ike wrote:
JFHJR wrote:
ike wrote:
JFHJR wrote:
ike wrote:
JFHJR wrote:
ike wrote:
JFHJR wrote:
monty wrote:
Listening to the talking head on the way home from swimming, it appears that the defense had their gotcha moment with Cohen. But after listening to what it was, seemed trivial to me. But they only have to get one juror to think it is something more, and it will be couched as 100% vindication!!! IT was something to the effect that on that 90 second phone call where the talked about Stormy, that they also talked about a 14 year old who was stalking Cohen. Apparently that was not disclosed before, the part with the teenager. SO they asked Cohen if they talked about that, and he said yes, as well as the other thing..
So they will run with this and try and get someone to believe it was all about the kid, and not about Stormy and the money paid out. Even though every single witness before this corroborates this exact scenario.. But Cohen is a lying piece of shit, so even when telling the truth, hard to get him to be a witness with any creditability. Which is always the. case in criminal trials, you often have to use criminals to get other criminals...
Trump is pumping his fist, thinks he just won this thing, which in his eyes, he well may have. Just needs one juror...
If you weren't listening in real time, you should find a source that's reliable to read about it. It was much worse than your summary.
Cohen is the only connection between the "paper" and Trump. If they can't connect Trump to the paper, they have a problem.
Today, they painted Cohen as a liar, yes, but also a liar who would (and has) benefited from the lie, and one who was bent on revenge.
The call where Cohen linked Trump to the paper, turns out was possibly Cohen calling Trump's security about a 14-year-old who was cranking Cohen. There were text messages leading up to the phone call. The defense showed it's reasonable to assume the call (which lasted 92 seconds) was about the 14-year-old and not the Stormy stuff. And that Cohen is lying that he spoke about the Stormy stuff. Apparently, this is the first time the 14-year-old has been mentioned at all. If this was the case, the prosecution really should have introduced the dual reason for the call. Now, they'll have to do it on redirect and it'll just look like he's lying because the defense caught him in a story.
I suspect today they got all the jurors.
What “paper” are you referring to? I don’t think there is any doubt that Trump wrote the checks to Cohen, which is 1/3d of the allegedly false business records. I agree that Cohen is an important witness but he is not the only link between Trump and the false business records.
My understanding is Cohen is the only one who can tie Trump directly.
Think about it this way: If they had a direct connection, they'd never put a convicted liar on the stand.
“Tie Trump directly” to what? To the scheme to kill bad stories before election? Pecker testified extensively about Trump’s role in that.
That's not what he's on trial for.
Actually, it is a very important part of what he is on trial for. Motive matters in most criminal cases, including this one. That is partly why the prosecution opened with Pecker. The fact that the payments were for campaign purposes, and not primarily for personal purposes, has been one of the key issues in the case.
The only criminal charge is falsifying business records. Everyone and everything else links Trump to the NDAs, the catch-and-kills, etc., but Cohen is the only one who puts the pen in Trump's hand telling Cohen to falsify the records. Stormy Daniels doesn't. David Pecker doesn't. Karen McDougal doesn't.
It's just Trump, Allen Weisselberg, and Cohen. And 2 of those 3 aren't testifying.
As I said just above, many of the false records are checks written by Trump. That puts the pen in Trump’s hand. As others here have noted, there are other facts further drawing the link. But, that is the simplest and clearest one.
For placing responsibility on Trump, that responsibility can come from illegal instructions, but I assume it can come from ratification? Even if Trump didn’t say “fix the business records to hide my misdeeds,” Trump is responsible if he asks his fixer to fix things and then he knowingly writes a check that contains false information or will be used to falsify business records. His knowing approval for the illegal business records is damning when the buck stops with him because they are HIS business records (or business records for which he is ultimately responsible.)
It is naive to think Trump can escape responsibility for fraudulent business records because we don’t have a written document signed by him in front of a notary with instructions for the fraudulent records. His responsibility comes from his instructions, approval, ratification, etc.
Last edited by:
Barks&Purrs: May 17, 24 8:53