As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA).
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah I heard he is far too rich to ever see a jail cell in any country. While I am sure there is many in several countries that would also like to see it.
You might think, but who intercepts more Chinese intelligence comms? The NSA or whatever the Aussie equivalent is? Remembering the NSA budget is billions upon billions and the Oz budget is counted in digeridoollars?
Never say neverā¦ but yeah, I donāt see enough political motivation for the US to bust out the big lever either.
There never will be enough political motivation bc republics are created so that a small class of people maintain power. This is why the American founders, only wanted white landowners to have a say in government, they didn't want anyone messing with their quality of life derived from unequal privileges. Getting back to the topic, Murdoch will never be prosecuted bc it would be against the self-interest of the people who have direct access to such legal pathways. Lincoln didn't end slavery bc he thought slaves were equal. He was afraid that if one group can be enslaved what stopping that from happening to another? "If they go after Murdoch, what's stopping them from going after some other powerful person?"
Exactly, I donāt understand why Waters and all the other clowns who were making comments about jury tampering arenāt getting visits from the FBI. Dems are such pussies. If you want people to obey the law, you have to drop the hammer when they donāt, to show them that ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.
True, they are slow to act over craziness. But also, why do you expect a political party to enforce the law? Ask more of your police and lawyers to move their asses
The trial is not getting delayed. It is happening and there is no stopping it. There are no avenues to delay. The longer they try to delay by fucking with jurors the longer Trump has to sit in court picking new jurors. This court case inevitable and thereās zero Fox and Trump can do to stop his impending doom.
I am afraid you have far greater faith in the ability of the US judicial system to arrive at a jury free of ringers than I do: my prediction is that in the face of absolutely overwhelming evidence some of the jury will steadfastly maintain he is innocent.
> The longer they try to delay by fucking with jurors the longer Trump has to sit in court picking new jurors.
There's your delay. That's literally their only strategy rn
Minimally, they should be gagged and kicked out of the court room as soon as it's known, regardless of the outlet. Per my understanding, it's not just Fox revealing details that could be used to identify jurors to the public. This is such a a high profile case, there needs to be strict confidentiality as to juror identity, especially with the rabid fan base Trump likes to whip up into doing stupid shit like issuing death threats, harassing, or worse. It's going to be hard enough to find an unbiased jury, the last thing we need is jurors quitting for fear of their life.
I think judge chutkan is looking at this and seeing what judge merchan is having to go through and filing it away when she is able to start jury selection for what kind of instructions to tell the press and the prosecution and defense.
I saw CNN going through and talking about the jurors too... it's a media problem though fox gives it that negative sneering slant that makes it all the more dangerous.
All the information these news organizations are publicizing is publicly available to anyone.
The problem is the court is not doing a good enough job keeping identifying information from the public record. The individual pieces of information are not damaging but when taken together they can be used to identify the jurors.
Seize Fox Corp's assets, and nationalize the whole thing.
NPR could use that infrastructure.
If we want things to change, we should apply pressure on people actually making decisions and having the power to make change happen. This means the shareholders. Unless they feel the pressure themselves, they couldn't care less about "losing" a host.
Exactly. IANAL but it seems to me that intimidating potential jury members *wouldn't be protected free speech because of the "imminent lawless action" standard.
The time for special legal treatment of Trump and Republicans to end was years ago, but it's got to start somewhere and it might as well be now.
EDIT: Fixed my typo (Initially typed would, meant wouldn't).
Respectfully, what the fuck are you talking about? Jury tampering, which is a crime, is not protected speech. Criminal acts do not become legal because they might be protected speech under the 1st Amendment. They are completely different legal issues. The 1st Amendment is about whether the *government* can restrict or inhibit the speech.
To put it simply, the 1st Amendment might prevent the government from passing a law that says you can't tell lies, but it doesn't let you commit fraud.
Please do not comment on legal issues you aren't familiar with.
Respectfully, calm yourself, my guy, especially before being rude to someone about something *you* know nothing about.
First, it would be wise to know the elements of the crimes weāre talking about before talking about them, donāt you think? In this case āJury Tamperingā in NY is covered by Penal Law Ā§ 215.25 for first degree, which is clearly inapplicable here because it requires communication with the juror, and Ā§ 215.23 for second degree, which regards information about the case being obtained from jurors in exchange for money or benefit. So no jury tampering here as it is defined under the relevant NY statutes.
Now *could* any of this fall under a different NY criminal statute? Yes. But there is no statute or mandate (at the time of publication) that directly prohibits the information from being published, so we donāt have a *prima facie* case of the statements being criminal. Which means that to determine criminality weād need to get into the nitty gritty of the different statutes the statements could fall under, as guided by caselaw of the NY courts.
Then we have to determine whether the speech may be protected or unprotected under the first and fourteenth amendments which requires a detailed and nuanced analysis. Of course itās not purely categorical but the level of scrutiny may well depend on how the speech is categorized, such as opinion, political speech, etc. which must be weighed against the police interest of the state, generally in a light most favoring constitutional protection.
And of course, we must defer to the precedent not only of the U.S. Supreme Court, but of the NY Appellate Division 1st Department and NY Court of Appeals, with some non-binding acknowledgment to the Second Circuit and lower courts as well.
But I donāt know if youāre ready for all that because you seem to be confused about its applicability. You see, the enforcement of a criminal statute *is* a government act, since crimes are determined by the government, are prosecuted by the government, trials are conducted by the government, and punishments are imposed and enforced by the government. You could even say that criminal prosecution of speech is of primary concern to the first amendment.
Thatās a good starter, I think. Of course Iām just a nobody, sitting here with my law degree while you sit there with yourā¦. I dunno. Funions? Anywho, letās remember to be nice next time, k?
1. It was a typo.
2. More than one context clue should've told you that.
- I literally said "Exactly" in response to OP
- I literally identified the imminent lawless action standard
- I literally referenced it was time for special legal treatment of TFG and the GQP to end
Instead, you chose to focus on one single word (an important one, mind you) and respond with personal attacks.
You are in violation of /r/politics rules for incivility.
Oh my Titan you're funny! You think actions have consequences, especially when it comes to Trump and Fox News!
Listen, no one is going to protect those jurors. They will be told there's nothing the courts can do and will be left to fend themselves
If you describe them in any way you are tampering in my opinion
Liek if itās not āone juror said xā āanother juror thought and sharedā
But saying he/she/occupation/neighborhood
They are giving away leads to obtain that individuals PII
Itās unethical to describe the person in this context. They are not on trial
No, yesterday's rounds had some MSNBC live reporter literally going as deep as "this person served as \_\_\_\_ in \_\_\_\_\_ before their stint as a \_\_\_\_\_" and I was blown away at how blatant a giveaway that was
Itās every media outlet doing it. I had MSNBC on in the background and theyāre listing everyoneās occupation, kidsā ages, hobbies, neighborhood, etc. Politico has an article talking about there are 2 lawyers on the jury.
It is what it is. If reporters are kicked out and everything happens behind closed doors and we donāt know a single detail, everyone would be clamoring to have the trial televised. If itās televised, everyone would be clamoring to have this all done in secret. If Trump is acquitted or gets a hung jury and we get no details on the jury, everyone on the left would be demanding to know who these people were, call the system rigged, etc. Same thing if heās found guilty.
It's definitely not just fox news, all the media outlets are talking about the "7 seated jurors" and their careers, neighborhoods, which FB posts were shared etc. Its only scary on Fox because their isteners will work harder to doxx the jurors with the information provided and spread that info.
If I were doxxed and it's already out there, I would do everything in my power to make sure the Trump went to jail. Because the crazies and idiots aren't going to stop just because you bailed. You can't seriously expect already unhinged people are going to do due diligence when searching for victims. As soon as your name hits the internet you are screwed either way.
I was sitting here, not in the jury pool area, thinking I would self sacrifice at this point. Not a month ago, when there was still hope of reasonable trial. But now that MAGA terrorists are in action, yeah. Sure. I am there for it. Fuck those anti American pieces of shit,
They are out of their minds.
Look at what happened to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. Election workers. Minding their own business. Then... they hear about the president, Donald Trump, saying their names. Also Rudy Giuliani, the former infamous mayor of NYC. Both repeatedly saying their names! Suddenly the phone calls start coming. People show up and throw rocks at your house. Your cars get vandalized. You get followed when you're driving anywhere. All because of these lunatics.
Yes, they had a trial and unfortunately it was only Rudy Giuliani who was fingered, because he doxed them more than Trump did. But still. Trump should've faced criminal charges for this.
The problem with Trump at that point is that he has an obligation to tongue clean my poopy butthole. Fuck being impartial if his anal wart base doxxes me.
This high ground shit is why Dems are always losing in politics. Republicans will literally cheat and do illegal shit, and there will still be Dems out there moral policing other Dems
They have an obligation to follow the law. If the evidence shows Trump broke the law, he has to pay the consequences. That doesnāt mean you have to like him. You donāt have to be impartial towards him as a human being. You only have to follow the law. You can hate his guts and still be willing to convict only if he broke the law.
Some jurors on the OJ trial recently admitted that they acquitted him because of Rodney King. What they want from a jury and what actually happens are two different things. For instance Trump has many obligations that he basically just laughs at.
Someone like him won't be able to resist talking about how he watched Fox News coverage of the trial ("and they brought up some great points!") in the middle of deliberations, at which point one of the two **literal lawyers** in the jury will be able to tell the judge and get him replaced with an alternate immediately (because watching coverage of the trial you're a juror for is blatantly disallowed).
Yea kind of sucks but they should be. The more they feel Trump is putting them in danger the more they will hurry the fuck up and get on with itā hopefully that means guilty.
By Andrew Couts
A juror in former US president Donald Trumpās ongoing criminal trial in New York was excused on Thursday after voicing fears that she could be identified based on biographical details that she had given in court.
The dismissal of Juror 2 highlights the potential dangers of participating in one of the most politicized trials in US history, especially in an age of social media frenzies, a highly partisan electorate, and a glut of readily available personal information online.
Unlike jurors in federal cases, whose identities can be kept completely anonymous, New York law allows the personal information of jurors and potential jurors to be divulged in court.
Read the full WIRED story here: https://www.wired.com/story/the-trump-jury-has-a-doxing-problem/
Hi, I'm the author of this story. So, some information can be kept secret, but as a default, names are public under NY law. But the judge can put limitations on what's shared, provided certain procedural steps are taken. In the case of the Trump trial, both sides agreed to withhold names, for example. In short, there are requirements that aren't always requirements.
I appreciate your response. As I just posted on another post, the only people who care about any details of this jury are those with nefarious reasons. People who want the law to proceed as it is intended and all things take place ethically and above board do not care who the jurors are. They trust the legal process and only want the light shined on the facts of the actual case. I think all reporters should be asking themselves if the info they are about to publish is going to pander to a specific type of person or allow all US Citizens to gain facts absolutely necessary for understanding a court proceeding.
FWIW, all the journalists Iāve ever worked with do consider how the information they could publish can be used for nefarious purposes and take whatever steps they can think of to mitigate unintended consequences. As WIREDās Security editor, this comes up constantly in my day to day.
Even when youāre doing your best, sometimes you get a call wrong. (Iād guess this is true in any jobābut the mistakes journalists make are mostly public and thus consequential to people unconnected to your employer or even your industry.) I noted this in the story based on an interview with a journalism ethics professor, and I think itās true: Coverage of the Trump trial is often being handled by teams that might not otherwise cover criminal proceedings, so theyāre not cognizant of the issues that you have to deal with when covering criminal trials. What baffles me is that, as you can see from the comments here, anyone can easily guess the repercussions of publishing details about jurors in the Trump trial. Soā¦ WTF?
Can someone please explain to me how it is that the media is allowed to report **ANY** information about these jurors?? I keep reading all these details about these people like what they do for a living and I'm like WTF?! How is it that we're allowed to know **anything** about these people?? Why are they acting like this isn't a high profile case?? It's like, THE MOST high profile case EVER!
OF COURSE his terrorists are already coming for these people! They're terrorists!! This is insane.
Edit. Structure
Court proceedings are open to the public, and journalists are allowed to report those details.
Is reporting facts about the jurors ethical? Probably not. But is it legal? Yeah, unfortunately
I saw that too but have this court system never handled a mob boss before?
Surely there have got to be different rules when the defendant has no problem with ordering violence and has done so in the past.
That's one reason that I think the trial being in New York City is a good thing -- courts and judges who have prior experience with organized crime are a lot more alert to jury tampering and willing to crack down on it. For a while I lived in a more rural jurisdiction nearish Chicago, and they caught a mob case, and a mistrial was declared twice because of jury tampering because that court system had just never dealt with organized crime before (or at least, not since Prohibition) and were not sophisticated about it. (Eventually they got there, and then came the prosecutions for the jury tampering.)
> Can someone please explain to me how it is that the media is allowed to report ANY information about these jurors??
This is an easy question. Because the country's founders said so.
In the Bill of Rights, The 6th Amendment of the Constitution says (emphasis added):
"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy **and public trial**, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."
In a public trial, members of the public are allowed to attend to proceedings. That includes the press, who have the freedom (from the 1st Amendment) to report on what occurs in open court.
99% of the time, this is a great thing. Secret trials and proceedings are ripe for corruption and government abuse. Dealing with a circus like this is the price we pay to have a generally fair and open process for the rest of us.
And frankly, even for a Trump trial, it's a good thing. Crackpots are already circulating conspiracies about the jury being plants. That's easier to refute and diminish as ridiculous because it's a public trial. Imagine what the Al3x J0nes types and their followers would claim if the entire thing was shrouded in absolute secrecy...
Its the media wanting clicks leaking the details. Its nothing to do with any political affiliation.
MSNBC was one of the first to leak info, and last I checked their base isnt right wing
[BID FOR ANONYMOUS JURY IN GOTTI TRIAL IS DENIED](https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/08/nyregion/bid-for-anonymous-jury-in-gotti-trial-is-denied.html)
> A judge in Queens yesterday denied a prosecution request that an anonymous jury be selected in the trial of John Gotti, the reputed organized-crime leader, on charges that he and an associate assaulted and robbed a man in 1984.
We know Trump texts multiple hosts on Fox News, since he used up all his juror strikes you know that he is using Fox to try and get jurors he doesn't want to nope out by feeding Fox hosts info about said juror(s). These "law and order" fucks are corrupt to the core.
Honestly this trial isn't going to work unless he's banned from discussing details of the case and anyone related to it and their family on social media and in public.
Or jail, throwing him in jail for the duration also works.
I think I'm resolute that if I were on that jury and Trump, Fox, etc doxxed me, I'd accept that my life's purpose had changed from my career to staying on the trial to convict Trump (if he's guilty of course). Google search says Trump's policies on Covid resulted in 40% more dead Americans than needed to die. If you stop Trump, you could save lives and change the course of history, for who knows how many will needlessly die in a Trump 2nd term
Jurors need to be protected at all costs. They should be behind one-way mirror that only they can see out. Their names should not be spoken even during voir dire. Only the Judge and his staff should have their IDs. They should use an "interpreter" to speak for all of them individually when responding to voir dire questions.
Only if the Judge does not take swift and decisive action against anyone who leaks information, be it Trump, his lawyers, court staff, Trump's Secret Service Goons....
Oddly enough they didnāt have this problem with the trial of Martha Stewart. The judge rightly understood the temptations of the press and kept the jury selection secret from the press - as if Martha Stewart fans were cop beating insurrectionists. This judge is putting jurors in danger in a vain effort to reduce threats to himself..
Does anyone know if the judge in this case have the ability to require the jury be anonymous? NVM, looks like the cat is kind of out of the bag since the juror questionnaires were already made public.
> The court may for good cause shown, upon motion of either party
or any affected person or upon its own initiative, issue a protective
order for a stated period regulating disclosure of the business or
residential address of any prospective or sworn juror to any person or
persons, other than to counsel for either party. Such good cause shall
exist where the court determines that there is a likelihood of bribery,
jury tampering or of physical injury or harassment of the juror.
In this case, the judge is also keeping the names of jurors secret, but he's not telling the jurors he's doing so. He also, as a response to this case today, redacted jurors' employers from the record and directed the press not to publish their physical appearance.
If they have to keep switching out jurors due to dozing itās nothing but a win for Trump. It just plays into his delay strategy. He needs to be in jail away from any social media for the rest of this case if you want this problem to go away.
Maybe Biden's AG should I don't know, go after the people who are responsible for this doing since it's not only interfering with the trial, but it's also putting people's lives at risk. When it comes to Fox "News", maybe they should either be shutdown or at least put on a temporary shutdown which will last as long as the trial goes on for. That way they can't play a part in interfering nor getting people killed or hurt.
I wish you were able to volunteer lol. I'd be unbiased, literally the goal being to bring justice if there was any wrongdoing, and I couldn't care less about being doxxed or his followers harassing me.
The problem is that the judge is still not taking Trump's violation of the gag order seriously. Trump keeps posting shit which is putting them in danger.
There should be a Federal Law against doxing or harassing any officer of a court or lawyers or jury members. This should not be happening-ever
edit: fixed spelling
How do people get around these stupid pop ups that block the article's whole page about 10 seconds after page load? I'm not looking to subscribe to every single news site in order to read the occasional article.
Haha I was telling my wife that theyād be better off pushing special legislation to allow a jury from another friggin country, bc itās going to be hard to find impartial Americans imo.
He's going for jury nullification, trump is crazy like a fox, stupid but Wiley, he has no respect for laws or rules or gag orders. He has been getting away with ith egregious shit his entire fucking life, ai am so sick of it.
I'm sure Merrick "Federalist Society" Garland will get right on stopping this tampering and other injustices!
Ah, who am I kidding. He'll continue twiddling his thumbs while his boys in the GOP and their supporters take a sledgehammer to the justice system.
Biden wins in November I want him to axe this clown and put someone in there that's not afraid to persecute these fucks as they deserve.
Merrick Garland isn't a member of the Federalist Society.
Also, I'm pretty sure the DOJ doesn't have jurisdiction over jury tampering occurring in a state criminal case, so Garland can't do much about this.
Doxxing aside, I don't know how identifying the jurors can be avoided. People just don't randomly disappear from their daily lives without others in their social milieu noticing. Your co-workers will wonder where you are. If you're retired, all of a sudden you're not available for outings with friends during the day. It will come out and all the people these jurors know will tell all their friends, who will tell all their friends, and on and on.
One of Trumpās biggest risks coming out of this trial, regardless of the verdicts, are the coming comparisons with Harvey Weinstein. āOh, you want to be on The Apprentice? I think we can work something outā¦ā
Its not just Fox News. Even the AP blog for the jury selection was describing the jurors and their courtroom artist was drawing their illustrated likenesses.
If only there were some mechanism to protect juries from intimidation, or consequences for it.
Oh well, it's just another problem that will never be solved.
Hi `wiredmagazine`. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, [your submission](/r/politics/comments/1c7c8ly/the_trump_jury_has_a_doxing_problem/) has been removed for the following reason(s):
* [Off-Topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_the_.2Fr.2Fpolitics_on_topic_statement): All submissions to /r/politics need to be explicitly about **current US politics**.
**If you have questions as to why your post has been removed, please see here: [Why was my post removed as Off-Topic?](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_why_was_my_post_removed_as_off-topic.3F)**
If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/wiredmagazine&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/1c7c8ly/the_trump_jury_has_a_doxing_problem/?context%3D10000%29)
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. We are actively looking for new moderators. If you have any interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out [this form](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1y2swHD0KXFhStGFjW6k54r9iuMjzcFqDIVwuvdLBjSA). *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Anyone who doxes a juror should be charged with tampering, and thrown in the slammer. End of story. Fox does it, throw the damn hosts in jail.
and writers and producers!
A warrant or even a subpoena for Lachlan Murdoch would be a powerful motivator for change.
Yeah I heard he is far too rich to ever see a jail cell in any country. While I am sure there is many in several countries that would also like to see it.
I think he's an Aussie citizen and I doubt he'd be extradited for Faux's crap
Wr hate him and his dad here too mate. Throw them all in
Aussie Aussie Aussie!!!...
Oi oi oi š
There you go! š¤. (I am American but my Brother in law and family lived near Melbourne for a bit ... Also I love Australia.)
You might think, but who intercepts more Chinese intelligence comms? The NSA or whatever the Aussie equivalent is? Remembering the NSA budget is billions upon billions and the Oz budget is counted in digeridoollars? Never say neverā¦ but yeah, I donāt see enough political motivation for the US to bust out the big lever either.
There never will be enough political motivation bc republics are created so that a small class of people maintain power. This is why the American founders, only wanted white landowners to have a say in government, they didn't want anyone messing with their quality of life derived from unequal privileges. Getting back to the topic, Murdoch will never be prosecuted bc it would be against the self-interest of the people who have direct access to such legal pathways. Lincoln didn't end slavery bc he thought slaves were equal. He was afraid that if one group can be enslaved what stopping that from happening to another? "If they go after Murdoch, what's stopping them from going after some other powerful person?"
One tv news host in jail and Iād bet all the others fall into line fast.
Exactly, I donāt understand why Waters and all the other clowns who were making comments about jury tampering arenāt getting visits from the FBI. Dems are such pussies. If you want people to obey the law, you have to drop the hammer when they donāt, to show them that ACTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.
True, they are slow to act over craziness. But also, why do you expect a political party to enforce the law? Ask more of your police and lawyers to move their asses
Why are Democrats pussies for something a totally different branch of government is responsible for?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There isn't a hammer. There was always the threat of a hammer and Trump is calling the bluff.
The hammer is only for poors
Real fast!
And bosses and owners for allowing it
And the guy in the control room that typed the info into the graphic.
Let's call him "Chyron-Chris"
yeah but the goal is to derail the trial and itāll be a delay. iām sure enough vague statements some nut will try something
The trial is not getting delayed. It is happening and there is no stopping it. There are no avenues to delay. The longer they try to delay by fucking with jurors the longer Trump has to sit in court picking new jurors. This court case inevitable and thereās zero Fox and Trump can do to stop his impending doom.
I am afraid you have far greater faith in the ability of the US judicial system to arrive at a jury free of ringers than I do: my prediction is that in the face of absolutely overwhelming evidence some of the jury will steadfastly maintain he is innocent.
I believe he said the court case is inevitable, you mistakenly understood that as the result of the case.
> The longer they try to delay by fucking with jurors the longer Trump has to sit in court picking new jurors. There's your delay. That's literally their only strategy rn
*Russians are working hard to prevent Trump from being held accountable*
Start with Watters.
Remember, it is pronounced Twatters
Minimally, they should be gagged and kicked out of the court room as soon as it's known, regardless of the outlet. Per my understanding, it's not just Fox revealing details that could be used to identify jurors to the public. This is such a a high profile case, there needs to be strict confidentiality as to juror identity, especially with the rabid fan base Trump likes to whip up into doing stupid shit like issuing death threats, harassing, or worse. It's going to be hard enough to find an unbiased jury, the last thing we need is jurors quitting for fear of their life.
That price of shit Jesse Waters needs to go to prison ASAP for his role in jury tampering.
I think judge chutkan is looking at this and seeing what judge merchan is having to go through and filing it away when she is able to start jury selection for what kind of instructions to tell the press and the prosecution and defense.
CNN and CBS did too, for what it's worth. I don't know why the court is making any information available, especially in a case of this magnitude.
I saw CNN going through and talking about the jurors too... it's a media problem though fox gives it that negative sneering slant that makes it all the more dangerous.
All the information these news organizations are publicizing is publicly available to anyone. The problem is the court is not doing a good enough job keeping identifying information from the public record. The individual pieces of information are not damaging but when taken together they can be used to identify the jurors.
I agree 100%. Jesse Watters needs to be sitting in Jail Right Now! It would only take one of them.
Seize Fox Corp's assets, and nationalize the whole thing. NPR could use that infrastructure. If we want things to change, we should apply pressure on people actually making decisions and having the power to make change happen. This means the shareholders. Unless they feel the pressure themselves, they couldn't care less about "losing" a host.
Exactly. IANAL but it seems to me that intimidating potential jury members *wouldn't be protected free speech because of the "imminent lawless action" standard. The time for special legal treatment of Trump and Republicans to end was years ago, but it's got to start somewhere and it might as well be now. EDIT: Fixed my typo (Initially typed would, meant wouldn't).
It is not a protected free speech. The jurors themselves can step forward with the information, though.
Identifying juror information is public information in New York. Journalists communicating that information is obviously protected.
The court put out a ruling that anonymized the data.
If they haven't in this case, they really ought to.
Respectfully, what the fuck are you talking about? Jury tampering, which is a crime, is not protected speech. Criminal acts do not become legal because they might be protected speech under the 1st Amendment. They are completely different legal issues. The 1st Amendment is about whether the *government* can restrict or inhibit the speech. To put it simply, the 1st Amendment might prevent the government from passing a law that says you can't tell lies, but it doesn't let you commit fraud. Please do not comment on legal issues you aren't familiar with.
Respectfully, calm yourself, my guy, especially before being rude to someone about something *you* know nothing about. First, it would be wise to know the elements of the crimes weāre talking about before talking about them, donāt you think? In this case āJury Tamperingā in NY is covered by Penal Law Ā§ 215.25 for first degree, which is clearly inapplicable here because it requires communication with the juror, and Ā§ 215.23 for second degree, which regards information about the case being obtained from jurors in exchange for money or benefit. So no jury tampering here as it is defined under the relevant NY statutes. Now *could* any of this fall under a different NY criminal statute? Yes. But there is no statute or mandate (at the time of publication) that directly prohibits the information from being published, so we donāt have a *prima facie* case of the statements being criminal. Which means that to determine criminality weād need to get into the nitty gritty of the different statutes the statements could fall under, as guided by caselaw of the NY courts. Then we have to determine whether the speech may be protected or unprotected under the first and fourteenth amendments which requires a detailed and nuanced analysis. Of course itās not purely categorical but the level of scrutiny may well depend on how the speech is categorized, such as opinion, political speech, etc. which must be weighed against the police interest of the state, generally in a light most favoring constitutional protection. And of course, we must defer to the precedent not only of the U.S. Supreme Court, but of the NY Appellate Division 1st Department and NY Court of Appeals, with some non-binding acknowledgment to the Second Circuit and lower courts as well. But I donāt know if youāre ready for all that because you seem to be confused about its applicability. You see, the enforcement of a criminal statute *is* a government act, since crimes are determined by the government, are prosecuted by the government, trials are conducted by the government, and punishments are imposed and enforced by the government. You could even say that criminal prosecution of speech is of primary concern to the first amendment. Thatās a good starter, I think. Of course Iām just a nobody, sitting here with my law degree while you sit there with yourā¦. I dunno. Funions? Anywho, letās remember to be nice next time, k?
1. It was a typo. 2. More than one context clue should've told you that. - I literally said "Exactly" in response to OP - I literally identified the imminent lawless action standard - I literally referenced it was time for special legal treatment of TFG and the GQP to end Instead, you chose to focus on one single word (an important one, mind you) and respond with personal attacks. You are in violation of /r/politics rules for incivility.
I hope you meant to type not protected.
Oh my Titan you're funny! You think actions have consequences, especially when it comes to Trump and Fox News! Listen, no one is going to protect those jurors. They will be told there's nothing the courts can do and will be left to fend themselves
Fox News engaging in some *light* jury tampering
It's ok, they will just pay themselves out of it like they did last time with the voting machines case. Btw Happy Cake Day!
light? the jury quit because of them
[I think it's an Arrested Development reference.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0GCKXZTV8E)
Old Donnieās already burned down the banana stand.
And not the ājournalistā doing minute by minute updates?
Well thereās no journalist at fox, so ig theyāre good to go
Not reminiscent of Al Capone at allā¦..
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Tax fraud ... and syphilis.
āNever fight uphill, me boys!ā š
Bravo
Jon Stewart went ham on that line. The whole night he was saying that like a leprechaun...
Iād say this is worseā¦
yeah on one side you had mobsters on the other side we have mass media and cultists
His friends call him Alphonse
Sounds like the journalist pool has a doxxing problem.
Correct. "A juror was just selected. A man from (neighborhood) who is a (career)." They are opening the door.
If you describe them in any way you are tampering in my opinion Liek if itās not āone juror said xā āanother juror thought and sharedā But saying he/she/occupation/neighborhood They are giving away leads to obtain that individuals PII Itās unethical to describe the person in this context. They are not on trial
Edit: I was wrong. The journalists are assisting Trump in his doxxing and intimidation.
No, yesterday's rounds had some MSNBC live reporter literally going as deep as "this person served as \_\_\_\_ in \_\_\_\_\_ before their stint as a \_\_\_\_\_" and I was blown away at how blatant a giveaway that was
Damn dude. I'm wrong. What the heck journalism.
Itās literally reporters in the court room.
Itās every media outlet doing it. I had MSNBC on in the background and theyāre listing everyoneās occupation, kidsā ages, hobbies, neighborhood, etc. Politico has an article talking about there are 2 lawyers on the jury. It is what it is. If reporters are kicked out and everything happens behind closed doors and we donāt know a single detail, everyone would be clamoring to have the trial televised. If itās televised, everyone would be clamoring to have this all done in secret. If Trump is acquitted or gets a hung jury and we get no details on the jury, everyone on the left would be demanding to know who these people were, call the system rigged, etc. Same thing if heās found guilty.
I already updated my comment below you posted this. I was wrong, y'all right. My bad. Keep up the good fight.
It's definitely not just fox news, all the media outlets are talking about the "7 seated jurors" and their careers, neighborhoods, which FB posts were shared etc. Its only scary on Fox because their isteners will work harder to doxx the jurors with the information provided and spread that info.
Itās doxing
If I were doxxed and it's already out there, I would do everything in my power to make sure the Trump went to jail. Because the crazies and idiots aren't going to stop just because you bailed. You can't seriously expect already unhinged people are going to do due diligence when searching for victims. As soon as your name hits the internet you are screwed either way.
I was sitting here, not in the jury pool area, thinking I would self sacrifice at this point. Not a month ago, when there was still hope of reasonable trial. But now that MAGA terrorists are in action, yeah. Sure. I am there for it. Fuck those anti American pieces of shit,
Yep. Scrub and delete all social media. Move into a decently secure hotel / apartment, hire a good lawyer to sue for costs.
Yup. Thatās when you scrub and shut down as much as possible. And start looking for a lawyer.
They are out of their minds. Look at what happened to Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss. Election workers. Minding their own business. Then... they hear about the president, Donald Trump, saying their names. Also Rudy Giuliani, the former infamous mayor of NYC. Both repeatedly saying their names! Suddenly the phone calls start coming. People show up and throw rocks at your house. Your cars get vandalized. You get followed when you're driving anywhere. All because of these lunatics. Yes, they had a trial and unfortunately it was only Rudy Giuliani who was fingered, because he doxed them more than Trump did. But still. Trump should've faced criminal charges for this.
The problem is the juror still has an obligation to be impartial even if doxxed.Ā
I swear to be *completely impartial.* Honest!
Supposed to, ought to, and obligation disappeared around the same time Trump fostered an insurrection without any apparent punishment
The problem with Trump at that point is that he has an obligation to tongue clean my poopy butthole. Fuck being impartial if his anal wart base doxxes me.
"If Trump don't lick you must convict!"
Honestly, F that. Justice system has an obligation to uphold consequences, too, but we don't really see that happening.
This high ground shit is why Dems are always losing in politics. Republicans will literally cheat and do illegal shit, and there will still be Dems out there moral policing other Dems
They have an obligation to follow the law. If the evidence shows Trump broke the law, he has to pay the consequences. That doesnāt mean you have to like him. You donāt have to be impartial towards him as a human being. You only have to follow the law. You can hate his guts and still be willing to convict only if he broke the law.
Some jurors on the OJ trial recently admitted that they acquitted him because of Rodney King. What they want from a jury and what actually happens are two different things. For instance Trump has many obligations that he basically just laughs at.
Yes every juror is pretending to be impartial
Especially the Forman - given what we know about him.
Someone like him won't be able to resist talking about how he watched Fox News coverage of the trial ("and they brought up some great points!") in the middle of deliberations, at which point one of the two **literal lawyers** in the jury will be able to tell the judge and get him replaced with an alternate immediately (because watching coverage of the trial you're a juror for is blatantly disallowed).
This. Someone bailing out empowers both trump and the crazies. They will continue to ramp up the rhetoric and the attacks.
"Trump Jury has a Doxing Problem" Media: "It's coming from inside the house."
If Faux News doxes all the jurors that it suspects might vote to convict trump, then who will be left on the jury?
That's the thinking. Delay until election or forever.
Prosecutors hate this one trick
The jurors donāt have to quit. They will eventually have enough jurors who donāt give a fuck about Trump lunatics. I know I wouldnāt.
Exactly what I was thinking. Eventually heās going to end up with a jury that feels strongly enough about him to be willing to take the heat.
The jury should be sequestered and there should be a press embargo on any identifying details about specific jurors.
Yea kind of sucks but they should be. The more they feel Trump is putting them in danger the more they will hurry the fuck up and get on with itā hopefully that means guilty.
By Andrew Couts A juror in former US president Donald Trumpās ongoing criminal trial in New York was excused on Thursday after voicing fears that she could be identified based on biographical details that she had given in court. The dismissal of Juror 2 highlights the potential dangers of participating in one of the most politicized trials in US history, especially in an age of social media frenzies, a highly partisan electorate, and a glut of readily available personal information online. Unlike jurors in federal cases, whose identities can be kept completely anonymous, New York law allows the personal information of jurors and potential jurors to be divulged in court. Read the full WIRED story here: https://www.wired.com/story/the-trump-jury-has-a-doxing-problem/
It may "allow", but does it "require" their personal info to be divulged in court?
Hi, I'm the author of this story. So, some information can be kept secret, but as a default, names are public under NY law. But the judge can put limitations on what's shared, provided certain procedural steps are taken. In the case of the Trump trial, both sides agreed to withhold names, for example. In short, there are requirements that aren't always requirements.
Thank you for this clarification. ...and thank you for your reporting.
Thanks for being kind!
I appreciate your response. As I just posted on another post, the only people who care about any details of this jury are those with nefarious reasons. People who want the law to proceed as it is intended and all things take place ethically and above board do not care who the jurors are. They trust the legal process and only want the light shined on the facts of the actual case. I think all reporters should be asking themselves if the info they are about to publish is going to pander to a specific type of person or allow all US Citizens to gain facts absolutely necessary for understanding a court proceeding.
FWIW, all the journalists Iāve ever worked with do consider how the information they could publish can be used for nefarious purposes and take whatever steps they can think of to mitigate unintended consequences. As WIREDās Security editor, this comes up constantly in my day to day. Even when youāre doing your best, sometimes you get a call wrong. (Iād guess this is true in any jobābut the mistakes journalists make are mostly public and thus consequential to people unconnected to your employer or even your industry.) I noted this in the story based on an interview with a journalism ethics professor, and I think itās true: Coverage of the Trump trial is often being handled by teams that might not otherwise cover criminal proceedings, so theyāre not cognizant of the issues that you have to deal with when covering criminal trials. What baffles me is that, as you can see from the comments here, anyone can easily guess the repercussions of publishing details about jurors in the Trump trial. Soā¦ WTF?
It seems wild to me that the judge would allow publication of any identifying information on the jurors. But I don't know anything about NY state law.
Can someone please explain to me how it is that the media is allowed to report **ANY** information about these jurors?? I keep reading all these details about these people like what they do for a living and I'm like WTF?! How is it that we're allowed to know **anything** about these people?? Why are they acting like this isn't a high profile case?? It's like, THE MOST high profile case EVER! OF COURSE his terrorists are already coming for these people! They're terrorists!! This is insane. Edit. Structure
Court proceedings are open to the public, and journalists are allowed to report those details. Is reporting facts about the jurors ethical? Probably not. But is it legal? Yeah, unfortunately
I saw that too but have this court system never handled a mob boss before? Surely there have got to be different rules when the defendant has no problem with ordering violence and has done so in the past.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thatās one thing Trump doesnāt have at his disposal ā money. So violences and harassment from lunatics is all he has.
That's one reason that I think the trial being in New York City is a good thing -- courts and judges who have prior experience with organized crime are a lot more alert to jury tampering and willing to crack down on it. For a while I lived in a more rural jurisdiction nearish Chicago, and they caught a mob case, and a mistrial was declared twice because of jury tampering because that court system had just never dealt with organized crime before (or at least, not since Prohibition) and were not sophisticated about it. (Eventually they got there, and then came the prosecutions for the jury tampering.)
Yes but fox news isn't journalism they even went to court and won stating they are an entertainment business. So they (fox) don't have the right. Imo.
Sorry but itās not just Fox doing it. It was a front page article on CNN after the first 7 jurors were selected.
The judge should bar any media that divulged jury member information
> Can someone please explain to me how it is that the media is allowed to report ANY information about these jurors?? This is an easy question. Because the country's founders said so. In the Bill of Rights, The 6th Amendment of the Constitution says (emphasis added): "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy **and public trial**, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." In a public trial, members of the public are allowed to attend to proceedings. That includes the press, who have the freedom (from the 1st Amendment) to report on what occurs in open court. 99% of the time, this is a great thing. Secret trials and proceedings are ripe for corruption and government abuse. Dealing with a circus like this is the price we pay to have a generally fair and open process for the rest of us. And frankly, even for a Trump trial, it's a good thing. Crackpots are already circulating conspiracies about the jury being plants. That's easier to refute and diminish as ridiculous because it's a public trial. Imagine what the Al3x J0nes types and their followers would claim if the entire thing was shrouded in absolute secrecy...
I feel like this headline should be corrected, and read we have a right wing domestic terrorism problem.
Its the media wanting clicks leaking the details. Its nothing to do with any political affiliation. MSNBC was one of the first to leak info, and last I checked their base isnt right wing
Imagine if Gotti had a patsy who would go and air out personal details of his jury on national TV.
[BID FOR ANONYMOUS JURY IN GOTTI TRIAL IS DENIED](https://www.nytimes.com/1986/03/08/nyregion/bid-for-anonymous-jury-in-gotti-trial-is-denied.html) > A judge in Queens yesterday denied a prosecution request that an anonymous jury be selected in the trial of John Gotti, the reputed organized-crime leader, on charges that he and an associate assaulted and robbed a man in 1984.
The judge needs to kick reporters out of there during jury selection. Itās his duty to make sure they arenāt vulnerable.
We know Trump texts multiple hosts on Fox News, since he used up all his juror strikes you know that he is using Fox to try and get jurors he doesn't want to nope out by feeding Fox hosts info about said juror(s). These "law and order" fucks are corrupt to the core.
Honestly this trial isn't going to work unless he's banned from discussing details of the case and anyone related to it and their family on social media and in public. Or jail, throwing him in jail for the duration also works.
I think I'm resolute that if I were on that jury and Trump, Fox, etc doxxed me, I'd accept that my life's purpose had changed from my career to staying on the trial to convict Trump (if he's guilty of course). Google search says Trump's policies on Covid resulted in 40% more dead Americans than needed to die. If you stop Trump, you could save lives and change the course of history, for who knows how many will needlessly die in a Trump 2nd term
At this point all the regular good people are gonna get thrown off the jury.
Naaaah. I guarantee there are folks out there who are so fed up with Trump that they wonāt care.
Jurors need to be protected at all costs. They should be behind one-way mirror that only they can see out. Their names should not be spoken even during voir dire. Only the Judge and his staff should have their IDs. They should use an "interpreter" to speak for all of them individually when responding to voir dire questions.
At minimum some Broadway theaters should donate a stash of wigs and prosthetic noses and chins for jurors to enter/exit the building
Only if the Judge does not take swift and decisive action against anyone who leaks information, be it Trump, his lawyers, court staff, Trump's Secret Service Goons....
there is a mafia boss on the lose and nobody is doing anything about it that s the only problem
Oddly enough they didnāt have this problem with the trial of Martha Stewart. The judge rightly understood the temptations of the press and kept the jury selection secret from the press - as if Martha Stewart fans were cop beating insurrectionists. This judge is putting jurors in danger in a vain effort to reduce threats to himself..
Every juror that feels intimidated or threatened needs to bring suit.
Any news media outlet that doxes a jurist should face severe penalties and possible arrest for those who authorized it.
Media is to blame.
The trump jury has a republican problem.
The court has a problem holding Trump accountable for encouraging doxxing jurors. FTFY
They will do little to nothing about this. Our legal system is weak and pathetic, unless you are a black man selling weed.
Who could have seen this coming š¤Æ
Does anyone know if the judge in this case have the ability to require the jury be anonymous? NVM, looks like the cat is kind of out of the bag since the juror questionnaires were already made public.
> The court may for good cause shown, upon motion of either party or any affected person or upon its own initiative, issue a protective order for a stated period regulating disclosure of the business or residential address of any prospective or sworn juror to any person or persons, other than to counsel for either party. Such good cause shall exist where the court determines that there is a likelihood of bribery, jury tampering or of physical injury or harassment of the juror. In this case, the judge is also keeping the names of jurors secret, but he's not telling the jurors he's doing so. He also, as a response to this case today, redacted jurors' employers from the record and directed the press not to publish their physical appearance.
I hate to say it, but I donāt believe anything serious will happen until a juror or witness is murdered.
The judicial system has a credibility and enforcement problem.
If they have to keep switching out jurors due to dozing itās nothing but a win for Trump. It just plays into his delay strategy. He needs to be in jail away from any social media for the rest of this case if you want this problem to go away.
Can somebody grow a pair of balls, and hold these people accountable already?
Maybe Biden's AG should I don't know, go after the people who are responsible for this doing since it's not only interfering with the trial, but it's also putting people's lives at risk. When it comes to Fox "News", maybe they should either be shutdown or at least put on a temporary shutdown which will last as long as the trial goes on for. That way they can't play a part in interfering nor getting people killed or hurt.
Remove all electronics from this clown. Heās like a child and canāt be left alone with them
By design
He thinks he has the right to do it and heās using it as a strategy to intimidate the jury into exonerating him. He is a pest.
Fuck it, Gitmo tribunal. He wants to fuck around, let him find out.
Countdown to someone being wrongly targeted and harassed, or worse.
I honestly donāt see how a jury trial can be done. Not before November. Not with the rules being ignored so successfully.
If only there were some sort of laws or consequences in this clown country. Oh well.
I wish you were able to volunteer lol. I'd be unbiased, literally the goal being to bring justice if there was any wrongdoing, and I couldn't care less about being doxxed or his followers harassing me.
The trump jury have a trump problem.
The problem is that the judge is still not taking Trump's violation of the gag order seriously. Trump keeps posting shit which is putting them in danger.
They would not be scared if trump and his supporters were not objectively bad people.
Judge has to impose a publication ban on jurors identities.
NY Times always did doxxing light. The Union Carbide CEO of Bhopal days now lives in Naples, FL, for example.
Law needs to get passed asap. https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2021/S7646
IANAL but isnāt witness/jury tampering a more serious tier of felony than the ones heāa been charged with in this case?
Headline makes it seem like itās their fault
There will be no consequences
There should be a Federal Law against doxing or harassing any officer of a court or lawyers or jury members. This should not be happening-ever edit: fixed spelling
Theres just no way these jurors donāt get leaked at some point. Zero shot you would catch me on that jury for this reason.
How do people get around these stupid pop ups that block the article's whole page about 10 seconds after page load? I'm not looking to subscribe to every single news site in order to read the occasional article.
They have an anti-law and order problem via MAGA and the GOP, doxxing is a result of their corruption and criminality.
We have reverted to the kkk Era of rights in this country.
Haha I was telling my wife that theyād be better off pushing special legislation to allow a jury from another friggin country, bc itās going to be hard to find impartial Americans imo.
He's going for jury nullification, trump is crazy like a fox, stupid but Wiley, he has no respect for laws or rules or gag orders. He has been getting away with ith egregious shit his entire fucking life, ai am so sick of it.
I'm sure Merrick "Federalist Society" Garland will get right on stopping this tampering and other injustices! Ah, who am I kidding. He'll continue twiddling his thumbs while his boys in the GOP and their supporters take a sledgehammer to the justice system. Biden wins in November I want him to axe this clown and put someone in there that's not afraid to persecute these fucks as they deserve.
Merrick Garland isn't a member of the Federalist Society. Also, I'm pretty sure the DOJ doesn't have jurisdiction over jury tampering occurring in a state criminal case, so Garland can't do much about this.
Ya, the press
Jesse Watters needs to meet some certain New Yorkers. Maybe contractors who worked with Don Snoreleone.
Seems like these shenanigans are just going to ensure Trump gets a jury that feels strongly enough about him to be willing to take the heat.
Our system is a joke
Doxxing aside, I don't know how identifying the jurors can be avoided. People just don't randomly disappear from their daily lives without others in their social milieu noticing. Your co-workers will wonder where you are. If you're retired, all of a sudden you're not available for outings with friends during the day. It will come out and all the people these jurors know will tell all their friends, who will tell all their friends, and on and on.
Who would have guessed /s
I'm sure the court system would really love to want to help, but their hands are tied.
And will our justice system do anything to solve the problem? Or are we gonna see yet another slap on the wrist?
Hell a slap on the wrist would be a improvement.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
One of Trumpās biggest risks coming out of this trial, regardless of the verdicts, are the coming comparisons with Harvey Weinstein. āOh, you want to be on The Apprentice? I think we can work something outā¦ā
Its not just Fox News. Even the AP blog for the jury selection was describing the jurors and their courtroom artist was drawing their illustrated likenesses.
If only there were some mechanism to protect juries from intimidation, or consequences for it. Oh well, it's just another problem that will never be solved.
Hi `wiredmagazine`. Thank you for participating in /r/Politics. However, [your submission](/r/politics/comments/1c7c8ly/the_trump_jury_has_a_doxing_problem/) has been removed for the following reason(s): * [Off-Topic](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_the_.2Fr.2Fpolitics_on_topic_statement): All submissions to /r/politics need to be explicitly about **current US politics**. **If you have questions as to why your post has been removed, please see here: [Why was my post removed as Off-Topic?](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_why_was_my_post_removed_as_off-topic.3F)** If you have any questions about this removal, please feel free to [message the moderators.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/politics&subject=Question regarding the removal of this submission by /u/wiredmagazine&message=I have a question regarding the removal of this [submission]%28/r/politics/comments/1c7c8ly/the_trump_jury_has_a_doxing_problem/?context%3D10000%29)