Yeah the surprising thing is not that some of his underlings roll on him, he’s a crappy boss who has never shown a shred of loyalty to one of his underlings in his life. Its genuinely shocking that some of his underlings (Like Weisselberg) choose not to. Like you could write physcology doctorate on the subject, it’s genuinely baffling.
This has been all been kind of boring accounting stuff.
Key points so far are that Trump approved everything over $10k and Cohen was disbursed money for $130k to pay to Stormy’s lawyer from Trump’s personal account
He’s shown at least some loyalty in the case of Weisselberg. Some of the improper accounting/benefits he got involved personal checks paying for cars, housing, and some expensive private school tuition for family members. Was that (plus the potential for it to continue in the future) sufficient? I suppose it was for him.
Were lower tier underlings also getting benefits to that extent? Probably not, hence the lack of loyalty.
Cohen’s problem appears to be that he got greedy and thought he merited even more than he got. But that’s also on Trump for picking such an underling. If you want somebody to be greedy and unscrupulous on your behalf, you shouldn’t be surprised if he decides to turn that avarice back around on you.
And that seems to be where the prosecution is going with this - that Cohen is not a good person. And certainly not scrupulous or ethical. But his story does check out and is consistent with what other people are saying.
Every witness who personally has interacted with Cohen has just been busting on him, many times causing the courtroom to break into laughter. No one has any respect for that idiot.
The point I hope the prosecution makes is to fully concede the Trump team’s accusations that Cohen is a belligerent, dishonest, amoral asshole — and then ask why Trump would have had him as his personal legal majordomo for so many years.
He may not be the first wealthy guy facing long odds on a criminal charge, but he IS the first who can avoid all consequences if he can delay the proceedings long enough to forestall a conviction and win an election.
That’s the whole case.
I agree. Judges know that if they allow shenanigans to derail the trial, more shenanigans will follow. That’s what contempt is for, and comments like: “The jury will disregard the statements just made by defence counsel.” And jurors aren’t idiots: if they keep seeing defence counsel pulling tricks to try to stop the trial, rather than putting on a real defence, they’ll take that into account in the jury room, would be my guess.
Remember that case a few months ago where the accused lunged at the judge when she started to sentence him? She cited him for contempt, to be handled by another judge, but she completed the sentencing process the next week herself, to underline that an accused can’t derail the process, even by attacking the judge.
“I want to make it clear I am not changing or modifying the sentence I was in the process of imposing last week before I was interrupted by the defendant’s actions,” Clark County District Court Judge Mary Kay Holthus said as Deobra Delone Redden stood in shackles before her.
C’mon Trump…show judge Merchan who is boss! (for the first time ever I hope Trump can’t keep his mouth shut)
New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan started the fourth week of Trump’s trial with a speech that’s more than a year in the making, explaining why he hasn’t yet thrown the politician into the slammer—making what he called his final warning to the former president.
“I’ll find you in criminal contempt for the tenth time,” Merchan said in a stark tone. “It appears that the $1,000 fines are not serving as a deterrent. Therefore, going forward, this court will have to consider a jail sanction. Mr. Trump, it’s important to understand the last thing I was to do is put you in jail. You are the former president of the United States, and possibly the next one as well.”
Spending a few months at liberty enjoying you rich person lifestyle and not in prison would be more than enough motivation to pull the “mistrial” card if it was option. I know I would in those circumstances.
Also this is a state case so he can’t make it go away by becoming POTUS.
That’s true about the state conviction. It may well prove that the GA and NY criminal cases prove to be more consequential than the federal cases if SCOTUS ends up throwing Trump a block like I fear they may.
Serious procedural question: Can the prosecution mention this in their closing? Something to the effect of, “you saw how they tried a bunch of nonsense and the judge shut them down, so obviously they’ve got nothing”?
I’m not asking whether it’s strategically wise to do this, to call the jury’s attention back to those arguments and bring them back to mind.
I’m asking whether it’s procedurally permissible to make general reference to the frequency at which the defense’s shitty tactics were disallowed (without detailing them), or if the simple fact that the judge disallowed them means they’re totally out of bounds for everyone even as an unspecified callback (“if they had a real defense they would have offered it, and you saw for yourself they didn’t”).
Eric Trump and Alina Habba are in the gallery today
Can you just turn up to a court case? Or does the defense have a certain number of places they can reserve for family/hangers-on?
I don’t know. That’s getting into the weeds of US/NY state trial procedure. IANAUSL.
I know a few people who have gone to jail. That moment when the jail door closes and you realize this is it. This is my life for the next X period of time can be very sobering. Maybe even for Donald Trump. Although there’s nothing he can do to avoid the charges against him right now (other than win the election). It might just put a bit of fear into him. And that’s a good thing.
My dad spent years in jail early in life. Not a long time at any one time. But he did eventually get a fairly lengthy sentence (2 years I think), and his brother got even longer (4 years). It was his longest sentence to that time. And he told me that he realized if he didn’t fly straight, then he was going to spend his life behind bars. And to his credit, he did.
But I really really want Trump to be feeling some fear. Some sleepless nights. I want him worrying that he might spend the rest of his miserable life behind bars (and quite possible broke).
I’m pretty sure that the defense gets some designated seats and the rest have to line up early.
In legal theory, this is true, of course.
But we are talking about Trump here.
He just last week told the Supreme court that a president is a king with unlimited power-and the court didn’t exactly tell him he is wrong.
Ohpleaseopleaseohplease.
I’ve gone back and forth about worrying if this would invigorate his voters. Right now, I just want to see him get what he so richly deserves, come what way. (Added bonus: Showing the US populace, and the world, that justice is blind – or at least it aspires to be.)
I’m pretty sure Trump is trying to get himself thrown in jail because it would be the ultimate act of “political interference” by the judge.
I also hold out hope that Trump continues to think his quest for self-inflicted imprisonment is a good idea right up until this moment here.