Michael Cohen Takes Center Stage in Trump's Hush Money Trial

Skipalongcassidy · May 21

On 5/15/2024 at 7:54 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

Successful criminal prosecutions frequently rely on the testimony of people who are themselves convicted felons.

Prosecutors negate the past behavior of their ‘flawed witnesses’ by use of corroborating testimony from multiple other witnesses and corroborating hard evidence.

Cohen’s part in the Prosecution’s case is not to provide new revelations of Defendant Trump’s crimes, rather to link the events and acts that others have already testified to and for which hard evidence has already been presented.

It’s for the Jury to decide, and it’s getting very close to the time when they will; which perhaps explains the histrionics we’re having to put with from the Defendant’s supporters.

So much for "the truth, the WHOLE truth" part of the swearing in... Key Trump witness nixed after Merchan's stringent rulings reveals what his testimony would have been

Chomper Higgot · May 21

2 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

So much for "the truth, the WHOLE truth" part of the swearing in... Key Trump witness nixed after Merchan's stringent rulings reveals what his testimony would have been

I understand Trump enjoyed the performance, but testimony it was not.

Yagoda · May 22

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

The underlying crime was a campaign finance violation that Michael Cohen pled guilty to.

Michael Cohen Pleads Guilty In Manhattan Federal Court To Eight Counts, Including Criminal Tax Evasion And Campaign Finance Violations

I welcome you to go troll the Department of Justice and tell them they are lying.

Id be happy to lol.

You havent explained what statute Trump violated. What Cohen is guilty of is meaningless when it comes to Trump. You and your ilks failure to answer the question demonstrates again to the world the farce of this situation, the vacuity of your knowledge about legal matters and law, the depth of your irrationality and the fascist, need I say dictatorial use of the legal system.

I wont ask again, the point has been made. After all the testimony is in, there is still....nothing.

Stalinists. The sad part is not the derangement of your movement, but the legnths you are willing to go to destroy one man even if it means you destroy the system.

But thats what you all want. Like your allies prancing around screaming Death to America. Now what do do about all those pesky deplorables that wont see the light and still love their country.

Thank god for the Second Amendment.

Yagoda · May 22

2 hours ago, jerrymahoney said:

i.e. The lawyers will have the jury instructions before closing arguments.

Standard trial practice.

Has anyone see the version of the Falsus in Uno instruction that will be given?

Chomper Higgot · May 22

13 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Id be happy to lol.

You havent explained what statute Trump violated. What Cohen is guilty of is meaningless when it comes to Trump. You and your ilks failure to answer the question demonstrates again to the world the farce of this situation, the vacuity of your knowledge about legal matters and law, the depth of your irrationality and the fascist, need I say dictatorial use of the legal system.

I wont ask again, the point has been made. After all the testimony is in, there is still....nothing.

Stalinists. The sad part is not the derangement of your movement, but the legnths you are willing to go to destroy one man even if it means you destroy the system.

But thats what you all want. Like your allies prancing around screaming Death to America. Now what do do about all those pesky deplorables that wont see the light and still love their country.

Thank god for the Second Amendment.

Second amendment?

What's that got to do with Trump’s criminal trial?

Or are your histrionics progressing?

jerrymahoney · May 22

24 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Standard trial practice.

Yes -- so the defense will maybe be able to argue points that are left out of the jury instructions.

Danderman123 · May 22

32 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Id be happy to lol.

You havent explained what statute Trump violated. What Cohen is guilty of is meaningless when it comes to Trump. You and your ilks failure to answer the question demonstrates again to the world the farce of this situation, the vacuity of your knowledge about legal matters and law, the depth of your irrationality and the fascist, need I say dictatorial use of the legal system.

I wont ask again, the point has been made. After all the testimony is in, there is still....nothing.

Stalinists. The sad part is not the derangement of your movement, but the legnths you are willing to go to destroy one man even if it means you destroy the system.

But thats what you all want. Like your allies prancing around screaming Death to America. Now what do do about all those pesky deplorables that wont see the light and still love their country.

Thank god for the Second Amendment.

New York State Election Law 17-152 will always be a mystery to you.

Yagoda · May 22

19 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Second amendment?

What's that got to do with Trump’s criminal trial?

Or are your histrionics progressing?

The only histrionics I have seen here is the screeching of the Trumpophobes. Readers of the whole thing here can form their own judgement. November will tell.

Yagoda · May 22

3 minutes ago, Danderman123 said:

New York State Election Law 17-152 will always be a mystery to you.

LOL. You woudnt pass a Bar Exam even in a give one to anybody State like Washington.

Chomper Higgot · May 22

4 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

The only histrionics I have seen here is the screeching of the Trumpophobes. Readers of the whole thing here can form their own judgement. November will tell.

Leave me out of this screeching thing you keep banging on about, I’m chilled.

The subject ‘judgement’ is due in a week or two.

I will accept the Jury’s judgement, will you?

Yagoda · May 22

9 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

Yes -- so the defense will maybe be able to argue points that are left out of the jury instructions.

Well the way it used to work is that both sides present whats called "Requests to Charge". You take the Pattern Jury Instructions and gussy them up. The key when you are a Defense attorney is to try to ensure that the instructions relect your point, because if there is an aquittal, case done. Prosecutors have to be careful, because if you gussy up the instructions too much, you could get a reversal on conviction. Once the Judge has the submissions from both parties, he accepts or rejects or changes as needed.

The pattern jury instructions in NY are on the NY Office of Court Admin website. They used to be in Black Three Ring binders so you could change pages when they were revised lol.

Obviously each party supports their requests to charge with case law.

jerrymahoney · May 22

7 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

You take the Pattern Jury Instructions and gussy them up.

As here:

https://nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/175/175.10.pdf

The discussion between Bove and Colangelo related to the "Irrespective" code in the FEC. Judge Merchan said he will resolve that notion, if any, in jury instructions. As Bove said May 16:

Bove: Next, I mentioned " The Irrespective Rule," which is set out in the FEC's regulations and cited, I think, by both parties in their request to charge .

And so, we seek to his have Mr. Smith discuss that (Irrespective) rule, and discuss the focus on whether an expense would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign , which we think is an important issue for the jury to consider with respect to whether the payments at issue could be considered expenditures and /or contributions.

Edited May 22 by jerrymahoney

Yagoda · May 22

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Leave me out of this screeching thing you keep banging on about, I’m chilled.

The subject ‘judgement’ is due in a week or two.

I will accept the Jury’s judgement, will you?

You are one of the bigger screechers here.

Judgements are only "final" after the appeals are finished. If The Magnificent Orange Mensch is convicted, then there will be an appeal. Ill wait till then, even though it will be after the election. Oh wait thats the point isnt it? Thats what show trials are for.

Not that it will make a difference in November, when you really start screeching. Oh right, you aerent a Yank, so your role is just to jump when your government tells you to because we told them to. In that sense, The Giant Orange Loudmouth is gonna be your boss too...screech away!!!

You accept Appellate judgements dont you? Or is that ONLY if the rule the way you want.

Chomper Higgot · May 22

9 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

You are one of the bigger screechers here.

Judgements are only "final" after the appeals are finished. If The Magnificent Orange Mensch is convicted, then there will be an appeal. Ill wait till then, even though it will be after the election. Oh wait thats the point isnt it? Thats what show trials are for.

Not that it will make a difference in November, when you really start screeching. Oh right, you aerent a Yank, so your role is just to jump when your government tells you to because we told them to. In that sense, The Giant Orange Loudmouth is gonna be your boss too...screech away!!!

You accept Appellate judgements dont you? Or is that ONLY if the rule the way you want.

Let me know when you’re done with the forum’s crystal ball, I’d like to borrow it for some stick picks.

Yagoda · May 22

4 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

As here:

https://nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/175/175.10.pdf

The discussion between Bove and Colangelo related to the "Irrespective" code in the FEC. Judge Merchan said he will resolve that notion, if any, in jury instructions. As Bove said May 16:

Bove: Next, I mentioned " The Irrespective Rule," which is set out in the FEC's regulations and cited, I think, by both parties in their request to charge .

And so, we seek to his have Mr. Smith discuss that (Irrespective) rule, and discuss the focus on whether an expense would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign , which we think is an important issue for the jury to consider with respect to whether the payments at issue could be considered expenditures and /or contributions.

Merchands conduct sure is suspect, huh? Wonder why.

Failure to allow Mr. Smith to testify is reversible error

Hanaguma · May 22

Interesting bit from NBC news coverage;

In further debate over jury instructions, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told the judge that the trial evidence could easily support a finding that the other crime was tax fraud.

The argument came during a discussion in which Colangelo said all they have to prove is Trump’s intent to conceal another crime, not that the crime actually happened.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-trial-live-updates-rcna153195

This may answer the long asked question of what is the predicate crime that lets the state bring these charges. The state doesn't have to charge or convice the predicate crime, only prove that it exists. Not even prove what it is, but just the intent of the defendant to conceal it. Interesting...

Yellowtail · May 22

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Okay, I hope the "underlying crime" trolling is over.

Meaning you still don't know.

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

The Defense will give it up tomorrow without having disproven any significant facts that Prosecution witnesses have alleged. That's usually bad for the Defense.

What crimes were proven by the prosecution?

What facts have been alleged?

12 hours ago, Danderman123 said:

Truly, the best hope for Trump is that he got info on one of the jurors and has either threatened or bribed them to hold out for acquittal.

The best hope for Trump is to will the election.

Yagoda · May 22

9 minutes ago, Hanaguma said:

Interesting bit from NBC news coverage;

In further debate over jury instructions, prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told the judge that the trial evidence could easily support a finding that the other crime was tax fraud.

The argument came during a discussion in which Colangelo said all they have to prove is Trump’s intent to conceal another crime, not that the crime actually happened.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-trial-live-updates-rcna153195

This may answer the long asked question of what is the predicate crime that lets the state bring these charges. The state doesn't have to charge or convice the predicate crime, only prove that it exists. Not even prove what it is, but just the intent of the defendant to conceal it. Interesting...

Interesting criminal law issue. That shows how political this whole thing is. Only folks with an agenda stretch and twist the criminal law.

Yellowtail · May 22

32 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

As here:

https://nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/175/175.10.pdf

The discussion between Bove and Colangelo related to the "Irrespective" code in the FEC. Judge Merchan said he will resolve that notion, if any, in jury instructions. As Bove said May 16:

Bove: Next, I mentioned " The Irrespective Rule," which is set out in the FEC's regulations and cited, I think, by both parties in their request to charge .

And so, we seek to his have Mr. Smith discuss that (Irrespective) rule, and discuss the focus on whether an expense would exist irrespective of the candidate's campaign , which we think is an important issue for the jury to consider with respect to whether the payments at issue could be considered expenditures and /or contributions.

Yes, but for the court to admit to this, would be admitting the court knew it to be a fraud all along.

Hanaguma · May 22

3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Meaning you still don't know.

What crimes were proven by the prosecution?

What facts have been alleged?

The best hope for Trump is to will the election.

It seems that the prosecution's theory is that an underlying crime doesn't have to be charged or proven, or even exist. But IF Trump believed he was concealing another crime, that is enough to convict him. Sounds perilously close to Thought Crime to me.

jerrymahoney · May 22

It seems to non-lawyer me that before you get to "another crime" or "unlawful means" or "intent", you have to the answer the question to NY § 175.05 Falsifying business records in the second degree as refenced in the 34x charged crime 175.10:

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree when, with intent to defraud, he:

1. Makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise.

So what was the false entry? If the entry was what it was but was false, what should it have been? And before you say 'campaign expenses', that is not necessarily what would be required under the FEC regs.

Yellowtail · May 22

14 minutes ago, jerrymahoney said:

It seems to non-lawyer me that before you get to "another crime" or "unlawful means" or "intent", you have to the answer the question to NY § 175.05 Falsifying business records in the second degree as refenced in the 34x charged crime 175.10:

A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree when, with intent to defraud, he:

1. Makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise.

So what was the false entry? If the entry was what it was but was false, what should it have been? And before you say 'campaign expenses', that is not necessarily what would be required under the FEC regs.

And as I understand it, the payment and book entries were in Trump's personal, not business books.

cjinchiangrai · May 22

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Second amendment?

What's that got to do with Trump’s criminal trial?

Or are your histrionics progressing?

He is threatening to shoot you. That is what right wing vigilantes do. See Kyle Rittenhouse.

Walker88 · May 22

Oh my!

Besides the guy who claimed "I want to testify; I tell the truth" (who did not testify, as his lawyers are smart enough not to allow it), this is the last thing the jury heard before recessing for the holiday weekend:

The defense called attorney Robert Costello, but they seem to have forgotten that prosecution gets to cross examine AND there were already Costello emails in evidence.

First, Costello sent Cohen an email telling him to hang tough and don't worry (about criminality), "because you are loved.....you have friends in very high places" (the implication being a pardon).

Prosecution asked "Is the 'friend in high places the President?"

Costello: "Yes"

A second email read into evidence had Costello writing:

“Our issue is to get Michael Cohen on the right page without giving the appearance that we are following instructions from Rudy Giuliani and the President”.

Again, this is the last thing the jury heard before their holiday break. Of course they can weigh the testimony of all witnesses however they want, but Costello---according to reports as well as court transcripts---does not seem to come across as a Boy Scout, but rather more as a mob consigliere.

That the defense called Costello as their only narrative witness, in spite of knowing what evidence the prosecution had about his emails (and his manner), would be grounds for me to agree with the defendant to refuse to pay his own legal team. Really poor decision...almost as poor as if they had allowed the defendant to testify.

Danderman123 · May 22

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

Meaning you still don't know.

What crimes were proven by the prosecution?

What facts have been alleged?

Groundhog Day trolling.

Edited May 22 by Danderman123

Walker88 · May 22

28 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

He is threatening to shoot you. That is what right wing vigilantes do. See Kyle Rittenhouse.

The guy is not in touch with reality. As a cultist, he is of the view that his messiah is infallible (or "totally immune"), so that any indictment is---to him---are not only proof of weaponization of the justice system, but also defines anyone, who supports any of the charges, as a Stalinist or a "Death to America" chanter. The subtlety of having different views on different issues is alien to people who run to Fever Swamp media for all of their talking points. To make such a silly leap---to "Stalinists, etc."---is evidence of cult behavior and, in my opinion, an addled brain. It is what drove the goober terrorists to attack the Capitol on 6 Jan 21, injure 140 cops, and set up a gallows to "hang Mike Pence".

If guys like that were of a certain faith that prohibits imaging of their founder, I have no doubt he would accept the challenge of a fatwa and go after Danish cartoonists. He "thanks" the 2nd Amendment, which is, I think, his way of saying death to infidels (ie, those who do not accept the cult leader's infallibility nor immunity).

Edited May 22 by Walker88

Danderman123 · May 22

1 hour ago, Hanaguma said:

It seems that the prosecution's theory is that an underlying crime doesn't have to be charged or proven, or even exist. But IF Trump believed he was concealing another crime, that is enough to convict him. Sounds perilously close to Thought Crime to me.

Concealment of a campaign finance violation.

Groundhog Day trolling

Yellowtail · May 22

Just now, Danderman123 said:

Concealment of a campaign finance violation.

Groundhog Day trolling

You mean concealment of someone else's campaign finance violation don't you?

In any event, do you have a statute number for that? I thought not.

Danderman123 · May 22

1 hour ago, Yellowtail said:

The best hope for Trump is to will the election.

The best hope for Trump is the Unified Reich.

Danderman123 · May 22

Just now, Yellowtail said:

You mean concealment of someone else's campaign finance violation don't you?

In any event, do you have a statute number for that? I thought not.

It's been posted here several times.

Re-posting it won't stop your trolling.

Sign In

Michael Cohen Takes Center Stage in Trump's Hush Money Trial

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Tug

Tug

TorquayFan

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US