Jump to content

45 indicated


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

And he destroyed Hope Hicks.

I’ve never really watched Lawrence O’Donnell, but damn he’s brutal and entertaining.

Based on the clip above, Larry has a very high opinion of himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Based on the clip above, Larry has a very high opinion of himself.

Based on the clip above, I have a very high opinion of Larry. I thought his show that night was remarkable. 

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

Just now, Texas73 said:

Based on the clip above, I have a very high opinion of Larry. I thought his show that night was remarkable. 

I agreed with most of his takedown of Hicks, but the intro about dotard avoiding eye contact because he said that was a dumb mistake (it was) was unnecessary fluff at the beginning of the clip.

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

7 hours ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

I agreed with most of his takedown of Hicks, but the intro about dotard avoiding eye contact because he said that was a dumb mistake (it was) was unnecessary fluff at the beginning of the clip.

Unless Trump was watching, which he likely was, which means he was losing his shit, which makes it absolutely necessary and awesome. 

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

Posted (edited)

New Witness:  Jeffery McConney

 

We’ve concluded looking at the series of 11 invoices that prosecutors say were falsified. With that testimony, we take our morning break.

The last 10 minutes or so have consisted of a slow procession of invoices from Cohen and related emails between Jeffrey McConney, Deborah Tarasoff and Allen Weisselberg being shown on the video monitors in the courtroom. These, prosecutors say, are the false documents. They don’t look like much, and despite their centrality to the case, the room has taken on a relaxed atmosphere as we make our way through them.

It’s worth noting that Michael Cohen was not working for the Trump Organization anymore as he was submitting these invoices. At some point in 2017, he set up shop at Squire Patton Boggs’s offices in Midtown. Cohen continued to describe himself as Trump’s personal lawyer that year, providing a connection to Trump directly. But he was not working for the company.

As Jeffrey McConney continued to testify, Trump turned to one of his lawyers, Emil Bove, and whispered to him urgently, with Bove responding a bit more calmly and nodding.

In a funny aside, Jeffrey McConney is asked where Trump physically was in 2017. He deadpans that Trump was in Washington, D.C. He then describes the fact that the checks would have to be sent to the White House for the president of the United States to sign.

McConney makes clear that starting in March 2017, these checks reimbursing Michael Cohen began coming out of Trump’s personal bank account.

In March 2017, Trump began a pressure campaign on his attorney general, Jeff Sessions, to get him to reverse his recusal from the investigation into possible ties between the Trump campaign and Russians.

For context on how the Trump Organization worked, Jeffrey McConney’s son Justin was the person who basically ran Trump’s Twitter feed before Trump learned how to do it himself, a moment that Justin described to Politico as like the moment the dinosaurs learned to open doors in “Jurassic Park.”

Jeffrey McConney, who no longer works for the Trump Organization, says they’re still footing his legal bills.

Jeffrey McConney testifies that he worked for the Trump Organization beginning in 1987. For context, that’s just a few years after Trump Tower opened, and the same year that Trump made a feint at running for president the first time with a trip to New Hampshire as his book “The Art of the Deal” was being published.

He is now describing the intricate lacing of more than 500 entities that comprise the Trump Organization.

Prosecutors call Jeffrey McConney to the stand. The jury is in its seats.

McConney is a tall man with a white shoulder length hair and bangs that nearly fall over his eyes. He is sworn in and sits down at the witness stand. He will be questioned by the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo.

Interesting to see that neither Joshua Steinglass nor Susan Hoffinger, the two prosecutors who led the last criminal trial at which McConney testified, are handling this. McConney was a difficult witness at that trial — not only did he decline to answer many questions, but he also had to be excused after falling ill, delaying the trial.

We are beginning to see the roots of what prosecutors say are false about the documents at issue in this case. Jeffrey McConney told Deborah Tarasoff, who dealt with the details of payroll at the Trump Organization and who is also expected to testify, to record the payments to Michael Cohen as “legal expenses.” He also told her to say they were being made as part of a “retainer” agreement between Cohen and Trump, which prosecutors say did not exist. Prosecutors say that was a way to disguise the hush-money reimbursement to Cohen. To find Trump guilty, jurors will have to agree that these documents were indeed falsified.

This is also why the prosecutors laid out their case they way they did — with the conspiracy around concealing negative information about Trump ahead of the election coming first.

Matthew Colangelo, the prosecutor, asked McConney if he ever saw a retainer agreement. He responded: “I did not.”

On screen is an email from Allen Weisselberg to Jeffrey McConney saying that it was okay to pay the money to Michael Cohen, “per agreement with Don and Eric.” Eric Trump is sitting in the courtroom as this takes place.

Notably, McConney testifies that he didn’t send the invoice from Cohen to the legal department for review. He acknowledges he typically would do so with invoices.

Jeffrey McConney is testifying about hugely important documentary evidence, only barely disguised by the financial documents and handwritten notes on screen. We just now learned that the payment came from Trump’s personal bank account. It appears we are about to see that the invoices Michael Cohen sent for the payment were prompted by Cohen’s conversation with Allen Weisselberg, in an arrangement, again, that Cohen will testify was confirmed with Trump.

Earlier in McConney’s testimony, the prosecution team established an important context for this: That Trump himself paid extremely close attention to his finances and especially to any outgoing cash.

McConney said he soon got in touch with Cohen about processing these payments. He emailed Cohen in early February 2017 with a reminder to send him invoices. The subject line was “$$.”

Jurors are seeing a lot of notes scribbled by Jeffrey McConney. It looks more like how someone might track their personal taxes on the fly, not something coming out of a company.

This evidence helps to counter one of the arguments that the defense made in its opening statement, asking the jury to consider why, if Michael Cohen made a payment of $130,000, he was paid so much more than he would have been owed. But Jeffrey McConney just walked us through the disparity in the amounts, which includes both a bonus for Cohen and tax considerations.

This also underscores the prosecution’s argument that top officials in the Trump Organization were involved in making Cohen financially whole. And McConney just walked through how closely Trump, historically, has paid attention to his bottom line.

We’re seeing a bank statement from Michael Cohen’s shell company, Essential Consultants, marked with a handwritten notation by Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s former chief financial officer. It outlines the reimbursement to Cohen, which included a bonus and monies to cover a tax burden. Weisselberg’s handwriting is a scrawl but Jeffrey McConney seems to be able to read it.

We are seeing important evidence right now, of the instructions Weisselberg gave to McConney as related to paying Cohen, in part to reimburse the hush-money payment. This fulfills several important functions: Cohen is expected to testify that he spoke with Trump about being repaid, and that Trump asked Weisselberg to handle the specifics. So here, we see paper evidence of what prosecutors will say is the aftermath of that conversation, and the blueprints for the repayment.

Jeffrey McConney, and the courtroom, are now being shown banking records that are going to lead to the heart of the case.

Last week, we saw only a brief glimpse of the hush money payment actually changing hands, when Keith Davidson, Stormy Daniels’s 2016 lawyer, texted someone the words “funds received.” Now, we’re seeing more evidence of that all-important transaction, including a withdrawal of about $130,000 related to the company Michael Cohen set up to facilitate the payment.

Jeffrey McConney is beginning to testify, albeit fairly euphemistically, about the reimbursement to Michael Cohen for the hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels. McConney says that in 2017, his boss, Allen Weisselberg, told him that Cohen needed some money. Some of it was related to Cohen’s bonus, McConney testifies, and adds, “And then there was some other money he was owed.” Cohen was owed $130,000 for the hush-money payment.

The prosecutor just asked Jeffrey McConney: “Are you familiar with” Michael Cohen? This is going to introduce key conversations between Allen Weisselberg, the former top financial official at the Trump Organization, and Cohen, a key witness for the prosection.

McConney is being fairly mocking of Cohen. Asked about his role, McConney says, “He said he was a lawyer.”

Jeffrey McConney is no stranger to the witness stand. I have seen him testify three times. In 2023, at Trump’s civil fraud trial, he teared up on the stand. “I just wanted to relax and stop being accused of misrepresenting assets for the company that I loved working for. I’m sorry,” he testified. McConney was also a defendant in that case.

Jeffrey McConney just told a story that is emblematic of Trump’s management style. He says about a year into his employment, he walked into Trump’s office. The boss, who was on the phone, said to him: “Jeff, you’re fired.” Once Trump hung up, he elaborated. McConney wasn’t actually fired, but Trump warned him that it was a problem that his “cash balances went down last week” and urged him to “focus on my bills.” It was, McConney says, a “teaching moment.” And it’s helpful for prosecutors seeking to illustrate how closely Trump was focused on the outflow of cash.

Trump smiled widely as McConney told this story. “You’re fired,” of course, was his catchphrase on “The Apprentice,” the reality show that vaulted him to a new level of fame, and, one could argue, his successful run for president.

So far in this trial, Trump has seemed to enjoy listening to his former employees recount positive memories of working for him during their testimony.

Trump is often leaning back and closing his eyes. The prosecution is currently asking the witness, in granular detail, about the inner workings of the Trump Organization’s accounting department. This includes defining the term “general ledger.”

Friday featured Hope Hicks discussing the fevered final days of the 2016 presidential campaign, crying on the stand. Today, we are hearing about accounting software.

While McConney was delving into one of the dryer details of his accounting job, I took a glance at Justice Merchan’s written ruling finding Trump in contempt. In the courtroom, the judge suggested he was giving the former president a last chance. But the written order leaves Trump a bit of wiggle room — Merchan writes that “if appropriate and warranted, future violations” of his orders will be punishable by jail. He could have drawn an even brighter red line by saying “any future violation.” Still, overall, this is a dire situation for the former president.

For those of us who covered the Trump Organization’s trial in 2022, hearing Jeffrey McConney’s testimony is like experiencing deja vu. At that trial, too, McConney testified about his old boss, Allen Weisselberg, the former chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, who is currently in jail. McConney and Weisselberg had been close, having lunch every day, as McConney just testified. In this trial filled with fascinating witnesses and compelling testimony, McConney’s appearance may mark a turn, as we begin to hear about the financial documents at the heart of the case.

During that trial, the Trump Organization was convicted of tax fraud and other crimes.

McConney lights up a little — looking at the jury, flashing a grin — when he mentions “Accounts Receivable,” describing it as when money is coming into an organization.

 

 

The jury is now coming in after an intense start to the day, complete with an overt threat of jail for Trump if he continues to violate his gag order.

The judge is now scolding the defense lawyers. He is frustrated because they wish to lodge objections related to the witness, Jeffrey McConney, but that they did not tell him yesterday, when they learned who the witness was, that they would have objections. Justice Merchan has objected to what he sees as efforts from the defense to delay the trial, often by taking action last minute.

Defense lawyers suggest they’ve been told Jeffrey McConney, who was a top Trump Organization official at the time of the Stormy Daniels payout, will be the next witness.

McConney, the former controller of the Trump Organization, is familiar to many of the reporters covering this trial. He testified at the trial of Trump’s company in 2022 and at Trump’s civil fraud trial last year, where he was among the defendants.

Justice Merchan says that his job is to “protect the dignity of the justice system,” and calls Trump’s violations of his gag order “a direct attack on the rule of law.” And now he hands down his decision. We’ve already heard that he held Trump in violation a 10th time, in addition to the previous nine violations.

Trump had no noticable reaction to Merchan warning him that jail could be in the offing if he continues to flaunt his gag order.

He was hunched over the defense table as Merchan issued his warning. When the judge concluded, Trump shook his head.

Justice Merchan is speaking directly to Trump, in an extraordinary moment. He tells him he’s finding him in contempt of the gag order a 10th time, but that the $1,000 per instance fines aren’t working and that he has to consider jail. “The last thing” he wants to do is put Trump in jail, the judge says, adding, “You are the former president of the United States and possibly the next president as well.”

Justice Merchan tells Trump his ongoing violation of his gag order is a “direct attack on the rule of law. I cannot allow that to continue." He says he wants him to understand he will put him in jail if he has to.

The judge says he will address the motion for contempt and begins to address Trump and his lawyers. He says that he will find Trump in criminal contempt for the 10th time — one for each of the violations of his gag order.

Emil Bove, who has been aggressive in cross-examination, is sitting first-chair at the defense table this morning, while Todd Blanche, another Trump lawyer, is sitting chatting with the defendant. Trump has wanted his defense to fight more.

The judge is on the bench and we are set to begin.

As a reminder, Hope Hicks concluded her testimony on Friday, and court ended a bit early that day. We don’t know yet who is testifying today.

Trump is in the courtroom, with his son Eric in tow again. Alina Habba, who represented Trump in his civil fraud trial last year, is sitting next to Eric Trump. Boris Epshteyn, Trump’s recently-indicted legal adviser, is sitting behind both, several seats away from Alan Garten, the Trump Organization's general counsel.

The prosecutors have entered, carrying their boxes of documents. They wish a good morning to the court officers and begin to set up their table.

Good morning from the Manhattan Criminal Courthouse, where Donald J. Trump is on trial on charges that he falsified business records while reimbursing a hush-money payment to a porn star. Today marks the start of the fourth week of the trial and the third week of testimony.

 

Edited by Francisco 2.0
  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

Note:  I actually have to go do some solid work here in about half an hour, so...there will be a slight delay in the proceedings.

The judge is now scolding the defense lawyers. He is frustrated because they wish to lodge objections related to the witness, Jeffrey McConney, but that they did not tell him yesterday, when they learned who the witness was, that they would have objections. Justice Merchan has objected to what he sees as efforts from the defense to delay the trial, often by taking action last minute.

spacer.png

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

14 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

Trump found in contempt again for violating gag order. 

Uh oh... they're going to revoke his early bird discount privileges at the Mar-a-Lago buffet.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, texasdago said:

Uh oh... they're going to revoke his early bird discount privileges at the Mar-a-Lago buffet.

If I recall, those are the last of the pre-direct warning gag order violations.  The prosecution turned in those prior to the rulings in the first batch of violations, where the court said next time jail.   Because of ex post facto reasons, the court did not give jail for these - as Trump had not received the “next time jail” talk yet, and so the fact they were turned in before the warning to Trump its just money. 

It is now set up for the next offense being jail.   Maybe an overnight stay? I guess it depends on the content and number.    in an event, the appellate record will be clean and show we had more than enough chances.

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

Posted (edited)

The thing I keep coming back to is the immediacy of these violations.  Failing to comply with a gag order isn't "deep state" stuff, it's about honoring the orders of the judge.  Whether you believe Trump should be in court or not, it's difficult to argue that staying in line during the trial is somehow part of the setup.

Not that I think the average MAGAt would agree, but still . . .

Edited by jimmyjazz
  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

Tell him he’ll be photographed without his wig and makeup and he’ll shut the fuck up. 

Or subject to a physical and mental examination by a doctor of the judge’s choosing. Not someone on Trump’s payroll 

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

“A note on today's gag order ruling

In contrast to the first contempt ruling, in which Merchan found nine of 10 statements were indeed willful violations of the gag order, in today’s ruling, Merchan held that only one of the four alleged statements -- the one about the jury — is violative. 

But he refused to find that the two statements about Michael Cohen and the one about former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker were reflective of criminal contempt. 

In particular, Merchan wrote that he was not convinced that the statements about Cohen were not political speech as opposed to attempts to intimidate a witness. In other words, Todd Blanche’s presentation of Cohen’s April 2024 tweets seem to have persuaded Merchan that it was at least possible that Trump was, in fact, defending himself against Cohen’s near-constant attacks”

 

Merchan is making any gag order complaints appeal proof by this.  Trump will eventually get his fund raising moment. 

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

1 hour ago, atomheartbevo said:

So where is Lawrence O’Donnell sitting?

I believe there's an MSNBC slot, and they are alternating between their people.  Maddow was in there previously.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Witness continued:  Jeffery McConney

And we are at break, with a new witness later.

Matthew Colangelo, the prosecutor, questioned Jeffrey McConney again during a brief re-direct. He leaned into the arguments the defense was making, and only really asked McConney if he later learned that there were things going on to which he had not been privy to.

This takes advantage of Emil Bove, Trump's lawyer, not having an alternative explanation for the documentary evidence. Bove argued that McConney didn’t know what he was talking about when it came to the transactions that Allen Weisselberg directed him to make. But not only was Colangelo fine with that — he thought it was helpful for the prosecution’s case.

“You were told to do something and you did it?” Colangelo asked. “Yes,” McConney answered.

McConney is done. Trump appeared to give him two fist pump gestures as he left the stand.

Watching Emil Bove’s largely hard-to-follow cross examination of Jeffrey McConney, the challenge facing Trump’s lawyers again becomes clear. They’re basically doing a version of: “He didn’t do it, and even if he did it’s not a crime.”

That worked effectively during, say, Trump’s first impeachment trial, which was a political trial. But this is a criminal case involving a lot of pretty clear evidence that Michael Cohen made a payoff to Stormy Daniels that he was reimbursed for after discussions involving top Trump financial officials.

Since the client here — Trump — never wants his lawyers to cede any ground as to whether he did anything questionable, the defense lawyers are left with this jumble.

As we listen to Emil Bove seek to emphasize that Jeffrey McConney was not personally sure what the repayments to Michael Cohen were for, I’m reminded that the defense lawyers, in their opening statement, did not offer a cohesive alternative theory of the case, but rather attacked various parts of the prosecution’s case. That can make it difficult to follow what Bove is trying to achieve with an individual witness, especially one like McConney who mostly testified about documentary evidence. Bove is implying that McConney doesn’t truly understand the documents he was asked to testify about — but even accepting McConney’s relative ignorance, it’s hard to know what the defense wants the jury to make of these damning documents.

Bove appears to be trying to make the jury feel like none of this was secretive or nefarious. To that end, he just spent a bunch of time getting McConney to say how he routinely locked cabinets to protect Trump Organization employees’ sensitive financial details. In other words, he implies, the cabinet was not locked to protect the secret agreement with Michael Cohen.

Emil Bove, who has been handling a lot of the cross-examination at this trial, is questioning Jeffrey McConney quite aggressively. It’s a bit of a mysterious approach. The prosecutor used McConney to bring up documents that were damaging to the defense's case, but his testimony itself was fairly innocuous. If I were a juror, I might be confused as to why Bove is taking such a tough tone with him, as the defense lawyers continue to try to distance their client from any false documents.

Emil Bove, Trump's lawyer, is trying to establish that Jeffrey McConney had no way of knowing what work Michael Cohen did as Trump’s personal lawyer in 2017. But this line of questioning seems to simply underscore the direct connection between Trump and Cohen. If Cohen was a such a mess who they wanted to get rid of, why did Trump continue letting him serve as a personal lawyer?

In his cross-examination, Trump’s lawyer Emil Bove is trying to establish some distance between Trump and the actions of his accounting department. Trump has opened his eyes for this section and is paying close attention. He smiled as Jeffrey McConney said he never discussed accounting software with Trump.

McConney said he never gave Trump a tour of the company’s accounting software. But it’s important to remember the government’s lawyers need not prove that Trump personally falsified the records, only that he orchestrated their falsification.

Emil Bove, one of Trump's lawyers, has begun his cross-examination of Jeffrey McConney. Michael Cohen, who has been slammed a few times in this trial, just got trolled again, as Bove asked McConney to confirm that Cohen was a lawyer. McConney scoffed and said “OK,” in a dismissive way.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, ends his direct questioning by asking Jeffrey McConney a series of questions about a financial disclosure publicized in 2018 in which Trump reported to the government that he had repaid more than $100,000 to Mr. Cohen the previous year. This form is further documentary evidence of the hush-money reimbursement, and as our colleagues reported then, raised many questions when it was first made public. Now we see prosecutors using them at Trump’s criminal trial as further evidence of the transaction at issue in the case.

We have now reviewed several general ledgers associated with Trump himself and his trust. 12 of the 34 counts against Trump are related to ledger entries that accounted for the reimbursements to Michael Cohen. It’s not clear, yet, that we’ve actually seen the entries in question — the ledgers we saw related to 2018, while the payments in question were made in 2017.

Tax forms were generated to account for the money paid to Michael Cohen, the implication being false records were also filed with the I.R.S.

 

We’re back in action, if “action” means a steady, often stultifying recitation of business records. As dull as it seems, it is critical to the prosecution’s case in trying to prove said business records were false and meant to cover a hush-money payment to Stormy Daniels, who could testify later this week.

Edited by Francisco 2.0
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing I keep coming back to is the immediacy of these violations.  Failing to comply with a gag order isn't "deep state" stuff, it's about honoring the orders of the judge.  Whether you believe Trump should be in court or not, it's difficult to argue that staying in line during the trial is somehow part of the setup.
Not that I think the average MAGAt would agree, but still . . .

Bro, the whole damn system is rigged against him. Everyone in the system is doing everything they can to take him down. No previous potus has ever had to deal with this kind of persecution. And for doing what? Just what needs to be done to save the country. It’s disgusting, really. But he’s fighting for us and staying strong. The gag orders are fucking joke, people just can’t deal with the truth.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Judge to defendant- I can’t really put you in jail for these repeated contempt acts because of who you are, so don’t you worry about that.  

This is, so infuriating...

Judge - Don't disobey me or I'll throw you in jail.

*Trump disregards the judge's order*

Judge - Ok, I'm serious this time, don't defy me or I'll throw you in jail.

*Trump defies*

Judge - This time I really, really, mean it...you're going to jail if you defy me again.

*Trump defies agains*

Rinse and repeat...

  • Fuck You 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Judge to defendant- I can’t really put you in jail for these repeated contempt acts because of who you are, so don’t you worry about that.  

You don't think there's a little bit of truth to that? This is truly unprecedented. The logistics of putting a former president in jail, even long term, much less temporarily, is astronomically difficult. He knows it to some extent which is part of why he keeps pushing it, and the judge knows that, and is in a horribly difficult position. I don't blame the legal system dealing with this nonsense as much as I do the 80 million voters who thought it was a good idea to make a man in his 70s with the emotional intelligence of a toddler president of the fucking United States. All this could have been avoided if these assholes among us had done the right thing and chosen a regular right wing idiot to run for president. It probably would have been way better for don himself who could have continued doing cheesy tv shows and go down as something other than one of the most reviled people in U.S. history.

Edited by 'stache
  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As amusing as it would be to see, him spending a little time in jail would do wonders for his campaign. He’d rake in millions on day one.   It would fire up his base like nothing else has before, and they would see it as proof of his persecution.  He’s probably already got a bunch of pre-written tweets for someone else to post on his behalf just for the occasion.


  
 

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

4 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

As amusing as it would be to see, him spending a little time in jail would do wonders for his campaign. He’d rake in millions on day one.   It would fire up his base like nothing else has before, and they would see it as proof of his persecution.  He’s probably already got a bunch of pre-written tweets for someone else to post on his behalf just for the occasion.


  
 

 

Good points, all. Now, allow me to retort: 

A weekend in jail just might kill him. 

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Drool 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

This is, so infuriating...

Judge - Don't disobey me or I'll throw you in jail.

*Trump disregards the judge's order*

Judge - Ok, I'm serious this time, don't defy me or I'll throw you in jail.

*Trump defies*

Judge - This time I really, really, mean it...you're going to jail if you defy me again.

*Trump defies agains*

Rinse and repeat...

You are now doing the Trump alternate facts thing. Please don’t do that.

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

18 minutes ago, 'stache said:

The logistics of putting a former president in jail, even long term, much less temporarily, is astronomically difficult.

Meh, I think there are a few spots left in Guantanamo

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

3 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

You are now doing the Trump alternate facts thing. Please don’t do that.

Um, these aren't alternate facts...these are just facts.  That judge isn't going to jail Trump, and both of them know it.

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

11 minutes ago, Your Mom said:

As amusing as it would be to see, him spending a little time in jail would do wonders for his campaign. He’d rake in millions on day one.   It would fire up his base like nothing else has before, and they would see it as proof of his persecution.  He’s probably already got a bunch of pre-written tweets for someone else to post on his behalf just for the occasion.


  
 

It would help with his hard core base. Maybe the shockingly stupid and disengaged undecideds will be moved away from him by a photo of that turd in a jail cell. Most of the dumbasses will intuit that this means he must be guilty of whatever they're charging him with (you can't expect them to know).

Further, it will quite possibly be the only time he is in an actual cell.

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

21 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Um, these aren't alternate facts...these are just facts.  That judge isn't going to jail Trump, and both of them know it.

yeah that's why they've already discussed the logistics of doing so with the secret service. I'm sure they did that just for shits and giggles.

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

21 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

 but it won't help him with undecided voters and it would send a signal to everyone that he's not actually above the law.

353.gif

Those are just voters who are voting for Trump, they just don't want to say they are.  I think perhaps they are the worst kind of Trumpkin.

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

Once a former president is indicted of a felony he should at that moment cease to be recognized a former president and have his secret service detail removed along with all perks of being a former president. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, DixonHur said:

Um, these aren't alternate facts...these are just facts.  That judge isn't going to jail Trump, and both of them know it.

The judge never explicitly warned Trump he would be jailed if he did it again until the hearing on the nine contempt charges. The judge then spent time saying what was appropriate and what was not, so there would be no mistake about what he expected.   This is all a precursor to the inevitable jail time, but was absolutely necessary to remove multiple avenues of appeal.  

I’ve already explained that there were contempt allegations brought before the judge told Trump what he could and could not do - and that he would be jailed if he did it again.  Today’s contempt allegations could not be considered in jailing him because they were all turned in before Trump was warned by the judge and told in detail what would not be allowed. 

Your post where the judge tells Trump three times do it again and you are  going to jail - and then doesn’t - is bullshit.  Just don’t make up stuff about the trial.  Others read this thread for actual news. 

I will bet a C-Note right now that Trump gets jailed before this thing is over. Feel free to accept. Loser donates to Surly. 

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

15 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

I will bet a C-Note right now that Trump gets jailed before this thing is over. Feel free to accept. Loser donates to Surly. 

I was more talking in general terms...not this judge in particular.  How many times have judges warned him not to violate a gag order?  Versus how many times has Trump violated gag orders in his various trials?

As far as a bet, I need to know what the bet is before I agree.

Jailed for contempt in this trial?  Or just in general? I just don't see him getting jailed for violating gag-orders because he would immediately appeal (possibly to SCOTUS eventually), so even if he were ordered to jail, I don't think they actually cuff him on the spot and put him in a cell...maybe he gets booked again but bonded out immediately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

The judge never explicitly warned Trump he would be jailed if he did it again until the hearing on the nine contempt charges. The judge then spent time saying what was appropriate and what was not, so there would be no mistake about what he expected.   This is all a precursor to the inevitable jail time, but was absolutely necessary to remove multiple avenues of appeal.  

I’ve already explained that there were contempt allegations brought before the judge told Trump what he could and could not do - and that he would be jailed if he did it again.  Today’s contempt allegations could not be considered in jailing him because they were all turned in before Trump was warned by the judge and told in detail what would not be allowed. 

Your post where the judge tells Trump three times do it again and you are  going to jail - and then doesn’t - is bullshit.  Just don’t make up stuff about the trial.  Others read this thread for actual news. 

I will bet a C-Note right now that Trump gets jailed before this thing is over. Feel free to accept. Loser donates to Surly. 

 

If by "this thing" you mean the current trial, and "gets jailed" as spending a single night in jail, I'll take that bet. 

Guilty, not guilty, hung jury, mistrial, whatever, I'm betting you 100$ (loser donates the money to surly) that dOTard does not end up in jail.

I guess if he dies on the shitter before the trial ends, the bet is a push. Imma gets nothing in that case. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pato del Muerto said:

Judge to defendant- I can’t really put you in jail for these repeated contempt acts because of who you are, so don’t you worry about that.  

that's not actually what he said or how this played out. be better

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hermanator said:

Once a former president is indicted of a felony he should at that moment cease to be recognized a former president and have his secret service detail removed along with all perks of being a former president. 

Kinda goes against the innocent until proven guilty thing we pretend exists in this country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...