Trump's NY Election Interference Trial - Trump is found guilty on all 34 counts

[thegeneral 1,544]

24 minutes ago, Strike said:

Who cares?  This thread is about a trial.  Take speculation to the "I hate Trump" thread.

One reason it relates to the trial is that Trump says Stormy made this all up and is lying. She is then allowed to tell her version of events because of this. Trump’s lawyers claimed this should be grounds for a mistrial.

[Strike 4,092]

10 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Okay so what do you think they haven’t proven?

What HAVE they proven is the question.  This has just been a bunch of character assassination.

[IGotWorms 3,430]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

What HAVE they proven is the question.  This has just been a bunch of character assassination.

Well I believe they think they’ve proven that Trump directed Cohen to pay off stormy Daniels to keep secret the time he boinked her, or at least knew that Cohen had done so, and then falsified financial documents to cover it up (that latter part being the crime).

[Strike 4,092]

1 minute ago, IGotWorms said:

Well I believe they think they’ve proven that Trump directed Cohen to pay off stormy Daniels to keep secret the time he boinked her, or at least knew that Cohen had done so, and then falsified financial documents to cover it up (that latter part being the crime).

This assume you believe Cohen, right?  Absent Cohen's testimony none of that is "proven", right?

[thegeneral 1,544]

1 hour ago, Strike said:

What HAVE they proven is the question.  This has just been a bunch of character assassination.

Donald’s character is held in such high esteem

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,715]

Just now, thegeneral said:

Donald’s character is held in such high esteem

And here I didn't think you and The Donald had anything in common! 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

Alvin Bragg is a weak man. He got bullied into taking this case to trial. Sad. 

[jerryskids 5,401]

58 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Well I believe they think they’ve proven that Trump directed Cohen to pay off stormy Daniels to keep secret the time he boinked her, or at least knew that Cohen had done so, and then falsified financial documents to cover it up (that latter part being the crime).

Well, not really.  Interesting read from the Free Press which those of us who aren't in the "convict OMB at any cost" camp have been trying to say:

Quote

The Trial Against Trump Will Throw the Election into Chaos
The former president has been dragged into court on a flimsy charge that rests on the testimony of a convicted liar.

By Eli Lake

May 15, 2024

Like
Comment
Share
When Donald Trump was indicted last year by Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, I was skeptical. The indictment alleged that the 45th president had falsified payments to his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, by classifying them as legal fees when in fact it was reimbursement for hush money to the porn star known as Stormy Daniels.

As the trial has unfolded over the past two months, Daniels has testified that Trump had sex with her at Lake Tahoe in 2006 and didn’t wear a condom or display much sexual endurance. Cohen testified that he dutifully made the payments to Daniels on Trump’s behalf because he was “knee-deep in the cult of Trump.” Former senior Trump aide Hope Hicks has testified to the lengths the 2016 campaign and Trump White House went to suppress stories of the former president’s past sexual scandals.

The resistance commentariat insists that Trump is going down. Republican Never Trump lawyer George Conway writes in The Atlantic that Bragg’s case is “kind of perfect.” MSNBC host and former Republican operative Nicole Wallace assures viewers that Trump’s lawyers “bombed” their cross-examination of Cohen. Former Justice Department official Andrew Weissman praises Bragg’s “crackerjack team of experienced attorneys” for building an airtight case. 

But missing from this wall-to-wall coverage is any mention of the underlying crime that Trump falsified business records to advance his campaign. And that is a fatal flaw in the case, because New York law stipulates that falsifying business records can only be charged as felonies (as Bragg has done) if it’s done to further another crime. Trump has not been charged with another crime, though Bragg has floated the theory that the business records were falsified to deprive 2016 voters of information about his tryst with Daniels.

There are other flaws as well. Robert Costello, one of the lawyers who worked closely with Cohen at the U.S. Attorney’s Office at the Southern District of New York, testified before the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that his old office declined to prosecute the hush money case against Trump because Cohen was “totally unworthy of belief.”

Cohen is Bragg’s star witness. And according to Costello, Cohen told the U.S. attorney’s office in 2018 that the “payment to Daniels was his own idea, designed to try and get him back into the inner circle of Trump people in Washington.” 

That is damning testimony from a far more credible source than Cohen, who pleaded guilty in 2018 to lying to Congress and served two and a half years in prison.

It’s still quite possible that the Manhattan jury will convict Trump on the 34 felony charges Bragg has brought. But there is no chance the conviction will withstand appeal, particularly given that it relies so heavily on Cohen’s testimony.

At best the anti-Trump “resistance” will win a Pyrrhic victory. They may get their headline: “Trump Convicted in Hush Money Trial.” But the charge will not stick.

In the meantime, Alvin Bragg has thrown the 2024 election into chaos by dragging the presumptive Republican presidential nominee into court to defend himself against an untested legal theory premised on the testimony of a convicted liar.

Trump already has proven that he will not recognize the results of elections that he doesn’t win. Bragg’s prosecution gives Trump and his supporters a ready-made excuse not to accept the results of the 2024 election should President Joe Biden prevail.

The hush money trial also gives permission and incentive to ambitious Republican prosecutors to repay Democrats in kind. Our legal system will soon be dominated by the whims of those in power as opposed to the rule of law.

Costello on Wednesday summed up the dangers of Bragg’s folly. “In the Trump case, they are seeking a conviction by any means necessary,” he said. “They do not care if it is overturned on appeal because that will likely not happen until after the election. In the meantime, they will have effectively interfered with the 2024 presidential election and perhaps influenced some voters because of an ill-gotten conviction.”

In other words, Alvin Bragg is destroying our democratic system in order to save it.

https://www.thefp.com/p/the-trial-against-trump-will-throw?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

To summarize:

- No charges have been filed against Trump to substantiate the calling of business record falsification a felony.

- A much more credible witness testified to Congress that the payments were Cohen's idea.  I presume he will testify in the trial.

- The judge doesn't care; he knows it won't hold up in appeal because of the first point, but it is all about interfering with the election.  Which is sad in a case where the prosecution is flimsily accusing Trump of election interference.

[squistion 975]

2 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

https://www.thefp.com/p/the-trial-against-trump-will-throw?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

To summarize:

- No charges have been filed against Trump to substantiate the calling of business record falsification a felony.

- A much more credible witness testified to Congress that the payments were Cohen's idea.  I presume he will testify in the trial.

- The judge doesn't care; he knows it won't hold up in appeal because of the first point, but it is all about interfering with the election.  Which is sad in a case where the prosecution is flimsily accusing Trump of election interference.

Don't hold your breath waiting on that one. If they were really more credible, they wouldn't have testified before that Congress. 

[jerryskids 5,401]

1 minute ago, squistion said:

Don't hold your breath waiting on that one. If they were really more credible, they wouldn't have testified before that Congress. 

Why is that?

[Tree of Knowledge 912]

2 hours ago, thegeneral said:

All those Chinese tchotchke factories will suffer. 

My stuff is “made by patriots for patriots “

[squistion 975]

11 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Why is that?

The Congressional Committee or hearing that he testified before is a joke. 

[jerryskids 5,401]

1 minute ago, squistion said:

The Congressional Committee he testified before is a joke. 

Well... that's an opinion.  Not sure why that would impact him testifying. 

Cohen is a convicted perjurer, not an opinion.   

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

40 minutes ago, squistion said:

The Congressional Committee or hearing that he testified before is a joke. 

Why? They asked him questions. He answered them.  Why is that a joke? That’s what happens at hearings. 

[Strike 4,092]

55 minutes ago, squistion said:

The Congressional Committee or hearing that he testified before is a joke. 

Whether that is true or not, you're still under oath when you testify in front of congress.  Any lawyer who cares about practicing law would not perjure themself in front of congress regardless of how much of a joke they though the committee they were testifying in front of was.  This is a very poor argument on your part.

[squistion 975]

Just now, Strike said:

Whether that is true or not, you're still under oath when you testify in front of congress.  Any lawyer who cares about practicing law would not perjure themself in front of congress regardless of how much of a joke they though the committee they were testifying in front of was.  This is a very poor argument on your part.

What exactly did he perjure himself on that could be proven as perjury?

[Strike 4,092]

8 minutes ago, squistion said:

What exactly did he perjure himself on that could be proven as perjury?

Are you high? 

[jerryskids 5,401]

6 minutes ago, Strike said:

Are you high? 

Yeah, his question makes no sense.

[The Real timschochet 3,192]

Robert Costello is the Giuliani lawyer who, according to Cohen, warned Cohen not to “flip”, right? 
If his testimony before Congress truly destroys Cohen, then surely the defense will call him as a witness right? Let’s see if they do. 

The problem with the article that @jerryskids posted, from everything else I’ve read, is that Cohem’s testimony is corroborated by Pecker and the other witnesses and the tape with Trump’s voice on it. But beyond that it doesn’t make any sense. If Cohen paid Daniels of his own volition, why would Trump repay it? And then why try to explain it away as a “legal expense”? Coven’s description of the crime is the only one that makes logical sense- unless of course Trump wants to take the stand and tell us what really happened. 

[The Real timschochet 3,192]

IMO, I am convinced a fraudulent act occurred and that Donald Trump committed it. The only question I still have is: is it a felony? The prosecution hasn’t quite explained that yet. I imagine they will attempt to do so in their summation. They need to explain how election interference of this sort is an actual felonious crime which would make the falsifying of records more than a misdemeanor. If they can make a convincing argument then I’m sold. If they can’t, I would be forced to acquit Trump if I were on the jury. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Robert Costello is the Giuliani lawyer who, according to Cohen, warned Cohen not to “flip”, right? 
If his testimony before Congress truly destroys Cohen, then surely the defense will call him as a witness right? Let’s see if they do. 

The problem with the article that @jerryskids posted, from everything else I’ve read, is that Cohem’s testimony is corroborated by Pecker and the other witnesses and the tape with Trump’s voice on it. But beyond that it doesn’t make any sense. If Cohen paid Daniels of his own volition, why would Trump repay it? And then why try to explain it away as a “legal expense”? Coven’s description of the crime is the only one that makes logical sense- unless of course Trump wants to take the stand and tell us what really happened. 

What crime? 

[squistion 975]

13 minutes ago, Strike said:

Are you high? 

I repeat. What did Costello say that could be proven as perjury?

[The Real timschochet 3,192]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

What crime? 

See my next post

[Horseman 1,590]

Oooof. Bad day for Cohen.  

[jerryskids 5,401]

6 minutes ago, squistion said:

I repeat. What did Costello say that could be proven as perjury?

I don't think you are following the discussion.  I suggest you go back and reread the thread that led to this.   

[Horseman 1,590]

New text messages seem to show Cohen lied, earlier in the trial when he said he talked to Trump on the phone. 

NBC News: Significant blow to the prosecution. 

Lol. 

[squistion 975]

3 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I don't think you are following the discussion.  I suggest you go back and reread the thread that led to this.  

So you can't point to anything he has said that he could be convicted for perjury of. Got it. Thanks. 

[Strike 4,092]

4 minutes ago, squistion said:

So you can't point to anything he has said that he could be convicted for perjury of. Got it. Thanks. 

Yeah, because no one has asserted that and it has nothing to do with the point I was responding to. 

[squistion 975]

5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

New text messages seem to show Cohen lied, earlier in the trial when he said he talked to Trump on the phone. 

NBC News: Significant blow to the prosecution. 

Lol. 

I think you got that from Fox not NBC News.

[Horseman 1,590]

7 hours ago, squistion said:

https://twitter.com/KatiePhang/status/1791157906236166367

Katie's Sidebar:

Todd Blanche has been crossing Michael Cohen for about 5 hours now. But, just minutes before the lunch recess, Blanche decided to finally hit a substantive area, crossing Cohen about an important 10/24/16 call with Trump.

As a general proposition, cross-examination is usually a "get in/get out" moment. The more prolonged and meandering the cross, the harder it is for the jury to be invested and to stay invested.

Blanche has shown that it takes him a long time to wind up for the pitch; I'm not sure the jury cares enough to wait for him to get there.

Blanche raising his voice, practically "shrieking" at Cohen, could be perceived as "much ado about nothing" by the jury, especially if he took so long to get to that point.

In the fact of Blanche's hysteria, Cohen has calmly responded that he “always ran everything by the boss immediately, and in this case it could have been just saying, 'Everything’s been taken care of, it’s going to be resolved.'”

Blanche yelling at Cohen: “We are not asking for your belief. This jury doesn’t want to hear what you think happened.” isn't true.

Of course, the jury wants to know from Michael Cohen what he thinks happened. Unless Trump wants to take the stand to explain what happened, then Cohen is a critical voice for the jury to hear from.

And no, I'm not saying Cohen should be speculating about what happened. But Cohen should be allowed to explain what was going on not only for that 10/24 call, but for all of the other facts and details relating to this case.

This Katie Phang is a joke. 

Completely different take than NBC Nightly who actually listed the facts of what Blanche said.  

[The Real timschochet 3,192]

8 minutes ago, Horseman said:

New text messages seem to show Cohen lied, earlier in the trial when he said he talked to Trump on the phone. 

NBC News: Significant blow to the prosecution. 

Lol. 

That’s one phone call in which he may or may not have talked to Trump. 

But so what? We already have the tape of the White House conversation in which Trump clearly knows about the payment to Stormy Daniels and how it’s going to be refunded. The defense is going to have a really hard time arguing that Trump knew nothing about this. It just won’t fly. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

Just now, Horseman said:

This Katie Phang is a joke. 

Completely different take than NBC Nightly who actually listed the facts of what Blanche said.  

Squistion is up at 6 am sharp every day to follow this stupidity. It’s very feminine, like a woman that can’t miss her soap opera.  

[The Real timschochet 3,192]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Squistion is up at 6 am sharp every day to follow this stupidity. It’s very feminine, like a woman that can’t miss her soap opera.  

You really shouldn’t be criticizing anyone else for wasting time every day. I’ve often get ripped for spending too much time on these boards and it’s a fair criticism, but I can’t hold a candle to you. Sometimes I leave this forum for several hours or even days and no matter when I choose to return the one constant I can count on is that you’re here posting. That’s your business but again, criticizing others for wasting time is rather ridiculous coming from you. 

[Horseman 1,590]

Just now, squistion said:

I think you got that from Fox not NBC News.

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news-full-episodes

Tonight's episode 5:45 in. Although you should watch the whole thing instead of getting your news from Katie Phang tweets. 

How's my asss taste?

[squistion 975]

Just now, Horseman said:

https://www.nbcnews.com/nightly-news-full-episodes

Tonight's episode 5:45 in. Although you should watch the whole thing instead of getting your news from Katie Phang tweets. 

I am not watching a full episode. Print out exactly what was said to prove your point. 

[thegeneral 1,544]

Trump has these focking losers coming to his trial and stand behind him dressed up like him  

Good lord…cucked beyond belief!!! 

[thegeneral 1,544]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You really shouldn’t be criticizing anyone else for wasting time every day. I’ve often get ripped for spending too much time on these boards and it’s a fair criticism, but I can’t hold a candle to you. Sometimes I leave this forum for several hours or even days and no matter when I choose to return the one constant I can count on is that you’re here posting. That’s your business but again, criticizing others for wasting time is rather ridiculous coming from you. 

Tim just took off his white glove and backhanded HT across the face while saying “how dare you”

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

5 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You really shouldn’t be criticizing anyone else for wasting time every day. I’ve often get ripped for spending too much time on these boards and it’s a fair criticism, but I can’t hold a candle to you. Sometimes I leave this forum for several hours or even days and no matter when I choose to return the one constant I can count on is that you’re here posting. That’s your business but again, criticizing others for wasting time is rather ridiculous coming from you. 

Nah. There are many gaps between my postings. Hours at a time. Nice try. I don’t work. You guys do. Sad. 

[thegeneral 1,544]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Nah. There are many gaps between my postings. Hours at a time. Nice try. I don’t work. You guys do. Sad. 

“Hours at a time”

[squistion 975]

Just now, thegeneral said:

“Hours at a time”

Yeah, like when he sleeps.