listening to the lawyer panel on msnbc, it is interesting how each one aligns or differs. one thought the jury was zeroing in on karen mcdougal, and perhaps not having her testify. the others are saying the jury is zeroing into trump and how he fits into the meetings and calls.
this could be an idea of what is going on in the jury room. we don’t know why these bits of testimony is being read back. we each have our own idea of how we heard/read the testimony.
I’m sure it’s just wishful thinking on my part, but I’m listening to CNN, and I’m thinking, “Damn! That judge is really making a case to reach a guilty verdict!”
He’s worried, but not about going to jail, but about how the stigma of being a convicted felon will affect his electability. It becomes harder to claim “I did nothing wrong” when 12 obviously careful jurors have decided otherwise. And failing to get elected makes the other cases against him very threatening.
I hate to say this, but I don’t think it will be even a blip. Obviously to the right it is completely irrelevant. Trump could shoot somebody on 5th Avenue and would not lose any supporters from the right.
I’m not sure that the undecided are going to be so swayed by being guilty in this case. The documents case relating to national security? Yes. But this one, I don’t know. I think beyond being able to use the term “convicted felon Trump” (which I hope the media starts using), it is difficult to translate it into a reason to not vote Trump.
Trump is writing notes on Post-its and passing them to his attorneys as the testimony readback continues. He handed one to Emil Bove and another to Todd Blanche.
Blanche passed him a note back, and Trump hunched over to read it before placing it on the table.
Trump has also turned to Bove to whisper something, and continues to pass notes back and forth with the attorneys.
This is happening as the jury hears the court reporters read the cross-examination of David Pecker about the Trump Tower meeting.
The court reporter on the witness stand has her pages of the transcript marked with blue tabs. There have been a few brief pauses as they make sure they’re all on the same page to read back.
Merchan and his staff attorney have been following along with the readback on a screen together, while three prosecutors sitting in a row at their table each read the transcripts from individual binders.
rc: i wonder if trump thinks his lawyer can do something… why the notes? does he think he can object?
commentary from cnn:
Prosecutors provided three theories of what unlawful means Trump used. Merchan told the jury: “Although you must conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you need not be unanimous as to what those unlawful means were. In determining whether the defendant conspired to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means, you may consider the following: (1) violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act otherwise known as FECA; (2) the falsification of other business records; or (3) violation of tax laws.”
Lee Kovarsky, a University of Texas law professor who has been following the trial, put it this way on social media on Wednesday: “If a law says NO VEHICLES IN THE PARK & list of vehicles includes mopeds and motorcycles, all the instruction means is that you need unanimous conclusion of vehicle but not unanimous on whether vehicle was moped or harley.”
That sounded like a classic quote mine to me, so I went and looked. Page 12 of the jury instructions, under “Burden of proof”:
If the People fail to satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant not guilty and if the People satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant guilty.
per msnbc: the readback has finished. judge merchan asked if that is what they needed. yes, the jury answered. the judge asked if they want speakers or headphones, the jury said both.
back to deliberations, start the deliberation clock.
Following the NY Times live updates about what the jury asked to be read back is giving me a little more hope. It seems (to me) like they are confirming the corroboration of Cohen’s testimony by Pecker about the critical Trump Tower meeting when the scheme was set up. If so, that’s good news.
Yep. Just rejecting Cohen out of hand, as the defense wanted them to do, would be easy. No need to add a few extra hours of sitting and listening. That they felt it was worth the extra time means they’re really examining what he said, and what Pecker said.
The plane would head out over the ocean. The passengers other than SS retire to their cabins and don oxygen masks. At that point the cabin is depressurized. After the plane descends sufficiently, his Blackwater (or whatever it’s called) security detail emerges and disposes of the evidence.