Twelve jurors were officially seated in President Trump’s hush-money trial on Thursday at Manhattan. Once all alternate jurors are selected, the opening arguments can begin. 

“We have our jury,” the New York State Supreme Court judge, Juan Merchan, told the court on Thursday afternoon, after he swore in seven more jurors and filled the twelve chairs in the jury box. He also swore in two alternate jurors of the six he needs. 

Mr. Trump told court reporters after he left the courtroom, “I’m supposed to be in New Hampshire, I’m supposed to be in Georgia, I’m supposed to be in North Carolina, South Carolina. I’m supposed to be in a lot of different places campaigning, but I’ve been here all day on a trial that really is a very unfair trial.” 

He showed reporters various media stories that quoted legal experts saying, as he put it, that “this is not a case, the case is ridiculous. 

“It’s a whopping outrage,” Mr. Trump added. “The whole world is watching this hoax.”

Mr. Trump also complained about the temperature inside the courtroom. “I’m sitting here for days now, from morning till night, in that freezing room, freezing. Everybody was freezing in there.”

Mr. Bragg has charged Mr. Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in an attempt to conceal information from voters during the 2016 election. Mr. Bragg alleges that Mr. Trump directed his former personal lawyer and current nemesis, Michael Cohen, to pay an adult film star, Stormy Daniels, whose legal name is Stephanie Clifford, $130,000 in hush money to keep her from publicizing a sexual encounter she claims she had with Mr. Trump in 2006 during a celebrity golf tournament at Lake Tahoe. 

When Mr. Trump, now president of the United States, repaid his debt to Cohen, the district attorney says, he covered the payments up as legal expenses. Mr. Trump has pleaded innocent to all charges and denies ever having had sex with Ms. Clifford.   

In the morning, Judge Merchan unseated two of the seven jurors he had sworn on Tuesday. One woman asked to be excused, expressing concerns she had been publicly identified. She said she had friends, colleagues and family who told her she had been identified as a potential juror. The judge dismissed her immediately and directed the press not to mention physical appearances that could possibly identify jurors. “We just lost what would have been a good juror for the case,” Judge Merchan said.      

The other seated juror that he dismissed was a man who on Tuesday had  told the court that he found Mr. Trump to be “fascinating and mysterious”, and that when Mr. Trump “walks into a room”, he “sets people off one way or the other”. But prosecutors informed the judge that the juror appeared to have been arrested in the 1990s for tearing down right-wing political advertisements. A prosecutor for the district attorney’s office, Joshua Steinglass, raised concerns that this juror may have lied on the questionnaire when asked by the judge if he had ever been arrested. Furthermore, his wife, Mr. Steinglass said, may have been involved in a corruption inquiry. However, the lawyers were not even sure if this was the same person. Nevertheless, the juror was dismissed, and the official reason for the dismissal was not made public.       

Judge Merchan also struck down a potential juror who, as defense attorney Susan Necheles phrased it, had a “vitriolic” view of Mr. Trump. “She harbors a deep hatred for him,” Ms. Necheles said, and began reading social media posts in which the woman had described the former president as “racist, sexist,” and as a “narcissist.” 

“She said,” Ms. Necheles continued, that she wouldn’t “believe Donald Trump if his tongue were notarized,” and that he was “anathema” to everything she was taught about love.

The judge called the woman back into the courtroom and confronted her with the posts, while Mr. Trump was sitting at the defense table a few feet away from her. 

The woman said she stopped posting political comments once the COVID-19 pandemic hit, and that her views today were not the same as they were eight years ago. “Election policies can get pretty spicy,” she said, “and Mr. Trump can get pretty spicy… They’re strong words and I do feel I was in a disturbed frame of mind during that election cycle,” she said, referring to the 2016 election.  

The woman then said she should apologize to Mr. Trump. But the judge concluded, “I don’t think we need to take a chance with this juror,” even though she may well be credible.

The judge plans to finish selecting the remaining four alternate jurors on Friday. If he is able to seat them, he will hold what is known as a “Sandoval hearing,” which will determine the questions prosecutors could ask Mr. Trump if he chooses to testify.

Court resumes at 9:30am on Friday.