GUILTY NY - Ex-President Donald Trump, charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023, Trial 25 Mar 2024 #3

[RANCH]

Yes, there was a non-disclosure agreement in the closing days of the 2016 election that shut up *advertiser censored* star Stormy Daniels from mouthing off about a supposed sexual affair. And yes, Trump paid the man who cut that deal $35,000 a month for a year in 2017—and even signed those checks from the White House.

But on Tuesday morning, lead defense lawyer Todd Blanche told the jury that the paperwork only shows that the real estate mogul was on the receiving end of an extortion scheme and later paid a lawyer to do his job as “personal attorney to the President of the United States.”

Trump Lawyer Closes Trial by Scorching Michael Cohen

Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesDonald Trump’s final message to New York City jurors was a simple twist on a classic excuse: It’s exactly what it looks like.Yes, there was a non-disclosure agreement in the closing days of the 2016 election that shut up *advertiser censored* star Stormy Daniels from mouthing off about...

sg.news.yahoo.com

 

[Chelly]

If found guilty, is judge fearless enough to impose a sentence of incarceration? Or is probation the most that could be hoped for?

 

[Izzylizzy]

Trump Lawyer Closes Trial by Scorching Michael Cohen

Spencer Platt/Getty ImagesDonald Trump’s final message to New York City jurors was a simple twist on a classic excuse: It’s exactly what it looks like.Yes, there was a non-disclosure agreement in the closing days of the 2016 election that shut up *advertiser censored* star Stormy Daniels from mouthing off about...

sg.news.yahoo.com

What was Blanche's explanation for Weisselberg's and Mc Conney's notes and numbers?
Oh, wait.


“That’s a ridiculous story, and I’ll tell you why. The idea that President Trump would agree to pay Michael Cohen $420,000 even though he only owed him $130[k] is absurd,” Blanche said, later putting emphasis on each word. “That! Is! Absurd!”"

Images




Michael Cohen Testifies on Handwritten Note in Trump Hush ...

The New Republic

 

[vls12345]

Trump is raging that Judge Merchan didn’t let him raise an “advice-of-counsel” defense.That’s not true. His lawyers in March specifically said they didn’t want to make that defense.“He does not intend to assert a formal advice-of-counsel defense…”

https://twitter.com/x/status/1795648397585846774

Liars gonna lie...

Imo.

 

[Artis]

In my opinion paying your lawyer to do something is a legal expense. JMO.

Not in the neo Bolshevik reality. This whole thing is Kafkaesque and will go down as one of the most egregious assaults on the "justice" system ever. As someone who has studied a fair amount of communist history, I'm in shock to see the same kind of things being played out here.

Show me the man and I'll show you the crime.
~Lavrentiy Beria, NKVD

https://twitter.com/x/status/1795604413769539737

SMH

 

[Izzylizzy]

Michael Cohen verified handwritten notes in court during Donald Trump’s hush-money trial Monday detailing the former president’s payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.
The notes were written on a bank statement of a wire transfer of $130,035, the amount of money paid to Daniels, with Cohen’s help, to prevent her affair with Trump from becoming public before the 2016 election. One note in Cohen’s handwriting shows how a $50,000 payment for tech services was added to the wire transfer amount for a total of $180,035. An additional note on the statement in Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg’s handwriting shows that subsequent amount being “grossed up” to $360,000 so Cohen would avoid federal taxes.

Michael Cohen Confirms Damning Note on Trump’s Hush-Money Payments

Donald Trump’s former fixer is using this trial to expose everything about Trump’s hush-money scheme.

newrepublic.com

 

[RANCH]

I find Michael Cohen to be a totally unreliable witness. JMO.

 

[Izzylizzy]

I find Michael Cohen to be a totally unreliable witness. JMO.

It's a moot point even though Blanche put all his eggs in the Cohen/Stormy basket.
The jury will decide on the enormous amount of evidence presented by the state.
Most of it corroborates Cohen's testimony among other witnesse's testimonies.

 

[RANCH]

He attacked the credibility of Cohen, who he called the "human embodiment of reasonable doubt".

Mr Blanche reminded jurors that Cohen had been jailed for lying under oath, that he had acknowledged stealing from his former employer and that he now lived with "an axe to grind" against Mr Trump.

“He's literally like an MVP of liars," he said.

Trump lawyer slams 'liar' Cohen in New York hush-money trial

The former president's hush-money trial nears its end as the prosecution and defence make closing arguments.

www.bbc.com

 

[GatorFL]

IANAL but from what I've casually seen there are numerous legal problems with this case: several important witnesses not being called (Weisselberg, Schiller), limiting what one witness (Smith) could say about Federal election laws, the oral jury instructions, the jury not being provided written instructions, and indecisions on defense motions. If there is a conviction, I expect a speedy appeal all the way to the SCOTUS. It only takes 4 justices to take the case on an emergency basis.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/28/politics/trump-family-members-hush-money-trial/index.html

Notably missing

 

[CrimeDawg123]

I find Michael Cohen to be a totally unreliable witness. JMO.

<modsnip> I found the opposite.

His demeanor said it all to me. Contrast that with Robert Costello - there is no comparison as to who is more credible IMO.

 

[Izzylizzy]

IANAL but from what I've casually seen there are numerous legal problems with this case: several important witnesses not being called (Weisselberg, Schiller), limiting what one witness (Smith) could say about Federal election laws, the oral jury instructions, the jury not being provided written instructions, and indecisions on defense motions. If there is a conviction, I expect a speedy appeal all the way to the SCOTUS. It only takes 4 justices to take the case on an emergency basis.

The defense could have called both Weisselberg and Schiller and they chose not to.
Weisselberg is at Riker's Island for perjury and

imo: Keith Schiller could have been a crap shoot for the defense because if asked he would have to deny his connection with Stormy as stated in her testimony.
Schiller already testified before the Grand Jury for Alvin Bragg so it could be that Schiller wasn't forthcoming enough like many of the state's witnesses were even though some were quite close to Trump and they decided not to call him.
Bradley Smith being limited on what he can be asked about or comment on is no different then what other witnesses experienced from both the state and the defense.

Judge Merchan had NO choice about giving the jury his written instructions.
That is not permitted under NY law, state and federal.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Weisselberg is at Riker's Island for perjury and

Snipped for focus

Perjury committed to aid Trump, I might add.

Prosecutors had to weigh the possibility that he might do it again.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

IANAL but from what I've casually seen there are numerous legal problems with this case: several important witnesses not being called (Weisselberg, Schiller), limiting what one witness (Smith) could say about Federal election laws, the oral jury instructions, the jury not being provided written instructions, and indecisions on defense motions. If there is a conviction, I expect a speedy appeal all the way to the SCOTUS. It only takes 4 justices to take the case on an emergency basis.

Why do you think this case could make it to SCOTUS?

 

[RANCH]

Cohen openly loathes Mr Trump. He at least partially blames him for his prison sentence for crimes tied to the New York case. He admitted in court to calling Mr Trump a “boorish cartoon misogynist” and “Cheeto-dusted” villain. Jurors heard clips from Cohen’s podcast screaming that “revenge is a dish best served cold.”

It's obvious to me that convicted liar Michael Cohen's testimony is worthless because he hates President Trump and is seeking revenge. JMO.

The credibility of a convicted liar could determine Trump’s fate

 

[Izzylizzy]

@frankrunyeon


**BELL RINGS** Likely note from the jury.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1795891939130093698

Lisa Rubin said the bell sounds like a 1960s telephone ring.
One ring: a note from the jury
Two rings: the jury has reached a verdict.

 

[GatorFL]

The defense could have called both Weisselberg and Schiller and they chose not to.
Weisselberg is at Riker's Island for perjury and

imo: Keith Schiller could have been a crap shoot for the defense because if asked he would have to deny his connection with Stormy as stated in her testimony.
Schiller already testified before the Grand Jury for Alvin Bragg so it could be that Schiller wasn't forthcoming enough like many of the state's witnesses were even though some were quite close to Trump and they decided not to call him.
Bradley Smith being limited on what he can be asked about or comment on is no different then what other witnesses experienced from both the state and the defense.

Judge Merchan had NO choice about giving the jury his written instructions.
That is not permitted under NY law, state and federal.

You can disagree with me, but multiple lawyers have mentioned the issues with the prosecution not calling Weisselberg or Schiller.

Federal cases in NY get the written instructions in NY, state cases do not. As we can see, it's already a problem since the judge will meet with the jurors in the morning to review instructions. See this link: https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/29/politics/takeaways-trump-jury-deliberations/index.html#

I expect a Federal-level appeal if there is a conviction, perhaps we will see a change in NY law over jury instructions from this very case.

 

[GatorFL]

Why do you think this case could make it to SCOTUS?

Read my post you replied to, the answer to your question is therein.

 

[CrimeDawg123]

Read my post you replied to, the answer to your question is therein.

No I understand why you expect an appeal, I am just not understanding why it would get to SCOTUS. Thx.