I take it the juror understands that Pecker risks going to jail pronto if what he’s saying isn’t the absolute truth.
Some of the cross, per NYT:
[Trump attorney] Bove is getting Pecker to say that he had never heard the phrase “catch and kill” until he first heard it from a prosecutor.
Emil Bove is now walking David Pecker through how he engaged in very similar behavior to help Arnold Schwarzenegger’s campaign for governor of California, orchestrating catch-and-kill deals to protect him.
David Pecker is testifying that he suppressed stories on behalf of Ari and Rahm Emanuel. Rahm Emanuel, of course, is a well-known Democrat, former mayor of Chicago, White House chief of staff to Barack Obama and currently, the U.S. ambassador to Japan.
Pecker says that his magazines would buy negative stories as leverage against celebrities to coerce them into providing interviews and other access.
You don’t have know a hammer’s colloquial name in order to swing one.
As for the other names, that’s up to the jury to understand relevance. Did those other people commit crimes in their catch and kill efforts? Crimes prosecutable by the state of NY? Sounds like a “what about” smokescreen to muddy the waters.
I hope “Why wasn’t someone else prosecuted?” doesn’t fly with the jury. That’s not what they’re there to consider.
gavel down, trial wrapped for today. on to the morrow.
Trump’s usual talk to the press on his way out of the courtroom.
And the usual word salad: something about Biden’s economy tanking, Biden’s incompetency, the stock market, $7.50 gas in California, Charlottesville, protests, and so on.
Donnie, you need new material.
The fans want the greatest hits.
He’s still talking about Charlottesville? Why on earth? That wasn’t his finest moment. What does he say about it?
Paraphrased, “Chalottesville was a peanut compared to the protests taking place around this country today.” He’s referring to the Gaza protests, of course.
But as a CNN commentator pointed out, there was one death at Charlottesville. There haven’t been any deaths at Gaza protests.
And yes, he did use the word, “peanut.”
Well, now I can’t get Arnold saying “ask Peck-uh” in his best Terminator voice out of my head.
Ah, more “what about”. A Trump classic.
Thanks for the updates! It gives people like me something to chew on.
I think the defense is trying to paint a picture that this was a celebrity thing, not a political one. Or, that it was being done for Pecker’s (or AMI, or the Enquirer’s) benefit.
Meaning, this wasn’t about the campaign at all. Just something between the media and the rich and famous.
(Of course, that creates a problem, doesn’t it? If these deals were done to ensure celebrity access, why in the world would Cohen have done it? And for his boss, who he can speak with quite easily? He’s not trying to line up celebrity interviews)
I want to hear about the Bowling Green Massacre again.
Look! I’m holding a picture of Chewbacca in my hand! It doesn’t make sense!
I just saw this:
So it turns out that the guy who created the phrase “fake news” is in cahoots with … The National Enquirer? Projection on steroids. Shocker.
Regarding the line of discussion about how the escalation to felony charges relies on an assertion that the violations were committed in furtherance of another crime which has not been clearly articulated, and the argument that this creates a legally weak case — there is a rebuttal here:
Obviously, nobody knows if this will be compelling for the jury until they return a verdict, and similarly nobody knows if the courts will buy the framing until the appeals are complete. So it’s just another opinion.
That said, the prosecution’s initial thrust with Pecker feels like it’s been more effective than expected, and the defense’s nibbling away at timelines and terminology seems to be pretty weak sauce.
And we’re back. Defense is back to cross examination.
The gag order hearing will be Thursday morning.
tea leaf readers believe the first witness should finish today. second witness may happen this afternoon.
So does this mean that Trump can basically go on spewing his crap, without consequence, until then?
Wait, what? It was, Tuesday, right? Then it was left for a bit, then it was supposed to be yesterday for result, and now they’re having a hearing again?
I think that one of the best things that Pecker accomplished was demonstrating that the players knew they were engaged in shady shit. At the end of the day, the DA isn’t going to be arguing that donald violated some obscure law, or failed some arbitrary metric. No, he and his collaborators were trying to ratfuck an election, and they kept it hidden from lawyers and normal business practices because they fully understood that it was a crime.
I heard that this was a hearing on new allegations of witness tampering against donald, since the trial began. The judge has yet to issue a ruling from the last contempt hearing.
I’m going to go back on my prediction from yesterday.
I think the second witness is Karen McDougal. Then we will get Hope Hicks.
McDougal confirms the account that Pecker gave. She also subtly shades donald.
Unlike Stormy Daniels, McDougal has always struck me as sort of naive; I believe she will testify that she had romantic feelings for donald, but broke it off with him because she felt bad for his wife, and we know already that Pecker completely lied to her regarding the purpose of her agreement (she thought she was going to be writing fitness columns and doing red carpet interviews).
So I’d expect her testimony to get over the idea that donald just used people, even those who might have cared about him, and he felt like his money and power gave him entitlement (whereas Daniels - the pornstar - is going to seem far more transactional. She was just angling for a spot on the Apprentice, and didn’t ascribe feelings to the sex act).
Also, a bit of procedure. Before we get to the second witness, the DA will have a chance to redirect David Pecker. That is, they can ask questions to address the issues raised on cross examination. But, they are prohibited from going into new areas of testimony.