Jump to content

45 indicated


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

I’m so fucking sick of our justice system making itself powerless against this orange shit-stain.

This is a really fresh take. We have not seen this issue brought up before.

Here is a suggestion: why not start a thread in CR and call it “justice system powerless against orange shit stain”.  As we go through Trump‘s various trials, every time the justice system displeases you, you and your unhappy brethren can post in that thread, and not continually interject that same opinion/observation throughout this thread.     

It is not an invalid topic, to be sure, and given the frequency and passion expressed in similar comments by several posters, it would seem that that topic legitimately deserves its own thread. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Placeholder for Hope Hicks afternoon testimony

Trump looks very unhappy as he departs the courtroom, and his lawyer Todd Blanche is not smiling.

The lawyers are not quite done yet, even though the jury is. Prosecutors have asked whether they can question Trump, if he testifies, about his nine violations of his gag order. Todd Blanche, a defense lawyer, is asking the judge to bar any such question.

Blanche slips and calls Trump “Mr. Trump,” before correcting himself and using Trump's preferred label: “President Trump.”

But Merchan says he agrees with the defense, saying it would be too prejudicial for a jury to hear that the judge presiding over the trial at hand had found against the defendant. That’s a win for Blanche. Merchan’s ruling doubles as an acknowledgment of his own sway over the jury.

As much as the defense lawyers — and Trump — complain about Merchan, he has been bending over backward to try to seem fair to Trump.

 

Matthew Colangelo, the prosecutor, responds, saying that the findings from the judge that Trump violated his gag order are directly relevant to Trump’s credibility if he takes the stand. He contradicts Blanche's stance, saying that there is case law supporting his argument. Previously, we’ve seen Justice Merchan respond positively to the presentation of case law — older cases in which judges discuss the matters in question —and express frustration with the defense when they don’t cite any.

Emil Bove’s last question to Hope Hicks was a pointed one, calling attention to the way that the actual charges of falsifying business records have not been discussed in two full weeks of testimony. “While you were focused on your job at the White House,” he asked, “you didn’t have anything to do with the business records of the Trump Organization 200 plus miles away in New York City, did you?” Hicks said she didn’t. That will conclude testimony for the week. The judge is excusing the jury now.

Hope Hicks is excused and leaves the courtroom. Overall, I think the defense will be very happy with what it got from her — but so will the prosecution.

Trump doesn’t look in Hicks’s direction as she leaves. She also doesn’t look toward him.

Emil Bove is now asking Hope Hicks about Trump's concerned over how his wife would react to the “Access Hollywood” tape. “President Trump really values Mrs. Trump’s opinion, and she doesn't weigh in all the time, but when she does, it’s really meaningful to him,” Hicks says. “He really, really respects what she has to say. I think he was just concerned of what her perception of this would be.” Hicks’s comments are similar to what a number of former White House officials have said about Trump’s reactivity to his wife’s opinions, regardless of what else was swirling around.

And again, this could aid the defense’s “family man” argument.

Emil Bove, the defense lawyer, has begun to ask Hope Hicks about her work on Trump's presidential campaign. He continues to press the argument that the work she did for Trump, and the work done by David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, was all the normal course of business for a presidential candidate.

Emil Bove builds on this theme, getting Hope Hicks to agree that Michael Cohen “went rogue” and did things that were “unauthorized.” These answers are largely helpful to the defense’s efforts to build a case that Cohen could have arranged the hush money without Trump’s direct orders.

Hicks further makes the defense lawyers’ point for them, saying of Cohen, “He liked to call himself a fixer, or Mr. Fix-it, and it was only because he first broke it.”

Bove, who can be a real pitbull in cross-examinations, is being studiously gentle here with Hicks.

Emil Bove is now asking Hicks about how Michael Cohen did not have an official role with Trump's 2016 campaign. “He would try to insert himself at certain moments,” she said, which will feed into the defense's argument that Cohen was freelancing.

This line of questioning from the defense is clearly designed to create distance between Trump and Cohen and to minimize Cohen’s role.

The comment echoes something David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, said of Cohen, that he would try to “inject” himself into the campaign.

Distancing Cohen from the campaign also supports the argument that the hush-money payment he made to Stormy Daniels was not a campaign-finance violation.

Emil Bove, the defense lawyer, heads straight into it, asking Hope Hicks about her relationships with the Trump family and employees of the Trump Organization. These questions may seem innocuous, but they will also remind Hicks of her fondness for the family whose head she is now testifying against. For an already emotional witness, this questioning is really difficult. Meanwhile, the sketch artist in front of me has begun a drawing of Hicks crying, holding up a tissue to her eyes.

Hope Hicks is back — still looking fairly upset. She walks to the witness stand and takes a seat. The jurors will be brought in shortly and cross-examination will resume.

As we mentioned earlier today, this is going to be a tricky cross-examination for the defense lawyer, Emil Bove, especially with a vulnerable witness. And Hope Hicks just began to cry.

Hicks suddenly broke down a little bit when she was asked about her time at the Trump Organization, and we’re taking a break.

Trump, who has largely avoided looking at Hicks during her testimony, locks his eyes on her as she starts to cry.

Bove has a tough job here. His client is furious with Hicks. And Bove will have to impeach her credibility or otherwise disrupt her testimony without coming off as too aggressive and alienating sympathetic jurors. The prosecutors are now leaving the room hastily, looking somewhat concerned.

Hicks’s emotion seemingly came quickly, as Emil Bove, the defense lawyer, had just begun with a few basic questions. Before that, she had been remarkably composed in the face of an intense moment

Hope Hicks is asked what she made Trump's suggestion to her that Michael Cohen had made a payment to Stormy Daniels “out of the kindness of his heart.” Hicks acknowledges that it did not fit in with the Cohen she knew, who she did not understand to be “an especially charitable person or selfless person.” The direct examination concludes with those very tough questions and Emil Bove, one of Trump's lawyers, stands up to cross-examine Hicks.

It's a Friday afternoon and there’s less than an hour to go but the jury seems riveted. We’ve had a really remarkable day of testimony, most of it from Hope Hicks.

For the record, we have had two fresh witnesses today, both of whom have cast aspersions on Michael Cohen. Hope Hicks just all but told the jury that Cohen had lied about the hush-money payment. Another sign that prosecutors are none too concerned about these lies. Cohen says that during this period of his life, he lied on Trump’s behalf.

Hope Hicks is now describing the initial Wall Street Journal article about the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels. She says she cannot recall certain facts about this period, including a conversation with Michael Cohen. But she says if the prosecution has something to refresh her memory, she is willing to look at it. She has gotten considerably more nervous-looking again, clenching her jaw and stumbling a bit in her speech.

As Hope Hicks starts talking about her time at the White House, after Trump was elected, Trump is sitting motionless at the defense table with his eyes closed.

Hope Hicks says Trump was very concerned about the Wall Street Journal story about his alleged affairs and the hush-money payments. He was worried about his wife’s reaction and asked Hicks to make sure the newspapers weren’t delivered to their residence this morning. Trump also asked her how the story “was playing” — given this was only a few days before the election.

Hicks just handed a real gift to the defense. As Matthew Colangelo, the prosecutor, asked about Trump’s reaction to the Wall Street Journal article, she responds: “He was concerned about how it would be viewed by his wife.” This is something the defense touched upon in its opening statement when it sought to portray Trump as a family man. It provides an alternative motive for covering up damaging information, a believable one that is unrelated to his electoral chances.

Colangelo sought to get another, more helpful response, asking if Trump was concerned about the campaign. Hicks acknowledged that Trump was concerned about how the story was playing — but her answer about his family was far more specific, and definitive. We will not be surprised if we see that in the defense’s closing argument.

We know this, but it’s still amazing to hear Hope Hicks say it aloud: During the period where she was texting with Michael Cohen about the Wall Street Journal story and the damage it could potentially cause, the presidential election was three days away.

Listening to the testimony about the timing of all of this underscores the duality of Trump’s life at that moment. On the one hand, he was on the cusp of becoming the president of the United States. On the other, he was still wading in the muck of the tabloid New York City life he had lived for decades.

The prosecution has now brought up text messages between Hope Hicks and Michael Cohen on Nov. 4, 2016, after the Wall Street Journal article about Trump’s alleged affairs with Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels was published. Cohen is repeatedly — and with great urgency — asking Hicks for a status update on the story.

In these text messages, Cohen is closely monitoring how many other outlets are picking up on the WSJ story about the alleged hush-money payments. When Cohen mentions how little coverage the story was getting, Hope replies to Cohen, “Keep praying!! It’s working!”

Hicks acknowledges the irony as she reads these messages, in which Cohen fretted about the story becoming more public than it already was. The story, of course, became a criminal case — the one you’re reading about right now.

One text from Cohen to Hicks is particularly damaging to the defendant: Cohen says he’s got a denial from Stormy Daniels, whom he calls “Storm,” but is holding it in reserve.

 

Hope Hicks is explaining how the Trump campaign responded to the story about Karen McDougal, who by this point had been paid money by the parent company of The National Enquirer to keep quiet. Hicks says that, internally, she was told — presumably by the candidate himself — that Trump had not had an affair with McDougal, but that she did not remember Trump “verbatim” saying that he had no knowledge of that hush-money deal. The jury is seeing something that prosecutors have sought to show them is a lie being shared with the media, and the public.

We then see that Hicks denied “unequivocally” to the Wall Street Journal that Trump had a relationship with Stormy Daniels. Hicks says that’s what she was told, and that she testified to that effect in front of the grand jury that indicted the former president.

Hope Hicks's testimony is a good reminder of something reporters frequently encounter. Some public relations people will flatly deny stories, and put their name to those denials, without having any idea whether the stories they are denying are true or false.

Court is only expect to run for another hour and twenty minutes. They’re ending early today. It will be interesting to see if Hope Hicks is back on the stand on Monday.

Hope Hicks, testifying again, says she denied that Trump had a relationship with Stormy Daniels to The Wall Street Journal. She is then asked if she witnessed conversations between Trump and Michael Cohen. “I believe I heard Mr. Trump speaking to Mr. Cohen shortly after the story was published,” she says.

The more prosecutors can illustrate the Cohen-Trump relationship — which they really have started to home in on, starting yesterday with a recording of the two men speaking — the easier it may be to persuade jurors of Cohen’s story that he was doing Trump’s bidding as he sought to silence Daniels.

We are back in the courtroom and Hope Hicks has returned to the stand. She left off starting to discuss Stormy Daniels, the porn star who would eventually receive a payment from Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen.

Edited by Francisco 2.0
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I dunno.  Again, it's a word salad problem.  Trump spews word salad non-stop.

A lawyer would not nod at the idea that his client cannot testify at trial because of a gag order because that's ridiculous.  Todd Blanche's judgment is questionable by his choice of client and some of the motions he has filed, but he is not a ridiculous lawyer.

 

 

Counterpoint, all lawyers are ridiculous to some degree 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

This is a really fresh take. We have not seen this issue brought up before.

Here is a suggestion: why not start a thread in CR and call it “justice system powerless against orange shit stain”.  As we go through Trump‘s various trials, every time the justice system displeases you, you and your unhappy brethren can post in that thread, and not continually interject that same opinion/observation throughout this thread.     

It is not an invalid topic, to be sure, and given the frequency and passion expressed in similar comments by several posters, it would seem that that topic legitimately deserves its own thread. 

You OK, dude?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

This is a really fresh take. We have not seen this issue brought up before.

Here is a suggestion: why not start a thread in CR and call it “justice system powerless against orange shit stain”.  As we go through Trump‘s various trials, every time the justice system displeases you, you and your unhappy brethren can post in that thread, and not continually interject that same opinion/observation throughout this thread.     

It is not an invalid topic, to be sure, and given the frequency and passion expressed in similar comments by several posters, it would seem that that topic legitimately deserves its own thread. 

This seems as good a thread as any to bring it up...repeatedly if the frustration level fits.  My frustration level with this shit-stain hit defcon1 years ago.   I'm not going to apologize for pointing out the special boy's special treatment for the umpteenth time. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I dunno.  Again, it's a word salad problem.  Trump spews word salad non-stop.

TIL word salad is a viable defense for multiple criminal indictments! Wow what a neat new loophole discovered by trumpco! It never seemed to work before, but it sure baffles the brightest legal minds now. 

Literally any other defendant would be spending at least one night in county for this many willfil and repeated violations of court orders. Never fucking mind the threats against the judge's family. The kid gloves trump gets as standard are just ridiculous and show the American justice system to be the multi-tiered farce that it is. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Counterpoint, all lawyers are ridiculous to some degree 

The most ridiculous thing I ever did was take your mom to a nice seafood dinner and never call her again.

 

 

Just kidding.  I called her again.

Edited by dcbc
  • Haha 6
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Smax said:

and again.... he needs a night or two in jail period 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Red Five said:

Another $1000 oughtta do it this time. /Susan Collins

spacer.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

spacer.png

 

Can we all just take a moment and appreciate the hotness of Hope Hicks.

Also, I didn't know she was an accomplished lacrosse player.... which also lends makes me wonder what kind of locker talk or locker shenanigans she got into with her teammates.

 

Oh and is it just me or does she look like a young Keri Russell / Lori Loughlin mashup.

 

Ok that's it. I'll be in my bunk.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Haha 1
  • Drool 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Mo Horn said:

And with that knowledge, millions will still vote for him, and might get him elected again. 

 

This is only half-true: they won't be voting for him with that knowledge. Because they're either not following the story, or they're hearing a very biased version of it.

 

48 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

This seems as good a thread as any to bring it up...repeatedly if the frustration level fits.  My frustration level with this shit-stain hit defcon1 years ago.   I'm not going to apologize for pointing out the special boy's special treatment for the umpteenth time. 

 

I mean, that's literally what they just talked about re: the Access Hollywood tape. If you're famous, "they" let you get away with everything.

On the other hand, "they" aren't courts of law. "They" are the public and the media.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Fucker should already be in jail due to the nature of his alleged crimes and the fact that most of them have been videotaped.

Jail Trump for this at the end of the day so that he has to stay in jail until Monday. Or just sentence him to two or three days. 

Or firing squad. Works either way.

Or visit a gravel pit with Noem.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, South Austin said:

To be fair, he probably has a lot of rape allegations, but the government-controlled North Korean press can't report on it.

When you’re supreme leader they LET you do it 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dcbc said:

The most ridiculous thing I ever did was take your mom to a nice seafood dinner and never call her again.

 

 

Just kidding.  I called her again.

She still laughs about your small penis and premature ejaculation issue, so we can call it even I guess.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little bit of the special treatment in the legal system:

"Former President Donald Trump claims millions of illegal votes cost him the 2020 election. However, all but three of his 64 election challenges failed. His three legal victories, all in Pennsylvania, threw out 270 provisional ballots lacking signatures, separated Election Day provisional ballots from those cast afterward, and moved back Pa.’s deadline for absentee voters to present voter ID by three days."

https://www.witf.org/2022/09/01/these-republicans-did-a-deep-dive-into-2020-election-lawsuits-including-in-pa-heres-why-most-of-them-failed/

NY State Fraud Case: $355M judgment against Trump

Carrol I Defamation and Assault: $5M judgment against Trump

Carrol II Defamation: $83.3M judgment against Trump

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

She still laughs about your small penis and premature ejaculation issue, so we can call it even I guess.

I remember it like it was yesterday.

 

29ae1b19-b44a-441e-8ee5-2e941ece7132_tex

 

I know I'm mixing movie references at this point.

Edited by dcbc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gernblansten said:

NY State Fraud Case: $355M judgment against Trump

Carrol I Defamation and Assault: $5M judgment against Trump

Carrol II Defamation: $83.3M judgment against Trump

Total amount paid out to date...

Fuck all

figure_with_empty_pockets_800_wht.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Captainant said:

TIL word salad is a viable defense for multiple criminal indictments! Wow what a neat new loophole discovered by trumpco! It never seemed to work before, but it sure baffles the brightest legal minds now. 

Literally any other defendant would be spending at least one night in county for this many willfil and repeated violations of court orders. Never fucking mind the threats against the judge's family. The kid gloves trump gets as standard are just ridiculous and show the American justice system to be the multi-tiered farce that it is. 

My comment had nothing to do whatsoever with any of that except that his double-talk makes it difficult to pin him down or draw valid or reasonable inferences from what he says.  Other than he's an abject moron who talks a lotta shit,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, C-Man said:

I can fap to this?

I'm guessing that at some point in history a man/men took care of business to the cave paintings in Lascaux, I'm guessing you are in the clear.  

  • Haha 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, BamaATL said:

I'm guessing that at some point in history a man/men took care of business to the cave paintings in Lascaux, I'm guessing you are in the clear.  

I meant the news moreso than the courtroom sketch ... but speakin' of no one's lookin' ...

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

because what that means is that the judge isn't giving me anything to complain about on appeal

This, all day long.  Of course, Chapter one in The Secret of Success on Appeal is called "Win at Trial."  The rest of the chapters have to do with what happens if you don't.

 

It's also the reason that he's trying to avoid jail for contempt if at all possible and why he's being careful in tailoring the gag order.  The last thing he wants is an interlocutory appeal with a possible stay of trial with a jury empaneled.  Sure, it's a long shot, but Trump doesn't care about the odds (insert failed casino joke here).

Edited by dcbc
  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Just extracted this statement from one of the summaries above to point out what that often means.

As a trial lawyer, I get the MOST nervous when the judge is doing all he can to accommodate my requests, grant my objections, etc.  In short, I worry when everything is going my way, because what that means is that the judge isn't giving me anything to complain about on appeal.  He knows I'm going to be fucked by the outcome at the trial court, and he wants to make sure that I don't have any leg to stand on if I try to appeal.

Seriously, I can recall the feeling of being in trial, and at a particular moment, ALL of the rulings started going my way.  It didn't take long for me to realize "oh fuck....I'm about to lose this fucking case."  If you're good, and lucky, you can pivot your approach to maybe give yourself a chance to win.  But sometimes, the judge knows what the outcome is going to be, and wants it to hold up on appeal, so he's made a record that will help that happen.

In this case, there's also an element of the judge not wanting to seem like he's a tool of any partisan/political plot (fat chance of that, what he does isn't what matters - what Trump SAYS is the only thing that matters to the cult), but there's also surely an element of him not wanting to give the defense any good grounds for an appeal of the eventual verdict.

I remember learning about this way back during the IBM vs SCO lawsuit, when SCO (with backing from Microsoft) was basically suing IBM for putting copyrighted code from UNIX (which, ironically, SCO didn't even really own the rights to, not like they thought they did) into Linux.

A paralegal, frustrated with the idiocy she saw on Slashdot and elsewhere from the nerds who cared deeply about the case but understood nothing about the legal system, started up a blog to cover the details of what was REALLY happening.

At some point pretty early on, she said that the judge was Actively Managing the case. And she explained what that meant: The judge had already figured out what he was going to rule, and from this point forward was more or less going to make sure that the ruling was going to be solid and un-appealable.

(IBM won. Big. No appeal succeeded.)

  • Hook 'Em 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Biff Tannen said:

Hearing CNN talk about how Hope Hicks clearly cared for him and felt bad just shows how soulless a ghoul she is.  No decent human being could go through the past several years being that adjacent to that fuck head and still think he's a good guy.  What a broken human she is.

The media are cunts.  I’m convinced they want fascism.

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Total amount paid out to date...

Fuck all

figure_with_empty_pockets_800_wht.jpg

I suppose you’re excluding the bonds. Now explain how him paying “fuck all” so far is due to special treatment and how anyone else would have already been made to pay. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

 

 

 

This reinforces the fact that his followers are the dumbest people.  He commits crimes right out in the open.  He commits non-criminal, but deplorable acts right out in the open.  Yet these people are not smart enough to see it when it is in front of their face.  

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...