Thread by @AsheinAmerica

Here at the Alfred A. Arraj Federal Court House for Coomer v. Lindell today. Updates will be provided on this thread (on delay because we’re not allowed to post until breaks).

Background: Coomer is suing Lindell for Defamation about voting machines. This case has been going on since 2022. @CannConActual and I went through all the details on Friday:
rumble.com/v6u2c1h-why-we…

@CannConActual Judge ruling on motions:
Rule 103(b) — Limine motions, discretion on Limine w/r to Eric car crash. Court will not revisit ruling that that can change at trial and the objection is preserved for the record.

Evidentiary questions:
Plaintiff: CISA statement — no evidence of election fraud. Lindell says China interfered in the election, directly belied by CISA statement, Lindell disregarded reliable sources — evidence will come in through Halderman

Defense: Inadmissible hearsay, statement had been rebuked by current DNI, Krebs had no right to make that statement and was fired. No foundation.

Plaintiff: Cyber symposium — Coomer and DVS did their best to take the election through China, $5M challenge. District court confirmed the award — it’s being appealed. Evidence will come in through Halderman and Lindell.
Defense: This is on appeal and appellate court indicated that the lower court and arbitration rewrite the rules. Grossly unfair to let it in.

@CannConActual Plaintiff: January 6 constitutes notice of danger that Mike Lindell caused with his statements and specifically danger to Dr. Coomer. Also, Matt Crane and the clerks were somehow harmed.
Defense: irrelevant, preposterous, designed to unfairly prejudice the jury.

Plaintiff: Settlement with Newsmax, Lindell continued defaming Coomer after the Newsmax retraction. Lindell’s assertions about a Newsmax deal preventing Lindell from coming on is also alleged to be defamatory.
Defense: Ask for Limine instruction about the details — no liability. Judge asked to see instruction in writing and legal authority. Rule 105.

@CannConActual Judge takes under advisement. Will rule on a break.

Objections to Redactions — judge delayed this until a break. Wants to proceed to jury selection.

Brief break while the jury assembles.

@CannConActual Jury assembles. Half the courtroom gallery is filled with potential jurors, as well as the jury box.

Judge enters and introduces case and parties. Several minutes of instruction about masking. If you even feel a tickle in your throat, please put on a mask.

@CannConActual Judge asked if any jurors know her or her staff. None do. Judge reads a statement on the importance of jury duty and the importance of jury trials.

Judge reads case overview to the jury. Summary / description of the parties and the claims before them.

Jury selection now underway. 8 jurors to be selected.

Questions:
Are you a citizen? All are.
Are you 18? All are.
Read write or understand English? One juror raised her hand, judge asked her some questions and thanked her, did not dismiss her.
Any reason you can’t serve on the jury? One guy says he can’t because work and financial, used his last 10 dollars for financing. Judge asked him to wait until the question about undue burden.

Counsel approaches. Sidebar.

@CannConActual Logistics:
Trial is set for 10 days
Set to end June 13, 2025.
9-4ish.

Undue Hardship for the 14 seated:
One guy says financial hardship for 10 days, works for an airline, would not be compensated for time, impact to financials beyond just work.
Who can’t stay for the full time. Two people raise their hands. First guy, has an exam and school. Can you complete those classes and exams outside 9-5? Yes. Second person, family trip on the 12th plus reality TV show runner, possible contract that would start immediately and missing the opportunity would harm him financially as he hasn’t been able to work since January. Third person, husband is out of town and she has no alternative for child care, and the times don’t work.

Counsel approach, sidebar.

The airline employee and the mom were dismissed. Two new jurors seated. Same questions about hardship, one of the new ones just started an internship in wind acquisition (yes really) and cannot afford to miss work. Company does not compensate.

Counsel approach, the wind acquisition juror is excused. New juror called up to replace him. He has no hardship.

Physical limitations, hearing, eyesight, back or mobility issues. Two jurors raised their hands. First: spinal disc issues, hard to sit for long periods of time. Takes meds for her back. Says she can stand in the back of the jury box when she gets uncomfortable. Second guy, neck fusion — headaches and nausea and pain, daily. No medication. How often are the headaches and nausea, daily. “Do you have a headache now?” “Yes — can’t focus.” Is there anything you can do to alleviate the pains? Not here… what would you do? THC.

Counsel approach, sidebar. THC guy excused. Replaced with new juror.

New juror also seeks to be excused. His wife is very pregnant and on bed rest, has to pick up his son every day and they’re on baby watch. First son was early.

Counsel approach, sidebar. Guy will pregnant wife is excused. Replaced with new juror.

New juror is the same one that originally said he had financial hardship and can’t even afford the parking let alone miss work. Hourly employee, no jury compensation. He is excused. Replaced with new juror.

New juror seeks to be excused. Just graduated and is a teacher, teaching summer school is a part of her contract. Believes there is compensation for jury duty.

Counsel approach, sidebar. Teacher lady is not excused.

Proceeding to specific voir dire.
Has anyone read media about this trial? One person raised his hand — he approaches, side bar with juror and counsel. The juror is excused. New juror called.

Three people raised their hands as the new juror is seated, stating that they should have said yes about media coverage. Judge calls them up one at a time for sidebar with counsel. One of the three jurors was dismissed. New juror called.

Do you have issues with the subject matter in this case where you may not be able to be fair? One of the juror is offended by Lindell’s political activities. “Can you set aside these opinions?” “Probably not — I could not put aside my personal feelings.” Second juror, pink hair and mask, says same — not able to set aside feelings, doesn’t think she can be impartial. Third juror says the same, cannot remain impartial. A fourth raises their hand as well.

Sidebar, counsel and the jurors that raised their hands, one by one, approach.

Two of the four jurors excused for cause. Two jurors seated.

@CannConActual Quick bio break, then more of this, then lunch break at 12:30p.

Back from lunch: Jurors asked about social media. What sites, how often, do you get use them for news.

Next set of questions is about prior history serving on a jury. Next set of questions about training in law. One juror is an inactive attorney.

Next set of questions is about feelings towards lawsuits and corporations and feelings about ability to be impartial.

Judge explains the burden (preponderance of the evidence). Then asked about inherent bias or religious opposition to juries generally.

Plaintiff Specific Voir Dire:
Did you see Lindell’s press conference, did you see the signs, did you read the signs.

One juror has a positive opinion of Mr. Lindell — she likes mypillow, supports Mr. Lindell but can’t specifically say why.

Another juror also likes the pillows and has a positive opinion of Mr. Lindell. Have you ever seen Lindell speak outside of pillow commercials. No.

Does anyone believe the election was rigged against President Trump? No one said yes. Atty asks specifically of a juror, he says no. Does anyone believe the election was rigged against President Trump in 2020? No one.

2016, 2020, 2024 — anyone believe any of these elections were rigged against President Trump? No.

Do you agree with the term “The Big Lie” in reference to the idea that Trump elections are rigged. Do you agree with that?
No - it’s come from both parties
No opinion, don’t follow politics.
I don’t know, don’t follow politics.

Do you have Truth or Parler? No.

@CannConActual Did you watch Fox or Newsmax during the 2020 election? One person said yes — I saw it, it didn’t consume it but it was on everywhere.

Did you follow Rudy Giuliani or Sidney Powell? “Are they on Fox News?” LOL. Another juror said they remember seeing them but didn’t consume it.

@CannConActual Are you familiar with the name Tina Peters? One person — very negative opinion of Tina but that won’t impact her testimony

Are you familiar with Joe Oltmann? No one.

Are you familiar with the Cyber Symposium in August 2021? No.

How involved are you in politics? Family are literally politicians (treasurer, candidate) but he says the whole family was turned off to politics. Claims no bias.

When I say January 6ers, do you know who I am talking about? “I know the date but not the label.” Atty then explains J6 and asks if the people were patriots. “I don’t think they were patriots.” Do you agree with the pardon of J6ers? “I think Trump did what he thought was right?

@CannConActual Next juror agrees with Trump’s pardon. Do you agree with calling J6ers patriots or criminals? Yes.

Juror being pressed on first amendment — what limits? Anything to do with treason. So if someone’s speech is treasonous, is that the line? No.

@CannConActual Same questions to another juror — Criminals. Should violent speech be protected under the first amendment? No.

Does anyone else have strong thoughts on the first amendment and its limits? Should Violent rhetoric and violent propaganda be protected? One juror, No.

Intentional infliction of emotional distress. Are you concerned about deciding on that? One lady talked about her stalker in college and that she understands emotional distress.

Have you heard the term “lawfare” before? No, I have not. Are you offended by Mr. Coomer bringing a civil case? No. Do you think that there are too many lawsuits? Yes.

Defendant Voir Dire:
Negative view of MAGA. One juror: yes, I do. As a historian, “make America great again” is offensive.

Anyone work in politics in 2016: one was a journalist in 2016 and did all the election coverage. Doesn’t recall Hillary Clinton claiming the election was stolen.

Anyone have a negative opinion of Donald Trump. One juror works in steel and is mad about tariffs. Another juror says “he is everything my dad said not to be.” Has Donald Trump done anything good? No. Another juror has a strong distaste for Trump because her family supports him and it’s icky. If Mike Lindell is a good friend of Donald Trump, does that impact your opinion of him? Yes but it’s not my opinion. I’ll try really hard to not let it.

Does anyone have a positive view of Antifa? None respond.

Has anyone heard the 2016 election was rigged or stolen? Has anyone heard that Elon Musk hacked the 2024 election for Donald Trump? One juror said yes but he can’t recall where he heard it.

Is anyone disappointed that this case doesn’t have anything to do with J6? No one responded. Does anyone have a negative opinion of Mike Lindell? No one responded.

@CannConActual Counsel approach, sidebar. Judge calls the juror that defended the first amendment up to the side bar.

Two jurors excused for cause. Two new jurors come up.

@CannConActual First one: Funeral on the 10th, family vacation on the 13th. Excused. Second one: no issues or conflicts. One more juror brought up from the pool.

10 more minutes per side to voir dire the new jurors. Same questions as before of these two new jurors.

@CannConActual First one leans positive on Lindell, bought his products, nothing on political. J6ers — patriots or criminals? I believe they thought they were justified or crossed a line — some of them crossed a line, as a group they did not. No opinion on voting machines.

Second one, not familiar with Mike Lindell or mypillow. No opinion on voting machines, no research but heard about controversy. No opinion. J6ers, patriots or criminals, no opinion. No knowledge of cyber symposium. Opinions on the first amendment? I think freedom of speech is a positive thing. What about violent rhetoric? No opinion because I don’t know. Can violent propaganda be dangerous? Yes. Did you see press conference? Yes. Did you hear it? No. Did it impact you? No. Tina Peters? No. Rudy or Sidney? No. Do you listen to Joe Rogan? One podcast, nothing political.

@CannConActual No questions from the defense for these two witnesses. Sidebar with counsel.

Follow up questions from the judge. Do you understand and / or want to change your answer and/or want to raise something outside of other earshot?
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No
Yes, No, No

@CannConActual Counsel Striking jurors, sidebar. Jury announced — remaining potential jurors dismissed. Jury conduct rules read into the record.

@CannConActual Court on a quick break. I need to get on the road — watch Culture of Change at 9pET tonight for my full breakdown of day one on @BadlandsMedia_!

@CannConActual @BadlandsMedia_ rumble.com/v6u70or-cultur…

@CannConActual @BadlandsMedia_ @threadreaderapp please unroll