He shouldn’t be able to threaten to do such without consequences, IMHO.
I’m having minor surgery in the morning, Pacific time, I’d love to come out of that and hear ‘Guilty, guilty, guilty.’
upvoting thank you @rocking_chair
Me too, and you’re right about the whining. I’m glad it’s a message board, like here, because I don’t know if I could stand all those whiny voices. Reading them is bad enough.
I forgot one of the biggest topics of discussion today: “Why does the defense go first on closing summations, and the prosecution go last? Is that appealable? Did Biden make Merchan do it that way?”
We’ve had lots of discussion on that here in this thread, and it basically boils down to “that’s how they do things in New York.” But to them, they’ve never heard of it, and a few of them have been trying to search New York criminal statutes for this. Of course, they’re not finding it, because they’re not legal researchers, so it’s obviously Biden’s doing.
Just recalling what I saw, maybe I do need a good stiff drink.
They’re not finding it because they’re fucking stupid.
Yeesh. 78 new posts since I left the office today. I’ll just catch up on developments tomorrow.
Quick summary for you:
Both defense and prosecution finished their closing arguments and tomorrow morning the jury should be able to start deliberations.
They will start at 10 AM EST with instructions from the judge, which is expected to take an hour.
I think you deserve one!
So, pretty much guaranteed the lunch!
I thought his noisy outbursts were coming from his backside?
Having one now. Actually, this is my second. Hey, I’m at home; I’m allowed.
Looking forward to the judge’s instructions tomorrow. I hope they’re clear and unambiguous. Generally speaking, a lot of the time, appeals can be caused by murky and ambiguous instructions that the jurors misinterpret. I’m sure that Judge Merchan has crafted his instructions so that they’re not misinterpreted, but you never know.
Me too. Costco 12.5% ABV margarita mix, with Trader Joe’s tequila. Woke up at 0200 this morning, and it’s about 20:30 now. I’ll probably have one more.
You owe me 20 bucks for that set up.
Is there a photograph or a sketch of this particular courtroom’s setup? I am trying to picture where everyone is seated in relation to one another. Details like trump leaning all the way forward and craning his neck to see the jury, or turning his back on the prosecutors don’t really line up with the Law and Order configuration that is my mental go-to when picturing a courtroom. Last night Lawrence O’Donnell was saying that there was no seat in the spectators area that allowed you to see all of the jury at once. I’m not able to put all of that information into a mental schematic.
I looked at this yesterday, wondering the same things:
ETA: And that seems to jive with the sketches:
And representing someone who’s fat, bald, and stupid is no way to go through life.
Thanks @Joey_P ! That’s exactly what I needed to see to fit it all into place in my mind.
So very this.
Will the public ever get to see what happened inside the courtroom? I see they have cameras and monitors. I’m assuming they’re recording the feed as well.
And if the public isn’t allowed to see it, would exceptions be made for individuals (or an Freedom Of Information Act request). A documentary style reenactment might be interesting to watch, but, as I think I mentioned upthread, I’d love to see a Ryan Murphy mini series on the case. Along the same lines as The People vs OJ.
Granted, there’s plenty of reporters in the courtroom that could be tapped to help with something like this, but an actual recording would be even better.
You and Mark.
It seriously disturbs their world-view. Compare with, “Biden had to have stolen the election – look how popular Trump is!”
Three thoughts:
I though Blanche was effective in presenting the defense’s tactic of making the trial about Trump v. Cohen - he said / she said. That’s what they had to work with hamstrung by the insistence on denial from Don.
Steinglass was very effective in countering defense arguments and laying out the rest of the evidence - it was long but he used humor and pacing to keep up the interest.
Going back to the dark ages, I remember Trump insisting that he didn’t know Cohen, never met him, … Then, he might have passed him in the hall a few times, Then, might have have done something with him. Cohen was his damn fixer for years; the dirty work.
here we go. judgement day. i got a can of bubbly chilling at home.
nyc is getting ready, security around the courthouse as ramped up a bit. more security is on standby.
per cnn:
Donald Trump is accused by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office of 34 state felony criminal charges of falsifying business records, specifically pertaining to 11 invoices, 12 vouchers, and 11 checks.
Prosecutors allege the payments were not a retainer for legal services, as they were recorded, but were reimbursements for paying off adult film star Stormy Daniels in exchange for her silence and the life rights to her story in the lead-up to the 2016 presidential election. While on the stand, Trump’s former attorney and fixer Michael Cohen implicated Trump in the hush money scheme, saying he doled out $130,000 with Trump’s approval and was promised reimbursement.
Paying hush money is not a crime. What prosecutors alleged is that Trump intentionally falsified documents to conceal his repayment to Cohen under the guise of a retainer for legal services to hide damaging information from voters during the 2016 presidential election.
The checks were listed as legal services on the ledgers but prosecutors allege these were in part reimbursement payments to Cohen, grossed up to account for tax and inclusive of an additional bonus and a separate repayment. Through testimony, it was elicited that former Trump Org. CFO Allen Weisselberg and former Trump Org. controller Jeff McConney deduced Cohen would be paid $35,000 a month as part of the reimbursement.
According to the statute, for Trump to be guilty of a felony charge of falsifying business records, jurors must find Trump not only “cause(d) a false entry in the business records of an enterprise” while acting “with intent to defraud,” but also that the “intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.”
Prosecutors allege the underlying crime was trying to illegally influence the 2016 presidential election.
a nice summation from npr with some highlights from yesterday.
Trump’s New York trial: Highlights from closing arguments : NPR