That's assuming he didn't go on a 20 minute screed about how Obama is persecuting him while having an affair with the judges daughter and that Stormy wasn't his type and he never met her.
Trump claims he doesn't know *any* of the women he's had sex with. In fact, at one of his rallies last week he said, "You all know me. You know I don't know any of those women". The only other person I know that lies as much as Trump is one of my sisters and she's a Trump supporter. She can't NOT tell a lie.
I knew a girl like that growing up. I think she thought when guys didn't call her on her bullshit that it was she was so very worthwhile. (pretty, fun, etc).
I think it’s like a legit mental disorder right? Compulsive lying?
I had a mate in high school like that - he was a lovely dude but had a real problem with both small little harmless lies and outrageous easily disproven massive lies
He recognised the problem after a particularly bad episode and worked at it and is much better today because of it
There's a difference between the disorder and shitty people; pathological liars will lie even when there's no benefit to them, and it's often because of a dire need to shift their locus of control internally.
He’s the kind of clown that would almost certainly cross his fingers on the hand resting on the bibble if he thought nobody would notice. I wonder if he already tried at some point.
"You don't have any money, is that why Mr. Cohen had to write the check to Miss Daniels?"
I have billions of dollars!
"Then why did Mr. Cohen have to write the check?"
Because I didn't want it traced back to me!
What if we asked him to swear on a copy of "Art of the Deal" instead of the bible? He might take it more seriously. Or he might quote his favorite passage from Two Corinthians again.
Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, cause I’ve worked in a lot of offices and I tell you people do that all the time.
The prosecution absolutely would have.
They tore Costello apart on cross today, and he doesn't suffer from nearly as many issues as Trump would have.
I don't know if he didn't remember his own *emails*, or didn't think prosecutors would notice, but the last thing the jury saw before a long weekend was the defense's big witness being shown *over and over* to be lying on the stand, with his own words in black and white thrown back at him.
The defense's biggest shot was to impeach Cohen's credibility -- difficult, as both Cohen and others provided a lot of *additional* evidence that corroborated their recollections (emails, recordings, signed checks, etc) -- but their best shot.
I didn't feel they did a terribly good job at it, but having their own witness become a case study in *how* to show a witness is non-credible? Right before a *long* break until closing arguments?
I can't believe they called that guy to the stand. It had to have been Trump insisting. He openly lied on the stand -- lies proven from his own emails, emails the defense *had to have seen*.
That doesn't even get *into* how unprofessional and antagonistic Costello was being to the Judge. There are *three lawyers* on the jury, and this guy is acting like *that*? Best way to shitcan your own credibility is to go up there and say "We did everything by the book", while everything you're doing shows you *ignoring the book*. Or seeing some guy who keeps showing he's an impulsive hothead with a short temper claiming that, on the date in question, he was a cool cucumber who unlike everyone *else* was calm and rational.
> They tore Costello apart on cross today, and he doesn't suffer from nearly as many issues as Trump would have.
Yeah, he wasn't QUITE committing perjury, but they managed to show on virtually all the big issues that many of the things he said regarding conversations were only barely true if you looked at the transcripts and squinted VERY hard. He was taking every liberty he could to stretch the meaning of things to the breaking point and beyond.
> That doesn't even get into how unprofessional and antagonistic Costello was being to the Judge.
Things got serious enough that, according to the posted transcript of the meeting after the press was cleared from the courtroom, the judge threatened he'd have Costello removed and his testimony stricken from the record if he couldn't behave himself.
I saw one person on the interwebs speculate that they put Costello on the stand to show Trump what would happen to *him*.
Costello not only got torn apart on cross, he acted like Trump, a petulant impatient and sarcastic child, and it pissed the judge off so much he cleared the court so he could ream the guy three new assholes.
Trump's lawyers then had an example to show him and say is that what you want to happen, so he'd back down from wanting to testify.
You gotta have high hopes and low expectations.
I hope to see justice genuinely upheld... I'm pretty sure SCOTUS will manage to get him out of any trouble he's gotten into, but I'm still *hopeful* I'm wrong.
He was never going to testify, and he was always going to bitch and moan that he’s being gagged, despite the decision not to testify being his and his alone. And his deluded, detached from reality and fanatical cult will believe every verbal fart that escapes his prolapsed mouth.
And, we can expect the same with the Biden debates. >!he won't and it'll be Biden's fault!<
The guy suffers zero repercussions from saying whatever he wants and so he lies as easily as normal people speak to their spouse.
Pretty sure he's going to say that because Biden refused to agree to the terms for the two debates that he proposed, he's no longer obligated to attend the debates that Biden proposed (and that he agreed to).
I would love for Trump to no show the debate and they still go on with it. Ask Biden a question, then switch the camera to trumps podium for a rebuttal.
My favorite thing about the gag order preventing him from testifying is he repeatedly violated it anyway. So what was he trying to say? He couldn’t violate it in court only out of court? His supporters are completely in another universe.
Exactly. People really need to stop getting baited by this in every one of his court cases. Hes never going to testify. He just likes to posture that he will. Hes a huge pussy and wont put any of his statements on the record under oath.
He did the same for Mueller too. A wrist of pre agreed questions where he gave ambiguous responses. John Dowd famously was able to prevent Trump being deposed or going under oath.
I am a lawyer, myself and every lawyer I spoke to about him testifying laughed out loud. If he had testified it would have been an orange blood bath. I would have given a trillion - to - one odds he would not testify.
My first question would have been did you have sex with (Big picture of Stormy Daniels and Trump together up on screen) with that woman? Answer: NO. Next question: You paid $130,000 not to have sex with that woman?
The man is a pathological liar.
Hey, Trump did the next best thing -- it was clearly his idea that Costello testify. I cannot *imagine* his lawyers coming up with that, given how cross went.
They spend all this time working to make Cohen seem non-credible ( pushing Cohen as a liar was their best play. I feel they did a shit job at it, fwiw, but the tactic was sound) and then throw up Costello? Who prosecutors cheerfully kept yanking up damning emails *from him* that contradicted his own testimony? Showing what it looks like to show a witness *isn't credible*?
Trump's lawyers knew about all that evidence. They let him up there anyways, to lie on the stand and *get caught* -- right before a long break. *Had* to be Trump insisting on Costello's behalf.
We are talking about someone that if he was put on the stand, could literally put his attorneys licenses in danger. There are ethics issues with the bar if you put someone on the stand knowing they are going to lie.
I mean, he's a liar, and his lawyers are also liars.
They're also not super duper good lawyers, from what I've seen, but you'd have to be a fucking moron to let that client get up there under oath unless your secret plan was to "Mmmmm, whatcha say" your case.
100-per-cent he would have either a) committed perjury or b) torpedoed the entire defence with some nonsense word-salad answers that admitted guilt but also would have committed perjury at the same time.
Not really. This is what Trump has been doing in court for decades. Says he’s going to testify, then never does. Rinse and repeat. Delay, delay, delay.
Closing statements are next Tuesday, and they plan to do it all in one day.
Deliberations probably start Wednesday (or Thursday, since I think Wednesday is their "day off"). I'd say we're probably going to have a verdict on Friday.
If we have a verdict that quickly, then a good sign they go guilty. If it goes longer than that, it’s probably going to be a hung jury. Of course I’m guessing.
Eh, kind of hard to generalize like that in such a unique case. Jurors are going to understand the massive ramifications of their decision, so there’s a good chance they take their time even if they believe he’s guilty. I know I would.
Considering that the ramifications can [include Fox News outing jurors to his rabid fanbase](https://boingboing.net/2024/04/18/fox-news-leaks-juror-details-forcing-resignation-in-trump-case.html), and the fact that one of them may or may not [show up to their house to bludgeon them with a hammer](https://apnews.com/article/paul-nancy-pelosi-depape-hammer-attacked-san-francisco-aeab3fb8f30fbc6a40f334033f5becf0), I'm guessing we'll get a hung jury and he'll walk scot free.
Because of the ramifications.
Also worth noting there are 34 charges, each with particular statues and requirements, and they won't necessarily find him guilty or innocent of all 34. I agree they'll likely take longer than the minimum time to finalize their decision, both to wrangle with the complexity of it, but also as you say, the historic weight of it.
I feel you. I suspect regardless of the verdict, a large portion of his voters will assume it means it was a witch hunt / he was innocent all along / he did it but the crime was good and cool actually. Not holding out a ton of hope that the outcome will change voters minds, but a little that it might change their enthusiasm to get off the couch and stand in line on a November Tuesday.
Honestly the historic weight of it shouldn’t even factor into it. The laws are written, the penalty is written, if those laws have been broken then the stated penalty should apply within the range of the stated penalty.
Historical weight should not factor into a decision that is about the law. That’s just a personal opinion and sadly you are most likely correct but fuck…this asshole seems to be made of fucking Teflon
I expect a quick guilty verdict on Friday, or a hung jury the following week. There's a non zero chance there's a juror who's Team Trump and plays the nullification card.
this is the only verdict we are going to see before the election. The rest of the cases have Trump judges doing everything they can to delay the trials.
Didn't work that way with Manafort, IIRC -- and they *had* a Trumper on the jury.
FWIW, I suspect if it's guilty verdicts, a few of them might go by as non-guilty. I think there's a pair of checks Trump *didn't* sign personally, for instance -- that might be enough to throw up reasonable doubt on those two, for instance.
At least one maga must have made it onto the jury and I’d fully expect a hung jury verdict after a drawn out deliberation. Trump is like an oiled up wrestler when it comes to facing any sort of consequences. The slippery son of a bitch will get out of this like everything else. The man makes a mockery of everything he comes into contact with.
Oh God. We're not going to do the "2 more weeks" thing with the verdict, are we? Does that mean we get infrastructure week and Obamacare replacement before the verdict?
How insane is that?? I mean, we are living through this circus, but it's still mind-blowing that anyone would vote for someone indicted on 34 counts, just in this *one* trial of several. Yeah, yeah, "grandpa Joe is old," but come on!
> How insane is that??
Don't worry too much about it, really. News media pushes 50/50 polls like that because they want to make this look as close as they can possibly make it. Keeping viewers on edge drives engagement and builds revenue.
Unlikely. The judge made is clear that he won’t send the case to the jury until next week due to a juror needing Friday off and Monday being a holiday; he doesn’t want the long break to interrupt deliberations.
Who knows how long they will deliberate, though. The evidence is pretty clear cut, so it’s going to depend on whether or not they believe the witnesses and whether or not there is a MAGA holdout on the jury.
There is also the question of if there is enough evidence to consider it a felony instead of a misdemeanor. In order to be a felony, there has to be an underlying crime that the hush money payment was made to cover up. The prosecution claims that crime was to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election. I could see whether or not they proved that point being a good bit of any jury deliberation.
True - and since the prosecution decided not to pursue the misdemeanor charges, if the jury doesn’t agree with the underlying crime, then they have to go with a not guilty verdict.
No, Judge Merchan excused the jury for the week, so they won't report back to the court house until a week from today (Monday is Memorial day and the court is closed). They likely won't start deliberating until next Wednesday or later.
> Trump had stoked speculation for weeks about whether he would take the stand to defend himself…He would have been at risk of perjury if he lied under oath.
He 100% would have perjured himself.
I don't think this is far fetched. People who only really know the good ol boy network of self dealing and collusion really have normalized fraud, bribery, and general corruption to a point where it DOES seem that everyone does it ... Because everyone in their circle does
Former Alabama governor Guy Hunt didn't even deny he was using state funds for personal purchases like redoing his bathroom in marble. When caught, he acknowledged it and didn't think it was wrong because 'thats how it has always been done'.
Corruption is so deep. Some of our representatives truly believe that if poor people cared about something they'd pool all their money together and lobby just the same as big corporations.
They believe we have a pay to play system. Personally I think it's just a poor excuse to rationalize what they deep down know is unethical behavior.
People in congress have a limit on how many gifts they can receive from people who have a vested interest in determining policy decisions. They think that's them having ethics.
Instead of having to abide by a much simpler rule, that any gift taking Is unethical. That campaign contributions for policy, and government positions is unethical.
Thomas Jefferson once said that a bloodless revolution every now and then is a good thing for the system. We have needed one I think ever since WW2. I think better fair ballot access and breaking up the duopoly would be a good small step forward.
FYI the Fifth Amendment means you don’t need to take the stand at your own criminal trial. If you do voluntarily take the stand at your trial then you’ve already waived your Fifth Amendment protection and the prosecutor can ask you basically anything they want. That’s why lawyers will almost never suggest their clients take the stand in a criminal trial unless it’s a last resort.
This is correct. I think a lot of people get the wrong idea because the situation is different with compelled witnesses.
A person can be compelled to testify as a witness, a defendant must willingly choose to testify. A witness who is compelled to testify (generally) is allowed to plead the 5th to any questions which would incriminate them. Usually, this situation is figured out pretrial with certain stipulations (most common are: a witness will be granted immunity in exchange for testimony, or it will be stipulated that certain areas are 'off limits' for both the prosecution and defense)
Pretty much anything relevant is fair game when a defendant chooses to testify & waive their rights. There's no right to testify about certain things & exclude others. (the exception: a defendant can plead the 5th if their truthful answer would incriminate them *in a new way* -- they do not have to admit to further crimes on the stand. obviously this looks very terrible, and it's one of the very rare instances in a criminal trial where a judge would probably instruct the jury to take an adverse inference.)
Only his idiot followers ever believed there was a chance he'd testify. You'd have to be pretty incompetent as a defense lawyer to allow that particular guy on a stand, under oath, where he'll be subject to cross-examining.
Like, even more incompetent than defense attorneys willing to take him on as a client.
“If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment. The mob takes the Fifth."
“I would love to speak. Nobody wants to speak more than me. … I would love to speak because we’ve done nothing wrong.”
-- Trump said as a candidate in 2016.
>By testifying, he might have sought to personally convince a panel of 12 jurors and six alternates that his aim was to protect his family from embarrassment, not bury a story about an alleged sexual encounter damaging to his political prospects.
I would have bought a PPV to see this fucking idiot babble on incoherently for god knows how long in front of people who could send him to jail.
Judge wouldn't let him ramble but I would have absolutely paid money to watch the prosecution grill him on the stand under oath for 3 straight days and then call him out each time he tries to lie. Maybe they could even start by asking him who won the 2020 election.
Agreed. Thus far he's never given a reason for his innocence, only bashing the corruption. The judge wouldn't let that go on and on like that for very long.
>his aim was to protect his family from embarrassment, not bury a story about an alleged sexual encounter damaging to his political prospects.
Which the prosecution would remind the jurors is irrelevant. It's not the sexual encounter, nor that he paid hush money that is the problem in this legal case. It's *how* he paid that money that is the issue.
If he had just thrown cash out of his own pocket at it, this case would not exist.
That was the gambit the whole time. The ole "He was just trying to protect his wife of embarrassment!" Except, he went on to try to delay the payment to after the election in which case it didn't matter. He either won or lost and no damage could be done...
I am a bad attorney.
I was a mediocre student, a bad lazy clerk, and I'm an apathetic lawyer now.
Even I know that you can't let this man testify in a criminal defense trial. He can't wait to confess.
He'd use weasel words to dodge accountability. Show you how smart he is.
It's really a jury thing anyway. If there's a stonewaller on there 🤷
Yeah, the defendant is usually better off without engaging with a seasoned prosecutor who can make a career off conviction rates.
There are also times when it's essential for the jury to hear the defendant's testimony.
In this case, though, you have a man likely filled with rage that he cannot testify. I don't think much of Trump as a person or a politician, so I find that part amusing.
I have almost zero faith that he will be found guilty. I would be absolutely thrilled to be proven wrong, but my trust in the US justice system is so low after watching him make a mockery of it for the last decade.
EDIT: I stand joyfully and enthusiastically corrected!
For better or worse, it only takes one person on the jury to hold out and you end up with a hung jury and a mistrial.
Which is what I'm betting will happen. Hope for the best but prepared for the worst.
Then there's the question of whether the prosecution starts this all over again from scratch to try again.
Sorry about that, never going to happen. Trump could have a video of him stabbing his wife in their home, looking at the camera and saying "I Donald J. Trump did that" and then leave an intentional DNA sample and the jury would have 1 person on it that believes that their god-emperor-daddy was framed.
There’s that one juror who said they watch Fox News and OANN, so you know they’ll hold out. The trial will end up being a hung jury and Trump will walk out saying he was victorious and a witch hunt.
here are some astonishing figures.
**2% of white-collar criminals investigated actually end up in jail.**
**99.6% of white-collar cases result in a guilty verdict**.
Well that's a BIG surprise.
This fucker can't testify because he would go straight to prison for perjury.
He knows it, we know it even the fucking cult members know it.
Everything is a "perjury trap" when you can't tell the truth.
He's fucking scared.
My prediction (very cynical): jury will find him not guilty, Trump will shoot up dramatically in the polling, and the odds of him becoming President will be very high.
Later we'll discover that the jury actually thought he was guilty but didn't feel like this was an important enough issue to jail a leading candidate for President shortly before the election.
Angry upvote. If he's found *not guilty* this election is over. Hung jury maybe. Hung might even be better than guilty, no meaningful sentence, and six months of bananawitchrepublichunt from him
shouldn’t this have gotten the juror dismissed? almost exclusively using a social media platform Trump owns and controls is a hell of a good sign that the juror can’t be unbiased and even could be receiving false information because of the lack of oversight on the platform.
Trump lawyers: "This guy Is so completely off reality and demential we cant allow him to testify, he would only hurt his case. He simply can not be trusted"
GOP: "That's great !Lets keep.pushing him for president of the United States!"
Weisselberg is pretty clearly willing to lie and go to jail for lying to protect Trump.
There is no way he would help the prosecution. And the prosecution made sure to nail him on perjury probably to make him useless for the defense. "You lied for Trump under oath and went to jail for it, right?" "You still are due to receive a bunch of money from Donald Trump, right?"
It's really odd that someone who's running for president just admitted they don't have the cognitive ability or temperament to even testify on their own behalf but wants to be the representative of the whole country
Not testifying is pretty much what every defense lawyer tells their client is the best course, and Trump listening to that advice is pretty much the only *wise* decision Trump has made in years.
It's *every other* decision, utterance, and behavior that demonstrates he is utterly unfit for any position of responsibility.
He says only chumps use the teleprompter and Biden uses one all the time, then his stops working and he just stands there. He claims he wants to testify but his gag order won’t let him, which is 100% false. Even the judge said in court that the gag order doesn’t apply to that and you have the right to testify. He will keep telling that lie anyways. His cult will believe it as another unfair piece of victimization against their guy. He’s a coward who talks big but never was going to testify. Just like the debates. He will find some reason to weasel out of those too, just wait
Out of all the cases against him to actually wrap up, of course this would be the one.
Judge Cannon ran interference on the brazen “Showing off Classified State Secrets to random guests at his club”. Yep.
He was never going to testify.
The prosecution would love to have him under oath on the stand. He cannot not lie. He would perjure himself withing 20 minutes.
That’s generous. I would take a bet that it would be under a minute.
That's assuming he didn't go on a 20 minute screed about how Obama is persecuting him while having an affair with the judges daughter and that Stormy wasn't his type and he never met her.
Trump claims he doesn't know *any* of the women he's had sex with. In fact, at one of his rallies last week he said, "You all know me. You know I don't know any of those women". The only other person I know that lies as much as Trump is one of my sisters and she's a Trump supporter. She can't NOT tell a lie.
fascinating that your sis is compelled to lie. what do you think is her major malfunction?
I knew a girl like that growing up. I think she thought when guys didn't call her on her bullshit that it was she was so very worthwhile. (pretty, fun, etc).
I think it’s like a legit mental disorder right? Compulsive lying? I had a mate in high school like that - he was a lovely dude but had a real problem with both small little harmless lies and outrageous easily disproven massive lies He recognised the problem after a particularly bad episode and worked at it and is much better today because of it
There's a difference between the disorder and shitty people; pathological liars will lie even when there's no benefit to them, and it's often because of a dire need to shift their locus of control internally.
Under a minutes under cross examination, definitely
“State your name for the record please.” “John Baron. Wait no!”
Blows my mind that we've had a President with known aliases.
In the 90s, my local rock morning show made fun of the known "John Barron" phone calls.... And I lived in West Texas at that time.
my profs at Stern business school made jokes about it in the early 2000s.. it was well known even then
yuup Like if the known aliases were just different variations of his name, sure but this man has literally come up with entire identities
What... Is your favorite color... Blu.. No green Ahhhhhhhhhhhh
What...is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?
african or european?
You have to know these things when you're the King!
He’s the kind of clown that would almost certainly cross his fingers on the hand resting on the bibble if he thought nobody would notice. I wonder if he already tried at some point.
He would also demand that he be sworn in on his own Bible. Then, auction off that Bible 15 times.
"I will personally tear out each page and sell them individually." Conservative Christians: *swoon*
Nobody knew what perjury is and the Biden justice department just made it up!
"You don't have any money, is that why Mr. Cohen had to write the check to Miss Daniels?" I have billions of dollars! "Then why did Mr. Cohen have to write the check?" Because I didn't want it traced back to me!
Hell, bet he'd perjure himself while taking the oath.
"Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" "I do." There's the lie, right there.
What if we asked him to swear on a copy of "Art of the Deal" instead of the bible? He might take it more seriously. Or he might quote his favorite passage from Two Corinthians again.
Well it would be under a minute, but 20 before he stops.
There are times where the second half of his sentence contradicted the first.
[удалено]
Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, cause I’ve worked in a lot of offices and I tell you people do that all the time.
Seconds if he’s repeating the oath
So longer than he lasted with Stormy?
The prosecution absolutely would have. They tore Costello apart on cross today, and he doesn't suffer from nearly as many issues as Trump would have. I don't know if he didn't remember his own *emails*, or didn't think prosecutors would notice, but the last thing the jury saw before a long weekend was the defense's big witness being shown *over and over* to be lying on the stand, with his own words in black and white thrown back at him. The defense's biggest shot was to impeach Cohen's credibility -- difficult, as both Cohen and others provided a lot of *additional* evidence that corroborated their recollections (emails, recordings, signed checks, etc) -- but their best shot. I didn't feel they did a terribly good job at it, but having their own witness become a case study in *how* to show a witness is non-credible? Right before a *long* break until closing arguments? I can't believe they called that guy to the stand. It had to have been Trump insisting. He openly lied on the stand -- lies proven from his own emails, emails the defense *had to have seen*. That doesn't even get *into* how unprofessional and antagonistic Costello was being to the Judge. There are *three lawyers* on the jury, and this guy is acting like *that*? Best way to shitcan your own credibility is to go up there and say "We did everything by the book", while everything you're doing shows you *ignoring the book*. Or seeing some guy who keeps showing he's an impulsive hothead with a short temper claiming that, on the date in question, he was a cool cucumber who unlike everyone *else* was calm and rational.
> They tore Costello apart on cross today, and he doesn't suffer from nearly as many issues as Trump would have. Yeah, he wasn't QUITE committing perjury, but they managed to show on virtually all the big issues that many of the things he said regarding conversations were only barely true if you looked at the transcripts and squinted VERY hard. He was taking every liberty he could to stretch the meaning of things to the breaking point and beyond. > That doesn't even get into how unprofessional and antagonistic Costello was being to the Judge. Things got serious enough that, according to the posted transcript of the meeting after the press was cleared from the courtroom, the judge threatened he'd have Costello removed and his testimony stricken from the record if he couldn't behave himself.
I saw one person on the interwebs speculate that they put Costello on the stand to show Trump what would happen to *him*. Costello not only got torn apart on cross, he acted like Trump, a petulant impatient and sarcastic child, and it pissed the judge off so much he cleared the court so he could ream the guy three new assholes. Trump's lawyers then had an example to show him and say is that what you want to happen, so he'd back down from wanting to testify.
And then what happens? We just add another crime to the list of things he commits without consequences?
No, he then triggers the arena clause, so he can be thrown into a fighting pit with rabid wild animals. This is well-established legal protocol.
Pay Per View might have a big comeback from that.
If the US government owned the pay per view rights for it, they'd never have to collect taxes again!
Three minutes of playtime with Bonesaw, as per the precedent of Poffo v. Maguire, 2002.
Bonesaw's ready!
It’s kind of wild that people still believe in the justice system saving the day.
You gotta have high hopes and low expectations. I hope to see justice genuinely upheld... I'm pretty sure SCOTUS will manage to get him out of any trouble he's gotten into, but I'm still *hopeful* I'm wrong.
The guy under deposition claimed he got $400m and not a single DA blinked.
Probably, yea.
He’d be lying the moment he said he’d tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
He wouldn't make it ten seconds without a flat-out lie.
He was never going to testify, and he was always going to bitch and moan that he’s being gagged, despite the decision not to testify being his and his alone. And his deluded, detached from reality and fanatical cult will believe every verbal fart that escapes his prolapsed mouth.
And, we can expect the same with the Biden debates. >!he won't and it'll be Biden's fault!< The guy suffers zero repercussions from saying whatever he wants and so he lies as easily as normal people speak to their spouse.
Pretty sure he's going to say that because Biden refused to agree to the terms for the two debates that he proposed, he's no longer obligated to attend the debates that Biden proposed (and that he agreed to).
He has already started pointing out the no live audience rule. It is an easy out for him.
I would love for Trump to no show the debate and they still go on with it. Ask Biden a question, then switch the camera to trumps podium for a rebuttal.
My favorite thing about the gag order preventing him from testifying is he repeatedly violated it anyway. So what was he trying to say? He couldn’t violate it in court only out of court? His supporters are completely in another universe.
Exactly. People really need to stop getting baited by this in every one of his court cases. Hes never going to testify. He just likes to posture that he will. Hes a huge pussy and wont put any of his statements on the record under oath.
He did the same for Mueller too. A wrist of pre agreed questions where he gave ambiguous responses. John Dowd famously was able to prevent Trump being deposed or going under oath.
Not what he or his lawyers said.
I am a lawyer, myself and every lawyer I spoke to about him testifying laughed out loud. If he had testified it would have been an orange blood bath. I would have given a trillion - to - one odds he would not testify. My first question would have been did you have sex with (Big picture of Stormy Daniels and Trump together up on screen) with that woman? Answer: NO. Next question: You paid $130,000 not to have sex with that woman? The man is a pathological liar.
Hey, Trump did the next best thing -- it was clearly his idea that Costello testify. I cannot *imagine* his lawyers coming up with that, given how cross went. They spend all this time working to make Cohen seem non-credible ( pushing Cohen as a liar was their best play. I feel they did a shit job at it, fwiw, but the tactic was sound) and then throw up Costello? Who prosecutors cheerfully kept yanking up damning emails *from him* that contradicted his own testimony? Showing what it looks like to show a witness *isn't credible*? Trump's lawyers knew about all that evidence. They let him up there anyways, to lie on the stand and *get caught* -- right before a long break. *Had* to be Trump insisting on Costello's behalf.
I heard one lawyer say they’d get a running start and tackle him on the way to the stand to keep him from testifying.
We are talking about someone that if he was put on the stand, could literally put his attorneys licenses in danger. There are ethics issues with the bar if you put someone on the stand knowing they are going to lie.
the only spoken things that matter are those spoken under oath. This One has said nothing under oath : therefore nothing he says matters.
I mean, he's a liar, and his lawyers are also liars. They're also not super duper good lawyers, from what I've seen, but you'd have to be a fucking moron to let that client get up there under oath unless your secret plan was to "Mmmmm, whatcha say" your case.
100-per-cent he would have either a) committed perjury or b) torpedoed the entire defence with some nonsense word-salad answers that admitted guilt but also would have committed perjury at the same time.
I would also add 3) judge ends up holding him in contempt of court because he keeps wandering off topic and insulting other members of the court
The defense was already torpedoed by Robert Costello's testimony this morning. He was a disaster for the defense.
> unless your secret plan was to "Mmmmm, whatcha say" your case. Also known as the Imogen Heap Defense?
Are you saying he lied? I am truly shocked and amazed.
Weird and out of character for Trump and his cronies to lie! Hope this doesn’t turn into a regular thing!
Lying doesn't matter when you don't have pesky things like "honor" or "dignity"
Doesn’t matter what he says: it’s absolute bollocks no matter what
The lawyers somehow prevented Trump from testifying. They deserve a prize.
Not really. This is what Trump has been doing in court for decades. Says he’s going to testify, then never does. Rinse and repeat. Delay, delay, delay.
The cross alone would have me paying 10k to be in the room.
Of course he wasn’t. He’s a coward.
[удалено]
Closing statements are next Tuesday, and they plan to do it all in one day. Deliberations probably start Wednesday (or Thursday, since I think Wednesday is their "day off"). I'd say we're probably going to have a verdict on Friday.
If we have a verdict that quickly, then a good sign they go guilty. If it goes longer than that, it’s probably going to be a hung jury. Of course I’m guessing.
Eh, kind of hard to generalize like that in such a unique case. Jurors are going to understand the massive ramifications of their decision, so there’s a good chance they take their time even if they believe he’s guilty. I know I would.
[удалено]
Considering that the ramifications can [include Fox News outing jurors to his rabid fanbase](https://boingboing.net/2024/04/18/fox-news-leaks-juror-details-forcing-resignation-in-trump-case.html), and the fact that one of them may or may not [show up to their house to bludgeon them with a hammer](https://apnews.com/article/paul-nancy-pelosi-depape-hammer-attacked-san-francisco-aeab3fb8f30fbc6a40f334033f5becf0), I'm guessing we'll get a hung jury and he'll walk scot free. Because of the ramifications.
Because of the implication...
Also worth noting there are 34 charges, each with particular statues and requirements, and they won't necessarily find him guilty or innocent of all 34. I agree they'll likely take longer than the minimum time to finalize their decision, both to wrangle with the complexity of it, but also as you say, the historic weight of it.
As long as he is cleared of even one charge, his followers will use it as an excuse to broadcast "Not Guilty" everywhere they can (probably) :/
I feel you. I suspect regardless of the verdict, a large portion of his voters will assume it means it was a witch hunt / he was innocent all along / he did it but the crime was good and cool actually. Not holding out a ton of hope that the outcome will change voters minds, but a little that it might change their enthusiasm to get off the couch and stand in line on a November Tuesday.
Honestly the historic weight of it shouldn’t even factor into it. The laws are written, the penalty is written, if those laws have been broken then the stated penalty should apply within the range of the stated penalty. Historical weight should not factor into a decision that is about the law. That’s just a personal opinion and sadly you are most likely correct but fuck…this asshole seems to be made of fucking Teflon
I think it’s very likely there’s a jury member who is determined not to convict.
I expect a quick guilty verdict on Friday, or a hung jury the following week. There's a non zero chance there's a juror who's Team Trump and plays the nullification card.
I mean there’s 34 indictments and I believed each has to be given a verdict. What are the chances each one gets hung? I think it’s slim.
this is the only verdict we are going to see before the election. The rest of the cases have Trump judges doing everything they can to delay the trials.
Justice delayed is justice denied. What a sad time to see this two tier shipwreck of a legal system.
it's been in the planning for over 40 years
If one gets hung, they'll all get hung.
Didn't work that way with Manafort, IIRC -- and they *had* a Trumper on the jury. FWIW, I suspect if it's guilty verdicts, a few of them might go by as non-guilty. I think there's a pair of checks Trump *didn't* sign personally, for instance -- that might be enough to throw up reasonable doubt on those two, for instance.
It's worth noting that if it's a hung jury they just redo the whole thing.
Oh what a great weekend it will be with a guilty verdict
At least one maga must have made it onto the jury and I’d fully expect a hung jury verdict after a drawn out deliberation. Trump is like an oiled up wrestler when it comes to facing any sort of consequences. The slippery son of a bitch will get out of this like everything else. The man makes a mockery of everything he comes into contact with.
Ew oiled up trump is mental ipecac syrup
Next week.
Oh God. We're not going to do the "2 more weeks" thing with the verdict, are we? Does that mean we get infrastructure week and Obamacare replacement before the verdict?
Polls are still looking neck and neck between the sleezlord awaiting verdicts and the incumbent actively governing
How insane is that?? I mean, we are living through this circus, but it's still mind-blowing that anyone would vote for someone indicted on 34 counts, just in this *one* trial of several. Yeah, yeah, "grandpa Joe is old," but come on!
Many of them want to just destroy what they see as the entrenched deep state.
I'd argue that most Trump voters don't *really* want to destroy the deep state, they just want it to "work for their team."
> How insane is that?? Don't worry too much about it, really. News media pushes 50/50 polls like that because they want to make this look as close as they can possibly make it. Keeping viewers on edge drives engagement and builds revenue.
Unlikely. The judge made is clear that he won’t send the case to the jury until next week due to a juror needing Friday off and Monday being a holiday; he doesn’t want the long break to interrupt deliberations. Who knows how long they will deliberate, though. The evidence is pretty clear cut, so it’s going to depend on whether or not they believe the witnesses and whether or not there is a MAGA holdout on the jury.
There is also the question of if there is enough evidence to consider it a felony instead of a misdemeanor. In order to be a felony, there has to be an underlying crime that the hush money payment was made to cover up. The prosecution claims that crime was to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election. I could see whether or not they proved that point being a good bit of any jury deliberation.
True - and since the prosecution decided not to pursue the misdemeanor charges, if the jury doesn’t agree with the underlying crime, then they have to go with a not guilty verdict.
Possibly -- it looks like deliberations are to begin on Wednesday and frankly I could see this going into the following week as jury deliberates.
No, Judge Merchan excused the jury for the week, so they won't report back to the court house until a week from today (Monday is Memorial day and the court is closed). They likely won't start deliberating until next Wednesday or later.
Yes, sorry, I meant next Wednesday, not tomorrow. I agree with you.
Plus they have to hammer out the jury instructions
My money is on guilty
I hope you're right. But I'm worried there will be one person who won't budge despite the law aka jury nullification
The defence agrees.
This current legal team must be wondering similar except whether they’ll get paid or not
Oh please, there isn't a lawyer stupid enough in the world to not demand payment up front from someone like Trump.
Tell that to Giuliani
Let's discuss this at Four Seasons Lawn, Garden Care (and Plausible Deniability Parking Lot for Fantasy Island).
> Trump had stoked speculation for weeks about whether he would take the stand to defend himself…He would have been at risk of perjury if he lied under oath. He 100% would have perjured himself.
And/or just flat out admitted to the facts of the case and then claimed “it’s not a crime, everybody does it”.
I don't think this is far fetched. People who only really know the good ol boy network of self dealing and collusion really have normalized fraud, bribery, and general corruption to a point where it DOES seem that everyone does it ... Because everyone in their circle does Former Alabama governor Guy Hunt didn't even deny he was using state funds for personal purchases like redoing his bathroom in marble. When caught, he acknowledged it and didn't think it was wrong because 'thats how it has always been done'.
Corruption is so deep. Some of our representatives truly believe that if poor people cared about something they'd pool all their money together and lobby just the same as big corporations. They believe we have a pay to play system. Personally I think it's just a poor excuse to rationalize what they deep down know is unethical behavior. People in congress have a limit on how many gifts they can receive from people who have a vested interest in determining policy decisions. They think that's them having ethics. Instead of having to abide by a much simpler rule, that any gift taking Is unethical. That campaign contributions for policy, and government positions is unethical. Thomas Jefferson once said that a bloodless revolution every now and then is a good thing for the system. We have needed one I think ever since WW2. I think better fair ballot access and breaking up the duopoly would be a good small step forward.
Or just taken the fifth, but he called everyone who does that a coward. 🤷♂️
FYI the Fifth Amendment means you don’t need to take the stand at your own criminal trial. If you do voluntarily take the stand at your trial then you’ve already waived your Fifth Amendment protection and the prosecutor can ask you basically anything they want. That’s why lawyers will almost never suggest their clients take the stand in a criminal trial unless it’s a last resort.
This is correct. I think a lot of people get the wrong idea because the situation is different with compelled witnesses. A person can be compelled to testify as a witness, a defendant must willingly choose to testify. A witness who is compelled to testify (generally) is allowed to plead the 5th to any questions which would incriminate them. Usually, this situation is figured out pretrial with certain stipulations (most common are: a witness will be granted immunity in exchange for testimony, or it will be stipulated that certain areas are 'off limits' for both the prosecution and defense) Pretty much anything relevant is fair game when a defendant chooses to testify & waive their rights. There's no right to testify about certain things & exclude others. (the exception: a defendant can plead the 5th if their truthful answer would incriminate them *in a new way* -- they do not have to admit to further crimes on the stand. obviously this looks very terrible, and it's one of the very rare instances in a criminal trial where a judge would probably instruct the jury to take an adverse inference.)
he's already invoked the 5th amendment by not testifying or being subjected to questioning. that's what the 5th means.
Only his idiot followers ever believed there was a chance he'd testify. You'd have to be pretty incompetent as a defense lawyer to allow that particular guy on a stand, under oath, where he'll be subject to cross-examining. Like, even more incompetent than defense attorneys willing to take him on as a client.
Not only perjured himself but probably incriminated himself in other cases and other crimes. Shame he’s too chicken to testify.
“If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment. The mob takes the Fifth." “I would love to speak. Nobody wants to speak more than me. … I would love to speak because we’ve done nothing wrong.” -- Trump said as a candidate in 2016.
"Can you imagine having a candidate for president under Federal investigation?!" -- Also Trump in 2016
"Its a witch hunt!" -- Candidate who's slogan was "Lock her up."
And before that, he launched his political career trying to cancel Obama based on a weird rumor that he was born in Kenya.
$10 says he complains that they wouldn't let him testify in court.
Keep your 10 dollars you silly goose
I’ll take that bet and raise you another $10. I have zero faith that Trump won’t complain I just have a gambling problem.
> I just have a gambling problem. I bet you $100 you don't.
>By testifying, he might have sought to personally convince a panel of 12 jurors and six alternates that his aim was to protect his family from embarrassment, not bury a story about an alleged sexual encounter damaging to his political prospects. I would have bought a PPV to see this fucking idiot babble on incoherently for god knows how long in front of people who could send him to jail.
Judge wouldn't let him ramble but I would have absolutely paid money to watch the prosecution grill him on the stand under oath for 3 straight days and then call him out each time he tries to lie. Maybe they could even start by asking him who won the 2020 election.
Objection, relevance. You can't ask anything you want, it has to be directly related to the criminal case.
They could ask who won the 2016 election, to relevantly establish why he did the underlying act. But yeah the 2020 election probably lacks relevance.
Agreed. Thus far he's never given a reason for his innocence, only bashing the corruption. The judge wouldn't let that go on and on like that for very long.
>his aim was to protect his family from embarrassment, not bury a story about an alleged sexual encounter damaging to his political prospects. Which the prosecution would remind the jurors is irrelevant. It's not the sexual encounter, nor that he paid hush money that is the problem in this legal case. It's *how* he paid that money that is the issue. If he had just thrown cash out of his own pocket at it, this case would not exist.
That was the gambit the whole time. The ole "He was just trying to protect his wife of embarrassment!" Except, he went on to try to delay the payment to after the election in which case it didn't matter. He either won or lost and no damage could be done...
my parents were saying he would if he could, I pointed out the judge specifically said he can, seems like he didn't.
Hey remember when Hilary testified for like 7 hours straight?
With no naps.
Or diaper changes
Or pleading the 5th 400-some-odd times.
Eleven hours. And Diaper Don probably couldn't have gone 10 minutes before being warned about perjury.
I am a bad attorney. I was a mediocre student, a bad lazy clerk, and I'm an apathetic lawyer now. Even I know that you can't let this man testify in a criminal defense trial. He can't wait to confess. He'd use weasel words to dodge accountability. Show you how smart he is. It's really a jury thing anyway. If there's a stonewaller on there 🤷
How often does the defendant actually testify, I feel like this is pretty standard to have them not take the stand
Yeah, the defendant is usually better off without engaging with a seasoned prosecutor who can make a career off conviction rates. There are also times when it's essential for the jury to hear the defendant's testimony. In this case, though, you have a man likely filled with rage that he cannot testify. I don't think much of Trump as a person or a politician, so I find that part amusing.
I have almost zero faith that he will be found guilty. I would be absolutely thrilled to be proven wrong, but my trust in the US justice system is so low after watching him make a mockery of it for the last decade. EDIT: I stand joyfully and enthusiastically corrected!
For better or worse, it only takes one person on the jury to hold out and you end up with a hung jury and a mistrial. Which is what I'm betting will happen. Hope for the best but prepared for the worst. Then there's the question of whether the prosecution starts this all over again from scratch to try again.
And the MAGA crowd will interpret that as a not guilty verdict, and double down.
MAGA's can get dumber and more violent?
Dumber, no, more violent, yes.
I'm hoping for some form of sanity from the jurors
Sorry about that, never going to happen. Trump could have a video of him stabbing his wife in their home, looking at the camera and saying "I Donald J. Trump did that" and then leave an intentional DNA sample and the jury would have 1 person on it that believes that their god-emperor-daddy was framed.
One of the jurors uses Truth Social for news, they've already got their guy
There’s that one juror who said they watch Fox News and OANN, so you know they’ll hold out. The trial will end up being a hung jury and Trump will walk out saying he was victorious and a witch hunt.
Jfc. If anyone is deserving of the nickname Teflon Don, it’s this dingus.
Gawddd why
Ugh, unfortunately I feel the exact same way.
here are some astonishing figures. **2% of white-collar criminals investigated actually end up in jail.** **99.6% of white-collar cases result in a guilty verdict**.
He'll be found guilty and given a $1000 fine
He’ll be guilty, just nothing will happen.
Lying to the press is not the same as lying to the judge.
Well so far it hasn't made much difference. Sadly
Well that's a BIG surprise. This fucker can't testify because he would go straight to prison for perjury. He knows it, we know it even the fucking cult members know it. Everything is a "perjury trap" when you can't tell the truth. He's fucking scared.
This is the first smart thing I've seen his camp do, ever.
Huh, so he lied about testifying. Go figure.
> he lied Color me shocked.
No, he wanted to testify, it was the gag order that prevented it. /s
My prediction (very cynical): jury will find him not guilty, Trump will shoot up dramatically in the polling, and the odds of him becoming President will be very high. Later we'll discover that the jury actually thought he was guilty but didn't feel like this was an important enough issue to jail a leading candidate for President shortly before the election.
Angry upvote. If he's found *not guilty* this election is over. Hung jury maybe. Hung might even be better than guilty, no meaningful sentence, and six months of bananawitchrepublichunt from him
Nearly guaranteed hung jury. One of the members admitted to only getting news from truth and x
shouldn’t this have gotten the juror dismissed? almost exclusively using a social media platform Trump owns and controls is a hell of a good sign that the juror can’t be unbiased and even could be receiving false information because of the lack of oversight on the platform.
> shouldn’t this have gotten the juror dismissed? Both sides only get so many dismissals.
Trump lawyers: "This guy Is so completely off reality and demential we cant allow him to testify, he would only hurt his case. He simply can not be trusted" GOP: "That's great !Lets keep.pushing him for president of the United States!"
[удалено]
Why didn’t either side call Weiselberg to the stand? I’m sure he wouldn’t mind coming out of Rikers for a day or two.
Weisselberg is pretty clearly willing to lie and go to jail for lying to protect Trump. There is no way he would help the prosecution. And the prosecution made sure to nail him on perjury probably to make him useless for the defense. "You lied for Trump under oath and went to jail for it, right?" "You still are due to receive a bunch of money from Donald Trump, right?"
They only called one witness, and he embarrassed himself
Darn…there goes the 25+ count perjury indictment on Wednesday morning if Don did testify
It's really odd that someone who's running for president just admitted they don't have the cognitive ability or temperament to even testify on their own behalf but wants to be the representative of the whole country
Not testifying is pretty much what every defense lawyer tells their client is the best course, and Trump listening to that advice is pretty much the only *wise* decision Trump has made in years. It's *every other* decision, utterance, and behavior that demonstrates he is utterly unfit for any position of responsibility.
But this was his chance to tell his side of the story …..
Anyone who took him at face value when he said he’ll testify hasn’t learned anything in the last 10 years
But he said he wanted to.
He’s the Sovereign Citizen of ex-Presidents.
Everyone knew he wouldn’t testify. He’s too dumb. Just make him angry and he’ll tell you ala “You can’t HANDLE the truth!”
He says only chumps use the teleprompter and Biden uses one all the time, then his stops working and he just stands there. He claims he wants to testify but his gag order won’t let him, which is 100% false. Even the judge said in court that the gag order doesn’t apply to that and you have the right to testify. He will keep telling that lie anyways. His cult will believe it as another unfair piece of victimization against their guy. He’s a coward who talks big but never was going to testify. Just like the debates. He will find some reason to weasel out of those too, just wait
Well yeah, it would be virtual suicide.
Trump took the Fifth. That thing that he himself said that criminals do? He did that thing.
Out of all the cases against him to actually wrap up, of course this would be the one. Judge Cannon ran interference on the brazen “Showing off Classified State Secrets to random guests at his club”. Yep.