GUILTY NY - Ex-President Donald Trump, charged with 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records, Apr 2023, Trial 25 Mar 2024 #4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Actually he appeared on other networks as well, and wasn't communicating to an audience of one, but to the many thousands of Trump's supporters who were pleased to hear from him so soon after the verdict was issued. He answered questions about appeal, next steps, etc.
That is not what an audience of one means.
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

David Pecker sure did rise to the occasion with his truthful testimony.
Thankfully the jury was able to connect his dots with Michael Cohens.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
To quote Josh Steinglass, "We didn't choose Michael Cohen to be a witness. We didn't pick him up at the witness store. The defendant chose him."

And the thing is, Trump was perfectly happy for “fixer” Cohen to lie for him, even before Congress when Trump was in office. But when Cohen went to prison for that and finally saw the light and turned on Trump, suddenly nothing he says now can possibly be true because he’s convicted of lying (for Trump). Circular reasoning much?

Cohen has a LOT to lose if he had perjured himself during this trial.

JMO
 
I just want to say some things.

No one will ever convince me for one moment that all those yelling "Sham trial! Kangaroo court!" yada yada yada would be yelling that if DJT had been acquitted.

You can't have it both ways, that the trial is a sham if you don't agree with the verdict but it's not a sham if you do.

Our justice system has produced some results that I haven't agreed with (Casey Anthony, anyone?) but it sickens me that people are going beyond saying they were disappointed by the verdict to flat out attacking the justice system itself.
 
I just want to say some things.

No one will ever convince me for one moment that all those yelling "Sham trial! Kangaroo court!" yada yada yada would be yelling that if DJT had been acquitted.

You can't have it both ways, that the trial is a sham if you don't agree with the verdict but it's not a sham if you do.

Our justice system has produced some results that I haven't agreed with (Casey Anthony, anyone?) but it sickens me that people are going beyond saying they were disappointed by the verdict to flat out attacking the justice system itself.
<modsnip: Please don't insult others who hold a different opinion>

Of course, Trump is following the old fascist playbook and that whole CULT of personality taking the place of the Constitution thing is part of trying to dismantle our democracy and take over as dictator. Hopefully, enough people do NOT fall for it and do NOT twist themselves into pretzels to justify and rationalize anything Felon Trump does. SMH
 
Last edited by a moderator:
And the thing is, Trump was perfectly happy for “fixer” Cohen to lie for him, even before Congress when Trump was in office. But when Cohen went to prison for that and finally saw the light and turned on Trump, suddenly nothing he says now can possibly be true because he’s convicted of lying (for Trump). Circular reasoning much?

Cohen has a LOT to lose if he had perjured himself during this trial.

JMO
Was it the Oct 24,2016 phone call that Cohen made to Keith Schiller that Blanche said Cohen lied about on direct?
 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed> ... the corroboration was to bury the Stormy Daniels’s issue. They played recordings of Trump discussing it with Pecker and Cohen.
The NDA was not what the felony charge was.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What I would really like to know is which one of the three possible underlying crimes needed for this conviction did the jury find to be true and what was their count. Was it 4-4-4 or some other count. JMO.

The prosecution has proposed three possibilities to choose from: that the conspiracy involved violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act; the falsification of other business records; or the violation of local tax laws.

 
<modsnip: Quoted post was removed> ... the corroboration was to bury the Stormy Daniels’s issue. They played recordings of Trump discussing it with Pecker and Cohen.
The NDA was not what the felony charge was.
That's the function of an NDA. JMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
<modsnip: Please don't insult others who hold a different opinion>

Of course, Trump is following the old fascist playbook and that whole CULT of personality taking the place of the Constitution thing is part of trying to dismantle our democracy and take over as dictator. Hopefully, enough people do NOT fall for it and do NOT twist themselves into pretzels to justify and rationalize anything Felon Trump does. SMH
I knew by the notes yesterday, that Trump was in trouble. Especially when they wanted headphones and laptops for each juror. They focused on the important conversations…Pecker and Cohen. Trump’s team put up zero defense to even suggest the situation was different/misrepresented. Of course they are not required to, but they gave nothing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree that Michael Cohen is a convicted liar.

I also agree that all the lies he told were at the behest of Donald Trump.

People such as Michael Cohen and David Pecker were part of Trump’s most inner circle. They believed in him, were paid substantially, and did his bidding.

IMO going to prison was a wake-up call for Cohen. He was locked up, but Trump was free. That must have been emotionally corrosive.

Plus, Cohen had the receipts, as did David Pecker. I believe that’s what carried the day.
 
What I would really like to know is which one of the three possible underlying crimes needed for this conviction did the jury find to be true and what was their count. Was it 4-4-4 or some other count. JMO.



We may never know, although I would hope that this would be known during the appeal process.
 
i went back to read stormy daniel’s testimony and it’s… challenging. the whole story makes me want to crawl out of my skin.

maybe more of an aside, but I had no idea how young stormy daniels was! i know some people want to invalidate her profession, but she seems to have really accomplished a lot when she first met trump. he was 33 years her senior.
 
What I would really like to know is which one of the three possible underlying crimes needed for this conviction did the jury find to be true and what was their count. Was it 4-4-4 or some other count. JMO.



I heard it will not be disclosed. It was a guilty/not guilty form. The judge covered this twice as did the prosecutor.
 
He's still a proven liar who's testimony is not believable to me. JMO.

If you had been on the jury, you could have factored that in to your verdict. But you still would have had to decide whether the physical evidence supported Cohen’s testimony or not. His testimony alone was not enough, either believable or unbelievable.

As we know, what this case boiled down to was whether there was a conspiracy involving Trump that was intended to help him get elected. The fact that the jury wanted to hear testimony again about the meeting between Trump, Pecker and Cohen shows that they understood the basis for the charges. They were convinced there was a conspiracy by the testimony (which they found believable) and physical evidence. Based on that, they looked at each of the 34 counts and made their decision. They didn’t have to find him guilty on all the counts, but they did. I think it must have been clear once they heard the testimony and Merchon’s instructions again.

Unfortunately for Trump, his defense team didn’t have a lot to work with in order to sow reasonable doubt. Calling Cohen the GLOAT was not enough. The prosecution presented a detailed and believable case IMO. Twelve good men and women who sacrificed their time and possible safety found him guilty. I appreciate that you accept their verdict @RANCH, despite your misgivings. :)

JMO
 
I just want to say some things.

No one will ever convince me for one moment that all those yelling "Sham trial! Kangaroo court!" yada yada yada would be yelling that if DJT had been acquitted.

You can't have it both ways, that the trial is a sham if you don't agree with the verdict but it's not a sham if you do.

Our justice system has produced some results that I haven't agreed with (Casey Anthony, anyone?) but it sickens me that people are going beyond saying they were disappointed by the verdict to flat out attacking the justice system itself.
Within the past few years I can think of quite a few other jury verdicts where many were blaming everyone and everything but the defendant.
I'd list them but it would probably be seen as OT.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
104
Guests online
2,148
Total visitors
2,252

Forum statistics

Threads
600,478
Messages
18,109,194
Members
230,991
Latest member
Clue Keeper
Back
Top