Indictment Monday?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard that Trump isn't even going to bother to raise a defense in his trial (for the jury, akin to admitting that Bragg proved the case beyond unreasonable doubt). Cohen's testimony was devastating for Trump. Do we have estimates on when the jury will convict and will it be stuck in appeals until election day?

The defense isn’t calling any witnesses?? Why didn’t they just enter into a plea deal then?

They really don't have to call any witnesses. The prosecution hasn't proven their case.
They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.
Another possible witness - Cohen's legal advisor Robert Costello who knows that Cohen is lying and has the receipts to prove it.

BOMBSHELL: Michael Cohen’s attorney Robert Costello just testified to Congress that Michael Cohen told him that he didn’t even believe Stormy Daniels story, and only paid her off to save Trump and his family embarrassment.

This completely blows up the entire case in Manhattan! Costello said that Cohen was becoming increasingly agitated at not being invited to work in Washington.

What will Cohen and the Manhattan DA do now? It’s clear now that Cohen and Daniels extorted the President of the United States with help from the US government!

Costello owes his soul to trump. If he had proof of this trump would have been shouting it the rooftops.

[Anonymous]

Why do I think “Travis_4_Trump” probably doesn’t have his finger on the pulse of legal activity?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard that Trump isn't even going to bother to raise a defense in his trial (for the jury, akin to admitting that Bragg proved the case beyond unreasonable doubt). Cohen's testimony was devastating for Trump. Do we have estimates on when the jury will convict and will it be stuck in appeals until election day?

The defense isn’t calling any witnesses?? Why didn’t they just enter into a plea deal then?

They really don't have to call any witnesses. The prosecution hasn't proven their case.
They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.
Another possible witness - Cohen's legal advisor Robert Costello who knows that Cohen is lying and has the receipts to prove it.

BOMBSHELL: Michael Cohen’s attorney Robert Costello just testified to Congress that Michael Cohen told him that he didn’t even believe Stormy Daniels story, and only paid her off to save Trump and his family embarrassment.

This completely blows up the entire case in Manhattan! Costello said that Cohen was becoming increasingly agitated at not being invited to work in Washington.

What will Cohen and the Manhattan DA do now? It’s clear now that Cohen and Daniels extorted the President of the United States with help from the US government!

Fine. Put him under oath in a court of law and let him introduce whatever evidence he has. I find it hard to beleive that Blanche wouldn't have done this already, unless he knew it was a bunch of bullshit.

Oh wait.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard that Trump isn't even going to bother to raise a defense in his trial (for the jury, akin to admitting that Bragg proved the case beyond unreasonable doubt). Cohen's testimony was devastating for Trump. Do we have estimates on when the jury will convict and will it be stuck in appeals until election day?

The defense isn’t calling any witnesses?? Why didn’t they just enter into a plea deal then?

They really don't have to call any witnesses. The prosecution hasn't proven their case.
They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.
Another possible witness - Cohen's legal advisor Robert Costello who knows that Cohen is lying and has the receipts to prove it.

BOMBSHELL: Michael Cohen’s attorney Robert Costello just testified to Congress that Michael Cohen told him that he didn’t even believe Stormy Daniels story, and only paid her off to save Trump and his family embarrassment.

This completely blows up the entire case in Manhattan! Costello said that Cohen was becoming increasingly agitated at not being invited to work in Washington.

What will Cohen and the Manhattan DA do now? It’s clear now that Cohen and Daniels extorted the President of the United States with help from the US government!

Fine. Put him under oath in a court of law and let him introduce whatever evidence he has. I find it hard to beleive that Blanche wouldn't have done this already, unless he knew it was a bunch of bullshit.

Oh wait.

Well, Blanche hasn’t begun yet, so yes, wait until the defense puts on their case. He already testified under oath to the GJ and to Congress.

[Anonymous]

They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.

Yes, unsurprising because any FEC expert unfamiliar with the facts of this case is going to advise the jury on the law. Judges advise juries on the law, not expert witnesses. In this trial and in every trial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.

Yes, unsurprising because any FEC expert unfamiliar with the facts of this case is going to advise the jury on the law. Judges advise juries on the law, not expert witnesses. In this trial and in every trial.

Merchan seems to have only a passing acquaintance with the law.
The FEC chairman has expertise as it pertains to campaign contributions. You would think most judges would want the jury to hear that expertise.
Unless of course, it exonerates the person Merchan wants to be found guilty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do I think “Travis_4_Trump” probably doesn’t have his finger on the pulse of legal activity?

Did you listen to the testimony of Costello or are you simply interested in shooting the messenger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I heard that Trump isn't even going to bother to raise a defense in his trial (for the jury, akin to admitting that Bragg proved the case beyond unreasonable doubt). Cohen's testimony was devastating for Trump. Do we have estimates on when the jury will convict and will it be stuck in appeals until election day?

The defense isn’t calling any witnesses?? Why didn’t they just enter into a plea deal then?

They really don't have to call any witnesses. The prosecution hasn't proven their case.
They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.
Another possible witness - Cohen's legal advisor Robert Costello who knows that Cohen is lying and has the receipts to prove it.

BOMBSHELL: Michael Cohen’s attorney Robert Costello just testified to Congress that Michael Cohen told him that he didn’t even believe Stormy Daniels story, and only paid her off to save Trump and his family embarrassment.

This completely blows up the entire case in Manhattan! Costello said that Cohen was becoming increasingly agitated at not being invited to work in Washington.

What will Cohen and the Manhattan DA do now? It’s clear now that Cohen and Daniels extorted the President of the United States with help from the US government!

Fine. Put him under oath in a court of law and let him introduce whatever evidence he has. I find it hard to beleive that Blanche wouldn't have done this already, unless he knew it was a bunch of bullshit.

Oh wait.

Well, Blanche hasn’t begun yet, so yes, wait until the defense puts on their case. He already testified under oath to the GJ and to Congress.

Until yesterday, the defense hadn't planned on calling any witnesses. The only one they're calling now is the head of the FEC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.

Yes, unsurprising because any FEC expert unfamiliar with the facts of this case is going to advise the jury on the law. Judges advise juries on the law, not expert witnesses. In this trial and in every trial.

Merchan seems to have only a passing acquaintance with the law.
The FEC chairman has expertise as it pertains to campaign contributions. You would think most judges would want the jury to hear that expertise.
Unless of course, it exonerates the person Merchan wants to be found guilty.

God, you sound like some soccer mom who's convinced the referee is out to get her little 9 year superstar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.

Yes, unsurprising because any FEC expert unfamiliar with the facts of this case is going to advise the jury on the law. Judges advise juries on the law, not expert witnesses. In this trial and in every trial.

Merchan seems to have only a passing acquaintance with the law.
The FEC chairman has expertise as it pertains to campaign contributions. You would think most judges would want the jury to hear that expertise.
Unless of course, it exonerates the person Merchan wants to be found guilty.

No, “most judges” do not want juries in their cases advised of the law by witnesses. Witnesses testify to facts.

[Anonymous]

2023 memo that federal election law jurisdiction is exclusive to DOJ and FEC.
Both passed on charging Trump. Because what is claimed is a campaign contribution is not a campaign contribution under election law. This kidge lets Bragg try to claim this anyway.
Only without indicting for it.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn’t it be hearsay (if Costello testified to Cohen’s statement)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:2023 memo that federal election law jurisdiction is exclusive to DOJ and FEC.
Both passed on charging Trump. Because what is claimed is a campaign contribution is not a campaign contribution under election law. This kidge lets Bragg try to claim this anyway.
Only without indicting for it.

The DOJ that charged Cohen for violating FECA for the same payments?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

They may call a former FEC chairman, but the judge has unsurprisingly placed huge limits on what he can testify to.

Yes, unsurprising because any FEC expert unfamiliar with the facts of this case is going to advise the jury on the law. Judges advise juries on the law, not expert witnesses. In this trial and in every trial.

Merchan seems to have only a passing acquaintance with the law.
The FEC chairman has expertise as it pertains to campaign contributions. You would think most judges would want the jury to hear that expertise.
Unless of course, it exonerates the person Merchan wants to be found guilty.

No, “most judges” do not want juries in their cases advised of the law by witnesses. Witnesses testify to facts.

Facts like what is and what is not a campaign contribution?
Yes, he should testify to such facts.

[Anonymous]

The jury.ust be wondering where Allen Weisselberg is.