, I wonder why people think Trump supporters are fascists.
-
It's astonishing how quickly republicans have aligned to the behaviours of the Nazi party of the 1930s. They're leveraging trump's conviction exactly the same as the Nazis used the Reichstag fire to turn the power of the government against anyone opposed to them.
-
They've been working towards that since the 1930s literally. They planned their own coup attempt largely in the image of Hitler's 10 years after his beer hall putch. Wealthy American robber barons and elected fascist, I mean Republicans planned to overthrow FDR and replace him with a business/ fascist friendly dictator. Only to do even worse than him and get caught and humiliated still in the planning phase. As a result they took a step back and decided a slower approach would be better. And have spent the last century slowly cranking up the fascism. Till today when people are finally starting to realize nearly a century too late.
-
Das wasser ish shmutzig!
-
-
I'll have you know, I also happen to think they're idiots.
-
-
Conservatives are a threat to stable and peaceful societies, and an existential threat to the whole human race due to their climate change denialism. As long as we continue to pretend that conservatism is a valid political ideology and not psychopathy and sadism packaged up to look like politics, they'll continue to undermine democracy and peace until they get the genocide(s) they keep clamoring for
In the present research (N = 675), we focus on the relationship between the dark side of human personality and political orientation and extremism, respectively, in the course of a presidential election where the two candidates represent either left-wing or right-wing political policies. Narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and everyday sadism were associated with right-wing political orientation, whereas narcissism and psychopathy were associated with political extremism. Moreover, the relationships between personality and right-wing political orientation and extremism, respectively, were relatively independent from each other.
We found eleven significant correlations between conservative [Moral Intuition Survey] judgments and the Dark Triad – [narcissism, Machiavellianism, psychopathy,] all at significance level of p<.00001 – and no significant correlations between liberal [Moral Intuition Survey] judgments and the Dark Triad. We believe that these results raise provocative moral questions about the personality bases of moral judgments. In particular, we propose that because the Short-D3 measures three “dark and antisocial” personality traits, our results raise some prima facie worries about the moral justification of some conservative moral judgments
-
Conservatism should be openly treated as the deadly, dangerous ideology that it is. It produces only bigotry, oppression and death.
In all of human history, nothing good has ever come from conservatism. Nothing at all.
-
Seriously. Is there one person that history remembers as a great important figure who did or would identify as a conservative?
-
The statistics have Communism as a far more dangerous and deadly ideology, and it's not even close.
-
Communism: an economic theory where the stated goal is achieving socio-economic equality.
Social conservationism: a social theory based on returning to regressive "traditional values" and oppression of "deviants".
Totally the same thing.
-
I see you've read "Everything I Hate is Communism ; an Idiot's Guide to Politics"
-
Bad bot
-
The right have killed significantly more than communists. We just don't label it as murder when it's capitalists, because making "lower beings" suffer is the intended effect of capitalism. Why is it not capitalism's fault when conservative states fail catastrophically and cause the deaths of millions, but when a communist state fails it's suddenly socialism's problem?
Conservatives refuse to acknowledge that capitalism is built on mountains of bones, hubdreds of millions of bones at least, and is still completely dysfunctional. Their criticism of better ideologies is just projection of that.
-
Well sure, but only self-identified communism rather than real communism. Like the National Socialism Party, the Chinese Communist Party, or the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. They were all "socialism" and "communism" where the rights to everything were held exclusively by the state which was controlled by small groups of individuals. To me that doesn't sound like it fits the bill, but whatevs.
-
How is that possible? Actual communism has literally never existed.
-
-
They're a little late, the conviction has happened. If they wanted to interfere with the outcome of the trial they should have done that before the verdict. Silly treasonous fascists.
-
They're not silly at all, they're thugs. They want to influence the next one by showing the cost of going against them.
Now, we're lucky that they're mostly grifting, incompetent, blustery cowards, so the risk isn't what it could be.
-
but it shows what happens when people start to get organized in retaliation. they could very well start to affect cases. this is not something to laugh at.
we could use these same techniques in support of progressive causes, or we could fight back against their strategies. either way, don't underestimate the power of this kind of resistance.
-
-
-
I'm glad the jurors have been smart enough to stay quiet. Now that the verdict is in, there is nothing keeping them from going public with details about their deliberations, but they seem to have all agreed it is best to keep out of the public eye. I wonder if the two lawyers purported to be on the jury advised them of that.
Still, I wouldn't be surprised if at least one of them already has an advance to write a book about it, which we will see eventuallty. I wonder if they get to keep their notes.
-
They absolutely should remain publicly silent until sentencing, personal safety aside. Publicly expressing opinions could be used in an appeal as argument for influencing the judge prior to sentencing.
-
On the flip side, the judge should absolutely use Trump violating his gag order to express his opinions about the case and those involved to impose prison time as part of his sentence.
-
-
-
Gosh! It’s lovely to see that they are such calm, reasonable and intelligent people.
-
No, see- they already know that the votes to convict were miscounted. They are currently on a crusade to overthrow it 😅
-
-
Imagine simping for this ugly, rich loser. I’d kind of get it if he was at least hot. Part of me thinks these simps are fake people that Trump and team created.
-
Mostly fake, foundationally created by pootin to get his favorite puppet elected, and to foment civil war.
And the uber-loser maga simps bought and jumped all in to racist christofascistlandia.
-
-
These people are nothing, but a bunch of unhinged cowards. Fuck'em.
-
No, some of them are also insurrectionists who've already tried to overthrow their government once.
-
They absolutely threaten people online and over the phone.
-
-
Can someone please create an organization called "Pride Boys" and make them so popular that searching for "proud boys" on google will turn up images of rainbow flags and gay men?
-
Disgusting but not too shocking knowing his supporters nowadays.
-
At this point I'd have been shocked if they didn't act this way.
-
-
What if we gave them the address to Sam Alito's house?
-
They won't recognize the flag if it's upside down.
-
-
“May God strike them dead. We will on November 5th”
…is a “win” missing or are they openly saying they’ll kill them on election day?
-
Same difference
-
-
It's only fitting for the man with the best words to finally get a sentence
-
I counter attack with, using their names to create an online fund raiser to make these reasonable people rich.
-
Notice how there were never any big protests or demonstrations at the actual courthouse.
-
Looking at a few different NYC election results, about 25% of the population votes republican. Meaning statically 3 of the jurors should be republican. I am sure it could get more granular when you cross that with their occupations.
-
Yeah but it's not a purely random sample, because of the jury selection process.
So we can't really say anything in a statistical sense. I'd guess (not based on any statistics, just common sense) that there would be a higher percentage of independents in the jury than there would be in the general population. At any rate they would people that likely don't think about politics very much. With Trump, if someone is politically minded at all they'd have a strong opinion on Trump (one way or the other) and would be likely disqualified from being on the jury.
Anyway the point of jury selection is to not be a random sample, but a group of people that aren't biased for or against the defendant. The polling on the general populace doesn't have the requirement to not be politically biased to participate, so we can't use statistics for this.
Sorry for being being that guy, but proper use of statistics is important to me! Sorry!
-
Selection process is random but the challenge process keeps it white noise. They're each going to throw away a set number of people that are bad for their side. In the end it ends up being kind of random still anyway.
-
Is it still likely that there is at least one republican? I think it is possible.
All it would take is one allied republican on the jury to potentially leak juror identities.
-
-
The trial was in Manhattan, so that rules out Staten Island. Manhattan alone only voted 14.5% ^[1] for Trump in 2020. Also 55% of registered voters cast ballots in all of New York City in 2020 ^[1] (idk what the actual number is for Manhattan specifically).
So about 7.97% of everyone eligible to vote in Manhattan voted for Trump in 2020. This is about 1/12. There's likely more probability math to perform, but maybe one Republican voter was in the Jury, but it's also likely that none of the jury had ever voted for Trump (despite what they said in jury selection). 3 republicans in the Jury seems high although I'm also too high to do the math.
^[1] https://www.gothamgazette.com/city/9961-breaking-down-2020-vote-new-york-city-biden-trump
-
-
I would expect nothing less from MAGA.
-
We need a fucking purge. These people need to go.
-
I seem to remember an old saying about blindness and an eye for an eye. Can anyone help me out?
-
Civil wars are good, and easy to win. It's from the bible.
-
-
K. Batter up, champ.
-
I'm upvoting both sides of this because it's a discussion that ought to happen. Everybody please stop downvoting topical discussion that you disagree with.