Now you have me thinking about a Forrest Gump reboot with Ivanka as the lead.
I’m not watching that.
Sorry, I’m having trouble getting my head around the notion of the America-hating fuckstick saying something isn’t his.
ETA: except responsibility, of course.
I probably would. She has that bland, blonde attractiveness, but lack of underlying character, that would probably get me to watch her movie around 16 hours into an 18 hour cross continental flight, once I had watched pretty much everything else.
Kinda like a porn actress, or at least the characters played by porn actresses. Darn good for what they’re good for, and not good for much else.
Moderating:
Ivanka’s value as a porn actress isn’t germane to this discussion, and it has taken an unfortunate objectifying turn. Let’s drop this conversation now. Thanks.
Not quite. There is no “guilt” because this is not a criminal trial. They were found liable of fraud, but there are 6 other civil claims that they are being sued for, and this trial is to determine whether they are liable for them as well, as well as penalties for all of the liability.
Among his findings, the judge’s ruling found that Trump falsely claimed his penthouse apartment in New York’s Trump Tower was three times larger than its actual size, and that Trump overvalued his Mar-a-Lago Club in Florida by at least 2,300% in part by ignoring a deed restriction on the property. Trump’s lawyers have appealed Engoron’s ruling, which they argue was wrongly decided.
The judge left six of James’ claims, including whether the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to commit fraud, to be decided at trial – along with any fine that Trump might be required to pay if the court so determined
It has been claimed and debunked multiple times in this thread that the trial is solely about damages.
I think this is in part because none of the explanations in the press have been very clear about exactly what is being decided now (aside from the size of financial penalties), how it differs from what has already been decided and what is important. Can anyone link to a good explanation? Perhaps there’s even one upthread that I missed.
Try post #1165 in this thread
today the defence calls jr back to the stand. he will be able to ramble on this time.
The more they ramble, the more shit gets on record.
IOW
Prosecutor: Were you lying here on page 124 of your transcript, or over there on page 247? They can’t both be true.
Junior’s a smart guy. My predicted response:
No, but they can both be lies. BOOM! In your FACE!!
/s
the morning had a slide show of the trump org.'s history and buildings, with jr. narrating. the judge over ruled the objection from the da.
If by some miracle there was a mistrial, I wonder if they could ask for a jury trial in the do-over. That would be a great delaying tactic, if allowed.
Agreed.
While this case can’t be stalled all the way to the election, stalling here might help with stalling some other cases.
And the other objective is to have the talking point of “We had 100+ witnesses testify for us, and that corrupt judge wouldn’t let them speak / ignored their testimony”
I don’t think it even matters what they say. If some of them were to criticize trump, then the average trump supporter would simply conclude that that person is corrupt or was coerced. That’s if they were to hear about it at all.
Oh, man, I misread that at first glance, and it put an image in my head. What if a great mistral rose up and blew all his arguments into the sky, whither it would carry them into the whirling blades of a copse of wind turbines, to be shredded into confetti, such as would comport in kind with his thoughts.
IANAL, but mistrials are extremely rare in bench trials. A mistrial occurs in a jury trial when the jury can’t reach an unanimous verdict, or when something happens - like witness tampering, inadmissible evidence being presented to the jury or an outburst containing hearsay by a witness that’s so damning that the jury is irreparably tainted.
For a bench trial to mistrial, the misdeed would have to be so egregious that the finder of fact - the judge- would have to rule that it was beyond his own ability to ignore it. The key point - and the reason mistrials are so rare in bench trials - is that the decision to declare a mistrial belongs to the judge alone.
If Trump wants to ask for a mistrial on the grounds that Judge Engoron is prejudiced because he’s a poopyhead that is friends with some Democrats….good luck in getting Judge Engoron to grant that motion. If he wants a third party to decide if Judge Engoron was biased, that’s called an appeal.
Habba thinks the law clerk’s RBF might be grounds for a mistrial.
RBF ?
Yes discourse that is a complete sentence.
Resting B Face, I guess?