Why the Sudden Doubts about the Verdict?

[Seymour Flops]

Since testimony before the jury was that FPOTUS#45 attempted to stiff Daniels on the payment until after the election and once the election was over there would be no need to pay her and the story could come out...

What paragon of honesty testified to that?

So given that evidence presented.

Please explain what these plenty of reasons but for the campaign existed JUST FOR THE 11-DAY period?

WW

11-DAY period?

Trump has used NDAs for decades, long before any hint of running for office.

 

[WorldWatcher]

What paragon of honesty testified to that?

11-DAY period?

Trump has used NDAs for decades, long before any hint of running for office.

We aren't talking about non-campaign related NDA's.

We are talking specifically about the NDA for Daniels that was executed because after the Bush "Grab'em By The Vagina" tape came out in October. The campaign was in fear of another sex scandal involving Trump.

So again...

Since testimony before the jury was that FPOTUS#45 attempted to stiff Daniels on the payment until after the election and once the election was over there would be no need to pay her and the story could come out...

So given that evidence presented.

Please explain what these plenty of reasons but for the campaign existed JUST FOR THE 11-DAY period?

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

We aren't talking about non-campaign related NDA's.

What is your evidence thata any of Trump's NDA's were campaign related?

We are talking specifically about the NDA for Daniels that was executed because after the Bush "Grab'em By The Vagina" tape came out in October. The campaign was in fear of another sex scandal involving Trump.

So again...

That's your guesswork. No credible witness testified to that.

Since testimony before the jury was that FPOTUS#45 attempted to stiff Daniels on the payment until after the election and once the election was over there would be no need to pay her and the story could come out...

WHOSE testimony?

So given that evidence presented.

Please explain what these plenty of reasons but for the campaign existed JUST FOR THE 11-DAY period?

WW

Trump used NDA's for decades prior to running for office.

There is no evidence from any credible witness that any particular one was for campaign purposes.

It's just another unsupported conspiracy theory.

 

[WorldWatcher]

What is your evidence thata any of Trump's NDA's were campaign related?

Cohen was convicted of federal campiagn finance fraud for his activities in paying off Stormy Daniels in support of the Trump campaign.

That convictin was entered into teh record at this trial as prima facia evidence of Cohen's campaign fraud.

That's your guesswork. No credible witness testified to that.

WHOSE testimony?

Davidson, Daniels and Cohen. But that's OK, go ahead and dismiss them, but there were emails at the time which put the testimony in context that the attempted delays DID happen and it wasn't until Team Daniels attempted to pull the plug and go with a wide media blitz that the money finally cam through.

Trump used NDA's for decades prior to running for office.

So?

FPOTUS#45 isn't charged with having an NDA while running for office. He's charged with falsification of business records for the way he tried to launder the money. Not for having an NDA.

There is no evidence from any credible witness that any particular one was for campaign purposes.

It's just another unsupported conspiracy theory.

To repeat:

But that's OK, go ahead and dismiss them, but there were emails at the time which put the testimony in context that the attempted delays DID happen and it wasn't until Team Daniels attempted to pull the plug and go with a wide media blitz that the money finally cam through.

This week it will be before the jury and it's their job to weigh credibility.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

Cohen was convicted of federal campiagn finance fraud for his activities in paying off Stormy Daniels in support of the Trump campaign.

Yes, that's Cohen. Was he convicted by a jury of his peers, or did he plead guilty as part of a deal?

The answer here:

Michael Cohen, President Donald Trump’s former attorney, pleaded guilty today to eight charges in federal court.

They included tax evasion and bank fraud but also campaign finance violations, specifically for his role in payments made to women to keep them from talking about alleged affairs with Trump ahead of the 2016 election.

Michael Cohen’s plea deal, explained

What does the 22-page plea deal tell us about Trump's personal attorney and Trump himself? Here are some highlights:

www.pbs.org

Cohen has already recanted some of his guilty pleas.

Despite spending more than 100 hours cooperating with investigators, President Trump's former fixer still ended up with a prison sentence, and he's pretty darn upset about it. That sentiment — as well as some more frustrations with Trump and a recanting of one of his guilty pleas — was revealed in a recorded conversation with Cohen that actor Tom Arnold gave to The Wall Street Journal.

Cohen pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and tax and bank fraud last August, and was sentenced to three years in prison in December. But in a conversation with Arnold, which the actor says he recorded with Cohen's knowledge, Cohen said there "is no tax evasion" and that "it's a lie." He went on to decry how prosecutors still served him a prison sentence,

Michael Cohen says part of his guilty plea was 'a lie'

The latest Speed Read,/speed-reads,,speed-reads, breaking news, comment, reviews and features from the experts at The Week

theweek.com

When are you going to realize that Michael Cohen is NOT a reliable source of truth. Not even when he pleads guilty to a crime.

He will lie anywhere and anytime he thinks that a lie will further his own ends.

If you just want to believe anything negative Cohen says about Trump, because you hate Trump anyway, fine. But Trump won't go to jail on the word of a man like Michael Cohen, that's pure fantasy.

That convictin was entered into teh record at this trial as prima facia evidence of Cohen's campaign fraud.



Davidson, Daniels and Cohen. But that's OK, go ahead and dismiss them,

Of course I dismiss them. Don't you? Why do you believe that they are honest and trustworthy people on whose word an innocent-until-proven-guilty defendant should go to prison?

but there were emails at the time which put the testimony in context that the attempted delays DID happen and it wasn't until Team Daniels attempted to pull the plug and go with a wide media blitz that the money finally cam through.

What makes you think that Cohen would not have paid the NDA whether Trump was running for president or not?

So?

FPOTUS#45 isn't charged with having an NDA while running for office. He's charged with falsification of business records for the way he tried to launder the money. Not for having an NDA.

Because having an NDA is not illegal. Why is judge Merchan refusing to tell the jury that?

Trump did not launder any money. If anyone did, it was Cohen. There's no reliable evidence that Trump knew of Cohen's payment, or the reimbursement of Cohen.

None.

To repeat:

But that's OK, go ahead and dismiss them, but there were emails at the time which put the testimony in context that the attempted delays DID happen and it wasn't until Team Daniels attempted to pull the plug and go with a wide media blitz that the money finally cam through.

This week it will be before the jury and it's their job to weigh credibility.

Repeating a false claim doesn't make it true.

WW

SF

 

[WorldWatcher]

Yes, that's Cohen. Was he convicted by a jury of his peers, or did he plead guilty as part of a deal?

He pled guilty, still a conviction.

When are you going to realize that Michael Cohen is NOT a reliable source of truth. Not even when he pleads guilty to a crime.

Cohen's testimony about emails exchanges were supported by, you know, the emails and Davidson and Daniels on the other side as the recipients.

Because having an NDA is not illegal. Why is judge Merchan refusing to tell the jury that?

FPOTUS#45 isn't charged with having an NDA.

Trump did not launder any money. If anyone did, it was Cohen. There's no reliable evidence that Trump knew of Cohen's payment, or the reimbursement of Cohen.

None.

Except for the audio tap of Trump knowing about the scheme, and therefore Cohen's involvement.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

He pled guilty, still a conviction.

Sure. But he was guilty because he said he was guilty, and he lies anytime it suits him.

Cohen's testimony about emails exchanges were supported by, you know, the emails and Davidson and Daniels on the other side as the recipients.

Was Trump a sender or reciever of any of those emails?

Post them.

FPOTUS#45 isn't charged with having an NDA.

Then why won't the judge tell the jury that having an NDA is not illegal?

Except for the audio tap of Trump knowing about the scheme, and therefore Cohen's involvement.

WW

The audio that Cohen recorded was about that Playboy whore, not about the porn whore.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

There are no doubts about the coming verdict.

Whatever it is, we accept it.

 

[Care4all]

Ok. I get paid by clients in 2024 for work done in 2023. SHould I be going to prison too?

It's called "grossing up" a bonus to account for taxes. It happens 10,000 times a day, every day. Do these employers need to go to prison to go to prison?

Your coworkers testify Care usually has a coffee. So she had to have coffee on December 13, 2006. Really? you think you should be sent to prison on the basis of that testimony?

Uh, the legal work was done. Did you miss that? This is all about Cohen negotiating an NDA with the porn actress' lawyer.

I'm pretty sure he was thinking about running the frigging country. Not $35K checks to his lawyer.

They didn't rehire him. It was compensation for work done. THis really ain't rocket science.

You keep chanting it was for legal work done in 2017. It wasn't.

Let's be clear here. The charges your cult brought in NY are intended to put Trump in prison for the rest of his life. This isn't some civil fine. They want to put him in prison for the rest of his life.

You're a smart lady and apparently not hyperpartisan. How you can support what your party is doing, and buy and regurgitate their bullshit, is beyond me.

Before I get a chance to answer your responses...... know that.....

Probation, is an available option if found guilty of these crimes he was charged with.... It is not solely a prison sentence....that would be for the worst of the worse offenders.

Trump, if found guilty, for these charges will certainly get probation and zero jail time.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

probation and no jail time

yes

 

[WorldWatcher]

Sure. But he was guilty because he said he was guilty, and he lies anytime it suits him.

No he was guilty because he did the crime and admitted so in court.

Was Trump a sender or reciever of any of those emails?

No, however it was corrobrative evidence which supported Cohen's claims.

Post them.

The discussion is in Davidsons, Daniels, and Cohen's testimony.

Read about it yourself.

Then why won't the judge tell the jury that having an NDA is not illegal?

Who said that Judge Merchan won't tell the jury that NDA's are not illegal.

Again, FPOTUS#45 is charged with having an NDA. Cohen was not charged with brokering an NDA. The "NDA is illegal schtick is a red hearing. No one has said NDAs are illegal.

Cohen was conviced for campaign fraud for the way the NDA was paid. FPOTUS#45 is charged with falsification of business records to conceal Cohen's crimes. Neither was charged with an illegal NDA.

The audio that Cohen recorded was about that Playboy whore, not about the porn whore.

Correct, however it shows that FPOTUS#45 was aware of and involved with the unlawfully interfere with the election. I disproves the "Who me? I didn't know" claim.

WW

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The written evidence corroborates all of the testimony.

 

[justoffal]

At the beginnng and through most of the trial, Democrats on her were crowing about Trump going to prison, Republicans being forced to vote for a felon, etc. Now the attitude seems to be "wait and see," and the moral cowardice of, "I'll respect the jury's verdict."

Even the WaPo is lowering expectations - they defining "high expectations" as a former president and current frontrunner literally imprisoned by the opposition party, banana republic style.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/21/forget-everything-you-think-you-know-about-what-trump-jury-will-do/

I would caution people, based on my own experience, to remember that their experience from the outside is as different than the jury’s as the courtroom sketches are from the reality of being there in person. And I would note that Trump’s guilt will ultimately be decided not on whether the public thinks the case has been made or even on whether the jury does, but instead on the conversation the jury has within the constraints of evidence and the law to which they have been exposed.

And no one can reliably predict how that conversation will unfold.

I don't get it. If the evidence is so strong, and the judge so fair, and the Jury made of savvy New Yorkers who won't be put off by the likes of fellow New Yorker Michael Cohen, why doubt the outcome? If Trump's actions are so proven, and they fit so well into a clearly defined crime, and the witnesses so credible, why would you not predict a swift verdict of guilty on all counts?

Team Trump barely responded to the prosecution's case. Two witnesses, both of whome the fair judge cut off from answering. The jury will consider only the prosecution's examinations, the defense's cross, and the closing arguments. How can you doubt a victory for your side?

Is is possible that this is the answer, incredible as it may seem:

Did you really and truly not know what a farce this trial was from the beginning? Did you believe your own nonsense about no one being above the law, and this case being a simple example of Donald Trump finally facing trial for his crimes as anyone else would? Now, having seen how absurdly weak and counter to the law, this prosecution is, you pretend that you only care that the process was carried out, and you were never expecting a particular outcome?

I'm disappointed in you, really. I would have expected you to keep up the cry of "Felon Trump" right up until the hung jury was announced and then to denounce the sneaky Trumpers who must have lied their way onto the jury.

But, you will respect the findings, eh?

I look forward to seeing you keep that promise.

Kangaroo court.... kangaroo verdict...

It was never going anywhere else. Appeal on the way.

Jo

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

We aren't talking about non-campaign related NDA's.

We are talking specifically about the NDA for Daniels that was executed because after the Bush "Grab'em By The Vagina" tape came out in October. The campaign was in fear of another sex scandal involving Trump.

So again...

Since testimony before the jury was that FPOTUS#45 attempted to stiff Daniels on the payment until after the election and once the election was over there would be no need to pay her and the story could come out...

So given that evidence presented.

Please explain what these plenty of reasons but for the campaign existed JUST FOR THE 11-DAY period?

WW

That was not the argument.

The argument was that finance laws were broken by how the paperwork was handled. Nobody cares about hush money at all.

 

[Seymour Flops]

No he was guilty because he did the crime and admitted so in court.

But, he lies anytime it suits him, so his words are meaningless.

No, however it was corrobrative evidence which supported Cohen's claims.

Not claims about Trump.

The discussion is in Davidsons, Daniels, and Cohen's testimony.

Read about it yourself.

So, you haven't even seen the emails? Just heard from somewhere that three professional liars had "discussed" the emails?

Who said that Judge Merchan won't tell the jury that NDA's are not illegal.

Mr. Merchan.

What Jury Won't Hear​

The defense wanted jurors to hear that there are no limits on what a candidate is allowed to contribute to their own campaign, and that Trump would have had enough wealth to pay the $130,000 that went to Daniels out of his own pocket if he wanted. Merchan said he would not give this instruction but told Trump's lawyers they could argue this in their closing statements.

Trump's lawyers also wanted the judge to inform the jury that hush money payments and non-disclosure agreements are not illegal, but prosecutors argued that would require Merchan to make the defense's argument for them. The judge agreed.

Additionally, Trump's team wanted Merchan to add to the phrase "for the purpose of influencing any election" and tell jurors that such influence would require "proof that the activity clearly and unambiguously related to President Trump's campaign." Merchan said doing so would further confuse the jury and that there would be other language in his instructions aimed at making that distinction.

Merchan hates the truth. So, he loves the prosecution witnesses.

Again, FPOTUS#45 is charged with having an NDA. Cohen was not charged with brokering an NDA. The "NDA is illegal schtick is a red hearing. No one has said NDAs are illegal.

Cohen was conviced for campaign fraud for the way the NDA was paid. FPOTUS#45 is charged with falsification of business records to conceal Cohen's crimes. Neither was charged with an illegal NDA.

But Merchan is refusing to make that clear to the jury.

That NDA's are not illegal is not an "argument," it is a fact. The prosecution presented the NDA as if it were evidence of a crime. It is not, and the "judge" should ensure that the jury understands that, if he wants a fair verdict.

Correct, however it shows that FPOTUS#45 was aware of and involved with the unlawfully interfere with the election. I disproves the "Who me? I didn't know" claim.

WW

It shows nothing of the kind.

This case has nothing to do with the Playboy "model."

 

[WorldWatcher]

So, you haven't even seen the emails? Just heard from somewhere that three professional liars had "discussed" the emails?

As I previously pointed out, the emails were read directly into the transcripts and entered into the court record as evidence.

You can review transcripts and evidence here (this is the court site, not a media site) -->> Press Center - Home | NYCOURTS.GOV

Mr. Merchan.

What Jury Won't Hear​

The defense wanted jurors to hear that there are no limits on what a candidate is allowed to contribute to their own campaign, and that Trump would have had enough wealth to pay the $130,000 that went to Daniels out of his own pocket if he wanted. Merchan said he would not give this instruction but told Trump's lawyers they could argue this in their closing statements.

FPOTUS#45 isn't charged with making campaign contributions to his own campaign.

Cohen was charged and convicted of fraudulent campaign contributions and he is not exempt from campaign contribution limits. At the time the maximum he could contribute was $2,700, he provided an in-kind contribution of $130,000.

Trump's lawyers also wanted the judge to inform the jury that hush money payments and non-disclosure agreements are not illegal, but prosecutors argued that would require Merchan to make the defense's argument for them. The judge agreed.

No one has said hush-money payments are illegal. It was the manner the hush-money payment was made that was illegal. Cohen was convicted of the crime.

WW

 

[Seymour Flops]

As I previously pointed out, the emails were read directly into the transcripts and entered into the court record as evidence.

You can review transcripts and evidence here (this is the court site, not a media site) -->> Press Center - Home | NYCOURTS.GOV

Fair point.

Still no credible evidence of Trump being involved.

FPOTUS#45 isn't charged with making campaign contributions to his own campaign.

Cohen was charged and convicted of fraudulent campaign contributions and he is not exempt from campaign contribution limits. At the time the maximum he could contribute was $2,700, he provided an in-kind contribution of $130,000.

Well that's Cohen, then. If anyone made a false entry to cover a crime, that would be - again - Cohen.

This trial is a pretty sweet deal for him. Trump, who he hates even worse than our own TDS folk, gets to stand trial for Cohen's crime and all Cohen has to do is lie under oath, something he does as naturally as you or I order breakfast.

No one has said hush-money payments are illegal. It was the manner the hush-money payment was made that was illegal. Cohen was convicted of the crime.

WW

What specific action did Trump do that was a crime? Here's a starter sentence: "Trump ______________________________________, and that was a crime under the statute: _________________________________________ .

 

[WorldWatcher]

Fair point.

Still no credible evidence of Trump being involved.

Well that's Cohen, then. If anyone made a false entry to cover a crime, that would be - again - Cohen.

This trial is a pretty sweet deal for him. Trump, who he hates even worse than our own TDS folk, gets to stand trial for Cohen's crime and all Cohen has to do is lie under oath, something he does as naturally as you or I order breakfast.

What specific action did Trump do that was a crime? Here's a starter sentence: "Trump ______________________________________, and that was a crime under the statute: _________________________________________ .

Easy...

Trump conspired with Cohen and Pecker to illegally arrange fraudulant in-kind campaign contributions resulting in Cohen being convicted and Pecker admitting to such in a non-proseuction agreement, and that was a federal crimes that FPOTUS#45 conspired for and attempted to conceal were illegal under New York State statues presented below.

WW

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

But, he lies anytime it suits him, so his words are meaningless.

Not claims about Trump.

So, you haven't even seen the emails? Just heard from somewhere that three professional liars had "discussed" the emails?


Mr. Merchan.

What Jury Won't Hear​

The defense wanted jurors to hear that there are no limits on what a candidate is allowed to contribute to their own campaign, and that Trump would have had enough wealth to pay the $130,000 that went to Daniels out of his own pocket if he wanted. Merchan said he would not give this instruction but told Trump's lawyers they could argue this in their closing statements.

Trump's lawyers also wanted the judge to inform the jury that hush money payments and non-disclosure agreements are not illegal, but prosecutors argued that would require Merchan to make the defense's argument for them. The judge agreed.

Additionally, Trump's team wanted Merchan to add to the phrase "for the purpose of influencing any election" and tell jurors that such influence would require "proof that the activity clearly and unambiguously related to President Trump's campaign." Merchan said doing so would further confuse the jury and that there would be other language in his instructions aimed at making that distinction.

Merchan hates the truth. So, he loves the prosecution witnesses.

But Merchan is refusing to make that clear to the jury.

That NDA's are not illegal is not an "argument," it is a fact. The prosecution presented the NDA as if it were evidence of a crime. It is not, and the "judge" should ensure that the jury understands that, if he wants a fair verdict.


It shows nothing of the kind.

This case has nothing to do with the Playboy "model."

Kyzr, please don't go to law school. If you practice, your clients would get the gallows.

Yeah, Trump knew what he was doing and wanted, and Cohen helped him.

 

[Rawley]

Before I get a chance to answer your responses...... know that.....

Probation, is an available option if found guilty of these crimes he was charged with.... It is not solely a prison sentence....that would be for the worst of the worse offenders.

Trump, if found guilty, for these charges will certainly get probation and zero jail time.

Sorry Care felony means more than a year in jail. Your team charged him with 34 felony counts. Your team wants to put the former President in prison literally for the rest of his life.