NY: Convicted Felon Donald Trump!

[emailking]

If all they have is the former FEC guy, and maybe not even him, then the highlight of their defense is the cross of Cohen and that's not going well so far.

[emailking]

There was an episode of The Practice where Dylan McDermott took a plea deal as the jury was coming back with their verdict because they didn't look at the defendant (but it was an acquittal, oops). I wonder if that's ever actually happened lol.

[emailking]

Unless they completely disbelieve Cohen, I think his testimony puts to rest any possibility that Trump was concerned about Melania in this whole affair. Like his statement that they just need to push it past the election, if he wins he's President and it doesn't matter, if he loses he doesn't care anyway. And also it supposedly was Malania's idea to call Access Hollywood just locker room talk which became a huge right wing messaging push that weekend. lol

[emailking]

I'm guessing low since they told the judge at the moment their only witnesses are Trump and the FEC guy and they haven't decided on either of those.

[emailking]

If all they have is the former FEC guy, and maybe not even him, then the highlight of their defense is the cross of Cohen and that's not going well so far.

Disagree

- they exposed for the jury that Cohen has an extreme grudge against Trump (e.g. "dictator douchebag," "Cheeto-dusted cartoon villain," "belongs in a cage") and had to be asked by prosecutors to stop talking about Trump.

-  they got Cohen to say he'd like to see Trump convicted in this case

-  they got Cohen to admit that he earned $3-4 million from writing books attacking Trump and selling anti-Trump merchandise

- they got Cohen to admit that he lied several times under oath (e.g. Mueller investigation)

Overall, I still think the prosecution, who rested their case, needed to do more. We still don't know the "other crime," there is not much about Trump's intent (i.e. did Trump know he was commiting or concealing some other crime), and they still never said why the payments couldn't have been legally or reasonably classified as "legal expenses." People ITT are counting on a superstar closing statement to answer those questions and package this case for the jury

They're good points. It sounds like Blanche's style isn't going over well though.

[emailking]

Defense tactics raise eyebrows in Cohen cross-examination

It would be no surprise if the jury in Donald Trump’s first criminal trial now sees his former fixer, Michael Cohen, as a profane social media troll and vengeful liar who dreams of seeing the boss he once worshipped behind bars.

But jurors don’t have to like Cohen. They just have to believe him.

Trump’s self-described former “thug” came under a sustained attack from defense attorney Todd Blanche Tuesday in a cross-examination meant to shatter his credibility as the star witness to the ex-president’s allegedly criminal behavior. But critically, he didn’t lose his composure on the stand. So far, he’s avoided traps that would fatally undermine the case.

...


The task of the defense in cross-examination was, therefore, to so undermine Cohen’s credibility that they sowed reasonable doubt in the minds of at least one juror about the wider case.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/15/politics/michael-cohen-donald-trump-analysis/index.html

[emailking]

Doesn't that guy remember the parade of cabinet hopefuls at Trump tower after the election? lol

[emailking]

Lauren Boebert and Matt Gaetz have shown up at the trial today to support Mr. Trump.

[emailking]

Judge asks the jury if they are ok with working next Wednesday, which could mean he thinks they'll be in deliberations by then. Remember they have off tomorrow for Trump's son's graduation.

[emailking]

Blanche got Cohen to admit the outcome of the trial affects him personally. Yikes.

[emailking]

Blanche got Cohen to admit the outcome of the trial affects him personally. Yikes.

I mean, that's not too surprising? I would imagine everyone would believe he was lying if he said no.

The thing with Cohen is that he has a sordid past and is an admitted liar, but it's also perfectly normal for him to have a personal reaction to Trump's actions and how he was treated.

I figured the implication was that he'll be able to monetize it like he's made millions already. Blanche just moved on immediately and didn't give him a chance to clean it up.

[emailking]

The prosecution has been terrible here, let's be real. They have asked essentially nothing about the documents being falsified, which is what this case is supposed to rest on. I thought they spent way too much time in the Access Hollywood stuff with Stormy and Cohen.

And then today, the star witness Cohen has repeatedly admitted under oath how many times he's lied about everything. It ain't looking good.

There has been no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump ordered these documents to be falsified. And to be honest the whole thing just looks like a complete mess full of liars that Trump surrounded himself with. The only thing the defense has to do is introduce enough doubt, and they've done that.

Disagree on most points. I think we have good evidence they were falsified.

[emailking]

So Trump should take the stand so the jury feels better about possibly concluding Cohen lied that Trump was briefed on the whole scheme 🤔

[emailking]

The prosecution has been terrible here, let's be real. They have asked essentially nothing about the documents being falsified, which is what this case is supposed to rest on. I thought they spent way too much time in the Access Hollywood stuff with Stormy and Cohen.

And then today, the star witness Cohen has repeatedly admitted under oath how many times he's lied about everything. It ain't looking good.

There has been no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump ordered these documents to be falsified. And to be honest the whole thing just looks like a complete mess full of liars that Trump surrounded himself with. The only thing the defense has to do is introduce enough doubt, and they've done that.

Disagree on most points. I think we have good evidence they were falsified.

I disagree. I don’t think they have shown that “legal services” was an obviously invalid or unreasonable way to characterize the payment.

If it's legal services they don't need to plus it up to cover his tax hit.

[emailking]

A juror has an appointment next Thursday and they're trying to get them to reschedule I guess.

[emailking]

If it's legal services they don't need to plus it up to cover his tax hit.

Huh? … the case is that he intentionally falsified business records by writing “legal services.” So you’re saying the prosecution doesn’t need to show that the payments were not actually legal services (and that Trump knew they weren’t “legal services”)?

You said there’s enough evidence that he falsified the business records. I don’t see it, nor do I see evidence of trump’s intent. A reasonable take is, simply, that Trump thought “legal services” was a true and accurate characterization

People's exhibit 35

[emailking]

They're definitely going to need a redirect.

[emailking]

Defense had a good day, for once, and made Cohen look bad, but impugning his credibility on the call about the prank caller doesn't erase all the other circumstantial evidence, or the evidence of the Trump tower meeting, which they didn't even attempt to touch it seems. It was all character attack on Cohen.

[emailking]

The only direct evidence that Trump knew about the scheme to falsify the business records is Cohen's testimony. So if they can convince jurors that his testimony can't be trusted that might given them reasonable doubt as to Trump's knowledge of the scheme. And they definitely showed that he has lied about a lot of things in the past. Not saying it's enough to doubt his testimony (not like we weren't expecting it), or to conclude there isn't enough other circumstantial evidence that Trump knew they were falsified, but it's the biggest glove they've laid on the prosecution's case so far.

[emailking]

Redban, they didn't pay him to administer the contract (which had been done a long time ago when most of these payments to him were made). That could be legal services I guess. But they were paying him back for the money he spent out of pocket to act as Trump's middleman. They paid it to him as salary and doubled it so that after taxes he would get back the exact amount he paid out pocket. And they're characterizing that as legal services. It's not.

[emailking]

No. No. Depends.

[emailking]

Doesn't change my opinion of him as being very fair to both sides in this case. I also don't think judges should be prohibited from making political contributions.

[emailking]

I don't think not making political contributions is a standard he ought to be held to.

[emailking]

Lawyer preparation suggests Trump won’t testify in New York trial
Awaiting final word from the mercurial defendant, the judge is proceeding as if Trump will not take the stand.

After brashly declaring he wanted to testify in his criminal trial, it appears increasingly unlikely that Donald Trump will do so, as the jury seems poised to hear closing arguments next week.

Defendants rarely testify in their own defense, because their lawyers advise them that the risks of doing so, particularly when it comes to being questioned by prosecutors under oath, are simply too great.

Even so, defense attorneys often try to hold out until the last possible minute to say whether their client will testify, hoping to keep prosecutors guessing.

...

Four people close to the former president said next week’s plan does not include him testifying, and they expect the jury to start deliberating later in the week. Trump is famously mercurial and could always demand to testify, some of these people said, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal deliberations. Todd Blanche, a lawyer for Trump, declined to comment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/18/trump-trial-testifying/


Not a surprise, but it's still his decision to make and he insisted on testifying in 2 recent civil trials.

[emailking]

Won't they just get to summation on Thursday then? Or you mean deliberations will be next week?