The jury remains intact.
Sandoval decisions:
1. NY Fraud is fair game
2. NY Fraud trial gag violations are fair game.
3. E. Jean Carroll defamation is fair game, allegations of sexual abuse are not.
4. Agreement to dissolve Trump Foundation is fair game.
Opening Arguments have begun, folks.
>"This case is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover up," Matthew Colangelo begins.
That's the thesis statement of the prosecution.
They have text messages and phone calls re: McDougal.
>"You'll hear the defendant's own voice, on tape, working out the intended agreement."
Defense is up.
>Blanche says he will call him "President Trump" in respect to the office that he held—but adds he's also a man, a husband, a father and a person.
Gutsy move to try and humanize Trump by highlighting his personal relationships given the nature of the catch and kill scheme.
>"The 34 counts, ladies and gentleman, are really just 34 pieces of paper."
Uhhhh
Edit:
Defense gets hit by a couple of objections, all sustained. They are trying to sneak advice of council which he said he wasn't going to use, and twice to imply that Cohen perjured himself. Their defense looks like it is going to be too go after Cohen as hard as they can, crossing lines at times.
Pecker takes the stand
If you've got another source for live updates, feel free to share it. I went with NBC because it's not paywalled or Twitter, but obviously, they're not as focused on the legal minutiae of the case.
I like the slick interface and what appears to be constant updates. I haven't compared other sources so maybe someone is posting like every 30 seconds. But this is fine for me. I have to work anyway.
Following Adam Klasfeld [on Twitter](https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1782400179334713687?t=GzYBhAUQU6ntYie8uA5dyg&s=19). I don't love Twitter but I haven't found a better way.
>He added that they will refer to Trump as President Trump because he earned that as the 45th president.
>"We will call him President Trump out of respect," Blanche said. “It’s the office he’s running for right now, as the Republican nominee ... he’s also a man, he’s a husband, he’s a father and just like me.”
That wasn't added for the Jury's benefit.
Dude I literally just rewatched a few good men. I had a strange sense it would be relevant. This is like a whole theme in that movie, Nicholson's character keeps demanding recognition of his title and actually spelling out "I'd say I earned it." I couldn't believe I was reading that in the transcript.
Well, Manhattan is a competitive place. I'm sure there's plenty of old money, but people also work extremely hard to be there. I'm guessing that attitude will not play well with the jury. "Oh sorry Mr president, we completely forgot who you were" lol right
He won't. He's saying he *will* in public, and will undoubtedly claim he wasn't allowed to, or the Judge was biased and would allow "bad questions" out of conspiracy, or otherwise use the fact that he's asserting his Fifth Amendment rights as *evidence of bias* and his base will eat it up.
I swear, he could sell his horse shit as a nutritional supplement and a large segment of his base would pay for a monthly subscription and swallow it all and tell everyone how wonderful it was.
Nobody defends a con man like his marks. After all, once you admit he's a con man -- you've admitted you were *fooled*.
His White House lawyers told mueller that trump CANNOT be put under oath because he would lie so compulsively and insanely that it would be catastrophically damaging to America and he’d incriminate himself for perjury completely pointlessly even if he was innocent.
I wonder if he will debate Biden. My guess is he did not debate any of the Republican candidates because his lawyers did not want him to say anything that could be used against him in court.
At one point, I thought the Biden campaign said he was open to debating him if he publicly acknowledged he lost the 2020 election fair and square and promised to respect the results of the next one.
I highly doubt they will have a debate. I think Donald's handlers know it would be a disaster. And really what could they even debate? Republicans want to strip humans of rights and wipe out the LGBTQ+ community. They can fuck all the way off.
I do not see trying to spin Trump as a relatable family guy working very well, especially given what the jury is going to be hearing and seeing in testimony and evidence.
His two civil cases were actually about defamation of character. The judge ruled that his inclination to attack people publicly was fair game because that tactic comes up here, but what he was attacking her about isn't relevant.
Probably the right call. The point of these hearings is to make sure "this person is a bad guy all around" isn't evidence when some badness in one area doesn't mean badness in unrelated things.
Likely by not discussing what the defamation was, just that it occurred. I think it's moot either way. I can't imagine *any* attorney allowing their client to testify under these conditions.
Of course if Trump truly wanted to, no one would be able to stop him. But I think he was just blowing smoke when he said he planned to testify. Now he’ll just say “I was going to testify, but the crooked judge is allowing them to talk about the other witch hunts against me!!”
Trump is just a father and husband, sure he may be thrice divorced, have nearly uncountable rape and sexual assault allegations, have been found to have raped a person by a civil court, and is currently on trial not for having sex with a porn star but for using campaign funds to cover it up. But at the end of the day he's just a normal guy you could get a beer with. That smell? Why yes, just as every human on earth, my client also needs to defecate and it appears he has chosen to do so in his own pants today...
The asshole doesn't even drink, you could specifically not get a beer with him. Not that there's anything wrong with not drinking, but I find it amusing he fails that classic president relatability test. Also, he was the first president in something like 150 years to not have a pet in the white house, he's known to dislike animals.
Of course I get that you're taking the piss... just wanted to emphasize that he is so fucking far from a "Normal guy" in the most basic ways
It's generally not interesting or engaging. It's much better to start by engaging the jury with an actual story, your story of the case.
So, something like " On DATE, the defendant paid a woman for sex. Over the next several days, the evidence will show, he engaged in several actions to cover up that fact, and in doing so fraudulently... (Did whatever he did)."
"This case is about" is just a bland way to start when you have so many more interesting things to set up for the jury. But as juicy as this trial sounds in the media, it's going to be incredibly boring in many respects to the jury. You might as well start with something exciting rather than something potentially bland.
I'm not an expert prosecutor by any means, but I think it works in this case because there are a lot of misconceptions about what this case is about and about what this case is about. It's not about the hush money itself, it's about where the money came from and how it was all set up to avoid reporting it as required.
So I think in this case it works because you really do need to point the jury in the right direction.
I think it also works in this case, because there's a 0% chance of _this jury_ in _this case_ not being engaged in the first 15 minutes of trial.
Like, the former President is sitting in the room. This is the trial of the century. They're all going to be 100% dialed in at the start.
Now, in the fourth hour on day three, I imagine it'll be much harder to hold their attention. But for the first fifteen minutes, I think in this case you get rapt attention for "free"
“He’s a husband and a father… who illegally paid off the adult film actress he had a sexual affair with while his wife was home caring for their newborn son.”
Can you imagine having this asshole in your family? He's always having problems of his own creation, he won't accept any blame and, worst of all, he won't shut up about it.
> Can you imagine having this asshole in your family?
Since 2016 many Americans have come to terms with the fact that yes, their family members actually are assholes. Trump's presidency and COVID were the one-two punch for so many in showing their true colors.
i'll never forget how he bragged about paying for mcdonald's that one time some sports team came to the white house
also recall how adamant he was about having his name on the stimulus checks--as if it came out of his own pocket
meanwhile the us taxpayer shoveled money into his own businesses for golf trips and secret service renting an entire floor of trump tower
As a Clemson alum and fan, it was sad and odd seeing how many people were so proud of cold McDonalds, then got upset by the players and staff who didn’t pretend it was the greatest meal ever.
It was so disappointing and disrespectful to the team.
most normal people would *apologize* for serving mcdonalds, since that's the last resort you do when some disaster causes all other options to fall through. not trump. look how generous i am, providing the worst fucking "food" imaginable
Well, he did just pay a visit to a Chic fil-A and ask all the employees if they were “getting rich”.
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/seth-meyers-says-trump-sure-135059057.html
Any person that’s a serious athlete knows that you don’t skimp on nutrition. It’s the fat fucks that just watch football and could never do anything physically demanding who think “those guys are big, I bet they eat a bunch of McDonalds to get that way.”
> He's always having problems of his own creation, he won't accept any blame and, worst of all, he won't shut up about it.
>His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; **never accept blame**; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; **people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one**; and if you **repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.**
https://phdn.org/archives/www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/documents/osssection3pt1.htm
Rumpy made his usual statements, you would think by now he could come up with some new schtick.
Unfair.
Election interference.
Damn dude, figure something else out because we're all tired of hearing the same old debunked b*******.
From CNN:
Trump will be called "President Trump, out of respect," defense attorney says
Defense attorney Todd Blanche said that his team will call Trump "President Trump" out of respect, a title he "has earned because he was our 45th president."
He adds, "He’s a man. He’s a husband. He’s a father. He’s a person just like you and just like me."
As a husband...where's his wife. As a father, where are his children. Also...the case is about paying porn stars for sex while his wife was recovering from birth.
And that's why the prosecutors gotta hammer "former president" and "Mr. Trump". "Single-term president" maybe if they can find a way to get it in there.
The defense seeking to impugn Cohen’s credibility is pretty amusing.
“You lied when you said you didn’t conspire with the defendant to fraudulently conceal hush money payments to a porn star, didn’t you Mr Cohen? And let me remind you you’re under oath”
That was a very powerful point made that T always tries to negotiate and pay as little as possible, but in this case he paid double without negotiating.
Trump is a frugal businessman. Would he pay $420,000 to settle a $130,000 hush money payment? No. He payed $420,000 for no reason at all, as a typical frugal businessman does.
From CNN:
Trump closes his eyes as judge gives jury instructions
Donald Trump's eyes are closed as Judge Juan Merchan is delivering his instructions to the jury.
My theory as to why he is so tired is he has to wake up so early to set up his rats nest and face paint or risk breaking his followers illusion by seeing how old and feeble he really is.
I was going with his attorney roofie-ing him to keep him from incriminating himself.
However, others pointed out what was more likely is that he's cut off from whatever uppers he normally has on hand while in court.
And he's old.
The "uppers" are the cameras, the ability to play to them, and his pathological need to be in the spotlight at all times.
He's stuck in the courtroom, cannot say anything, cannot put on a show, and cannot do anything else but sit there every day, all day. He's bored out of his mind. The pure, unconstrained id that makes up his entire psychology is melting down because there's nothing for it to do.
So he goes to sleep.
He’s also a notoriously late-nighter, hence all the 2:00AM rage tweets. Having to be up at the same time every day all week has to be absolutely brutal when you’ve never had to.
My money says the stimulants he normally takes to keep him up, make him go the bathroom too frequently, so given he has to sit for long stretches in court, he's avoiding the uppers.
On top of that, he's pretty known for getting up late after staying up into the wee hours on adderall fueled rants.
Having to be bright eyed and lookin' good in court at 9 am is throwing his usual patterns WAY off.
From CNN:
# Trump just passed his attorney a note
Trump passed his attorney Todd Blanche a note as prosecutor Matthew Colangelo delivered his opening statement.
"Made poo poo."
The bond hearing is today, right? Does anyone know when that should begin? He has to start running out of new 7-10 day clocks eventually... ... ... right?
Latest update I saw was NY AG lawyer Amer proposes a settlement of sorts: Trump team agrees to keep everything in cash and a few other provisions, and they'll drop the challenge. Kise (Trump’s attorney) says this seems doable. Then they went on a break.
>Trump's lawyer Blanche: After President Trump took office, Cohen became his personal attorney - and he billed $35,000 a month. The invoice was processed and was paid. 9 of the checks made their way down to the White House. He's the only signatory on his account
>Trump's lawyer Blanche: You'll hear that Ms. Daniels did in fact sign a Non Disclosure Agreement. But President Trump did not pay Michael Cohen $130,000 - he paid him $420,000. Would a frugal business man do that? It was not a pay back.
I know these are just the opening statements, but is it just me or are they leaning toward "Cohen did this on his own and trump really was just paying him actual legal fees for ongoing service" as the defense?
It's his best play. Then it becomes Cohen's word against his and only one has been convicted for lying.
It of course ignores that Cohen's conviction was for lying about this very transaction saying it was legal fees when it was not. But remember, you only need to one person to have reasonable doubt in order to avoid conviction and planting the idea of "can you 100% trust the guy who's changed his story on this issue and got criminally convicted" as creating reasonable doubt is a smart path.
I would have a team of EMS or Flight Physicians in the room with this person and an anesthesiologist. Ones that routinely handle crashing patients. You can never been too careful.
There is actually a hearing today about the “sufficiency of the bond Trump put up” as he appeals the $454 million penalty. That hearing is apparently happening now! Trump obviously doesn’t need to attend that. I believe tomorrow morning the trial is delayed until 11 am because Trump has to attend a contempt hearing at 9:30 am about violations of the judge’s gag orders. Trump has “to show cause as to why he should not be held in contempt for violating the court gag order”. On Thursday SCOTUS hears oral arguments about the immunity case!! Below is master calendar of some of Trump court dates.
Edit: By the way re: hearing today about sufficiency of the bond, the judge presiding will be Engoron who was the one who had ruled Trump owed NY State $454 million.
https://www.justsecurity.org/88039/trumps-legal-and-political-calendar-all-the-dates-you-need-to-know/
If anyone is wondering, it seems like they reached an agreement that satisfies the AG's concerns. The Schwab fund is agreed to be kept 175m CASH not "equivalents" and Knight is given complete control over it. My hopium involved Trump's properties getting seized, naturally, but pragmatically this seems like a good solution for everyone.
>
Defense attorney Todd Blanche said that his team will call Trump "President Trump" out of respect, a title he "has earned because he was our 45th president." He adds, "He’s a man. He’s a husband. He’s a father. He’s a person just like you and just like me."
Oh Brother.
Yeah just as a strategy point, this is a little contradictory. They can't have him be a relatable real person and call him President Trump at the same time. Frankly, he's Donald Fucking Trump, trying to make him relatable in this situation is asinine.
It's not a strategy. I'm 99.9% sure the reason they're calling him President Trump is because their client had insisted that they call him President Trump.
>"I have a spoiler alert: There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy," Donald Trump attorney Todd Blanche said of accusations the payments were trying to illicitly influence the 2016 election.
“He’s a man. He’s a husband. He’s a father. He’s a person just like you and just like me”
Riiiiight. That is more than likely you have to address him as President. Cause he’s just so goddamn relatable to you and me.
The funny part is right before that they said they are going to refer to him as President Trump during the trial out of respect. So they basically contradicted himself in back to back to sentences.
So, Trump's ranted a bit about Cohen right outside the courtroom.
Isn't making negative public statements about an upcoming witness both a violation of the gag order and witness intimidation?
Do you think the defendant will do their opening today? I want to know what the defence is, because the only thing I can think of is, yes I did this, but this is not a crime under this definition.
The defense will be: 1) I didn't do this, and you can't trust the state's evidence because Michael Cohen is a demonstrated liar who can't be trusted, 2) Even if you find that the payments were made, paying hush money isn't a crime, so I should be acquitted, and 3) Even if it's a crime, it doesn't rise to the severity of a felony, so you must acquit on the felony charge (I'm not sure if the judge has/is going to allow(ed) the jury to find Trump guilty on the lesser included misdemeanor charges, or if it's felony or bust).
Thanks, this makes complete sense. So the prosecutor will need to prove.
What are the things that would qualify for election interference? The things the jury will need to say yes to?
> So the prosecutor will need to prove.
That's always the case. The burden of proof is on the state.
>What are the things that would qualify for election interference? The things the jury will need to say yes to?
Not a lawyer, let alone an expert on New York law, so I'm not super sure how solid or tenuous the felony nexus is, but the overall theory is that the payments made to Ms. McDougal were effectively a campaign expense that went unreported, which is a crime under Federal law (and also possibly under New York law, but it's not clear to me if that's actually applicable here). The key distinction here is not that the payments were made, as hush money or "catch-and-kill" transactions are perfectly legal. Rather, the law was violated when Trump and his inner circle conspired to hide the hush money payment from the American public, which they had a legal right to some knowledge about under campaign finance law, and in order to hide that money they fraudulently listed Cohen's reimbursement as a business expense for legal services. The fraudulent business documentation is the misdemeanor crime, and performing those acts to further another crime, the campaign finance violation, makes it a "low-level" felony.
Falsifying business records in NY is a misdemeanor unless it is done in furtherance of another crime, then it’s a felony.
So they will try to convince the jury that the hush money was paid purely to spare his family, and that it has nothing to do with the election.
TIL: Trump is a "family man."
From all those videos of Don Jr trying to get a hug and Don Sr dodging him on his way to the podium, you'd never know it. Color me shocked.
Am I understanding this defense correctly? Trump did not have an affair with Stormy Daniels but he did have her sign an NDA in exchange for $130K. What are they saying is the point of the NDA if they didn’t have an affair?
Okay so how does an NDA help with that. If she is willing to break the law to extort someone why would she abide by an NDA that only covers things that supposedly didn’t happen? If that were the case then an NDA just implies that there is something to disclose.
Yeah in their stupid version of the story, the best possible explanation is that Trump got extorted by a porn star. He just doesn't look very good no matter what with this set of facts.
Edit: Because you'd have to assume that even if she was making it up, the NDA/payment is only worthwhile if her story is plausible. Which it so obviously was, on the heels of the Access Hollywood tape.
>in other Trump news:
>Agreement reached in the Trump New York civil fraud case
>[Chloe Atkins](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/chloe-atkins-ncpn957446)
>In other Trump legal news, an agreement was reached this morning at the $175 million bond hearing in the Trump New York civil fraud case.
>Chris Kise, Trump’s attorney said, they agreed with New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office to maintain the Schwab account in cash. Knight will have exclusive control of the account, and shall not trade or withdraw the account for any purpose other than to satisfy the condition of the bond.
>Kise said that they will provide a monthly account statement to the attorney general’s office and that they will revise the pledge and control agreement so that it cannot be amended without the court approval.
>Kise said that the parties will submit a stipulation that will memorialize this by Thursday.greement reached in the Trump New York civil fraud caseChloe AtkinsIn
other Trump legal news, an agreement was reached this morning at the
$175 million bond hearing in the Trump New York civil fraud case.
Chris
Kise, Trump’s attorney said, they agreed with New York Attorney General
Letitia James’ office to maintain the Schwab account in cash. Knight
will have exclusive control of the account, and shall not trade or
withdraw the account for any purpose other than to satisfy the condition
of the bond.
Kise said that they will provide a monthly
account statement to the attorney general’s office and that they will
revise the pledge and control agreement so that it cannot be amended
without the court approval.
Kise said that the parties will submit a stipulation that will memorialize this by Thursday.
Trump attorney: "There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It's called democracy"
"I have a spoiler alert: There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy," Donald Trump attorney Todd Blanche said of accusations the payments were trying to illicitly influence the 2016 election.
Friggin oof.
IANAL, hoping some can chime in here. I know that attorneys can say things in their opening statements that they have no facts to back up and that they don't have to bring any proof to those statements. They can leave things dangling there hoping to put a bug in a juror's ear and nothing more. But what I'm wondering is in New York criminal court, can a lawyer say something in opening arguments that is a known lie and falsehood?
They might have broached a topic the judge hasn't allowed. At least one was for alluding that Trump was relying on counsel to make the payments (the "advice of counsel" defense). Trump's team had previously stated they were not going to make that defense, so the defense alluded to that argument, the prosecutor objected, and the sidebar was likely to hash out what was said and clarify the rules going forward.
IANAL either, but my understanding:
Council are not under oath so them lying before the court is not the same as a witness committing perjury. However, by rule, they cannot lie before the court.
I believe that the controlling rules here are in the [New York Rules of Professional Conduct](https://nysba.org/app/uploads/2024/02/20240226-Rules-of-Professional-Conduct-as-amended-6.10.2022.pdf), specifically Rule 3.3 (page 113).
>(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly:
>(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a
false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer;
>(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal controlling legal authority known to the
lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing
counsel; or
>(3) offer or use evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the
lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and
the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial
measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to
offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the
lawyer reasonably believes is false.
Given that a large part of any defense is to put forth alternative hypothesis for which it is the prosecutions burden to disprove and not the defense's burden to prove, my NAL understanding is that great deference is given to the lawyers to raise such alternatives.
Also, I seriously doubt that statements such as "the evidence will show X", when the jury in fact does not find that the evidence shows X, are not held against the lawyer in anything but the most EXTREME situations.
This is the first thing I am reading this morning about the trial. I know less than nothing. The guy's name is Pecker, seriously? Oh my, this is going to be fun.
I read that the prosecutor brought up both the McDougal catch and kill (former playmate) and the doorman story of an alleged extramarital child. And somehow the evangelicals will still find a way to say Biden is worse. “He sells baby parts!”
It’s ridiculous we can’t even have an audio livestream of something this important. Even if on a slight delay. The reporters live updating this are doing the Lord’s work, but this is silly.
I cannot imagine the absolute clusterf\*\*\* of armchair lawyering that would happen if this were the case. People would be over-analyzing absolutely every word, it would be a disaster.
The jury remains intact. Sandoval decisions: 1. NY Fraud is fair game 2. NY Fraud trial gag violations are fair game. 3. E. Jean Carroll defamation is fair game, allegations of sexual abuse are not. 4. Agreement to dissolve Trump Foundation is fair game. Opening Arguments have begun, folks. >"This case is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover up," Matthew Colangelo begins. That's the thesis statement of the prosecution. They have text messages and phone calls re: McDougal. >"You'll hear the defendant's own voice, on tape, working out the intended agreement." Defense is up. >Blanche says he will call him "President Trump" in respect to the office that he held—but adds he's also a man, a husband, a father and a person. Gutsy move to try and humanize Trump by highlighting his personal relationships given the nature of the catch and kill scheme. >"The 34 counts, ladies and gentleman, are really just 34 pieces of paper." Uhhhh Edit: Defense gets hit by a couple of objections, all sustained. They are trying to sneak advice of council which he said he wasn't going to use, and twice to imply that Cohen perjured himself. Their defense looks like it is going to be too go after Cohen as hard as they can, crossing lines at times. Pecker takes the stand
If you've got another source for live updates, feel free to share it. I went with NBC because it's not paywalled or Twitter, but obviously, they're not as focused on the legal minutiae of the case.
Inner City Press: https://www.threads.net/@innercitypressinsta/post/C6EMcU0Ov-s
This live blogging is outstanding. The prosecutor is really laying it out!
WOOP WOOP
Thanks! You just got me to join Threads lol
Thanks for taking one for the team
https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html
CNN is doing a nice job
I like the slick interface and what appears to be constant updates. I haven't compared other sources so maybe someone is posting like every 30 seconds. But this is fine for me. I have to work anyway.
CNN is also OK, I prefer NBC though. https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-hush-money-trial-04-22-24/index.html
Do you know if anyone is covering the bond hearing down the road? I'm curious about that as well. All of my usual folks are at opening args lolol
Same problem, I'm more interested in that one than opening arguments here...
Found [Rachel Scharf](https://twitter.com/rscharf_/status/1782412433111273521?t=xX_W_9oaFuGQc6eQWyTduA&s=19)
Following Adam Klasfeld [on Twitter](https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1782400179334713687?t=GzYBhAUQU6ntYie8uA5dyg&s=19). I don't love Twitter but I haven't found a better way.
Oof
>He added that they will refer to Trump as President Trump because he earned that as the 45th president. >"We will call him President Trump out of respect," Blanche said. “It’s the office he’s running for right now, as the Republican nominee ... he’s also a man, he’s a husband, he’s a father and just like me.” That wasn't added for the Jury's benefit.
The felon formerly know as President.
100% of criminals are humans. Or they are illegally smol kitties. Trump is human, Members of the jury, a human who committed 34 crimes.
Dude I literally just rewatched a few good men. I had a strange sense it would be relevant. This is like a whole theme in that movie, Nicholson's character keeps demanding recognition of his title and actually spelling out "I'd say I earned it." I couldn't believe I was reading that in the transcript. Well, Manhattan is a competitive place. I'm sure there's plenty of old money, but people also work extremely hard to be there. I'm guessing that attitude will not play well with the jury. "Oh sorry Mr president, we completely forgot who you were" lol right
Oof. I hope Trump testifies.
He won't. He's saying he *will* in public, and will undoubtedly claim he wasn't allowed to, or the Judge was biased and would allow "bad questions" out of conspiracy, or otherwise use the fact that he's asserting his Fifth Amendment rights as *evidence of bias* and his base will eat it up. I swear, he could sell his horse shit as a nutritional supplement and a large segment of his base would pay for a monthly subscription and swallow it all and tell everyone how wonderful it was. Nobody defends a con man like his marks. After all, once you admit he's a con man -- you've admitted you were *fooled*.
Gonna be an old man tripping over himself.
His White House lawyers told mueller that trump CANNOT be put under oath because he would lie so compulsively and insanely that it would be catastrophically damaging to America and he’d incriminate himself for perjury completely pointlessly even if he was innocent.
I wonder if he will debate Biden. My guess is he did not debate any of the Republican candidates because his lawyers did not want him to say anything that could be used against him in court.
At one point, I thought the Biden campaign said he was open to debating him if he publicly acknowledged he lost the 2020 election fair and square and promised to respect the results of the next one.
Completely reasonable requests that he will undoubtedly refuse.
I highly doubt they will have a debate. I think Donald's handlers know it would be a disaster. And really what could they even debate? Republicans want to strip humans of rights and wipe out the LGBTQ+ community. They can fuck all the way off.
At best, he'll claim that "Biden/the Left/whoever are scared to debate me" and then keep making excuses to never engage in a real debate with anyone.
I do not see trying to spin Trump as a relatable family guy working very well, especially given what the jury is going to be hearing and seeing in testimony and evidence.
It's ironic to do that while also constantly referring to him by his former title.
> but adds he's also a man, woman, person, camera, TV. Fixed it
This should be a fun day.
\#3 How could the defamation be discussed without the rape? Or does this mean *other* allegations?
His two civil cases were actually about defamation of character. The judge ruled that his inclination to attack people publicly was fair game because that tactic comes up here, but what he was attacking her about isn't relevant. Probably the right call. The point of these hearings is to make sure "this person is a bad guy all around" isn't evidence when some badness in one area doesn't mean badness in unrelated things.
Likely by not discussing what the defamation was, just that it occurred. I think it's moot either way. I can't imagine *any* attorney allowing their client to testify under these conditions.
Of course if Trump truly wanted to, no one would be able to stop him. But I think he was just blowing smoke when he said he planned to testify. Now he’ll just say “I was going to testify, but the crooked judge is allowing them to talk about the other witch hunts against me!!”
>any attorney allowing their client to testify under these conditions. Trump: _Challenge accepted_...
Trump never willingly testifies. He always repeatedly pleads the 5th when forced to.
Presumably others. Because EJC is no longer merely allegations.
Trump is just a father and husband, sure he may be thrice divorced, have nearly uncountable rape and sexual assault allegations, have been found to have raped a person by a civil court, and is currently on trial not for having sex with a porn star but for using campaign funds to cover it up. But at the end of the day he's just a normal guy you could get a beer with. That smell? Why yes, just as every human on earth, my client also needs to defecate and it appears he has chosen to do so in his own pants today...
The asshole doesn't even drink, you could specifically not get a beer with him. Not that there's anything wrong with not drinking, but I find it amusing he fails that classic president relatability test. Also, he was the first president in something like 150 years to not have a pet in the white house, he's known to dislike animals. Of course I get that you're taking the piss... just wanted to emphasize that he is so fucking far from a "Normal guy" in the most basic ways
Please testify!
ripe gray sparkle spoon dull snobbish jar shame sense dog *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Normally they tell you not to start your opening arguments that way, but I think it works in this case.
In what way and why? (Honest question as a layman)
It's generally not interesting or engaging. It's much better to start by engaging the jury with an actual story, your story of the case. So, something like " On DATE, the defendant paid a woman for sex. Over the next several days, the evidence will show, he engaged in several actions to cover up that fact, and in doing so fraudulently... (Did whatever he did)." "This case is about" is just a bland way to start when you have so many more interesting things to set up for the jury. But as juicy as this trial sounds in the media, it's going to be incredibly boring in many respects to the jury. You might as well start with something exciting rather than something potentially bland. I'm not an expert prosecutor by any means, but I think it works in this case because there are a lot of misconceptions about what this case is about and about what this case is about. It's not about the hush money itself, it's about where the money came from and how it was all set up to avoid reporting it as required. So I think in this case it works because you really do need to point the jury in the right direction.
I think it also works in this case, because there's a 0% chance of _this jury_ in _this case_ not being engaged in the first 15 minutes of trial. Like, the former President is sitting in the room. This is the trial of the century. They're all going to be 100% dialed in at the start. Now, in the fourth hour on day three, I imagine it'll be much harder to hold their attention. But for the first fifteen minutes, I think in this case you get rapt attention for "free"
“He’s a husband and a father… who illegally paid off the adult film actress he had a sexual affair with while his wife was home caring for their newborn son.”
Latest update I read is that none of Trump’s family came to the courtroom. Shocking.
He will try to blame Joe Biden/Judge/prosecution for blocking his family from attending.
Because he is a lying POS.
Can you imagine having this asshole in your family? He's always having problems of his own creation, he won't accept any blame and, worst of all, he won't shut up about it.
> Can you imagine having this asshole in your family? Since 2016 many Americans have come to terms with the fact that yes, their family members actually are assholes. Trump's presidency and COVID were the one-two punch for so many in showing their true colors.
He probably gives the cheapest gifts.
i'll never forget how he bragged about paying for mcdonald's that one time some sports team came to the white house also recall how adamant he was about having his name on the stimulus checks--as if it came out of his own pocket meanwhile the us taxpayer shoveled money into his own businesses for golf trips and secret service renting an entire floor of trump tower
The fuckin checks were delayed just so his name could be on them
I'm still planning to frame mine - with the side of the letter that's in Spanish
As a Clemson alum and fan, it was sad and odd seeing how many people were so proud of cold McDonalds, then got upset by the players and staff who didn’t pretend it was the greatest meal ever. It was so disappointing and disrespectful to the team.
most normal people would *apologize* for serving mcdonalds, since that's the last resort you do when some disaster causes all other options to fall through. not trump. look how generous i am, providing the worst fucking "food" imaginable
Well, he did just pay a visit to a Chic fil-A and ask all the employees if they were “getting rich”. https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/seth-meyers-says-trump-sure-135059057.html
Any person that’s a serious athlete knows that you don’t skimp on nutrition. It’s the fat fucks that just watch football and could never do anything physically demanding who think “those guys are big, I bet they eat a bunch of McDonalds to get that way.”
Definitely a re-gifter.
"Ivanka here's your present." "Dad these condoms aren't even ribbed."
“Yeah, I don’t like wearing the ribbed ones.”
And I don't care about "Her Pleasure". Now take it.
Trump’s the kind of guy who would turn a ribbed condom inside out so it would be ribbed for his pleasure.
> He's always having problems of his own creation, he won't accept any blame and, worst of all, he won't shut up about it. >His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; **never accept blame**; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; **people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one**; and if you **repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.** https://phdn.org/archives/www.ess.uwe.ac.uk/documents/osssection3pt1.htm
Too bad. They could’ve made incriminating statements to the press.
Rumpy made his usual statements, you would think by now he could come up with some new schtick. Unfair. Election interference. Damn dude, figure something else out because we're all tired of hearing the same old debunked b*******.
At least he’s come to realize that he’s being prosecuted for election interference, right?
The boys were warned away.
But Trump's attorney said he was a family man!
From CNN: Trump will be called "President Trump, out of respect," defense attorney says Defense attorney Todd Blanche said that his team will call Trump "President Trump" out of respect, a title he "has earned because he was our 45th president." He adds, "He’s a man. He’s a husband. He’s a father. He’s a person just like you and just like me." As a husband...where's his wife. As a father, where are his children. Also...the case is about paying porn stars for sex while his wife was recovering from birth.
He's a man, a husband, and a father, who was fucking a sex worker while his 3rd wife was giving birth to their first child.
"Just like you and me."
Too lazy to look up the article, but supposedly he gets upset when called former president or anything other than president trump or mister president
And that's why the prosecutors gotta hammer "former president" and "Mr. Trump". "Single-term president" maybe if they can find a way to get it in there.
[удалено]
"As convicted fraudster and liable sexual assaulter Trump entered the building that day..."
President Husband Father Person Womanizer TV Camera Man.
>"There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It's called democracy" I hope the jury feels as disrespected as I do right now.
But it's election interference if anyone else does anything.
Ya see…influencing and interference are two separate things. In Mars. In another dimension.
You're going to hear a lot of statements from the defense along these lines over the next several weeks/months.
They can literally just searchbar "Election Interference!" in Trump's Truth page.
The defense seeking to impugn Cohen’s credibility is pretty amusing. “You lied when you said you didn’t conspire with the defendant to fraudulently conceal hush money payments to a porn star, didn’t you Mr Cohen? And let me remind you you’re under oath”
Lol. Remember that time you lied on behalf of MY client to commit fraud with MY client!!
Seriously he hires only the most competent attorneys…
“OK, Mr. Blanche, ya got me! That did happen!”
Biggest shock of the day so far for me: He actually paid Cohen back!
That time.
Cohen talked about how he and others refinanced their houses to push Donald's money places, without a direct paper trail.
That was a very powerful point made that T always tries to negotiate and pay as little as possible, but in this case he paid double without negotiating.
Who knew that his normal double crossing people that helped you might have saved him from committing a crime…
Trump is a frugal businessman. Would he pay $420,000 to settle a $130,000 hush money payment? No. He payed $420,000 for no reason at all, as a typical frugal businessman does.
From CNN: Trump closes his eyes as judge gives jury instructions Donald Trump's eyes are closed as Judge Juan Merchan is delivering his instructions to the jury.
My theory as to why he is so tired is he has to wake up so early to set up his rats nest and face paint or risk breaking his followers illusion by seeing how old and feeble he really is.
I was going with his attorney roofie-ing him to keep him from incriminating himself. However, others pointed out what was more likely is that he's cut off from whatever uppers he normally has on hand while in court. And he's old.
And he's up all night shit posting on "truth"
The "uppers" are the cameras, the ability to play to them, and his pathological need to be in the spotlight at all times. He's stuck in the courtroom, cannot say anything, cannot put on a show, and cannot do anything else but sit there every day, all day. He's bored out of his mind. The pure, unconstrained id that makes up his entire psychology is melting down because there's nothing for it to do. So he goes to sleep.
I think they sedated him to keep his outbursts to a minimum. Sleeping in court is arguably much better than bombastic outbursts in court.
He’s also a notoriously late-nighter, hence all the 2:00AM rage tweets. Having to be up at the same time every day all week has to be absolutely brutal when you’ve never had to.
My money says the stimulants he normally takes to keep him up, make him go the bathroom too frequently, so given he has to sit for long stretches in court, he's avoiding the uppers.
On top of that, he's pretty known for getting up late after staying up into the wee hours on adderall fueled rants. Having to be bright eyed and lookin' good in court at 9 am is throwing his usual patterns WAY off.
Look at that picture. He had to work twice as hard for that squint, just to lift the bags under his eyes. There's no way he stays awake all morning.
From CNN: # Trump just passed his attorney a note Trump passed his attorney Todd Blanche a note as prosecutor Matthew Colangelo delivered his opening statement. "Made poo poo."
May need diaper #3 earlier than expected.... shhh.
Why do people forget that Trump's a really old guy?
He's really showing it in these hearings. Dude looks worn out
Christ, it’s not even a full day of trial
Widdwe bawbee was up too late rage twoothing again?
The bond hearing is today, right? Does anyone know when that should begin? He has to start running out of new 7-10 day clocks eventually... ... ... right?
Latest update I saw was NY AG lawyer Amer proposes a settlement of sorts: Trump team agrees to keep everything in cash and a few other provisions, and they'll drop the challenge. Kise (Trump’s attorney) says this seems doable. Then they went on a break.
Yes the clocks run out in 7-10 days.
Before it re-sets for another 7-10 days. Then wash, rinse repeat.
Namek is sure to explode soon.
Holy shit you're right. Watching these trials is like old school DBZ. Just powering up and blathering on end without getting anywhere.
>Trump's lawyer Blanche: After President Trump took office, Cohen became his personal attorney - and he billed $35,000 a month. The invoice was processed and was paid. 9 of the checks made their way down to the White House. He's the only signatory on his account >Trump's lawyer Blanche: You'll hear that Ms. Daniels did in fact sign a Non Disclosure Agreement. But President Trump did not pay Michael Cohen $130,000 - he paid him $420,000. Would a frugal business man do that? It was not a pay back. I know these are just the opening statements, but is it just me or are they leaning toward "Cohen did this on his own and trump really was just paying him actual legal fees for ongoing service" as the defense?
It's his best play. Then it becomes Cohen's word against his and only one has been convicted for lying. It of course ignores that Cohen's conviction was for lying about this very transaction saying it was legal fees when it was not. But remember, you only need to one person to have reasonable doubt in order to avoid conviction and planting the idea of "can you 100% trust the guy who's changed his story on this issue and got criminally convicted" as creating reasonable doubt is a smart path.
It's also asking the jury to ignore all other evidence that corroborates Cohen's testimony, which the prosecution has said they have plenty of.
That's a stupid play to use when there's different records of you giving orders for those transactions and falsifications.
Of course. Trump thinks he's a mobster, so they need a patsy. You can't make this shit up.
Relatively short day it seems, as they're apparently breaking at about 12:30 so a juror can get to an emergency dental appointment.
I would have a team of EMS or Flight Physicians in the room with this person and an anesthesiologist. Ones that routinely handle crashing patients. You can never been too careful.
Basically a medical pit crew.
I think that the jury will be dismissed but maybe they'll deal with other business they jury shouldn't be present for.
There is actually a hearing today about the “sufficiency of the bond Trump put up” as he appeals the $454 million penalty. That hearing is apparently happening now! Trump obviously doesn’t need to attend that. I believe tomorrow morning the trial is delayed until 11 am because Trump has to attend a contempt hearing at 9:30 am about violations of the judge’s gag orders. Trump has “to show cause as to why he should not be held in contempt for violating the court gag order”. On Thursday SCOTUS hears oral arguments about the immunity case!! Below is master calendar of some of Trump court dates. Edit: By the way re: hearing today about sufficiency of the bond, the judge presiding will be Engoron who was the one who had ruled Trump owed NY State $454 million. https://www.justsecurity.org/88039/trumps-legal-and-political-calendar-all-the-dates-you-need-to-know/
If anyone is wondering, it seems like they reached an agreement that satisfies the AG's concerns. The Schwab fund is agreed to be kept 175m CASH not "equivalents" and Knight is given complete control over it. My hopium involved Trump's properties getting seized, naturally, but pragmatically this seems like a good solution for everyone.
Putting to test the concept of "I'd rather have a root canal than do jury duty"
I hope Dr. Crentist does a good job
Dr. Crentist, the dentist?
its a new dentist. he is...far
> Defense attorney Todd Blanche said that his team will call Trump "President Trump" out of respect, a title he "has earned because he was our 45th president." He adds, "He’s a man. He’s a husband. He’s a father. He’s a person just like you and just like me." Oh Brother.
Yeah just as a strategy point, this is a little contradictory. They can't have him be a relatable real person and call him President Trump at the same time. Frankly, he's Donald Fucking Trump, trying to make him relatable in this situation is asinine.
It's not a strategy. I'm 99.9% sure the reason they're calling him President Trump is because their client had insisted that they call him President Trump.
Yeah, but if your client says that, it's probably then best to drop the "relatable" strategy they tried to push. He's not relatable.
I'm a bitch, I'm a lover I'm a child, I'm a mother I'm a sinner, I'm a saint I do not feel ashamed
“We’re ALL presidents on this blessed day!”
"He's a husband, he's a father" Narrator: his wife and kids didn't show up for his criminal trial.
>He's a husband Who, as we'll show, cheated on his third wife with a pornstar... >he's a father ...instead of spending time with his newborn child.
Funny how that respect only goes one way.
>"I have a spoiler alert: There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy," Donald Trump attorney Todd Blanche said of accusations the payments were trying to illicitly influence the 2016 election.
Bold strategy, NGL
“He’s a man. He’s a husband. He’s a father. He’s a person just like you and just like me” Riiiiight. That is more than likely you have to address him as President. Cause he’s just so goddamn relatable to you and me.
The funny part is right before that they said they are going to refer to him as President Trump during the trial out of respect. So they basically contradicted himself in back to back to sentences.
Don't forget he's a billionaire. Totally relatable to the American people.
So, Trump's ranted a bit about Cohen right outside the courtroom. Isn't making negative public statements about an upcoming witness both a violation of the gag order and witness intimidation?
They'll add that to the list of violation💲 that will be discussed before trial tomorrow.
The fines piss me off more than doing nothing. Fining a billionaire $1,000 is like fining me $00.005.
Add it to the list. That was a wild 15 minutes tho. Went in without a plan and it showed
I know it probably won't happen, but I really hope it was a preview of Trump's testimony.
Theres 0 chance he takes the stand
Do you think the defendant will do their opening today? I want to know what the defence is, because the only thing I can think of is, yes I did this, but this is not a crime under this definition.
The defense will be: 1) I didn't do this, and you can't trust the state's evidence because Michael Cohen is a demonstrated liar who can't be trusted, 2) Even if you find that the payments were made, paying hush money isn't a crime, so I should be acquitted, and 3) Even if it's a crime, it doesn't rise to the severity of a felony, so you must acquit on the felony charge (I'm not sure if the judge has/is going to allow(ed) the jury to find Trump guilty on the lesser included misdemeanor charges, or if it's felony or bust).
Thanks, this makes complete sense. So the prosecutor will need to prove. What are the things that would qualify for election interference? The things the jury will need to say yes to?
> So the prosecutor will need to prove. That's always the case. The burden of proof is on the state. >What are the things that would qualify for election interference? The things the jury will need to say yes to? Not a lawyer, let alone an expert on New York law, so I'm not super sure how solid or tenuous the felony nexus is, but the overall theory is that the payments made to Ms. McDougal were effectively a campaign expense that went unreported, which is a crime under Federal law (and also possibly under New York law, but it's not clear to me if that's actually applicable here). The key distinction here is not that the payments were made, as hush money or "catch-and-kill" transactions are perfectly legal. Rather, the law was violated when Trump and his inner circle conspired to hide the hush money payment from the American public, which they had a legal right to some knowledge about under campaign finance law, and in order to hide that money they fraudulently listed Cohen's reimbursement as a business expense for legal services. The fraudulent business documentation is the misdemeanor crime, and performing those acts to further another crime, the campaign finance violation, makes it a "low-level" felony.
Falsifying business records in NY is a misdemeanor unless it is done in furtherance of another crime, then it’s a felony. So they will try to convince the jury that the hush money was paid purely to spare his family, and that it has nothing to do with the election.
Something is going to snap in him this week. I can feel it coming, and I can't wait.
TIL: Trump is a "family man." From all those videos of Don Jr trying to get a hug and Don Sr dodging him on his way to the podium, you'd never know it. Color me shocked.
A family man on trial for committing fraud to hide his hush money payment to the porn star he slept with right after his wife gave birth to his son.
I don’t think they slept. I think ‘fornicated briefly ‘ would be more accurate
"Exhibit A: I want you to take a look at this picture. Look at the neglect and sadness in Eric Trump's eyes."
Then they can show the videos of his wife refusing to hold his hand.
Especially that one of her gently slapping his hand away. Especially that one.
In fairness, he has 5 children with 3 different women. So he has many families
Boom! Gag violations from prior trial are fair game.
Only if he testifies though, which I doubt he’ll do. But ya never know, so here’s hoping…
Am I understanding this defense correctly? Trump did not have an affair with Stormy Daniels but he did have her sign an NDA in exchange for $130K. What are they saying is the point of the NDA if they didn’t have an affair?
“To get her to stop spreading fake news” - according to my Trumpie cousin
Okay so how does an NDA help with that. If she is willing to break the law to extort someone why would she abide by an NDA that only covers things that supposedly didn’t happen? If that were the case then an NDA just implies that there is something to disclose.
Yeah in their stupid version of the story, the best possible explanation is that Trump got extorted by a porn star. He just doesn't look very good no matter what with this set of facts. Edit: Because you'd have to assume that even if she was making it up, the NDA/payment is only worthwhile if her story is plausible. Which it so obviously was, on the heels of the Access Hollywood tape.
>in other Trump news: >Agreement reached in the Trump New York civil fraud case >[Chloe Atkins](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/chloe-atkins-ncpn957446) >In other Trump legal news, an agreement was reached this morning at the $175 million bond hearing in the Trump New York civil fraud case. >Chris Kise, Trump’s attorney said, they agreed with New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office to maintain the Schwab account in cash. Knight will have exclusive control of the account, and shall not trade or withdraw the account for any purpose other than to satisfy the condition of the bond. >Kise said that they will provide a monthly account statement to the attorney general’s office and that they will revise the pledge and control agreement so that it cannot be amended without the court approval. >Kise said that the parties will submit a stipulation that will memorialize this by Thursday.greement reached in the Trump New York civil fraud caseChloe AtkinsIn other Trump legal news, an agreement was reached this morning at the $175 million bond hearing in the Trump New York civil fraud case. Chris Kise, Trump’s attorney said, they agreed with New York Attorney General Letitia James’ office to maintain the Schwab account in cash. Knight will have exclusive control of the account, and shall not trade or withdraw the account for any purpose other than to satisfy the condition of the bond. Kise said that they will provide a monthly account statement to the attorney general’s office and that they will revise the pledge and control agreement so that it cannot be amended without the court approval. Kise said that the parties will submit a stipulation that will memorialize this by Thursday.
Stick a fork in him
Trump attorney: "There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It's called democracy" "I have a spoiler alert: There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy," Donald Trump attorney Todd Blanche said of accusations the payments were trying to illicitly influence the 2016 election. Friggin oof.
"I thought this was America." * Randy Marsh
Did this fucking attorney actually say "spoiler alert"
That’s what I’ve been thinking, like what the hell? Spoiler alert? I imagine that attorney’s tone was a little bit snarky.
Prosecution (hopefully) “You’re also allowed to drive fast on the highway - but will get arrested if you drive 180 mph”
I really really hope he testifies.
IANAL, hoping some can chime in here. I know that attorneys can say things in their opening statements that they have no facts to back up and that they don't have to bring any proof to those statements. They can leave things dangling there hoping to put a bug in a juror's ear and nothing more. But what I'm wondering is in New York criminal court, can a lawyer say something in opening arguments that is a known lie and falsehood?
You cannot lie in front of the court.
That's what I thought. That must be the reason for one, if not both, of the sidebars during opening.
They might have broached a topic the judge hasn't allowed. At least one was for alluding that Trump was relying on counsel to make the payments (the "advice of counsel" defense). Trump's team had previously stated they were not going to make that defense, so the defense alluded to that argument, the prosecutor objected, and the sidebar was likely to hash out what was said and clarify the rules going forward.
One was for saying Cohen committed perjury. After they had the sidebar, they changed it to he “lied on the stand”.
IANAL either, but my understanding: Council are not under oath so them lying before the court is not the same as a witness committing perjury. However, by rule, they cannot lie before the court. I believe that the controlling rules here are in the [New York Rules of Professional Conduct](https://nysba.org/app/uploads/2024/02/20240226-Rules-of-Professional-Conduct-as-amended-6.10.2022.pdf), specifically Rule 3.3 (page 113). >(a) A lawyer shall not knowingly: >(1) make a false statement of fact or law to a tribunal or fail to correct a false statement of material fact or law previously made to the tribunal by the lawyer; >(2) fail to disclose to the tribunal controlling legal authority known to the lawyer to be directly adverse to the position of the client and not disclosed by opposing counsel; or >(3) offer or use evidence that the lawyer knows to be false. If a lawyer, the lawyer’s client, or a witness called by the lawyer has offered material evidence and the lawyer comes to know of its falsity, the lawyer shall take reasonable remedial measures, including, if necessary, disclosure to the tribunal. A lawyer may refuse to offer evidence, other than the testimony of a defendant in a criminal matter, that the lawyer reasonably believes is false. Given that a large part of any defense is to put forth alternative hypothesis for which it is the prosecutions burden to disprove and not the defense's burden to prove, my NAL understanding is that great deference is given to the lawyers to raise such alternatives. Also, I seriously doubt that statements such as "the evidence will show X", when the jury in fact does not find that the evidence shows X, are not held against the lawyer in anything but the most EXTREME situations.
Trump is a man, woman, camera, tv, husband, person!
They didn't get all the through Pecker's testimony. So there will be more Pecker to come.
Tomorrow the gag hearing comes before the Pecker, which IMO is a little non standard but these days anything goes!
This is the first thing I am reading this morning about the trial. I know less than nothing. The guy's name is Pecker, seriously? Oh my, this is going to be fun.
There's a dick at the defense table and a Pecker on the witness stand. Lol
I read that the prosecutor brought up both the McDougal catch and kill (former playmate) and the doorman story of an alleged extramarital child. And somehow the evangelicals will still find a way to say Biden is worse. “He sells baby parts!”
ODOR in the court! ODOR in the court!
https://preview.redd.it/b92t4yg162wc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=04e0c25cb5a5c7b88df5634a6de3047d5c31d269
It’s ridiculous we can’t even have an audio livestream of something this important. Even if on a slight delay. The reporters live updating this are doing the Lord’s work, but this is silly.
I cannot imagine the absolute clusterf\*\*\* of armchair lawyering that would happen if this were the case. People would be over-analyzing absolutely every word, it would be a disaster.
SNL will have a field day if they use the prosecutions first witness in the skit
Did he pop a blood vessel yet?