So to get back on the topic of this thread, it appears the New York Appellate Division has upheld Judge Merchan’s decision not to recuse himself from the hush money case. From ABC News:
New York’s Appellate Division has upheld Judge Juan Merchan’s decision not to recuse himself from former President Trump’s hush money case.
Trump’s defense team had sought Merchan’s recusal based on his daughter’s work for a consulting firm with Democratic clients.
A panel of appellate judges ruled that Trump failed to prove the judge overstepped his authority by denying a defense motion for recusal.
“Petitioner has failed to establish that the court acted in excess of its jurisdiction by denying his motion,” today’s order said. “Petitioner also has not established that he has a clear right to recusal.”
The appellate court also upheld Merchan’s decision denying Trump’s argument that some of his social media posts were covered by presidential immunity.
These references of ‘grossing up’ are in reference to Cohen secretly over-charging for Red Finch, right? Not the grossing up that Weisselberg did for Cohen to get him to $360k for the Stormy payoff?
I’m confused because I thought Cohen just plain over-charged because he was mad about his bonus. While the grossing up was an agreement with Trump Org to cover his taxes.
So it’s a little bit of both. Cohen overcharged on the Red Finch expenses because he was mad about his bonus. That inflated amount was then grossed up to cover the taxes - resulting in an even higher overcharge.
And I may be misunderstanding the exchange, but it seemed like there was an extra layer of grift. I got the impression that Red Finch quoted them 50k, to which everyone agreed. Once Cohen had the 50k, he decided to keep 30k for himself, offering Red Finch 20k with a “take it and sue me for the rest of you want” attitude. A classic move that he would have learned from his boss.
Still wrong, but not quite the same as simply lying on an expense report.
Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked Michael Cohen what Red Finch did for Trump.
Cohen said Trump was polling low in the CNBC poll.
"And it upset him,” Cohen says.“And he had me come to his office and provide me a sheet of paper that showed it.”
"I reached out to Red Finch who assured me he was able to go through the acquisitions of IP addresses to create an algorithm that would ensure Mr. Trump would rise and rise significantly into this poll,” Cohen added.
Cohen is now looking directly at the jury as he’s answering Hoffinger’s question to explain the Red Finch situation. Cohen said Trump wanted to be number one in the poll but after Red Finch’s work, he ended up at nine.
The former Trump fixer said “despite cheating” Trump felt he didn’t get his money’s worth for the work.
Cohen added that Trump did not pay Red Finch because CNBC ended up not moving forward with this poll, “and so he didn’t feel he had gotten the benefit” for the services they had provided.
trump did his usual “i’m not going to pay” thing.
rc: when cohen and weisselberg got together to go over cohen’s reimbursement, cohen possibly saw an opening an added in the red finch payment.
cohen felt pressured to repay red finch so he withdrew 20k from his own account, put it in a paper bag, and gave it to the company’s ceo,
Cohen was called to the stand a second time? Is this is a different kind of testimony? I thought the jurors were dismissed until Tuesday the 28th?
EDIT: Thanks for that post. Helps buttress the “Why trust The PollsTM uncritically?” stance.
EDIT 2: I jumped the gun a bit – I read Cohen’s testimony as referring to political polling. That was incorrect. It was “Most famous businessman of the 20th century” or some such fluff.
What bothered me about that exchange is the defense spun it as “You stole from Trump, didn’t you?”, when in fact, he was stealing form the third party vendor that Trump himself had stiffed in the first place. That money didn’t belong to Trump any more, it belonged to the people who had done the work for him.
the above testimony was in the direct of cohen. during cross exam, the defence played up the “you stole from trump angle”. that is when the 20k in a brown bag testimony happened.
nothing new on the nyc trial since tuesday and the jury instruction discussion. the judge hoped to have the instructions published on thursday, i reckon he is still working on them.
Thank you for posting that again. So I guess it’s unclear if Trump knew the invoice was supposed to be 50k when I decided not to pay, or if Cohen made that number up when he was eventually reimbursed by Weisselburg.
Eta: And yes, it seems much more accurate to say that Cohen stole from Red Finch than from Trump.
Nitpick, I don’t think it was a “reverse mortgage,” I think it was a HELOC. And the profit was nice, but the main purpose was to do Trump’s bidding and get to continue that sweet gig.
I disagree on this. If Cohen thought (or knew) he could get away with only paying $20k to Red Finch he should have given back the difference (or not taken it in the first place). It’s clear from the doodles that Weisselberg thought they were paying $50k to Red Finch.
I have to say that I’m astounded that the takeaway from the entire Redfinch situation seems to be:
“OMG, Michael Cohen stole from the Trump Organization!”
Instead of
“The Trump Org paid to hack a CNBC poll because Trump didn’t like it and the employee entrusted with this task stole most of the money….what a clusterfuck, the Trump Org really is a criminal organization packed full of criminals doing criminal things!”
But you can add another layer. This is another example of the fact that Trump throws around nickels like they are manhole covers. He agreed to pay $50,000, then didn’t want to pay the company when he felt like he “didn’t get his money’s worth.” They had to settle for less than half.
Showing, once again, that if Trump signed checks to reimburse Cohen, he knew exactly what they were for, and he only made good because he felt he had to.
I disagree. If anyone should have gotten the 30k, it should have been Red Finch. Obviously it would have been more ethical to give it back to Trump rather than keep it, but that money seems to have rightfully belonged to Red Finch per their original agreement.
I don’t think this nitpicking about the 30k is anyone saying this is the takeaway. It’s just something to talk about while nothing else is happening.
Eta: And of course the defense, who brought this up in the first place, isn’t going to talk about any of the other things you mentioned. That the Trump Org is a corrupt clusterfuck is a given for the prosecution and anyone else paying attention.
Red Finch satisfied their contractual obligations. Trump decided, as is his practice, not to pay because of reasons (at least initially). But Red Finch was due $50K, unless I misunderstand.
Now, all the players on the Trump side of the transaction were (and are) immoral scumbags. That’s a given. But $50K was owed. RF settled for a better-than-nothing $20K, based on the reasonable assumption that that was all they were getting.
So, Cohen stole from Red Finch. Returning the “overage” to Trump would have been an “honor among thieves” move, but it certainly wasn’t making Trump whole. That dough was rightfully Red Finch’s.