An example, today the judge wouldn’t let him explain a yes or no answer.
Trump Trial - New York
- Thread starter Bowlmania
- Start date
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.
If you get tired of my laughing emojis then stop making stupid partisan posts.
You play the pathetic victim card even better than Trump.
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??
He fell asleep and his lawyers rushed to inform judge he wasn't testifying.
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.
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!!
Trump Roasted For 'Amazing Lie' In Courthouse Speech
MSNBC's Stephanie Ruhle said Trump's claim about the area surrounding the courthouse was "categorically FALSE."
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."
They 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?
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.
That's why people call it a cult of personality.
If Trump claims it isn't right, then they all have to claim it isn't right.
This is who these people are folks. Get him. Get him at any cost whatsoever. These people are beyond despicable.
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.
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.
If you had bothered to read post 1433, you would have known what I was talking about and this all could have been avoided. Maybe try actually reading what’s written next time. Just a thought.
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.”
"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?
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 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.
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...
"Trump’s own Justice Department alleged that a mass murder in New York City in 2017, which killed eight people and injured others, was a terrorist attack carried out in support of ISIS; Trump repeatedly lamented this attack during his presidency. Trump’s Justice Department also alleged that a 2019 attack by an extremist member of Saudi Arabia’s military, which killed three US servicemembers and injured others at a military base in Florida, “was motivated by jihadist ideology” and was carried out by a longtime “associate” of al Qaeda.
In addition, there were a variety of other terrorist attacks during Trump’s presidency. Notably, Trump’s Justice Department said it was a “domestic terrorist attack” when one of Trump’s supporters mailed improvised explosive devices to prominent Democratic officials, CNN and other people in 2018.
In 2019, a White supremacist pleaded guilty to multiple charges in New York, including first-degree murder in furtherance of an act of terrorism, for killing a Black man in March 2017 to try to start a race war. And Trump’s Justice Department described a 2019 shooting massacre at a Walmart in Texas as an act of domestic terrorism; the gunman who killed 23 people was targeting Latinos."
Hell even suicide rates among US military were higher in 2019 than in any year under Biden...
The attack at the Kabul airport was horrible and resulted in 13 deaths. But that is the total amount of deaths of US military in hostile action under Biden. On the other hand, during Trump's 2017-2020 presidency KIAs were 65, more than 4x as many...
Defense Casualty Analysis System
Any more ridiculous MAGA talking points about "Trump the Peacemaker" that you need me to dispel?
Last edited:
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.
With respect to the defense, Costello appears to have been a poor witness. His grandstanding, muttering and other bizarre conduct from the stand likely alienated the jury, particularly when they saw that he was pissing off Merchan. The jury's favorite person in the courtroom is almost always the judge. That's because the judge typically fawns over the jury, thanks them profusely for their service, is respectful of their time, tries to entertain them with corny jokes, etc. When the jury sees a judge is repeatedly angry with a witness or counsel, even if it's at sidebar (they don't miss a thing), that militates against the jury warming up to that witness or lawyer. It definitely impacts perception.
That's said, it's almost impossible to get a clear read unless you're physically in the courtroom for the duration of a trial. This will be a suspenseful verdict.
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.
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
No, they've exclusively said things you like so far. That's not the same as being right.
Takes forever to type on this damn phone. Much easier to find someone else echoing your own thoughts.
Former AG of Kansas.
Last edited:
Everything Judge Merchan told Trump jurors
Here's where the prosecution and the defense stand on the instructions that jurors will hear before giving a Trump verdict.
www.newsweek.com
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.
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.
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.
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.
Similar threads
