An example, today the judge wouldn’t let him explain a yes or no answer.Sounded like Costello was being a dick on the stand. How exactly is Merchan "cancelling" him?
An example, today the judge wouldn’t let him explain a yes or no answer.Sounded like Costello was being a dick on the stand. How exactly is Merchan "cancelling" him?
There isn’t a more worthless poster on this Forum than you. I get tired of your laughing emojis but when you post it’s even worse.I'm sure that was the plan lmao.
You really think any juror's opinion on trump will change at this point? All of our opinions on the chump is pretty much set in stone at this point. 7 days, 7 years...no one is changing their opinon.
You'll claim victimhood over anything.
If you get tired of my laughing emojis then stop making stupid partisan posts.There isn’t a more worthless poster on this Forum than you. I get tired of your laughing emojis but when you post it’s even worse.
He fell asleep and his lawyers rushed to inform judge he wasn't testifying.Just saw a headline "Defense rests in Trump trial." This has to be a mistake. I remember Trump insisting that he would testify. What's going on??
Don't worry. He will come up with another lie on why he could not testify. Hope he is smarter this time than his last excuse of the gag order.Just saw a headline "Defense rests in Trump trial." This has to be a mistake. I remember Trump insisting that he would testify. What's going on??
Stick to accounting. You don't know what you're talking about on this subject.Now the judge giving jurors 7 days to go home and listen to NY hate Trump 24/7.
Somebody should write new lyrics to the tune of "I Left My Heart in San Francisco," starting with "Trump left his balls at Mar-A-Lago."Don't worry. He will come up with another lie on why he could not testify. Hope he is smarter this time than his last excuse of the gag order.
Sad thing is most of his base is not intelligent enough to separate fact from fiction.
Point taken. You sure Wednesday was not available?Stick to accounting. You don't know what you're talking about on this subject.
The only remaining trial date this week was Thursday. It had previously been announced that trial proceedings wouldn't be happening on Friday. Also, Friday is the start of the long Memorial Day weekend.
A judge never wants a long gap between summations and/or the charge and the start of jury deliberations, or for jury deliberations to begin and then quickly shut down because of a lengthy recess.
Look on the bright side. This break allows Trump to campaign for six straight days. Unified Reich!!
They haven't been convening on Wednesdays since the beginning, allowing judge to address other matters on his docket.Point taken. You sure Wednesday was not available?
OkThey haven't been convening on Wednesdays since the beginning, allowing judge to address other matters on his docket.
Where did I say anything about an appeal?I assume you're reading the daily transcripts.
How exactly has the judge erred? What do you believe are the best grounds for appeal?
You said the trial is a “disgrace.” A judge is presiding over the trial. Where has he screwed up? Should he have dismissed the indictment or some portion of it? Why?Where did I say anything about an appeal?
The fact that they pursued the case at all kills their credibility, for the reasons I mentioned and more.
You said the trial is a “disgrace.” A judge is presiding over the trial. Where has he screwed up? Should he have dismissed the indictment or some portion of it? Why?
I recognize you don’t have a substantive response. That’s ok. I get it. It just doesn’t feel right to you. And to the pro-Trump media.
WTF? Did you have a stroke or something?You said the trial is a “disgrace.” A judge is presiding over the trial. Where has he screwed up? Should he have dismissed the indictment or some portion of it? Why?
I recognize you don’t have a substantive response. That’s ok. I get it. It just doesn’t feel right to you. And to the pro-Trump media.
Let me help you out here as it’s clear that written communication is not your forte. It appears you’re trying to say that the case never should have been PROSECUTED. That goes to the issue of prosecutorial discretion. Certainly an argument can be made that the decision to prosecute was overreaching or overkill or piling on or something else. But that ship has long since sailed. If the indictment was legally defective, that would have resulted in a successful motion many months ago. That didn’t happen. If the prosecution failed to make a case at trial, that would have been the subject of a successful motion at the end of the state’s case. That didn’t happen. Now it’s going to a jury who, unlike you, has heard every word of testimony and will examine every piece of evidence. They will weigh credibility and make a call based on the facts and the law that will be read to them. That’s how it works. If there were errors, they will be the subject of an appeal.WTF? Did you have a stroke or something?
The.
Trial.
Itself.
Is.
A.
Disgrace.
The fact that the trial EXISTS is a disgrace.
I didn’t say anything about the judge or an appeal or anything like that.
Try responding to what i actually write. Maybe that will help. Or keep looking like a dumbass.
Either way is good with me.
Let me help you out here as it’s clear that written communication is not your forte. It appears you’re trying to say that the case never should have been PROSECUTED. That goes to the issue of prosecutorial discretion. Certainly an argument can be made that the decision to prosecute was overreaching or overkill or piling on or something else. But that ship has long since sailed. If the indictment was legally defective, that would have resulted in a successful motion many months ago. That didn’t happen. If the prosecution failed to make a case at trial, that would have been the subject of a successful motion at the end of the state’s case. That didn’t happen. Now it’s going to a jury who, unlike you, has heard every word of testimony and will examine every piece of evidence. They will weigh credibility and make a call based on the facts and the law that will be read to them. That’s how it works. If there were errors, they will be the subject of an appeal.
Oh, go f**k yourself, Mr “I recognize you don’t have a substantive response, it just doesn’t feel right to you and the Trump media.”I doubt you’ve ever set foot in a criminal courtroom, but keep wowing us with your expertise. And keep going with your angry, personal attacks. I know that, ultimately, that’s all you’ve ever got.
"We are tired of your…….. attempts to steal from us and change what makes America great, to what makes America Russia."Lower than sewage…. Libs, please understand what damage that you’ve created with your “feelz”.
MAGA is trying to keep you from chains, that you continually keep begging for all of us.
If you don’t aggressively beg for forgiveness one day soon, and I mean totally beg on both knees, you will be held accountable .
We are tired of your…….. attempts to steal from us and change what makes America great, to what makes America Russia.
Consider yourself warned.
Do you know who sat with his hands folded, in his lap, with his mouth closed, while Trump was president?"We are tired of your…….. attempts to steal from us and change what makes America great, to what makes America Russia."
I think you're addressing this to the wrong side of the aisle. It's MAGA world that's all gungho for Putin... Have you never read posts from Mas and dbm?
I thinkthe fact that the Prosecution announced after a day or two of Cohen's testimony that he was the last witness, sort of indicates that he was the witness they wanted to appear at the end of their case. The fact that they didn't feel a need to amend that schedule following cross exam, sort of belies the blather coming from the Right that somehow Cohen wasn't a valuable witness. If they had felt any need to "clean up" Cohen's testimony beyond redirect, they had options to do so...Just saw a headline "Defense rests in Trump trial." This has to be a mistake. I remember Trump insisting that he would testify. What's going on??
Really? All those white supremacists murdering people during Trump's reign don't count for you? I didn't think you were so gullible to believe nonsense just because Trump claims it to be true? You probably believe more US servicemen died under Biden than Trump as well, but that would be really stupid...Do you know who sat with his hands folded, in his lap, with his mouth closed, while Trump was president?
EVERY GD TERRORIST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. Including Putin.
I wonder if F12/cntrl/D shuts down your program. Cosmic 5 short circuit... must have power...
I hear you, but I don't think it's so cut and dried. Cohen's admission on cross that he stole from Trump was a bomb and that couldn't have played well with the jury. That doesn't destroy him as a witness nor negate his beneficial (for the prosecution) testimony but it certainly doesn't help. It doesn't help the jury's view of the prosecution team either.I thinkthe fact that the Prosecution announced after a day or two of Cohen's testimony that he was the last witness, sort of indicates that he was the witness they wanted to appear at the end of their case. The fact that they didn't feel a need to amend that schedule following cross exam, sort of belies the blather coming from the Right that somehow Cohen wasn't a valuable witness. If they had felt any need to "clean up" Cohen's testimony beyond redirect, they had options to do so...
I don't think the Prosecution was surprised by any element of Cohen's cross examination. They spent a great deal of time conditioning the jury to his unsavory nature. But his testimony was corroborated by mountains of witness testimony and submitted evidence. The Defense opted to try and attack Cohen's credibility, but the Prosecution had already baked that into the cake.
Lots of unsavory and downright despicable chracters testify against their co-conspirators. Mob figures like Sammy the Bull, Whitey Bulger, and numerous others have provided testimony that resulted in people they knew being convicted. It's not just Cohen's testimony- it's all backed up with evidence. And never once did the defense even try to explain the $130,000 payment written on Weselberg's stationary.
You're right, it is unreal. But you fall for it, anyway.
Dbm why do you believe these twitter people. I don’t get it. That pro swing guy isn’t a lawyer. He has no clue about trials
They've been right about virtually everything in this trial thus far. That's why.Dbm why do you believe these twitter people. I don’t get it. That pro swing guy isn’t a lawyer. He has no clue about trials
They have no idea what they are talking about. Guy isn’t a lawyer. He doesn’t know trial procedure. Evidence etc. why don’t you just post. When you filter it through these twitter idiots it just clouds shit up with useless opinionsThey've been right about virtually everything in this trial thus far. That's why.
No, they've exclusively said things you like so far. That's not the same as being right.They've been right about virtually everything in this trial thus far. That's why.
Takes forever to type on this damn phone. Much easier to find someone else echoing your own thoughts.They have no idea what they are talking about. Guy isn’t a lawyer. He doesn’t know trial procedure. Evidence etc. why don’t you just post. When you filter it through these twitter idiots it just clouds shit up with useless opinions
Takes forever to type on this damn phone. Much easier to find someone else echoing your own thoughts.
Former AG of Kansas.
Have we seen the jury instructions?
You must be kidding! You’ve posted Twitter Twit after Twitter Twit that said the case would be dismissed immediately. It never was. You don’t know anything and what you think you know is misinformation fed to you by your Twitter feed. It’s 95% false (estimate, which may be low) yet you never learn and aren’t smart enough to know it.They've been right about virtually everything in this trial thus far. That's why.
What? I've said all along a guilty verdict was the most likely outcome. This is NYC they are completely corrupt. With any remotely sane judge yes this would've been dismissed immediately. But here we have a foreign born Marxist judge.You must be kidding! You’ve posted Twitter Twit after Twitter Twit that said the case would be dismissed immediately. It never was. You don’t know anything and what you think you know is misinformation fed to you by your Twitter feed. It’s 95% false (estimate, which may be low) yet you never learn and aren’t smart enough to know it.
Here is a picture of corrupt. Trump gave her a job and she is paying him back.What? I've said all along a guilty verdict was the most likely outcome. This is NYC they are completely corrupt. With any remotely sane judge yes this would've been dismissed immediately. But here we have a foreign born Marxist judge.
If trump loses you should probably take some time to reflect with a glass of Kool aid.What? I've said all along a guilty verdict was the most likely outcome. This is NYC they are completely corrupt. With any remotely sane judge yes this would've been dismissed immediately. But here we have a foreign born Marxist judge.
You are an extremely desperate Trump sycophant. I’ve never seen anything like it. You post insane take after insane take from Trumpster Twitter Twits because you desperately want your Lord let off the hook. There’s no evidence the Judge is a Marxist, but you thoughtlessly repeat the rants of your Lord and your fellow sycophants. Foreign born too? You should be embarrassed. If Trump wins or loses the trial, it won’t be because the Judge is a foreign-born insane Marxist - and I didn’t think either state case should have gone to trial, but not our call. Your take is totally moronic.What? I've said all along a guilty verdict was the most likely outcome. This is NYC they are completely corrupt. With any remotely sane judge yes this would've been dismissed immediately. But here we have a foreign born Marxist judge.
You realize Biden has had almost 200 judicial appointments. Trump the same. That’s not how they all think. DumbbbbbbbHere is a picture of corrupt. Trump gave her a job and she is paying him back.