Prosecutor tells jury candidates: No one's going to testify that Trump said, 'Hey, let's falsify business records'.
Cased dimissed
As with many of your posts, your point above is so stupid, naive, ignorant and/or frivolous, that it is genuinely difficult to respond to, other than to note that it is stupid, naive, ignorant and/or frivolous.
Jury is in. Again, this judge moves things along which is his job. Contrast Judge Cannon who either lacks the ability or deliberately won't do her job.
Here's a question, if anyone knows. Trump has said he is going to testify in the Porn Interference trial. But, like most guilty criminals, he previously pled the Fifth during the civil trial brought by New York against the Trump Empire/Family. The subject matter of the two cases seems related in the sense that both cases were about fraudulent bookkeeping and fraudulent documents in New York. Can he selectively plead the Fifth like this? I know it's two different cases, but again, similar subject matter. Can you plead the Fifth sometimes and not other times? Doesn't seem right.
Opening statements on Monday! Let's hope the media reporting is accurate and directed to what is relevant.
Not claiming legal expertise here, but I would guess that one can plead the 5th at any time and on any question completely unencumbered by what other questions one did or did not plead the 5th to in the same or other court cases.
He could plead the fifth whenever. But if he testifies the prosecution will have a whole slew of topics they want to ask him about that relate to his intent and basic criminality. Sandoval hearing -- prosecution would like to ask him about the criminal fraud case that trumpco lost, and the civil fraud case that he lost to whackaDon James, and the civil cases he lost to EJ Carroll, and his sleepfarts, and the lawsuit he brought against Hillary Clinton where he was sanctioned as frivolous. Good and plenty topics. Ok maybe not the farts.
So, if I'm reading this right, a criminal defendant cannot selectively choose which questions to answer and which to plead the Fifth on. It looks like it's all or nothing.
So, if Trump makes good on his word that he will testify (I think he'll back out when the time comes), he can't just answer cross-exam questions he likes and plead the Fifth on others. So he would have to answer everything including, I believe, the questions he previously pled the Fifth on in the civil trial against Trump org. He's NOT going to want to do that, for obvious reasons, which is why I highly doubt he's going to testify at his Porn Interference trial.
Opening statement in the case of America v. Trump tomorrow. Big day. The lawyers are stressing out preparing as we speak. Trump is spazzing out in his tower, on the phone, yelling stuff, throwing food around, bananas, Big Macs. No one wants to be around him. Melania is in another state, trying to stay away from all this sh!t.
Looks like David Pecker (chairman of AMI/National Enquirer) will be the first witness called, probably Monday afternoon. "Pecker Necker" as Trump calls him. Trump has great nicknames for people. He used to like Pecker Necker, but now he hates him because Pecker Necker took a plea deal. Pecker knows a LOT of sh!t that went down and none of it is good for Trump. Trump's lawyers are going to come after Pecker HARD.
Opening statement in the case of America v. Trump tomorrow. Big day. The lawyers are stressing out preparing as we speak. Trump is spazzing out in his tower, on the phone, yelling stuff, throwing food around, bananas, Big Macs. No one wants to be around him. Melania is in another state, trying to stay away from all this sh!t.
Looks like David Pecker (chairman of AMI/National Enquirer) will be the first witness called, probably Monday afternoon. "Pecker Necker" as Trump calls him. Trump has great nicknames for people. He used to like Pecker Necker, but now he hates him because Pecker Necker took a plea deal. Pecker knows a LOT of sh!t that went down and none of it is good for Trump. Trump's lawyers are going to come after Pecker HARD.
Calling Pecker will establish from the get go that this is 100% an election interference case. He told Pecker “ what can you do for my candidacy”. Then they hatched the Stormy catch and kill
At least so far, it's hard to find detailed or focused reports of the opening day in Trump's Porn Interference trial. But the Pecker Necker testimony appears to have been very uneventful. It seems like the prosecution didn't try to get the emails and texts into evidence through Pecker, almost to the point of wondering why he was even called to the stand? As far as I can tell, he hardly said anything other than some background stuff as to how National Enquirer operated.
Trump was giving Pecker Necker the stink eye from the defense table. You could tell Trump had visions in his mind of grabbing Pecker by the neck and mashing a plate of spaghetti into his face, like he did that time with Giuliani. To Trump's credit, he restrained himself and didn't make any throat slitting gestures at Pecker or anything like that.
The Drudge headline is "Trump and his Pecker" - hahaha! Matt Drudge can't stand Trump.
Hearing tomorrow on Trump's violations of the gag order. MAG@s seems to believe that Trump is subject to the first judicial gag order in the history of American jurisprudence, issued by a Soro-appointed Trump-hating judge. Normal people know many cases over the last 5-10 decades have gag orders in place, and Trump appears to go out of his way to violate the one in his Porn case. He probably thinks all the judge will do is had down some trivial fines each time he violates the order. He's probably right.
The judge's evidentiary rulings on what other cases that Trump can be cross-examined on doesn't make much sense to me. He can be crossed on the Carroll verdicts, which seem to have nothing to do with any issues in the Porn case, but he can't be crossed on the Trump Org tax fraud case which seems to be relevant to the additional fraud he is accused of in the Porn case. Doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to this, but I'm sure it will make Trump and his lawyers think twice about Trump taking the stand.
Just learned that Pecker Necker will be back on the stand tomorrow. I read many reports in the last two hours and not one mentioned that pretty significant fact. I'm glad to finally learn that Pecker will be coming back tomorrow, because from what I've read of his testimony so far, it seems almost pointless if that was all there was.
The media really sucks at reporting on legal cases - they never seem to figure out what is important and what isn't (and they often get stuff completely wrong).
Seeing a lot of chatter about Trump's Porn Interference trial being bogus because the statute of limitations (SOL) had expired. Not wanting to be one of the many political posters here who post stuff without knowing what the faulk they are talking about, I decided to see if I could find anything on that issue.
On February 15, 2024, Judge Merchan denied Trump's motion to dismiss based on SOL. See link below. While the charges were filed more than 5 years (the SOL term for felonies in NY) after Trump's crimes, at the beginning of COVID, New York governor Cuomo extended the deadlines to file criminal charge in New York by one year and 47 days -- basically tolled the SOL by 1year 47 days. So the charges against Trump were filed within the SOL. See pages 22-23.
Donald Trump’s valet Walt Nauta was told that if he was charged with lying to the FBI, the former president would pardon him when he won a second term in 2024, according to notes from an interview with a witness in the federa...
Hard to figure out from the article what exactly was/is going on there, but it sure sounds like an additional and very serious felony. Basically paying someone for false testimony.
That guy Nauta is betting his entire future on Trump winning the election in 2024. He is either nuts or incredibly stupid. And I doubt the prosecution will offer him any more plea bargains. He's pissed them off by now.
Again, hard to tell from reports exactly what is going on in the New York court, but it looks like the prosecution is doing a good job of showing that the National Enquirer/AMI was operating as a marketing subsidiary of the Trump campaign. (I was thinking we may see a shareholder suit against parent company AMI after this trial. This can't be normal business operation for a media outlet.)
Prosecution seems to have done a good job of showing that Pecker, Cohen and Trump were close business partners as well as friends for many years. Cohen was Trump's agent for all this, and Pecker had to go through Cohen to advise Trump. Prosecution has also done a good job of just painting the whole relationship between the three as one of sleaze, lies and fraud. Be hard for Trump to clean up that impression left on the jurors on cross-exam. Trump's lawyers have some tricky work to do - they need to make Pecker Necker look like a liar and scumbag, but at the same time distance the overall aura of scumbaggitry from his friend Trump.
Is Ted Cruz monitoring this testimony? These scumbags did a number on Cruz. Awful behavior. Evil stuff. He should sue the fvck out of Pecker, Cohen AND Trump.
Seeing multiple reports in the idiot media that the prosecution has "finally revealed" the crime that Trump was trying to conceal with the fraudulent business records. That is erroneous -- the concealed crime was "revealed" at least last November 9, 2023, and probably much earlier in the case.
Prosecution brief dated November 9, 2023 at pages 21 to 43.
I haven't seen a lot. Has DJT whined about how he has to follow the same court rules as everybody (e.g., not talk over witnesses the way he interrupts debate opponents but instead have to leave questioning to his counsel and wait for his turn to take the stand, if he chooses to do so), but just calls it being treated unfairly?
Any chance he has run afoul of the gag order and plans to keep pushing to force the judge's hand so that he has to uphold the law, so that then DJT can whine again about how he's being treated unfairly?
