Top | Newest First | Oldest First
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
View 6 more replies »
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@KunsanVeteran She spent less than an hour on the stand Friday and was cross-examined at that time. Another witness was called after she completed her testimony. Of course, she could be called back to the stand to provide additional information later.
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
@windinhishair But it’s going so fast—fast enough to incarcerate Quad Indicted by Barron’s graduation!
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
@KunsanVeteran Keith Davidson gave a solid testimony and confirmed that Cohen was working for Trump. And text message exchanges that back it up (the McDougal case, that is). Davidson also represented Daniels later on and was involved with both NDIs…
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
Somehow this just doesnt seem like enough..But there again, what does it take to get Americans to admit that have no taste or judgement and they really Fubared it up letting Trump stay out of jail this long..But it isnt just Trump is it? Look at the Republican movement in general...😷
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
@whowasthatmaskedman Here’s some weird trivia for you: Keith Davidson who testified in Quad Indicted’s trial today is a lawyer who also was involved in an NDA for the Hulk Hogan sex tape.
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@KunsanVeteran So we have a role model for "bottom feeder". Maybe its my age. Maybe is my "roomatizz".. But I am running out of patience with a society that allows people like Davidson and his clients to go out on public without being tarred and feathered. Those examples are terrible role models for kids or young people looking for a way forward.😷
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
@whowasthatmaskedman true dat!
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
ElwoodBlues · M
Powerful stuff!
Here's a little legal nuts and bolts that helped me understand the structure of Bragg's case.
[quote]If you’re looking for the clearest statement of Bragg’s legal theory, you can find it in a November 2023 court filing opposing Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, along with Merchan’s ruling on that motion. Notably, in that ruling, Merchan clarified that § 175.10 “does not require that the ‘other crime’ actually be committed”—“all that is required is that defendant … acted with a conscious aim and objective to commit another crime.”
In his filing, Bragg sets out four potential object offenses: violations of federal campaign finance law under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA); violations of New York Election Law § 17-152; violations of federal, local, and state tax law; and additional falsifications of business records outside the Trump Organization. Merchan allowed Bragg to move forward with the first three theories but tossed out the last one.
. . .
The potential tax fraud arises from the particular method by which the Trump Organization reimbursed Cohen for his payments to Daniels. Bragg alleges that “defendant reimbursed Cohen twice the amount he was owed for the payoff so Cohen could characterize the payments as income on his tax returns and still be left whole after paying approximately 50% in income taxes.” Here, Bragg points to federal, state, and local prohibitions on providing knowingly incorrect tax information. [/quote]
[b]https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/charting-the-legal-theory-behind-people-v.-trump[/b]
Here's a little legal nuts and bolts that helped me understand the structure of Bragg's case.
[quote]If you’re looking for the clearest statement of Bragg’s legal theory, you can find it in a November 2023 court filing opposing Trump’s motion to dismiss the case, along with Merchan’s ruling on that motion. Notably, in that ruling, Merchan clarified that § 175.10 “does not require that the ‘other crime’ actually be committed”—“all that is required is that defendant … acted with a conscious aim and objective to commit another crime.”
In his filing, Bragg sets out four potential object offenses: violations of federal campaign finance law under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA); violations of New York Election Law § 17-152; violations of federal, local, and state tax law; and additional falsifications of business records outside the Trump Organization. Merchan allowed Bragg to move forward with the first three theories but tossed out the last one.
. . .
The potential tax fraud arises from the particular method by which the Trump Organization reimbursed Cohen for his payments to Daniels. Bragg alleges that “defendant reimbursed Cohen twice the amount he was owed for the payoff so Cohen could characterize the payments as income on his tax returns and still be left whole after paying approximately 50% in income taxes.” Here, Bragg points to federal, state, and local prohibitions on providing knowingly incorrect tax information. [/quote]
[b]https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/charting-the-legal-theory-behind-people-v.-trump[/b]
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@ElwoodBlues The facts strongly support a conviction. Trump's approach to trial is not to win acquittal, which is almost impossible given the facts. He is counting on a hung jury. It only takes one juror to hold out on conviction for Trump to hang the jury.
ElwoodBlues · M
@windinhishair Yes they do. Once you understand the point about how § 175.10 “does not require that the ‘other crime’ actually be committed,” the whole thing becomes a documents case.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@ElwoodBlues Yes. And it is pretty clear that Trump falsified business records, and it is well documented.
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
The prosecution is absolutely brilliant!
They are literally performing a forensic autopsy of the “catch-and-kill” scheme. Dotting every “i” and crossing every “t”.
Nothing like collaborating every aspect of Michael Cohen’s testimony [b]before he ever enters the courtroom![/b]
They are literally performing a forensic autopsy of the “catch-and-kill” scheme. Dotting every “i” and crossing every “t”.
Nothing like collaborating every aspect of Michael Cohen’s testimony [b]before he ever enters the courtroom![/b]
DallasCowboysFan · 61-69, M
whowasthatmaskedman · 70-79, M
@JSul3 I think America inventd the term. "Sports entertainment" to redefine the competition out of sport and put in the parody hero values of the comics. And that is what much of America has become. A parody of a Batman comic.Where a Kardashian can be admired, rather than despised. I wont even touch Trump and his cohort there. Too easier target...😷
DallasCowboysFan · 61-69, M
@KunsanVeteran @JSul3 It's successful marketing. I forget how many millions of dollars they receive just in concession sales with every home game.
It's not just football. ATT stadium is occupied almost every weekend with a different event. It might e a concert, wrestling, motorcycle races, monster pickups... there is something going on almost every week.
Although I think they are still number one, someone offered to buy the Dolphins this week for $10BN and the owners turned it down.
It's not just football. ATT stadium is occupied almost every weekend with a different event. It might e a concert, wrestling, motorcycle races, monster pickups... there is something going on almost every week.
Although I think they are still number one, someone offered to buy the Dolphins this week for $10BN and the owners turned it down.
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
BREAKING NEWS:
Judge Merchan has just ruled that Donald Trump is in contempt for violating his gag order 9 times and ordered him to pay $9,000 for criticizing expected trial witnesses in social media posts and his campaign page. The judge also threatened incarceration if Trump willfully violates the gag order again.
Judge Merchan has just ruled that Donald Trump is in contempt for violating his gag order 9 times and ordered him to pay $9,000 for criticizing expected trial witnesses in social media posts and his campaign page. The judge also threatened incarceration if Trump willfully violates the gag order again.
KunsanVeteran · 61-69, M
JSul3 · 70-79
1 juror can/will cause a hung jury, simply because they see nothing wrong with what Trump did. Facts won't matter.
windinhishair · 61-69, M
@JSul3 Lawyers are often removed during jury selection because they know the law well, and one side or the other often wants jurors to base their decisions on emotional issues rather than the facts. It could work out well for either side to have knowledgeable jurors for this particular case.
Montanaman · M
God. I'm So over itall!🙄
NoThanksLeon · M
You poor thing. 😥
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
NoThanksLeon · M
[b][big]6 - 3[/big][/b] 🤣
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment