jerrymahoney

So if informally the Prosecution may object. From the same ruling as above: Turning to the amorphous defense of "presence of counsel", defendant has in the past hinted, implied, and now declared that he will rely on said defense. However, Defendant has never asked this Court whether he would be permitted to do so. This Court now rules that Defendant may not offer, or even suggest, the defense of "presence of counsel".

You rang? Trump Attacks R.F.K. Jr., a Third-Party Wild Card Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the independent presidential candidate, has asserted that he intends to be a “spoiler” for both Donald Trump and President Biden. March 27, 2024, 3:25 p.m. ET vuia NY Times Former President Donald J. Trump attacked Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the independent presidential candidate, on Wednesday morning, casting Mr. Kennedy as a liberal Democrat in disguise while also seeming to back him as a spoiler for President Biden’s campaign. Mr. Trump, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, pointed in particular to Mr. Kennedy’s views on climate change and the environment, writing on his social media site that Mr. Kennedy was more “radical Left” than Mr. Biden. https://archive.is/YxBmM

Per Judge Merchan's 18 MAR 2024 ruling: The People have inquired countless times from Defendant whether he intended to rely on advice of counsel. Likewise, this Court has given defendant numerous opportunities to declare his intent. Ultimately, he was directed to give notice by March 11, 2024. He has now made clear that he will not invoke the defense of advice of counsel. People's VI is GRANTED. https://www.justsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Just-Security-NY-2016-Election-Interference-Case-Clearinghouse-Order-on-State-of-New-York-motions-in-limine-March-18-2024.pdf

Bogart was 5'8" -- Ingrid Bergman was s5'9". These are the lifts Bogart wore in their scenes together:

And sometimes amateurs posting on a website get it wrong. My amateur view on what the reporter with 30 years of Wall Street reporting experience was maybe suggesting is that, if the stocks are transferred to e.g. a trust, they are not sold, only pledged as collateral. And the volatility of the share price then becomes a concern to whomever was taking those shares as collateral for a loan.

Gee I guess the financial reporter at the NY Times never thought of that.

March 21, 2024 Mr. Trump could also obtain the board’s blessing to transfer his shares into a trust, or give them to a family member as a gift. By placing them in a trust, Mr. Trump would be able to use the shares as collateral for a loan; a family member, too, could borrow against those shares. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/business/trump-truth-social-merger.html

So a Business Forum type discussion of the IPO. But for this topic, what's more germane ,,is if or how Trump might use this largesse for the $175 million bond coming due soon.

DA Bragg has estimated that "The trial is expected to last about six weeks" -- not 6 minutes. https://www.npr.org/2024/03/14/1238639425/trump-hush-money-trial-delay

With due respect to Source CNN, in other reports: Judge in hush money case hits Trump with partial gag order The ruling bars the former president from talking about witnesses and court staffers in the case, which is set to go to trial April 15. March 27, 2024, 2:09 AM +07 / Updated March 27, 2024, 4:52 AM +07 The judge presiding over the New York criminal case against Donald Trump on Tuesday slapped the former president with a partial gag order. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/judge-hush-money-case-hits-trump-partial-gag-order-rcna145170

This is from page 13 in the 18 MAR 2024 reply: The Attorney General wrongfully argues that new “transactions were completed,” , every time Defendants submitted an annual statement relating to long-completed loan. This argument directly and disrespectfully contradicts this Court’s June 2023 ruling. ********* The Appeals Court did not address any specifics of the request for stay but a partial stay was granted.

All I know is that it was in the reply brief submitted 18 MAR 2024 to the Appellate Court: The Judgment Contradicts This Court’s Statute-of-Limitations Ruling. First, Supreme Court’s judgment clearly failed to comply with this Court’s June 2023 ruling on the statute of limitations.

Alternative facts.

I've read a fair amount of the topic and will say: Even if the OP has a good case of an illegitimate activity, a phone call even if his Thai GF makes the call in Thai, ain't going to cut it.

Well whoopee do for U. You got me. I just reacted to Kuhn Danderman's WHEN, not IF. But from the more current topic: David B. Saxe, a former judge on the appeals court that ruled on Monday, said that the court’s decision to short circuit Ms. James’s collection efforts suggests that some of the judges were uncomfortable with Justice Engoron’s ruling. “My view is that the court indicates it has difficulty with the breadth of the lower court’s decision,” said Mr. Saxe, who retired in 2017 after 36 years on the bench, 19 of them on the appeals court. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/25/nyregion/trump-bond-reduced.html

when ? What if the Appellate Court rules all the claims are void as beyond THEIR definition of the statute of limitations and not Judge Engoron's.

Maybe convictions and appeal first.

Maybe the Appellate Court agreed with the Trump brief that Judge Engoron ignored the Appellate Court's prior ruling on Statute of Limitations and substituted their own definition for the Appellate Court's definition. Supreme Court Entered Judgment Upon the Same “Continuing Wrongs” Previously Rejected by this Court as Bases to Extend the Statute of Limitations (page27) https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/24017947/appeal-filing.pdf

Trump’s Bond in Civil Fraud Case Is Reduced to $175 Million March 25, 2024Updated 3:46 p.m. ET David B. Saxe, a former judge on the appeals court that ruled on Monday, said that the court’s decision to short circuit Ms. James’s collection efforts suggests that some of the judges were uncomfortable with Justice Engoron’s ruling. “My view is that the court indicates it has difficulty with the breadth of the lower court’s decision,” said Mr. Saxe, who retired in 2017 after 36 years on the bench, 19 of them on the appeals court. “They had other options available to them, and they issued a broad-based stay,” he continued, which he said suggests “that there is a view that they’re going to need to take a hard look at the lower court’s decision.” https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/25/nyregion/trump-bond-reduced.html

So hope doesn't spring eternal. Just 10 days. Also stayed: 4) barring defendant Donald J. Trump and the corporate defendants from applying for loans from New York financial institutions for three years; and https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/ncwlife.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/7/c7/7c73e03a-c6fb-5bc5-b014-3e4679c189f6/6601aa2e43a11.pdf.pdf

I will change my response to this after reading the following: March 20, 2024 For starters, McAfee has expressed skepticism that all the defendants can be tried at once. That likely would mean multiple trials, along with difficult decisions for the prosecution about which of the remaining 15 defendants should be tried together. https://www.ajc.com/politics/breaking-fulton-judge-allows-trump-others-to-appeal-fani-willis-removal-ruling/Z7NZGYJVXRDGDFEBMCWPSTBIEQ/

That would presume the scheduling of who would be in the first round would be up to the Prosecution.

Maybe you should say 'dates' as in plural for remaining 15 defendants: Fulton judge ‘very skeptical’ of trying all 19 Trump defendants together 07 SEP 2023 A Fulton County judge on Wednesday appeared highly skeptical of trying all 19 defendants together in the sprawling election interference case involving former President Donald Trump. Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee posed tough questions to Fulton prosecutors, who argued that all of the defendants indicted on racketeering and 40 other charges last month should be tried at the same time, potentially as soon as the end of October (2023) https://www.ajc.com/politics/fulton-judge-denies-chesebro-powell-attempts-to-separate-trials/Q57EQ7BN2FA6NG65RFWWV6SIWQ/

Although all of those who pleaded guilty were so charged, none of those pleas involved the RICO statute *. And no guilty pleas since. * 1 VIOLATION OF THE GEORGIA RICO (RACKETEER INFLUENCEDAND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS) ACT O.C.G.A. 16-14-4( c ) Ex-Trump attorney Jenna Ellis pleads guilty to felony in Fulton 2020 election case Four of 19 indicted in Fulton now have flipped pleas to guilty, agreed to testify https://georgiarecorder.com/2023/10/24/ex-trump-attorney-jenna-ellis-pleads-guilty-to-felony-in-fulton-2020-election-case/

Ain't my bubble. Mr. Trump could also obtain the board’s blessing to transfer his shares into a trust, or give them to a family member as a gift. By placing them in a trust, Mr. Trump would be able to use the shares as collateral for a loan; a family member, too, could borrow against those shares. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/21/business/trump-truth-social-merger.html