Lmao there go the mental gymnastics again.
LOL, as if you get to determine what it is a candidate campaigns about.
unless you are the candidate, you don’t
Everyone involved in politics has an implicit risk from some nut every time their opponent says something bad about them. Can a judge order that no one is allowed to say anything bad about Trump because of the possibility of a threat to him? His daughter put herself in the political arena.
Based on what we know, I agree with you. And he says that he is allowed to discuss this because Cohen signed a document waiving all claims to attorney client privilege. Why wouldn’t they call him? He contradicts every relevant statement Cohen has made over who was making decisions. And he has already made these claims under oath, so that ads no risk.
1 Like
Because she is not part of the trial. Wasn’t the complaint that the existence of a daughter with political interests a reason Judge Merchan should recuse himself? Why do you want to have it both ways?
They have never listed him as a witness. He might meet the standard for credibility in right wing circles, but that’s too low a bar to decide to have someone in a courtroom.
Cohen is the prosecutions main witness. Enough said about credibility.
1 Like
Trump’s attorney Blanche has been cross examining Cohen for more than a day now. That’s how these things should go. Cohen is under oath and Blanche is attacking him.
Looking at what Blanche has achieved so far, can you point to any questions in which he undermined the prosecution case? Obviously Cohen is a perjurer and a bit of a jerk but that’s not the matter before this jury.
If the defense thinks Costello would hold up on the stand they would put him up there; just as the prosecution did with Cohen, knowing full well that Cohen is neither a paragon of innocence or virtue.
1 Like
Nice to see you love you some election interference. Got to do whatever you can to cover for your old pervert in the white house. Cult members will do whatever they are told to do by the one they worship. With every post you are proving that you belong to the democrat cult where no one can say anything against the party they worship.
Defend a grown man showering with his daughter. Yep, that was ok according to you.
Election interference. Yep that ok with you.
Proof that you will defend whatever Biden does no matter how illegal or perverted.
What are you babbling on about now. Trump is on the camapign trail and talking freely about his vision of America.
Ashley Bidens diary has zero to do with the Trump trial.
There is a whole other thread on that.
Yes. Cohen’s credibility is very much a main issue in this case.
1 Like
Of course it is. But my question was where has Blanche’s cross examination brought out a flaw or contradiction in Cohen’s evidence regarding the charges in the case – document falsification?
Correct she is not do shouldn’t be covered under the gag order.
The left is trying to have it both ways. She either is or is not. If she isn’t (I don’t believe she is) then the gag order should not be applied. It also means he is not being impartial and protecting a Dem operative wether his daughter or not.
1 Like
Cohen never testified as to whom decided to label the payments as legal expenses. He was more just proving what everyone knows, a payment for hush money was made. The impeachment would be that Cohen has been saying he was doing what he was ordered to do, but was bragging to his attorney that he was the big decision maker…”Mr, Fixit”.
Should any of this be relevant? Probably not since paying hush money is not even a crime.
“In his opening statement in the case, Colangelo said that Trump, Cohen and David Pecker, the former National Enquirer publisher who was involved in the Daniels’ discussions, conspired in a bid to influence the 2016 election and that Trump “covered up that criminal conspiracy by lying in his New York business records over and over and over again.”
Conspiring to influence the election? That’s what political parties do.
1 Like
Again I see lots of legal strategies suggested which (to the best of my knowledge) are not being followed by Trumps legal team which indicates either they are been outclassed by google lawyers or the google lawyers dont know as much as they think.
2 Likes
That’s not what the trial is about, of course. Simply paying off porn stars to hide their affairs with married men apparently is completely legal.
It’s about falsifying records, to hide what one is doing.
Apparently, the NY AG office gets a hundred or so convictions on that rap annually, and none of the other cases have anything to do with electoral politics.
You are ignoring the issue in the gag order: the argument that because Judge Merchan’s daughter is a Demcoratic operative the judge is conflicted.
It is using her position to impugn the trial, not to impugn her per se. That’s not a matter of having it both ways.
Cohen not winning people over?
The reviews have been mixed. CNN has been the most negative on Cohen. I’ve been reading a summary thread that is pointing that out along with others who feel Blanche is less effective.
Of course, none of us know how the twelve jurors are reacting.
CNN is now reporting that Trump’s legal team is considering putting Costello on the stand. One of the first questions anyone has to ask is why this witness has not come forward previously?
1 Like
