Haha thanks. I really appreciate how it looks like my avatar is looking down at my posts like, what the heck did I just say?
Back on topic, yes, but Cohen is a perjurer, who has directly insulted Trump repeatedly. He can’t let that go, and he can just hand wave away anything he says as coming from a liar. His followers have already turned on Cohen. Also, Pecker has “the safe”, which I believe is currently whereabouts unknown:
Thus my comments about the lawyers being able to control him for how long.
Pecker is/was useful for Trump, but Cohen was a consigliere - guess which one he hates more.
And of course, Cohen is a lot more vulnerable as a convicted crook. So, if I was Trump’s lawyer (not even for a million dollars in advance of course) I’d pick my battles. And even then he’s attacked Cohen’s credibility more than his prior direct attacks.
I just want to say, speaking as a total outsider looking in, and lacking any knowledge of legal proceedings, that the distinct vibe I get from the testimony so far is that Trump is rotten to the core, and virtually everything he does is shady and self-serving and done with zero regard for the law. I hope the jury is getting the same impression.
Also that Steinglass really knows what he’s doing and is just getting warmed up. Trump’s lawyers may or may not be any good (judging by their performance so far they’re not, and don’t even get me started on Alina Habba) but even the best lawyers are hamstrung if they have nothing to work with, or are being micromanaged by an idiot.
defence is trying to get pecker to say that mcdougal was a celebrity. pecker is saying no. “i wouldn’t say there was a value to her brand to a media company.”
The backing crime is tied to his attempt to get elected. She was a central part of that scheme, so she would have inside knowledge about strategies and actions related to that.
I’m guessing she’s going to authenticate (I.e. verify as accurate so that they can be admitted as evidence) some internal communications from the Trump team.
I think judges and juries see things your way when he finally makes it into court. His delay tactics might work, see current Supreme Court case about presidential immunity, but once the case actually starts he loses and he loses big. Pretty much ever single time. With Trump it’s like turnover over a rock and watching all the vermin trying to crawl away.
She worked for him for 30 years! Can you imagine how many slights, insults, or outrageous acts he did over that time? Yet she likely kept quiet, just figuring that maybe, just maybe, one day somebody might come and ask what she’s seen.
(At least, that’s how I like to imagine it. Maybe she’s a crook like all the rest of them and just doesn’t want to get sent to Rikers. But I like to think that there might have been an honest broker all the while, watching, who was simply ignored because she wasn’t flashy enough)