NY: Trump on Trial!

[brucejoel99]

Appellate court also upheld the gag today:

https://twitter.com/anthonymkreis/status/1790400070879162837https://twitter.com/tylermcbrien/status/1790434979530350775

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Did Cohen’s testimony also establish the tax law violations that were supposed to be a basis for the felony upgrade? I also feel like I’ve heard almost nothing about this part of the case.

[dspNY]

Maggie Haberman of the NYT got outed as a Trump lackey in court by Cohen. Cohen basically said (with text messages to prove it) that Haberman wrote whatever Trump and Cohen told her to write

[Progressive Pessimist]

Maggie Haberman of the NYT got outed as a Trump lackey in court by Cohen. Cohen basically said (with text messages to prove it) that Haberman wrote whatever Trump and Cohen told her to write

No s***, but it's good to have some confirmation.

The media really did fail us in 2016, and are still continuing to do so.

[Pouring Rain and Blairing Music]

Maggie Haberman of the NYT got outed as a Trump lackey in court by Cohen. Cohen basically said (with text messages to prove it) that Haberman wrote whatever Trump and Cohen told her to write

No s***, but it's good to have some confirmation.

The media really did fail us in 2016, and are still continuing to do so.

Yeah, I think the most shocking thing is that it’s not a shock at all? Like I thought it was pretty widely known that Haberman was just a Trump mouthpiece.

[brucejoel99]

Did Cohen’s testimony also establish the tax law violations that were supposed to be a basis for the felony upgrade? I also feel like I’ve heard almost nothing about this part of the case.

Yes, he testified yesterday about Weisselberg's handwritten "X2 for taxes" math written on a copy of the Essential Consultants LLC bank statement:

https://twitter.com/klasfeldreports/status/1790113184050798622

[Landslide Lyndon]

Maggie Haberman of the NYT got outed as a Trump lackey in court by Cohen. Cohen basically said (with text messages to prove it) that Haberman wrote whatever Trump and Cohen told her to write

Haberman is the poster girl of access journalism and why it has failed the American public. She should have been ostracised from the journalistic community after she openly admitted that she had damaging information on Trump before the election but kept it secret because she wanted to include it in her book.
The New York Times and CNN ought to be embarrassed for still employing her.

[dspNY]

Maggie Haberman of the NYT got outed as a Trump lackey in court by Cohen. Cohen basically said (with text messages to prove it) that Haberman wrote whatever Trump and Cohen told her to write

No s***, but it's good to have some confirmation.

The media really did fail us in 2016, and are still continuing to do so.

Yeah, I think the most shocking thing is that it’s not a shock at all? Like I thought it was pretty widely known that Haberman was just a Trump mouthpiece.

When it’s testimony under oath in court with a penalty of perjury attached for lying it hits differently!

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

Blanche then asks if Cohen has called Trump a "Cheeto-dusted cartoon villain."

"That also sounds like something that I said," Cohen says.

I'm dead. 

[Landslide Lyndon]

Blanche then asks if Cohen has called Trump a "Cheeto-dusted cartoon villain."

"That also sounds like something that I said," Cohen says.

I'm dead. 

Rick Wilson has the copyright on Cheeto Jesus.

[emailking]

Sounds like cross has been uneven so far and the defense got off to kind of a rough start. hmm

[brucejoel99]

https://twitter.com/molcranenewman/status/1790500041125159419https://twitter.com/grahamkates/status/1790432811570106562

[emailking]

What's the expert they're weighing?

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Donald said the quiet part out loud, then Coach Tuberville went and said the quiet part out loud, too.

Trump tries to get around his gag order, praising "surrogates" who "beautifully" attack witnesses

On Monday, as Michael Cohen testified, three lawmakers —Sen. J.D. Vance, R-Ohio, Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala. and Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y. — attacked him outside the courthouse.

Trump has been pleased with the performance, telling reporters Tuesday that he has "a lot of surrogates and they are speaking very beautifully."

Tommy Tuberville admits he came to New York to break Trump's gag order

Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) has admitted he came to New York City Monday to break a gag order for former President Donald Trump.

MSNBC Anchor Nicolle Wallace reported Tuberville's public admission, made on the conservative channel Newsmax, as part of her coverage on Trump's ongoing criminal hush money trial and the gag order the former president has been fined for repeatedly violating.

"I guess we love that he just gives it to us, right?" said a laughing Wallace. "Were you trying to go against the gag order and intimidate witnesses because Trump can't? 'Yes, sir.'"

Tuberville spoke to the media outside of the courthouse on Monday, attacking the district attorney and witnesses, and went so far as to question whether the jury was truly American.

The whole lot belong behind bars.

[brucejoel99]

What's the expert they're weighing?

Former FEC chair Bradley Smith to testify that what Bragg alleges Trump did wasn't illegal because paying hush money to a mistress is too personal an expense to be a FECA violation even if the purpose & effect of keeping the affair quiet was to benefit a federal election campaign just like an in-kind contribution well in excess of federal campaign contribution limits.

[emailking]

So he would just be arguing that the falsifications can't be upgraded to felonies or that he didn't even break the law at all?

[soundchaser]

So he would just be arguing that the falsifications can't be upgraded to felonies or that he didn't even break the law at all?

Seems like it would be an easy enough move for the prosecution to counter in their closing statement. "The grand jury and the court have already established that this is a crime -- all that you need to decide is whether Trump is guilty of it."

[brucejoel99]

So he would just be arguing that the falsifications can't be upgraded to felonies or that he didn't even break the law at all?

That he didn't violate FECA & so presumably therefore isn't guilty of the upgraded falsification to conceal a conspiracy to commit (nonexistent) FECA violations; I guess he could still be convicted of lesser-included misdemeanor business record falsification offenses, but I'll be surprised if this defense team willingly eats the imp(L)ication of asking for that instruction.

[mjba257]

So he would just be arguing that the falsifications can't be upgraded to felonies or that he didn't even break the law at all?

That he didn't violate FECA & so presumably therefore isn't guilty of the upgraded falsification to conceal a conspiracy to commit (nonexistent) FECA violations; I guess he could still be convicted of lesser-included misdemeanor business record falsification offenses, but I'll be surprised if this defense team willingly eats the imp(L)ication of asking for that instruction.

We've talked about this possibility b4 and I think its more likely than some may want to believe. A plea down to a misdemeanor won't carry the same weight as a felony conviction and if the prosecution agrees, that could lead to an early end of the trial (as soon as next week). And from the standpoint of the prosecution, this may be ideal because a misdemeanor as a lesser chance of being reversed on appeal.

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

So he would just be arguing that the falsifications can't be upgraded to felonies or that he didn't even break the law at all?

That he didn't violate FECA & so presumably therefore isn't guilty of the upgraded falsification to conceal a conspiracy to commit (nonexistent) FECA violations; I guess he could still be convicted of lesser-included misdemeanor business record falsification offenses, but I'll be surprised if this defense team willingly eats the imp(L)ication of asking for that instruction.

We've talked about this possibility b4 and I think its more likely than some may want to believe. A plea down to a misdemeanor won't carry the same weight as a felony conviction and if the prosecution agrees, that could lead to an early end of the trial (as soon as next week). And from the standpoint of the prosecution, this may be ideal because a misdemeanor as a lesser chance of being reversed on appeal.

I doubt there would be a plea. But if there was a plea, that wouldn’t be appealable at all, right? (Unless there was an assertion the plea was somehow coerced or there was new evidence.)

[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.

[brucejoel99]

So he would just be arguing that the falsifications can't be upgraded to felonies or that he didn't even break the law at all?

That he didn't violate FECA & so presumably therefore isn't guilty of the upgraded falsification to conceal a conspiracy to commit (nonexistent) FECA violations; I guess he could still be convicted of lesser-included misdemeanor business record falsification offenses, but I'll be surprised if this defense team willingly eats the imp(L)ication of asking for that instruction.

We've talked about this possibility b4 and I think its more likely than some may want to believe. A plea down to a misdemeanor won't carry the same weight as a felony conviction and if the prosecution agrees, that could lead to an early end of the trial (as soon as next week). And from the standpoint of the prosecution, this may be ideal because a misdemeanor as a lesser chance of being reversed on appeal.

I doubt there would be a plea. But if there was a plea, that wouldn’t be appealable at all, right? (Unless there was an assertion the plea was somehow coerced or there was new evidence.)

Most plea deals contain a clause waiving the right to appeal that, once accepted, make it very hard to appeal the verdict itself even while retaining appealability on other case aspects like sentencing or ineffective assistance of counsel. It always depends on whatever the prosecutor & defense attorney negotiate, but most guilty pleas are effectively unappealably final (like when David Wildstein pled guilty to felony charges for being the mastermind of Bridgegate; the advisers he ratted out got their convictions unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court, & the most he could do as a defendant who pled guilty was petition his judge persuasively enough that those convictions being overturned, & why, meant his should be too).

But that's beside the point that a deal won't be offered. The D.A. wouldn't be unreasonable to feel like they've got the defendant in a vise-grip right now, so why should they offer one? With how much work they've put into making this case ready for trial, they're gonna see this through to its end; the only reason not to is a bad vibe about a jury with 0 bad vibes.

Hell, is Trump even interested in a plea bargain? He'd have to admit guilt as part of any deal, & there'd be no deal without an accountability structure (even if just community service & fines).

[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.

[Badger]

We're weeks into the trial ... When Trump first got indicted, I remember reading claims that merely being on trial would hurt Trump's image or bring down his polls. I don't think that's happened. The mere fact that he's on trial has done nothing to him politically.

I feel that regular folks might know that Trump is on trial, but few of them are reading live updates by the hour, parsing through dry witness testimony and lawyerly questions. A handful of us ITT have been following the trial in detail, but we are the hardcore political followers (else we wouldn't even be aware of this site, let alone have accounts). Even I admit that some days passed where I didn't bother to read much about the trial beyond the New York Post's headline

Maybe the absence of courtroom video makes following this trial less enticing for regular people (the GA trial is the only one that would be videotaped). And maybe a guilty verdict would finally doom Trump. But as of now, this trial hasn't brought down his numbers

I think it's the nature of the case. People see "hush money trial" and they think "really, they're putting him on trial for THAT?" Basically a much-ado-about-nothing, which I agree with. It's obviously politically motivated and people see that which is why it's not hurt him. Some of the more serious cases against him could be a different story, but it looks like none of those will happen before the election.

No, YOU look at the charges that way because you are a complete hack.

[soundchaser]

Serious question: what does the defense’s case look like if they don’t call a single witness to the stand?