Monday, April 15th: First Ever Criminal Trial for a Former US President

[stxjimmy]

Strong opening by Trump's legal team.
View attachment 2341457

Love-fifteen.

 

[dmallord]

Trump's public attack, blasting Cohen, follows the evidence presented today about the checks. Trump went to some lengths to tell the cameras that Cohen was a convicted criminal and went to jail for those charges. So eager to rant, Trump ignored the gag order he is under, again.

Standing before cameras outside the court building, Trumpasaur-like hands gestured to indicate that the tiny space, a tiny line, wasn't big enough to write more than a couple of words. "Legal defense,' he spread his hands to explain the purpose of the checks he personally signed to Michael Cohen on said little line.

He explained that it was 'just bookkeeping,' normal accounting practices and that it was no criminal matter.

This attack against a witness will join the other gag violations that Judge Merchan will take Trump to task again tomorrow morning before the jury is brought in.

 

[SmokingFap]

"Just bookkeeping" sounds like "just locker room talk".

 

[dmallord]

It sounds more like cook-the-books accounting jargon to pay a 'hatchet' man. To make the entry on that tiny line clearer Trump should have written: Hatchet fee/legal.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Interesting. Trump tried dragging out the Stormy Daniels payment until AFTER the election (had he won, which he did with help from Russia, he would have not paid a dime).

Daniels' lawyer realized what was going on and put a "drop-dead" date for payment the summer before the election.

 

[desecration]

Ooopsie for the prosecution:

Judicial Watch Sues Energy Department for Records on Retroactive Termination of President Trump’s Security Clearance

 

[LLCox]

*pooooot*

 

[IrezumiKiss]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1782794884249755770

https://twitter.com/x/status/1782796475027919097

 

[icanhelp1]

It sounds more like cook-the-books accounting jargon to pay a 'hatchet' man. To make the entry on that tiny line clearer Trump should have written: Hatchet fee/legal.

In Trump trial, Manhattan DA Bragg's hocus-pocus case exposed on first day

Like a skilled magician, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg hopes his pretense and bag of legal tricks will fool jurors in the Trump hush money trial

By Gregg Jarrett Fox News
Published April 23, 2024 3:00am EDT | Updated April 23, 2024 4:18am EDT

“• FacebookGregg Jarrett: If your last name is Trump, the standard of justice is turned on its head
Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett on jury selection beginning in the Trump hush money trial, which he argues is a double standard of justice for the former president.
Hocus-pocus is a meaningless distraction or illusion that is intended to fool. That neatly summarizes District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Donald Trump. The DA hopes to snooker a Manhattan jury into convicting the former president with a bag of legal tricks.
In most courtrooms, the chicanery would never work. But in this Trump-hating venue the defendant’s jury of purported peers are likely predisposed to accept magic for magic’s sake. They may want to believe there’s no white rabbit behind Bragg’s back, despite the pink ears peaking around his coat.

The first sleight of hand happened the moment the lead prosecutor addressed jurors during opening statements on Monday. Assistant DA Matthew Colangelo (formerly Joe Biden’s number three official at the Justice Department) told the panel, "This case is about a criminal conspiracy." Really?

TRUMP TRIAL: FORMER PRESIDENT 'INNOCENT,' SAYS DEFENSE AS DA ALLEGES 'CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY'
Why, then, is Trump not charged with that? Even though Colangelo repeatedly accused the defendant of participating in a criminal conspiracy, the word "conspiracy" can be found nowhere in Bragg’s indictment. It’s not there because there was no criminal conspiracy. But that didn’t stop the prosecutor from deceiving the jury by arguing about an uncharged crime. Like a skilled magician, he hopes his pretense will fool them.

Undeterred, Colangelo used pejorative terms to portray the Daniels cash as a nefarious scheme without bothering to mention that such non-disclosure agreements are perfectly legal and routine. Also, lawful and quite common was the alleged "catch and kill" device used by the tabloid, National Enquirer. On Trump’s behalf, it bought the rights to Daniels’ story about her supposed relationship with him but declined to publish it. Contractually, it had every right to do that.

Video
None of this stopped the prosecutor from informing the jury that all of this constitutes "an illegal conspiracy to undermine a presidential election." Like most illusions, it seems plausible on the surface. But wait. Let’s check the indictment again. Every single one of the 34 charges against Trump took place in 2017. You’ll note that this is after the 2016 election. It’s quite the magic trick to have committed crimes before they allegedly occurred.
Colangelo must be new to politics or a neophyte reader of history. He’s under the mistaken impression that campaigns never try to bury negative stories or promote positive ones. In truth, it’s been going on for more than two centuries. This prompted the defense in its opening statement to warn the jury, "I have a spoiler alert, there is nothing wrong with trying to influence an election; it’s called democracy." Trump attorney Todd Blanche then added, "They put something sinister on it."
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Blanche offered a full-throated defense of his famous client when he declared to the jury, "President Trump is innocent." He described how Trump had nothing to do with the bookkeeping or the 34 invoices reflecting the same number of charged counts. He assigned his lawyer at the time, Michael Cohen, to resolve the demands for money, which he did. Cohen booked the cost as legal services and expenses, which they were.

Video
Why did Trump capitulate to what smacks of blackmail or extortion? Blanche offered this explanation: "Stormy was an attempt to try to embarrass Trump with all sorts of allegations damaging to him and damaging to his family. Trump fought back to protect his family, reputation, and brand…and that is not a crime." Indeed, it is not.

The defense contends that no crimes were committed at all, that Trump was targeted because he’s running for president, and that unscrupulous prosecutors motivated by politics built their case on clever deceptions, an abuse of the law, and liars who cannot be trusted. While much of this should be self-evident, Bragg is committed to employing a hocus-pocus strategy to fool the jury.
Video
Through his minion, Colangelo, the lefty DA accuses Trump of "conspiring to influence the 2016 presidential election" without recognizing the obvious hypocrisy. It is Bragg, himself, who is guilty of election interference in 2024 by bringing a legally absurd case designed to take Trump off the campaign trail while his opponent, Joe Biden, freely blankets key states in advance of the November balloting.
It’s a neat trick called "lawfare" — weaponizing the law to persecute a political enemy under the guise of a legitimate prosecution. It doesn’t matter that any conviction will surely be overturned on appeal. By then, the damage will be done.

For now, we are left to watch and wait, wondering whether Manhattan jurors will fall for the legal illusions and distractions conjured up by an unprincipled trickster called Alvin Bragg.”

 

[IrezumiKiss]

my goodness.

That's quite the cut and paste job there. Basically everything on the page without the HTML stuff!

https://media.tenor.com/KLwoE6_9WMcAAAAM/anxiety-spongebob.gif

 

[icanhelp1]

my goodness.

That's quite the cut and paste job there. Basically everything on the page without the HTML stuff!

https://media.tenor.com/KLwoE6_9WMcAAAAM/anxiety-spongebob.gif

No worse than your constant barrage of twitter post.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

No worse than your constant barrage of twitter post.

No, Twitter posts are short bites that link you to more or other related fare.

You literally jacked and dumped the whole damn page to read. Pretty sure it's a TOS violation, too.

Kinda feel sorry for Gregg Jarrett, he's not getting any residuals outta that aggregate!

 

[icanhelp1]

No, Twitter posts are short bites that link you to more or other related fare.

You literally jacked and dumped the whole damn page to read. Pretty sure it's a TOS violation, too.

Kinda feel sorry for Gregg Jarrett, he's not getting any residuals outta that aggregate!

I presented it as an informational read. It's targeted to objective readers not Trump haters. You have the option to gloss over it, ignore it or read it for a different angle and formulate your own opinion. If it's a TOS violation it was not my intention.

 

[adrina]

Fox News and "objective".

 

[IrezumiKiss]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1782799051982823442

https://twitter.com/x/status/1782774270269018145

 

[desecration]

Groupthink Chorus Emerges at Trump Trial

 

[AWhole6]

I just thought this criminal trial, regarding Trump's illegal (allegedly, but c'mon) hush money payments, accounting, and reporting, should have its own thread. I'm sure next Monday, there will be a tsunami of news, and if not before then. Feel free to post any relevant stories or videos (on BOTH sides ) here.

I have no doubt that Ol' Babydoll Hands isn't done filing frivolous motions and lawsuits. And I wouldn't be shocked if his cronies on the Supreme Court step in at some point. But as of this post, it's full steam ahead on the first criminal trial of a former president in United States history.

Waste of taxpayers money!

 

[BrightShinyGirl]

Explosive testimony from the David Pecker, the former CEO of the National Enquirer today about his criminal conspiracy with Donald Trump to commit election fraud. He ran a "catch and kill" operation, buying up the exclusive rights to any news story that would be damaging to Trump and making sure it never saw the light of day. This provides context for Trump's use of election funds to bribe Stormy Daniels.

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/22/1246321962/trump-hush-money

 

[ByteMe13]

It’s hilarious that Trump could be done in by a Pecker.

 

[LLCox]

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It's targeted to objective readers not Trump haters.

It's targeted alright, and you occupy the bullseye of said target.

 

[Lazaran]

Explosive testimony from the David Pecker, the former CEO of the National Enquirer today about his criminal conspiracy with Donald Trump to commit election fraud. He ran a "catch and kill" operation, buying up the exclusive rights to any news story that would be damaging to Trump and making sure it never saw the light of day. This provides context for Trump's use of election funds to bribe Stormy Daniels.

https://www.npr.org/2024/04/22/1246321962/trump-hush-money

The jury is going to get a much clearer picture of the corrupt orange traitor’s criminality as it relates to election law without the obfuscating right wing lies and gaslighting that the general public is constantly subjected to:

 

[ByteMe13]

Waste of taxpayers money!

Exactly! They should just declare Trump an enemy combatant and send him to GITMO.

 

[butters]

Ooopsie for the prosecution:

Judicial Watch Sues Energy Department for Records on Retroactive Termination of President Trump’s Security Clearance

https://th.bing.com/th?id=ODLS.1b1ae8de-6359-4fb6-a0d3-49fb4419967e&w=32&h=32&qlt=90&pcl=fffffa&o=6&pid=1.2
Media Bias/Fact Check
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/judicial-watch

Judicial Watch – Bias and Credibility - Media Bias/Fact Check​

Web3 days ago · Overall, we rate Judicial Watch Questionable based on extreme right-wing bias, promotion of conspiracy theories, and an abysmal fact-check record. Detailed Report Reasoning: Conspiracy, Propaganda, Numerous Failed Fact Checks

https://adfontesmedia.com/judicial-watch-bias-and-reliability/


Bias: Hyper-Partisan Right

Reliability: Unreliable, Problematic

Reliability scores for articles and shows are on a scale of 0-64. Scores above 40 are generally good; scores below 24 are generally problematic. Scores between 24-40 indicate a range of possibilities, with some sources falling there because they are heavy in opinion and analysis, and some because they have a high variation in reliability between articles.

Bias scores for articles and shows are on a scale of -42 to +42, with higher negative scores being more left, higher positive scores being more right, and scores closer to zero being minimally biased, equally balanced, or exhibiting a centrist bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Watch

The organization has filed lawsuits against government climate scientists. JW has made numerous false and unsubstantiated claims that have been picked up by right-wing news outlets and promoted by conservative figures. Former U.S. President Donald Trump has repeatedly cited false claims by Judicial Watch about voter fraud. Various courts have dismissed the vast majority of its lawsuits.[3]

 

[dmallord]

In Trump trial, Manhattan DA Bragg's hocus-pocus case exposed on first day

Like a skilled magician, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg hopes his pretense and bag of legal tricks will fool jurors in the Trump hush money trial

By Gregg Jarrett Fox News
Published April 23, 2024 3:00am EDT | Updated April 23, 2024 4:18am EDT

“• FacebookGregg Jarrett: If your last name is Trump, the standard of justice is turned on its head
Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett on jury selection beginning in the Trump hush money trial, which he argues is a double standard of justice for the former president.
Hocus-pocus is a meaningless distraction or illusion that is intended to fool. That neatly summarizes District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against Donald Trump. The DA hopes to snooker a Manhattan jury into convicting the former president with a bag of legal tricks.
In most courtrooms, the chicanery would never work. But in this Trump-hating venue the defendant’s jury of purported peers are likely predisposed to accept magic for magic’s sake. They may want to believe there’s no white rabbit behind Bragg’s back, despite the pink ears peaking around his coat.

The first sleight of hand happened the moment the lead prosecutor addressed jurors during opening statements on Monday. Assistant DA Matthew Colangelo (formerly Joe Biden’s number three official at the Justice Department) told the panel, "This case is about a criminal conspiracy." Really?

TRUMP TRIAL: FORMER PRESIDENT 'INNOCENT,' SAYS DEFENSE AS DA ALLEGES 'CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY'
Why, then, is Trump not charged with that? Even though Colangelo repeatedly accused the defendant of participating in a criminal conspiracy, the word "conspiracy" can be found nowhere in Bragg’s indictment. It’s not there because there was no criminal conspiracy. But that didn’t stop the prosecutor from deceiving the jury by arguing about an uncharged crime. Like a skilled magician, he hopes his pretense will fool them.

Undeterred, Colangelo used pejorative terms to portray the Daniels cash as a nefarious scheme without bothering to mention that such non-disclosure agreements are perfectly legal and routine. Also, lawful and quite common was the alleged "catch and kill" device used by the tabloid, National Enquirer. On Trump’s behalf, it bought the rights to Daniels’ story about her supposed relationship with him but declined to publish it. Contractually, it had every right to do that.

Video
None of this stopped the prosecutor from informing the jury that all of this constitutes "an illegal conspiracy to undermine a presidential election." Like most illusions, it seems plausible on the surface. But wait. Let’s check the indictment again. Every single one of the 34 charges against Trump took place in 2017. You’ll note that this is after the 2016 election. It’s quite the magic trick to have committed crimes before they allegedly occurred.
Colangelo must be new to politics or a neophyte reader of history. He’s under the mistaken impression that campaigns never try to bury negative stories or promote positive ones. In truth, it’s been going on for more than two centuries. This prompted the defense in its opening statement to warn the jury, "I have a spoiler alert, there is nothing wrong with trying to influence an election; it’s called democracy." Trump attorney Todd Blanche then added, "They put something sinister on it."
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Blanche offered a full-throated defense of his famous client when he declared to the jury, "President Trump is innocent." He described how Trump had nothing to do with the bookkeeping or the 34 invoices reflecting the same number of charged counts. He assigned his lawyer at the time, Michael Cohen, to resolve the demands for money, which he did. Cohen booked the cost as legal services and expenses, which they were.

Video
Why did Trump capitulate to what smacks of blackmail or extortion? Blanche offered this explanation: "Stormy was an attempt to try to embarrass Trump with all sorts of allegations damaging to him and damaging to his family. Trump fought back to protect his family, reputation, and brand…and that is not a crime." Indeed, it is not.

The defense contends that no crimes were committed at all, that Trump was targeted because he’s running for president, and that unscrupulous prosecutors motivated by politics built their case on clever deceptions, an abuse of the law, and liars who cannot be trusted. While much of this should be self-evident, Bragg is committed to employing a hocus-pocus strategy to fool the jury.
Video
Through his minion, Colangelo, the lefty DA accuses Trump of "conspiring to influence the 2016 presidential election" without recognizing the obvious hypocrisy. It is Bragg, himself, who is guilty of election interference in 2024 by bringing a legally absurd case designed to take Trump off the campaign trail while his opponent, Joe Biden, freely blankets key states in advance of the November balloting.
It’s a neat trick called "lawfare" — weaponizing the law to persecute a political enemy under the guise of a legitimate prosecution. It doesn’t matter that any conviction will surely be overturned on appeal. By then, the damage will be done.

For now, we are left to watch and wait, wondering whether Manhattan jurors will fall for the legal illusions and distractions conjured up by an unprincipled trickster called Alvin Bragg.”

Fox News?

Where to start? So many errors in the article are wrong, but just for fun here are a few things that standout:

• Pejorative DA term: 'nefarious scheme' similar to 'crooked DOJ' or 'sleepy-eyed Joe'?
• Pejorative terms by Fox: 'minion, Colangelo,' 'lawfare,' 'unprincipled trickster,' 'liars who cannot be trusted'

BTW, according to legal experts, conspiracy does not have to be charged under NY law. Just FYI to Fox.

The defense, poor as it seems, doesn't have to prove Trump is innocent; the DA is required by law to show Trump is guilty in the eyes of twelve jurors.

The legal approach used by the DA is standard law 101. Lay the foundation, build the credibility brick by brick, and as the trial progresses, pave the path to how all the actions by Trump's cabal meet the definition of election criminality.

Oh, Bragg is not charged in this case - how did that get into the article - typos?