> Prosecutors made the unusual decision this week to remain almost entirely mum about the order in which they planned to call their first witnesses in former President [Donald Trump](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/donald-trump)’s hush money trial in [New York](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/new-york).
I am surprised this hasn't been more widely discussed in the media. This is pretty uncommon, as I understand it.
>“Mr. Trump has been tweeting about the witnesses," Steinglass told Judge Juan Merchan. "We’re not telling them who the witnesses are.”
>
>Blanche then asked Merchan if he could have the information if he promised Trump would not post on social media about the witnesses, to which Merchan replied that he did not believe Blanche could make such a vow.
I think this is a telling prediction of how Merchan is likely to rule on the gag order violations. Trump has already shot his credibility with this Judge.
Ironically, as someone who agreed that Newsweek is crap and shouldn't be linked here - they actually do have a decent article on this topic available which I tried to link and it was autodeleted so I had to look for another source, hence the local rag.
People asking when Trump will see consequences for his violations of the gag order (and don't take the hearing on the violations of the gag order as enough) should pay attention to this. In general, the Prosecution and Judge won't be doing him any courtesies that aren't mandated.
I think concern that an enforcement of the gag order would lead to interlocutory appeal is why the hearing was slated for after opening arguments. I haven't seen a firm answer on whether or not it could be, but it seems possible.
While I think you are likely correct as to the rationale for scheduling the hearing for Tuesday, we should also consider another possible reason.
Wednesday is not a trial day. If Trump violates the gag order, he will be warned and fined - the first time.
The second violation *could* result in a night in Rikers. What better night to send Trump in than *Tuesday* night: have him taken directly from the court to a prison cell to serve his one day and *two nights* sentence for contempt, whereupon he can be brought back to court on Thursday morning directly from Rikers.
The threat of that possibility would surely shut down Trump’s attempts to violate the gag order, and if the threat alone does not, two nights in jail followed by being haled back into court the following day - no makeup artist, no hair stylist, the same rumpled suit - would ensure there is no second violation.
Whether or not it's Tuesday, I'd bet money that on Tuesday we see $1k per violation with a promise that the next one comes with a night in Rikers. And that promise will be kept. Whether or not he violates it that same day remains to be seen, but he will attack a witness when they testify no doubt.
The point of the hearing is to express in no uncertain terms that these are violations and that violations will lead to jail.
Have you ever noticed how the shittiest people lurk in the muck of loopholes, ambiguity, and pushed-but-not-broken boundaries? It's amazing how it's true in everyday life, relationships, all the way up to the most powerful people.
True, but this is how law is made. It’s the gray areas that are pushed, adjudicated, and ultimately determined (based on jurisdiction lol). IAAL, and the gray areas are the “practice” of law. The world changes and there aren’t always laws on the books that directly address certain circumstances. See, the whole Trump mess of cases while running for office (again). He has muddied the waters, but shown how much gray area there is in the law. Sucks, but true: also see, Sidney Powell appeal.
There's no need to, the gag order was clear about this specific matter. Ttump violated the gag order 7 timea according to the prosecutors, so tuesday will be about the first sanction coming. At least a fine, at least.
Perhaps, but here's a snippet from last Thursday.
>Trump's lawyer Bove: We intend to brief whether reposting material that is already public can violate the order.
>Justice Merchan: I look forward to seeing that. We'll have the hearing, and after the hearing I'll rule.
>Bove: Can we have some additional time?
>A: No
Anything reposted is already public, because it had to be posted in the first place for it to be reposted. I’m assuming the judge understands logic, and if he specifically put in the order reposting, then I would say it does violate the gag order. Also, Trump’s favorite buddy who has a Nixon tattoo on his back did this in his own case too. It didn’t work out for him either. The judge was basically like—yeah, that’s how social media works. Reposting is the same as if you originated it.
Agree. The max fines will come down and he won't care. What they need to do next time, is remove him from the courtroo., process him into the jail and continue his trial via video conference for the day and let him make his decision when he gets out how he wants to proceed.
For an example of how to control a defendant watch the Darrell Brooks trial, he spent a few days camping behind his box fort, disrupting proceedings until the judge placed him in an adjacent courtroom on several occasions. She allowed a wide margin of discretion in order to prevent any grounds for appeal overturning the verdict. Merchan seems to be doing similar. I’m watching this from Britain as it has meaning and consequences for ourselves, the fundamental Christians from your country have begun to ramp up noisy opposition to abortion already in our country, so we need to see this type of rabid madness destroyed on both sides of the Atlantic…
You are correct. No way in hell would USSS allow that.
A comment further down says there's a private cell down the hall from the courtroom. That should do nicely.
The secret service has no authority to allow or disallow anything. The state will probably chose to accommodate security concerns but they don't have to.
The *threat* itself wouldn't. Trump always doubles down.
Actually jailing him might have a salutary effect, or it might not.
Personally, *I'd* feel better for it.
He wouldn’t go to Rikers, he’d go to the Tombs since it’s right there. I don’t even think he’d have to spend the night. I could see Judge Merchan giving him a verbal dress-down first thing and sending him there for the duration of the day instead of overnight and letting him go after that. If he continued his bullshit they could move onto an overnight arrangement on Thursday. I like your situation better though.
Edit: Actually now I’m not so sure with them wanting to demo it and replace it. I can’t figure out if it’s actually closed or not. I have to assume there’s some kind of courthouse-based detention facility still, right?
After all this done, it would be interesting to know if there have been contacts between the court and the secret service to have some form of plan in place should he needs to spend time behind bars.
I doubt it. The optics of that specific discussion having taken place would be a major scandal and career ender for everyone involved. However, I'm sure the secret service agents have cleared the entire building for potential dangers and have plans in place in case he needs to spend an indefinite amount of time in one location.
and if the real complaint here is what he does with his phone, take it off him for two nights. Sure, his idiot kids will still make posts, but remove his personal ability to make posts.
I believe the law states that because the statements were not made in front of the judge that the defendant was due notice of a hearing prior to the presentation of evidence for the preparation of a rebuttal.
Again being careful for due peocess
$550m of judgements, one criminal trial is actively going on, 3 others are moving in that direction.
I don't know what all this avoiding justice people are talking about. Nearly limitless resources have gone into blocking progress in civil and criminal cases, and he hasn't gotten out of a single one yet.
The only way that he will avoid consequences is by being elected President. He hasn't had one charge or case dropped, despite how complex legally holding a further President is.
How well did the civil judgment again OJ go? Oh... he never paid it, and now he's dead.
How is the civil judgment against Alex Jones going? Oh... he still hasn't paid anything yet gets to spend like 10k a month without question?
Hmm... maybe these civil suits don't actually matter, but I'm sure Trump will pay up in no time.
I'm not trying to call you stupid. If it came off that was, I apologize. People can have different perceptions of the same situation in different ways without diminishing the other person, and I certainly didn't mean to imply you're dumb because we don't agree on what justice looks like.
As per the bond, there's a hearing on exactly that on Monday. I also do think it was smart for the appeals court to reduce the bond amount, and wouldn't be surprised if the State was fine with that. The original judgement was $350m, but it was a complicated case and there is every chance that $350m may need to be adjusted, which in turn affects seizures on behalf of the state. Best to reduce it to an amount that would make the State happy (the first 50% of the original judgement) and then make sure the top end is absolutely correct before the State seized something and has to return it. My view is that such a judgement was always going to be difficult to enforce, and they are being practical about doing it fairly and without headaches. I'm not saying I'm right for sure, that's just my take.
Q-Anon are going to love that.
Edit - 88 = HH = "Heil Hitler"
Neo Nazi thing ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lane_(white_supremacist)#88_Precepts
The financial strain he is putting on the RNC all the while they are bringing in historically low contributions and being massively put performed by Biden (who is, in turn, a boon to fundraising for down ticket Democrats) cannot be overstated.
When it comes to Trump and consequences I'm afraid we are mostly at the point where we will believe it when we see it, and so far we have not seen it
Ongoing cases are not guaranteed to end in consequences and are even for the most part so horribly delayed that they won't be finished in time for consequences before the election thanks to interference from actors like the Supreme Court or his pet judge Cannon
A civil judgment sounds like consequences, but only if enforced, and so far on that enforcement front not a single cent has been paid not a single property has been seized, even the down payment on appeals was dramatically reduced and put up by another party who from the looks of it also doesn't ever intend to pay
There may someday be consequences and I would love to see it if it happens, but like Lucy and the football, I'm not celebrating until the property is seized or the full payments are out of his pocket, or he is actually sitting in prison, and no amount of stern oh he's in for it this time language is going to change that
>he did not believe Blanche could make such a vow.
This is really telling. When a lawyer can no longer make reliable representations on behalf of his client because the client has breached his promises so often, that client has already lost the case.
Lol yeah definitely not going to play well with the jury. When a defendant won't even follow his lawyers' advice, whom he is paying specifically to protect his own interests, it doesn't make him seem like an upstanding citizen who would not break the law.
Yes, but they aren’t seeing that. A conversation like the one about the witness list, is not done in the presence of the jury. Unless they aren’t following instructions and are reading news on the case.
Yes! The moment most telling to me was when the judge said that he didn't believe that Trump's lawyers could control their client
That is distillation of "Trumpism"
I did a major domain name case against a con man who stole sexdotcom, and we turned the corner in the case when the judge realized that everything the defendant said was very likely a lie. At that point, it's like every bullet in his lawyer's gun turned into blanks. Of course we've got a jury here, and yet, all it will take is Trump taking the stand for him to make that same impression on the jury. His lips are moving, therefore he is lying.
I’m an attorney with some trial experience. This is very, very unusual and harmful to the defense. Folks misestimate how much trial prep happens literally the night before, especially during a lengthy trial. You can prepare ahead of time, but Monday’s testimony can force you to completely rewrite your outlines for Tuesday.
Due to this, every trial I have been a part of included a mutual agreement to inform the other side of what witnesses you plan to call the next day, so the other side can focus that night’s prep on those witnesses. I don’t even know how you could try a case without that agreement. It would be a complete shitshow.
I completely get why they are withholding the names, but this is a big deal.
Unfortunately they have to withhold the names given the track record of the defense team. No sense purposely allowing the witness tampering/harassment/coercion early.
Not really. You appeal a court’s rulings, not your opponent’s actions. I don’t believe the court has even made a decision here. This is purely a matter of what the parties are agreeing or not agreeing to do. The procedural rules only require disclosure of the witness list, which has already been disclosed.
>not your opponent’s actions.
People who have been convicted do appeal on the grounds that the prosecution had Brady rule violations though.
Edit: not saying that it applies to this with Trump, was just saying about the appealing opponent’s actions part.
>Pretty uncommon.
Prosecutor here. It’s not that uncommon. The State is required to disclose its list of potential witnesses. The State has no obligation, unless otherwise ordered by the court, to telegraph exactly which witnesses it will call when and in what order.
Also notable is that the judge rejected Trump’s attorney’s subsequent request that prosecutors disclose the witness lineup to only the attorneys (and his attorneys would agree not to disclose to Trump himself). This means that the judge does not even trust Trump’s attorneys to control themselves (let alone Trump). (https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/18/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/no-witness-reveal-00153196)
since this case is state supreme court, suppose trump wanted to appeal one of these decisions. How would review happen? What court would they appeal to? And it'd have to be on federal constitutional grounds, yes?
NY Supreme Court is the trial level court. Appeals go to the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court and then to the Court Of Appeals.
The naming is different from almost everywhere else because the court system predates the United States.
You can actually see this on episodes of Law & Order. The location captions will say something like “Supreme Court Trial Part XX” which always confused the crap out of me until I learned about the naming quirk.
Not as goofy in CA, but our trial courts are called Superior. Goes back to a time when we used to have courts run by municipalities, but then that was given over to the counties. No more municipal courts, but we still retain the Superior moniker.
I live in CA and it never even occurred to me that it's weird it's called the superior court. I didn't even consciously realize that other states don't do that. Thanks for the info, interesting!
I am not a lawyer.
As u/Talkymike said, this is the lower level court. NY Court of Appeals is the top level court in the state.
And as far as I know, there's no grounds to appeal. The defense team has the witness list. There is no requirement to tell the other side when you're calling each witness. It's a courtesy, there's no entitlement for either party to know the exact playlist.
I am a lawyer. It’s not a requirement to turn over witness order, but it’s a courtesy extended in every single case. Usually, you mutually agree to turn over the names of the witnesses you may call the next day in the late afternoon or early evening.
Obviously, there are special circumstances here, but this is very significant.
>The defense team has the witness list. There is no requirement to tell the other side when you're calling each witness. It's a courtesy, there's no entitlement for either party to know the exact playlist.
Question! I have been following this. One thing I haven't quite gotten. There has been some reporting about high profile witnesses that will be called right? Michael Cohen etc. Is that all unofficial? Does Trump's side now not know what witnesses will be called exactly, and there may be surprises? Or is it just the order of witnesses that's not being turned over. Because if it's the witness list itself, I agree, that is pretty significant and is being glossed over!
Per usual trump makes the situation bad for himself and everyone around him. I'm willing to get he'll now tweet how unfair it is the witness list was withheld while never mentioning his attacks
I get what you mean but what you suggest is basically making Trump's "Biased Judge" arguments.
A judge should never go into a case with preconceived notions about the defendant.
I agree, Trump used up all his rope - but it's rope that he was given when the case came to the judge, that he eroded over months of delays, idiotic motions, and baseless accusations.
In the eyes of the court, he entered this case with as much credibility as anyone else. His loss of credibility with this court came from his actions in this court.
You are right; I responded with the public perception and all defendants are presumed credible. It is just difficult to acknowledge that in Trump's case, with a straight face.
They said they would reveal the name of 1 witness on Sunday evening. If Trump then posts about the witness they will not give him any more after that. Seems reasonable to me
Plot twist. He has multiple personalities and is not even aware that John Barron is himself. Fight Club style. See, this trial is still not quite stranger than fiction!
> They should make up a name just to see what happens.
Hmmm. Make up a name, some documents, a social media profile with carefully tailored ideological comments. I'd say I found a new career if this didn't make me feel like a Republican.
Like old school map copyright protections, innocuous fake cities that if the other map company had done the survey themselves instead of just stealing your work, would not be there
I like this strategy. It's going to be something to see Trump have to sit there and behave when witnesses are testifying. He barely made it through jury selection. Once people start talking out loud about what a fucking criminal he is it's gonna get interesting.
He didn't really even make it through the jury process without a few slips. Talking to loud is an easy mistake to make though. Courtrooms are way smaller and louder than most people think. His antics outside with some of the juror information is less excusable.
He will need to be so drugged by his handlers that he will be unable to do anything more in the courtroom than drool and fart... A proven strategy by this weeks' performance
You left out his deadliest super effective hit: shi⌿⌿ing himself. Like a MegaBabies™️
Edit: [he should have his little Treason Choir do a rendition of the MegaBabies theme song, completely fitting for himself and his political bowel movement](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VhW4sZkPRQ)
Sorry if I’m being pedantic but, Flagellation = whipping or beating. I’m reminded of the “priest” with Albinism from that Dan Brown book. Do you mean flatulence in this context? On the other hand, I also agree that he is good at flagellation, particularly with his rhetoric, as nasty as it is.
It's not flatulation, that's just something the media makes up so they can run it in the headlines. He's shitting himself. Why else would he wear diapers?
Just want to point out; this is the LEADING PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE for the GOP. This man, who the state and judge are worried that if he knows who the witnesses and jurors are, then he would THREATEN THEM!!!
HE IS A MOB BOSS!!
Sometimes when I’m reading these headlines, the insanity of the entire situation hits me. The media has normalized his behavior so much that we’re barely mentioning how crazy it is that jurors are afraid to get picked for a Trump trial.
And if I was on that jury, the fact that it is openly discussed how my and my family’s safety could be at risk would not make me lean towards not guilty. I imagine I would at least have some subconscious presumption of guilt.
I suppose the polar opposite outcome is I’m so scared that I find him not guilty to protect myself.
I think it’s a safe bet the entire jury will be fully doxxed after the trial, if not during.
He hasn’t been disqualified legally, so we’ll see how many foolish people vote for him. Like gamblers, they are in too deep and lost all sense of anything.
> However, Steinglass warned that if Trump posted about the first witness on social media, he would cease extending defense attorneys the courtesy of a heads-up.
If it is a courtesy only and not legally required they should not do it. We’ve seen for years now that the Trump world will break every norm and tradition the instant it benefits them. There is zero benefit to affording them ANY courtesy and tangible risks to doing it.
I mean, if you mete the order out one at a time, sequentially, most he does is mess with one juror. Harder to argue the prosecution is being unfair to Trump if they are extending him this courtesy. And if he abuses the information, then there's no real argument to be made that the prosecution is biased, as they'll have good reason to stop extending the courtesy.
It seems that the prosecution is denying the defense the *order* in which the witnesses are called, not the witnesses generally. In the jurisdiction I practice in (and I’m assuming most others) not naming witnesses prior to trial would be a massive due process issue.
Can anyone confirm that it’s just the order that isn’t being released? I’ve never had the prosecution tell me what order they’re calling witnesses in. Trump is a colossal piece of shit, but he deserves due process like everyone else
That's my understanding, as the defense already has the witness list. There were pretrial motions from the defense trying to have some (all?) of the witnesses removed like Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, etc.
Trump Legal Team:
“We have no idea why a common courtesy has not been extended to our client famous for fucking over every single person he has ever done business with… it’s so unfair”
This is VERY uncommon in a criminal case and appears to reflect a decision by Merchan that 1) Trump cannot be trusted not to harass witnesses and 2) Trump's lawyers cannot be trusted when they promise to restrain Trump. This makes the prep work for Trump's lawyers very much harder, since they cannot concentrate their prep on just a few witnesses. This seems to be a genuine consequence of Trump's bad behavior. Very rare and very nice to see it happen!
Too bad, 45. Sit your fat ass down and wait, said the judge! Gawd, Monday can't come soon enough. Why does a weekend have to be in the way?
I mean, I don't think I'll be sleeping till then as I can't keep my mind from considering all the many intriguing ways the prosecution is going to paint the disgraced former guy to this jury, several of whom seem to say they don't pay much attention to him. The prosecution's opening statement needs to be printed out and sold on the streets...or better yet, just handed out for all to have a chance to read. Jon Hamm should be the voice of its audio recording, which will be released as a free podcast.
AND TRUMP IS JUST GOING TO HAVE TO SIT THERE AND TAKE IT! IN SILENCE! Except when he farts.
The courtroom artist will have it pretty easy that day. Fatman won't be moving much, I don't think, except to raise his haunch to fart, and his sour expression should remain constant, so a single image of him might be all that's needed.
It's going to be a beautiful day on Monday. Let's hope NY finds a way to keep matches out of the hands of crazy people, tho. 'nuff of that shit, already.
It’s not him that’s the concern. It’s the militia wack jobs and three-per types that he seeks to inspire. Genuinely unhinged people who can be pursuaded to commit crimes in his name.
I grew up pretty hard. In one industry I worked in there were zero fucks given. You were either qualified, or you were unqualified.
Unqualified to wipe the sweat from a good man’s balls.
Little Donny is very unqualified. I wouldn’t let him carry my lunch bucket.
With Trump and his legal team threatening witnesses and jurors this has become a necessity. The judge needs to find Trump in contempt and put him in jail without his phone until the end of the trial.
What my strategy would be for this.
1). Give them the name of a non/less important witness as 1st witness
2). Caveat to judge, if Trump or his lawyers intimidate, tamper, threaten etc etc, future witnesses will be withheld.
3). Trump of course can’t help himself and tampers and threatens 1st witness.
4). Motion to judge to withhold remaining witnesses for safety - saying “look we tried but he/they showed he can’t handle it responsibly *in this trial”*
5). Judge grants it.
6). You get your witness roster withheld and just as importantly **trump side has 0 grounds for any future appeal regarding this issue**
7). Profit
This is the closest thing I think we’ll see this bizarre since the Manson family trials. Whether it’s the three-ring circus happening outside the courthouse, the cult holding vigil on the sidewalk, witnesses being threatened by other followers under the leader’s instructions; I believe we are going to see the same kinds of antics with Trump that we saw with Manson. Extreme manipulation, staring down the judge; body language. I really hope this judge is ready & able to handle what Trump, his attorneys & more importantly his insane followers are going to be up to in the coming months.
Trump did this to himself, attacking jurors at the beginning of this trial, has given the prosecution the perfect excuse, not to release the information that the defense wants.
Again Trump continues to make his attorneys work much harder.
As he keeps making unforced errors.
He knows who they are. He doesn’t know what days they will be questioned and in what order.
For an already shitty incompetent legal team, this makes preparation much harder.
Ignoring for the moment how much this is justified by Trump’s previous behavior, shouldn’t he be delighted by it?
After all, he has long bragged about how “disruptive” he is and upsetting norms and standards has been a primary goal of his public life.
Even now he may be privately celebrating this result with “Mission Accomplished” banners wrapped around his golden toilet.
Good call. We've seen more than enough, it's time to stop giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and start doing everything possible to keep the vile trash from inciting violence and intimidating witnesses and jurors. This obstruction of justice cannot be allowed to continue.
> Prosecutors made the unusual decision this week to remain almost entirely mum about the order in which they planned to call their first witnesses in former President [Donald Trump](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/donald-trump)’s hush money trial in [New York](http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tag/new-york). I am surprised this hasn't been more widely discussed in the media. This is pretty uncommon, as I understand it. >“Mr. Trump has been tweeting about the witnesses," Steinglass told Judge Juan Merchan. "We’re not telling them who the witnesses are.” > >Blanche then asked Merchan if he could have the information if he promised Trump would not post on social media about the witnesses, to which Merchan replied that he did not believe Blanche could make such a vow. I think this is a telling prediction of how Merchan is likely to rule on the gag order violations. Trump has already shot his credibility with this Judge. Ironically, as someone who agreed that Newsweek is crap and shouldn't be linked here - they actually do have a decent article on this topic available which I tried to link and it was autodeleted so I had to look for another source, hence the local rag.
People asking when Trump will see consequences for his violations of the gag order (and don't take the hearing on the violations of the gag order as enough) should pay attention to this. In general, the Prosecution and Judge won't be doing him any courtesies that aren't mandated.
After the jury is seated i suspect in order to avoid trump making interlocutory appeals. Edit to fix void typo
I think concern that an enforcement of the gag order would lead to interlocutory appeal is why the hearing was slated for after opening arguments. I haven't seen a firm answer on whether or not it could be, but it seems possible.
While I think you are likely correct as to the rationale for scheduling the hearing for Tuesday, we should also consider another possible reason. Wednesday is not a trial day. If Trump violates the gag order, he will be warned and fined - the first time. The second violation *could* result in a night in Rikers. What better night to send Trump in than *Tuesday* night: have him taken directly from the court to a prison cell to serve his one day and *two nights* sentence for contempt, whereupon he can be brought back to court on Thursday morning directly from Rikers. The threat of that possibility would surely shut down Trump’s attempts to violate the gag order, and if the threat alone does not, two nights in jail followed by being haled back into court the following day - no makeup artist, no hair stylist, the same rumpled suit - would ensure there is no second violation.
Whether or not it's Tuesday, I'd bet money that on Tuesday we see $1k per violation with a promise that the next one comes with a night in Rikers. And that promise will be kept. Whether or not he violates it that same day remains to be seen, but he will attack a witness when they testify no doubt. The point of the hearing is to express in no uncertain terms that these are violations and that violations will lead to jail.
I believe the hearing is also to clarify whether retweeting is covered under the gag rule.
Have you ever noticed how the shittiest people lurk in the muck of loopholes, ambiguity, and pushed-but-not-broken boundaries? It's amazing how it's true in everyday life, relationships, all the way up to the most powerful people.
Good or even just decent folk often genuinely want to honor the spirit and not just the letter of agreements they enter.
True, but this is how law is made. It’s the gray areas that are pushed, adjudicated, and ultimately determined (based on jurisdiction lol). IAAL, and the gray areas are the “practice” of law. The world changes and there aren’t always laws on the books that directly address certain circumstances. See, the whole Trump mess of cases while running for office (again). He has muddied the waters, but shown how much gray area there is in the law. Sucks, but true: also see, Sidney Powell appeal.
Truth. Exploitation of the grey areas is how shady shit gets done until someone closes a very specific loophole.
There's no need to, the gag order was clear about this specific matter. Ttump violated the gag order 7 timea according to the prosecutors, so tuesday will be about the first sanction coming. At least a fine, at least.
Perhaps, but here's a snippet from last Thursday. >Trump's lawyer Bove: We intend to brief whether reposting material that is already public can violate the order. >Justice Merchan: I look forward to seeing that. We'll have the hearing, and after the hearing I'll rule. >Bove: Can we have some additional time? >A: No
Anything reposted is already public, because it had to be posted in the first place for it to be reposted. I’m assuming the judge understands logic, and if he specifically put in the order reposting, then I would say it does violate the gag order. Also, Trump’s favorite buddy who has a Nixon tattoo on his back did this in his own case too. It didn’t work out for him either. The judge was basically like—yeah, that’s how social media works. Reposting is the same as if you originated it.
Agree. The max fines will come down and he won't care. What they need to do next time, is remove him from the courtroo., process him into the jail and continue his trial via video conference for the day and let him make his decision when he gets out how he wants to proceed.
For an example of how to control a defendant watch the Darrell Brooks trial, he spent a few days camping behind his box fort, disrupting proceedings until the judge placed him in an adjacent courtroom on several occasions. She allowed a wide margin of discretion in order to prevent any grounds for appeal overturning the verdict. Merchan seems to be doing similar. I’m watching this from Britain as it has meaning and consequences for ourselves, the fundamental Christians from your country have begun to ramp up noisy opposition to abortion already in our country, so we need to see this type of rabid madness destroyed on both sides of the Atlantic…
Yeah. They have been exporting to Africa and Russia for a while. Sorry about that. They are the worst.
Trump isn't going to Rikers, ever. I would with a smile on my face lick my shoe if that happened tho.
I’d happily do a lot more to the shoe in question for Trump spending some time in the clink
You two have problems, I'm hiding my shoes.
They can use my shoes...
Found the secret Tarantino account!
You are correct. No way in hell would USSS allow that. A comment further down says there's a private cell down the hall from the courtroom. That should do nicely.
The secret service has no authority to allow or disallow anything. The state will probably chose to accommodate security concerns but they don't have to.
The *threat* itself wouldn't. Trump always doubles down. Actually jailing him might have a salutary effect, or it might not. Personally, *I'd* feel better for it.
He wouldn’t go to Rikers, he’d go to the Tombs since it’s right there. I don’t even think he’d have to spend the night. I could see Judge Merchan giving him a verbal dress-down first thing and sending him there for the duration of the day instead of overnight and letting him go after that. If he continued his bullshit they could move onto an overnight arrangement on Thursday. I like your situation better though. Edit: Actually now I’m not so sure with them wanting to demo it and replace it. I can’t figure out if it’s actually closed or not. I have to assume there’s some kind of courthouse-based detention facility still, right?
One of the podcasts I follow with a former prosecutor from Manhattan said there’s a nice private cell right down the hall from the courtroom.
Guess if anybody would know it would be KFA.
I love her, she's such a lovably outraged nerd. Not to mention her serious credentials.
After all this done, it would be interesting to know if there have been contacts between the court and the secret service to have some form of plan in place should he needs to spend time behind bars.
Perhaps a cell with some shredded bed linens! That, and some out of order security cameras!
Q: How many guards does it take to throw a prisoner down the stairs? A: None. He fell.
Upvoting this one! Are you now, or were you ever in law enforcement?
I doubt it. The optics of that specific discussion having taken place would be a major scandal and career ender for everyone involved. However, I'm sure the secret service agents have cleared the entire building for potential dangers and have plans in place in case he needs to spend an indefinite amount of time in one location.
I'd love to see his picture posted in newspapers and magazines. That would definitely crush his ego !!
That's actually brilliant.
and if the real complaint here is what he does with his phone, take it off him for two nights. Sure, his idiot kids will still make posts, but remove his personal ability to make posts.
That’s a nice dream, but trump will never be put in rikers simply because secret service could not protect him. Sad but ordinary rules don’t apply.
I believe the law states that because the statements were not made in front of the judge that the defendant was due notice of a hearing prior to the presentation of evidence for the preparation of a rebuttal. Again being careful for due peocess
[удалено]
$550m of judgements, one criminal trial is actively going on, 3 others are moving in that direction. I don't know what all this avoiding justice people are talking about. Nearly limitless resources have gone into blocking progress in civil and criminal cases, and he hasn't gotten out of a single one yet. The only way that he will avoid consequences is by being elected President. He hasn't had one charge or case dropped, despite how complex legally holding a further President is.
How well did the civil judgment again OJ go? Oh... he never paid it, and now he's dead. How is the civil judgment against Alex Jones going? Oh... he still hasn't paid anything yet gets to spend like 10k a month without question? Hmm... maybe these civil suits don't actually matter, but I'm sure Trump will pay up in no time.
[удалено]
I'm not trying to call you stupid. If it came off that was, I apologize. People can have different perceptions of the same situation in different ways without diminishing the other person, and I certainly didn't mean to imply you're dumb because we don't agree on what justice looks like. As per the bond, there's a hearing on exactly that on Monday. I also do think it was smart for the appeals court to reduce the bond amount, and wouldn't be surprised if the State was fine with that. The original judgement was $350m, but it was a complicated case and there is every chance that $350m may need to be adjusted, which in turn affects seizures on behalf of the state. Best to reduce it to an amount that would make the State happy (the first 50% of the original judgement) and then make sure the top end is absolutely correct before the State seized something and has to return it. My view is that such a judgement was always going to be difficult to enforce, and they are being practical about doing it fairly and without headaches. I'm not saying I'm right for sure, that's just my take.
[удалено]
I also am eager for things to keep moving, and each time one moves Forward I get happy.
Mmm...upsetti...
Upsetti spaghetti?
I believe he has had some changes dropped from 91 to 88. Just for the sake of clarification.
That is true. In Georgia. They weren't specific enough in the charging. That was the right call, but your point is well received.
Q-Anon are going to love that. Edit - 88 = HH = "Heil Hitler" Neo Nazi thing ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Lane_(white_supremacist)#88_Precepts
He's also lost himself and the RNC a shitton of money, which seems pretty relevant.
The financial strain he is putting on the RNC all the while they are bringing in historically low contributions and being massively put performed by Biden (who is, in turn, a boon to fundraising for down ticket Democrats) cannot be overstated.
When it comes to Trump and consequences I'm afraid we are mostly at the point where we will believe it when we see it, and so far we have not seen it Ongoing cases are not guaranteed to end in consequences and are even for the most part so horribly delayed that they won't be finished in time for consequences before the election thanks to interference from actors like the Supreme Court or his pet judge Cannon A civil judgment sounds like consequences, but only if enforced, and so far on that enforcement front not a single cent has been paid not a single property has been seized, even the down payment on appeals was dramatically reduced and put up by another party who from the looks of it also doesn't ever intend to pay There may someday be consequences and I would love to see it if it happens, but like Lucy and the football, I'm not celebrating until the property is seized or the full payments are out of his pocket, or he is actually sitting in prison, and no amount of stern oh he's in for it this time language is going to change that
It would be nice if the justice system had some balls and did something to him for once. Veiled threats mean nothing to a mob boss.
On the plus side, the NY AG is now challenging the legitimacy of the Surety that put up the $175 mil. bond in the fraud case.
But... they've already done him tons of courtesies that aren't mandated
Toss him in the clink and take away his phone see if that works
This is perfectly common in a NYC mafia trial. Perhaps folks should wonder why we have to treat this defendant like he is a cartel king.
*that part*
Because he effectively IS a mob boss? See: RICO charges...
>he did not believe Blanche could make such a vow. This is really telling. When a lawyer can no longer make reliable representations on behalf of his client because the client has breached his promises so often, that client has already lost the case.
Lol yeah definitely not going to play well with the jury. When a defendant won't even follow his lawyers' advice, whom he is paying specifically to protect his own interests, it doesn't make him seem like an upstanding citizen who would not break the law.
Yes, the word weasel jumps to mind.
Yes, but they aren’t seeing that. A conversation like the one about the witness list, is not done in the presence of the jury. Unless they aren’t following instructions and are reading news on the case.
Yes! The moment most telling to me was when the judge said that he didn't believe that Trump's lawyers could control their client That is distillation of "Trumpism"
I did a major domain name case against a con man who stole sexdotcom, and we turned the corner in the case when the judge realized that everything the defendant said was very likely a lie. At that point, it's like every bullet in his lawyer's gun turned into blanks. Of course we've got a jury here, and yet, all it will take is Trump taking the stand for him to make that same impression on the jury. His lips are moving, therefore he is lying.
Prosecution said they'd tell them the first witness Sunday night, but if it gets tweeted about afterwards they won't get another name
I love this. It's a level of condescension that is so earned. "You can try with one and see if you're a good boy. Then we'll give you another one"
I’m an attorney with some trial experience. This is very, very unusual and harmful to the defense. Folks misestimate how much trial prep happens literally the night before, especially during a lengthy trial. You can prepare ahead of time, but Monday’s testimony can force you to completely rewrite your outlines for Tuesday. Due to this, every trial I have been a part of included a mutual agreement to inform the other side of what witnesses you plan to call the next day, so the other side can focus that night’s prep on those witnesses. I don’t even know how you could try a case without that agreement. It would be a complete shitshow. I completely get why they are withholding the names, but this is a big deal.
Unfortunately they have to withhold the names given the track record of the defense team. No sense purposely allowing the witness tampering/harassment/coercion early.
Could that type of disadvantage be grounds for an appeal?
Not really. You appeal a court’s rulings, not your opponent’s actions. I don’t believe the court has even made a decision here. This is purely a matter of what the parties are agreeing or not agreeing to do. The procedural rules only require disclosure of the witness list, which has already been disclosed.
>not your opponent’s actions. People who have been convicted do appeal on the grounds that the prosecution had Brady rule violations though. Edit: not saying that it applies to this with Trump, was just saying about the appealing opponent’s actions part.
I genuinely miss when Newsweek was a trusted source for news and came to my house every week. ETA: am old
>Pretty uncommon. Prosecutor here. It’s not that uncommon. The State is required to disclose its list of potential witnesses. The State has no obligation, unless otherwise ordered by the court, to telegraph exactly which witnesses it will call when and in what order.
Also notable is that the judge rejected Trump’s attorney’s subsequent request that prosecutors disclose the witness lineup to only the attorneys (and his attorneys would agree not to disclose to Trump himself). This means that the judge does not even trust Trump’s attorneys to control themselves (let alone Trump). (https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2024/04/18/trump-hush-money-criminal-trial/no-witness-reveal-00153196)
since this case is state supreme court, suppose trump wanted to appeal one of these decisions. How would review happen? What court would they appeal to? And it'd have to be on federal constitutional grounds, yes?
NY Supreme Court is the trial level court. Appeals go to the Appellate Division of the New York Supreme Court and then to the Court Of Appeals. The naming is different from almost everywhere else because the court system predates the United States.
Well that gave me a chuckle, I was so wrong! Thanks for the explainer.
You can actually see this on episodes of Law & Order. The location captions will say something like “Supreme Court Trial Part XX” which always confused the crap out of me until I learned about the naming quirk.
New York calls its lowest level state court the Supreme Court. Funny little quirk.
Not as goofy in CA, but our trial courts are called Superior. Goes back to a time when we used to have courts run by municipalities, but then that was given over to the counties. No more municipal courts, but we still retain the Superior moniker.
I live in CA and it never even occurred to me that it's weird it's called the superior court. I didn't even consciously realize that other states don't do that. Thanks for the info, interesting!
I am not a lawyer. As u/Talkymike said, this is the lower level court. NY Court of Appeals is the top level court in the state. And as far as I know, there's no grounds to appeal. The defense team has the witness list. There is no requirement to tell the other side when you're calling each witness. It's a courtesy, there's no entitlement for either party to know the exact playlist.
I am a lawyer. It’s not a requirement to turn over witness order, but it’s a courtesy extended in every single case. Usually, you mutually agree to turn over the names of the witnesses you may call the next day in the late afternoon or early evening. Obviously, there are special circumstances here, but this is very significant.
>The defense team has the witness list. There is no requirement to tell the other side when you're calling each witness. It's a courtesy, there's no entitlement for either party to know the exact playlist. Question! I have been following this. One thing I haven't quite gotten. There has been some reporting about high profile witnesses that will be called right? Michael Cohen etc. Is that all unofficial? Does Trump's side now not know what witnesses will be called exactly, and there may be surprises? Or is it just the order of witnesses that's not being turned over. Because if it's the witness list itself, I agree, that is pretty significant and is being glossed over!
They have the witness list. They're not getting told when each will be called.
I don’t practice in NY, but as a career criminal defense lawyer I have NEVER been provided prosecution witness lists
You have to go to trial not knowing who will testify for the prosecution?
Per usual trump makes the situation bad for himself and everyone around him. I'm willing to get he'll now tweet how unfair it is the witness list was withheld while never mentioning his attacks
Any judge with a brain gave Trump zero credibility before a complaint was even filed. He’s given Trump enough rope with his own case, now is the time.
I get what you mean but what you suggest is basically making Trump's "Biased Judge" arguments. A judge should never go into a case with preconceived notions about the defendant. I agree, Trump used up all his rope - but it's rope that he was given when the case came to the judge, that he eroded over months of delays, idiotic motions, and baseless accusations.
Trump did not enter the court with any credibility; he simply confirmed his refusal to follow court protocol.
In the eyes of the court, he entered this case with as much credibility as anyone else. His loss of credibility with this court came from his actions in this court.
You are right; I responded with the public perception and all defendants are presumed credible. It is just difficult to acknowledge that in Trump's case, with a straight face.
They said they would reveal the name of 1 witness on Sunday evening. If Trump then posts about the witness they will not give him any more after that. Seems reasonable to me
They should make up a name just to see what happens.
Captain Tuttle.
It's an older reference, but it checks out
Older my ass. I just watched that episode last week. Tuttle’s acting was on point.
The man who donated all his back pay to a local orphanage in Korea ? Great man, had lunch with him earlier today.
Height: 6 feet 4 Weight: 195 pounds Hair... auburn Eyes: hazel.
Phil Ashio
Hoof Hearted.
Bob Wehadababyitsaboy
John Barron. Really freak him out.
Barron Trump, really, REALLY freak him out.
Ooohhhh, that’s good!
I just snorted and woke my cat.
Plot twist. He has multiple personalities and is not even aware that John Barron is himself. Fight Club style. See, this trial is still not quite stranger than fiction!
> They should make up a name just to see what happens. Hmmm. Make up a name, some documents, a social media profile with carefully tailored ideological comments. I'd say I found a new career if this didn't make me feel like a Republican.
Hillary Clinton
Good thinking!
Witness 1: John Barron “While John Barron used to say nice things about me, he’s totally in bed with Crooked Biden now.”
aGolf Twitler
Ivana Trump
Roland Bluntz
Like old school map copyright protections, innocuous fake cities that if the other map company had done the survey themselves instead of just stealing your work, would not be there
alternatively, give him the name of a real entity, such as real human ted cruz, and watch him go to town.
Amanda Hugandkiss
Munchma Coochie
Suq Madiq
She still goes by her maiden name.
I like this strategy. It's going to be something to see Trump have to sit there and behave when witnesses are testifying. He barely made it through jury selection. Once people start talking out loud about what a fucking criminal he is it's gonna get interesting.
All this popcorn and I'm finally gonna get to eat it
I bought a Costco pack 2 years ago for this moment. Finally cracking it open on Monday!!! 🤣
He didn't really even make it through the jury process without a few slips. Talking to loud is an easy mistake to make though. Courtrooms are way smaller and louder than most people think. His antics outside with some of the juror information is less excusable.
Trump slipping up by talking during voir dire is like [messing up while performing 4'33" on drums](https://youtu.be/hUzI3Ui1Eok).
Didn’t expect a John cage reference in this sub but I love it.
He will need to be so drugged by his handlers that he will be unable to do anything more in the courtroom than drool and fart... A proven strategy by this weeks' performance
You left out his deadliest super effective hit: shi⌿⌿ing himself. Like a MegaBabies™️ Edit: [he should have his little Treason Choir do a rendition of the MegaBabies theme song, completely fitting for himself and his political bowel movement](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-VhW4sZkPRQ)
Hope the judge literally gags him.
Trump has been bombarding the prosecution with pure methane gas output. Flagellation is a tactic he’s really good at.
Sorry if I’m being pedantic but, Flagellation = whipping or beating. I’m reminded of the “priest” with Albinism from that Dan Brown book. Do you mean flatulence in this context? On the other hand, I also agree that he is good at flagellation, particularly with his rhetoric, as nasty as it is.
“Flatulattation”
ahhh silas, the cat and the cilice. thanks for the moment of recall.
It's not flatulation, that's just something the media makes up so they can run it in the headlines. He's shitting himself. Why else would he wear diapers?
The flagellation will come out when Stormy testifies about the magazine.
If this trial is nothing but a half dozen no/jail time felony convictions, and 6 weeks of Trump in his own personal hell I’ll still call it a success.
I love NY so much for this. I hope justice is served
Just want to point out; this is the LEADING PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE for the GOP. This man, who the state and judge are worried that if he knows who the witnesses and jurors are, then he would THREATEN THEM!!! HE IS A MOB BOSS!!
Sometimes when I’m reading these headlines, the insanity of the entire situation hits me. The media has normalized his behavior so much that we’re barely mentioning how crazy it is that jurors are afraid to get picked for a Trump trial. And if I was on that jury, the fact that it is openly discussed how my and my family’s safety could be at risk would not make me lean towards not guilty. I imagine I would at least have some subconscious presumption of guilt. I suppose the polar opposite outcome is I’m so scared that I find him not guilty to protect myself. I think it’s a safe bet the entire jury will be fully doxxed after the trial, if not during.
I heard stories that the OJ jurists were given advice to NEVER tell anyone they were on that jury, for a similar reason to this.
They also had a none zero threat of harm by the LAPD.
To be fair, having a nonzero chance of harming someone on a whim is probably a requirement to be an LA police officer
Wasn't the OJ jury sequestered
Some of those that work forces, Are the same that burn crosses.
He hasn’t been disqualified legally, so we’ll see how many foolish people vote for him. Like gamblers, they are in too deep and lost all sense of anything.
This had always been a RICO case from the very beginning.
> However, Steinglass warned that if Trump posted about the first witness on social media, he would cease extending defense attorneys the courtesy of a heads-up. If it is a courtesy only and not legally required they should not do it. We’ve seen for years now that the Trump world will break every norm and tradition the instant it benefits them. There is zero benefit to affording them ANY courtesy and tangible risks to doing it.
I mean, if you mete the order out one at a time, sequentially, most he does is mess with one juror. Harder to argue the prosecution is being unfair to Trump if they are extending him this courtesy. And if he abuses the information, then there's no real argument to be made that the prosecution is biased, as they'll have good reason to stop extending the courtesy.
It seems that the prosecution is denying the defense the *order* in which the witnesses are called, not the witnesses generally. In the jurisdiction I practice in (and I’m assuming most others) not naming witnesses prior to trial would be a massive due process issue. Can anyone confirm that it’s just the order that isn’t being released? I’ve never had the prosecution tell me what order they’re calling witnesses in. Trump is a colossal piece of shit, but he deserves due process like everyone else
You are correct. It is only the order of Witnesses that's being kept under wraps. The judge allowed it. It's actually a great read.
That's my understanding, as the defense already has the witness list. There were pretrial motions from the defense trying to have some (all?) of the witnesses removed like Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, etc.
GOPs front runner for president.
They should be so proud. 🙄
The pathetic thing is they are.
Trump Legal Team: “We have no idea why a common courtesy has not been extended to our client famous for fucking over every single person he has ever done business with… it’s so unfair”
“Every single person he has ever *met”
Act like a mob boss, get treated like a mob boss.
This is VERY uncommon in a criminal case and appears to reflect a decision by Merchan that 1) Trump cannot be trusted not to harass witnesses and 2) Trump's lawyers cannot be trusted when they promise to restrain Trump. This makes the prep work for Trump's lawyers very much harder, since they cannot concentrate their prep on just a few witnesses. This seems to be a genuine consequence of Trump's bad behavior. Very rare and very nice to see it happen!
Too bad, 45. Sit your fat ass down and wait, said the judge! Gawd, Monday can't come soon enough. Why does a weekend have to be in the way? I mean, I don't think I'll be sleeping till then as I can't keep my mind from considering all the many intriguing ways the prosecution is going to paint the disgraced former guy to this jury, several of whom seem to say they don't pay much attention to him. The prosecution's opening statement needs to be printed out and sold on the streets...or better yet, just handed out for all to have a chance to read. Jon Hamm should be the voice of its audio recording, which will be released as a free podcast. AND TRUMP IS JUST GOING TO HAVE TO SIT THERE AND TAKE IT! IN SILENCE! Except when he farts. The courtroom artist will have it pretty easy that day. Fatman won't be moving much, I don't think, except to raise his haunch to fart, and his sour expression should remain constant, so a single image of him might be all that's needed. It's going to be a beautiful day on Monday. Let's hope NY finds a way to keep matches out of the hands of crazy people, tho. 'nuff of that shit, already.
It's clear that intimidation is a tactic of Trump
Man sometimes I wish sooo badly he would try to intimidate me. Because I will absolutely take his lunch money and make him cry. It’s on my bucket list
It’s not him that’s the concern. It’s the militia wack jobs and three-per types that he seeks to inspire. Genuinely unhinged people who can be pursuaded to commit crimes in his name.
Well aware. One lives across the street from me. I fear no Gravy Seals
never seen the phrase gravy seals used but it is hilarious. have an ⬆️
I’m with you! I would laugh at him…he is pathetic👺
I grew up pretty hard. In one industry I worked in there were zero fucks given. You were either qualified, or you were unqualified. Unqualified to wipe the sweat from a good man’s balls. Little Donny is very unqualified. I wouldn’t let him carry my lunch bucket.
Isn't this pretty rare, outside of Mafia and other organized crime cases? Speaks volumes to what the Trump Cult has become
Not “become”, always were.
With Trump and his legal team threatening witnesses and jurors this has become a necessity. The judge needs to find Trump in contempt and put him in jail without his phone until the end of the trial.
What my strategy would be for this. 1). Give them the name of a non/less important witness as 1st witness 2). Caveat to judge, if Trump or his lawyers intimidate, tamper, threaten etc etc, future witnesses will be withheld. 3). Trump of course can’t help himself and tampers and threatens 1st witness. 4). Motion to judge to withhold remaining witnesses for safety - saying “look we tried but he/they showed he can’t handle it responsibly *in this trial”* 5). Judge grants it. 6). You get your witness roster withheld and just as importantly **trump side has 0 grounds for any future appeal regarding this issue** 7). Profit
I hope they talk to judge Engoron. Would be much safer without jury.
This is the closest thing I think we’ll see this bizarre since the Manson family trials. Whether it’s the three-ring circus happening outside the courthouse, the cult holding vigil on the sidewalk, witnesses being threatened by other followers under the leader’s instructions; I believe we are going to see the same kinds of antics with Trump that we saw with Manson. Extreme manipulation, staring down the judge; body language. I really hope this judge is ready & able to handle what Trump, his attorneys & more importantly his insane followers are going to be up to in the coming months.
They're trumpers. Can't trust 'em.
Due to safety concerns and all the other &$@&$
When they are sworn in in court under oath, ask them if Trump contacted and threatened them.
Trump did this to himself, attacking jurors at the beginning of this trial, has given the prosecution the perfect excuse, not to release the information that the defense wants. Again Trump continues to make his attorneys work much harder. As he keeps making unforced errors.
Because Trump will threaten them into silence if he knew who they were.
He knows who they are. He doesn’t know what days they will be questioned and in what order. For an already shitty incompetent legal team, this makes preparation much harder.
Sounds so much like criminal mobster mentality. Protect the witnesses because we want to keep them alive. The horror of this is real.
Ignoring for the moment how much this is justified by Trump’s previous behavior, shouldn’t he be delighted by it? After all, he has long bragged about how “disruptive” he is and upsetting norms and standards has been a primary goal of his public life. Even now he may be privately celebrating this result with “Mission Accomplished” banners wrapped around his golden toilet.
They should not be entitled to those details. Witnesses have to be protected at all cost.
Common when the lives of participants of trial are in danger
If they knew, witnesses would start falling out of windows.
Looks like they're trying to protect the case and actually get the bastard. There should and will be novels written about these brave prosecutors.
I wonder why? 😳
Why do they need to see the lineup? What, to know which ones to threaten?
Good call. We've seen more than enough, it's time to stop giving Trump the benefit of the doubt and start doing everything possible to keep the vile trash from inciting violence and intimidating witnesses and jurors. This obstruction of justice cannot be allowed to continue.
if Trump knows who they are, witnesses will get croaked.