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

[RANCH]

Also. She wouldn't have testified at all hadn't Blanche (no doubt at the insistence of his client) claim in his opening argument that DJT and she never had sex.

If he hadn't claimed that, there was no reason for the prosecution to call her as a witness, since obviously she would have known nothing about the business records.

But he did, so she was called as a witness, and the cross examination insofar as I've heard reported, focused on petty details about how she got to the hotel and whether she did or did not get dinner. In other words, whether she was lying about the sexual encounter--which has no bearing on the charges.

It might have been reported elsewhere, but as far as I know the defense never once asked her whether she knew anything about his business records.

That one question would have gotten her off the witness stand instantly because her reply would have obviously been no.

Yet AFAIK they never asked about that.

IANAL but it seems like a weird strategy to me.

I'm not understanding your comment about the defense asking Stormy if she knew anything about the business records.

You say that the defense asking about it would have gotten her off the witness stand instantly. How would doing that after the state had got all of the salacious testimony from her help their case? It would be too late.

Also the jury would wonder why they asked a question that she obviously couldn't answer and perhaps not care much for it. I don't see it as a strategy fail at all.

Best to point out that failure made by the State during closing arguments in my opinion. JMO.

 

[Thewiley]

Motive for doing a NDA. Which is not illegal or what President Trump was charged

an NDA is not illegal and that was established in court. However, falsifying financial records to cover up a sexual tryst to win an election is illegal. I believe the prosecution proved their case, but all it takes is one juror hold out.

 

[RANCH]

an NDA is not illegal and that was established in court. However, falsifying financial records to cover up a sexual tryst to win an election is illegal. I believe the prosecution proved their case, but all it takes is one juror hold out.

I think we are in agreement now. JMO.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I think Trump is guilty, but I trust that the justice system gets it right more often than not.

So if he is acquitted, so be it. That means that the jurors decided that the prosecution didn't prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[RANCH]

I think Trump is guilty, but I trust that the justice system gets it right more often than not.

So if he is acquitted, so be it. That means that the jurors decided that the prosecution didn't prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

Thank you for a great post.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I'm not understanding your comment about the defense asking Stormy if she knew anything about the business records.

You say that the defense asking about it would have gotten her off the witness stand instantly. How would doing that after the state had got all of the salacious testimony from her help their case? It would be too late.

Also the jury would wonder why they asked a question that she obviously couldn't answer and perhaps not care much for it. I don't see it as a strategy fail at all.

Best to point out that failure made by the State during closing arguments in my opinion. JMO.

If I'm a competent defense lawyer questioning SD:

You were paid off for not telling your story about having a sexual encounter with DJT, correct?

Yes.

Are you aware of how your payments were recorded in DJT's financial records?

No.

No further questions.

 

[SouthAussie]

I am not seeing the jury believing that Cohen was paid $36,000 an hour for the 10 hours legitimate work that Cohen did for trump, plus a $60,000 bonus.

Or that he was paid $35,000 a month on retainer, when there is no retainer agreement. Plus a $60,000 bonus.

imo

 

[RANCH]

If I'm a competent defense lawyer questioning SD:

You were paid off for not telling your story about having a sexual encounter with DJT, correct?

Yes.

Are you aware of how your payments were recorded in DJT's financial records?

No.

No further questions.

Okay. I still don't see how that negates the salacious testimony Stormy made. It's too late. The jury heard all of that. JMO.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Thank you for a great post.

You're welcome.

I trust that if he is convicted, you will also accept that the justice system did its job, and that the prosecution proved its case.

 

[RANCH]

I am not seeing the jury believing that Cohen was paid $38,000 an hour for the 10 hours legitimate work that Cohen did for trump, plus a $60,000 bonus.

Or that he was paid $35,000 a month on retainer, when there is no retainer agreement. Plus a $60,000 bonus.

imo

Where are all of these figures coming from? Some I recognize some but not all.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Okay. I still don't see how that negates the salacious testimony Stormy made. It's too late. The jury heard all of that. JMO.

I don't quite understand.

My point was that the defense could have asked SD one--one--crucial question:

Do you have any knowledge of DJT's business practices regarding how you were paid?

Answer: No.

She's gone and off the stand.

 

[RANCH]

You're welcome.

I trust that if he is convicted, you will also accept that the justice system did its job, and that the prosecution proved its case.

No. And that's because I don't feel this is a legitimate trial.

I shouldn't explain much further because it will be totally political. JMO.

 

[SouthAussie]

Where are all of these figures coming from? Some I recognize some but not all.

From Allen Weisselberg's handwritten notes (I edited my previous post as I should have said $36,000 an hour).

And from the testimony that Cohen did less than 10 hours work for trump.

imo

BBC have published the tally - in Weisselberg''s handwriting on Cohen's bank statement - of what Cohen was to be repaid for the hush money payment.

From this article: Michael Cohen testifies he got Trump's approval to pay hush money

View attachment 503404

It can also be seen at this NY Courts link: nycourts.gov

 

[RANCH]

I don't quite understand.

My point was that the defense could have asked SD one--one--crucial question:

Do you have any knowledge of DJT's business practices regarding how you were paid?

Answer: No.

She's gone and off the stand.

Yes, the defense could have asked Stormy one question and she would have been done answering them. JMO.

 

[RANCH]

Disassociation, when one “blacks out” or physiologically removes oneself from an unpleasant experience. Not associated with drug, alcohol or other substance abuse. Basically, you’re caught in a traumatic or vulnerable situation and you dissociate ie blackout. Real stuff

The most common cause of a complete or partial blackout is alcohol. When you drink while taking other drugs, a blackout is even more likely. Frequent alcohol-related blackouts might be a sign of problem drinking.

Blackouts: What Causes a Blackout?

A blackout can occur for various reasons, such as drinking too much alcohol. Find out if blackouts are dangerous and what to do if you are experiencing them.

www.medicinenet.com

 

[Joe Friday]

If you haven't participated in the WS verdict poll, please do so.

Poll - Is Ex-President Donald Trump, Guilty or Not Guilty of 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records

Now that the Prosecution and Defense have rested their cases, if you were on the jury and deciding the verdict, how would you vote? Guilty or Non Guilty

www.websleuths.com

 

[Izzylizzy]

Michael Popok and Karen Friedman, two very seasoned lawyers discuss the "2nd crime' needed to convict Trump of a felony.
@ 5:50

 

[Izzylizzy]

That "2nd crime" again and Judge Merchan's jury rules.

Andrew Weissmann explains how the jury can reach a unanimous decision to convict Trump of the felony.
They have 3 options and as long as they're are "12" yes votes total he's convicted.
Very interesting along with with Popok saying that the "2nd crimes" do not have to be charged or in the indictment.
The 2 videos I posted should clear up any confusion about the 2nd crime and how it works.
Weissmann @ 0:50 secs

 

[Izzylizzy]

It’s obvious to me that he isn’t credible and can’t be trusted.

I wonder why they couldn’t find someone to corroborate this liar’s testimony.

Michael Cohen confirmed that he considered running for Congress — based on his name recognition, and not Donald Trump.

"My name recognition is because of the journey I've been on. Is it affiliated with Mr. Trump? Yes," Cohen said, but he wouldn't say it's because of Trump.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche then asked Cohen if his "journey" included "daily attacks on President Trump."

After some back-and-forth, Cohen eventually confirmed that the attacks are part of his journey.

Trump’s ‘hush money’ trial live updates: Michael Cohen back on stand

Follow The Post’s latest live updates from Donald Trump’s “hush money” trial as Michael Cohen’s testimony continues in New York City court.

nypost.com

And this is the star witness, the person that the prosecution is hanging their hat on. He also just admitted on the stand he embezzled from the Trump organization.

BBM

Old news.

Michael Cohen fessed up to stealing the $30,000 years ago in 2019.
The owner of the "Red Finch" IT Co. who Cohen hired to juice the polls in Trump's favor came straight from Jerry Fallwell Jr.'s "Liberty University" and he still is employed there.
Why didn't Trump/Organization files charges against Cohen?
That is a question that needs to be answered and Trump's denial of knowing about the scheme doesn't hold any water, Trump denies everything.

'Jan.17,2019

Michael Cohen says he paid tech firm to rig online polls 'at the direction of' Trump'


"I truly regret my blind loyalty to a man who doesn’t deserve it," Cohen said in a tweet.'

"Gauger, who is also chief information officer at Liberty University in Virginia, where evangelical leader and Trump supporter Jerry Falwell Jr. is president, said he was supposed to be paid $50,000 for the project but never received the remaining money. Trump, however, reimbursed Cohen in early 2017 for $50,000 for the work, the Journal reported, citing a government document and a person familiar with the matter.'

cont:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/do...ys-he-paid-tech-firm-rig-online-polls-n959746

 

[Izzylizzy]

It’s obvious to me that he isn’t credible and can’t be trusted.

I wonder why they couldn’t find someone to corroborate this liar’s testimony.

The prosecution is loaded with evidence.
Documents, phone records and recordings, texts,emails,cancelled Trump checks and witnesses too numerous to list that have corroborated Cohen's testimonies.
Had Michael Cohen not been greedy, a liar, a schemer, a pit-bull bully and a guy who threatened people he never would have lasted for 10 years as Trump's lawyer and close confident.

He would have been fired!