I say YES. YOU say NO....Numero Tre! Enjoy!
Comments
-
betrayal,
I have no doubt that he will find legal representation . Even the worst criminals can find lawyers willing to represent them and trump is no exception. I actually think his notoriety is appealing to some lawyers who think they can use this to make a name for themselves (ask Jenna Ellison, Sydney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, et al how that went) Although this may personally upset him, he will simply use the guilty verdict to grift more money from his cult to defend this “injustice “.
2 -
exbrnxgrl and everyone. It is sad that people are still 'dumb' enough to part with their hard-earned cash for Trump. I do think there are lawyers who will think they somehow can do something that others have not been able to do. I'm still amazed by the fact that Blanche bought property close to MaraLago, went to any place where Trump was making any sort of speech etc. and appears to believe deeply in him — became a Republican and otherwise just went full bore being as devoted as a person could be.
It was almost as though he thought in order to do the best job for Trump he had to REALLY be all in. I would like to think that others will see this and be shy about the prospects, but I do think you are right. People who have to display confidence at all times perhaps become somewhat immune to their own likely failings. Trump will find someone to help him and the likelihood is that it will be their un-doing. I just have to say so be it.
0 -
Agreed, but his "injustice" is actually justice for those who feel he thinks he is above the law. Pity that you spend all that time going to law school to earn your "creds" on a slime ball. Damages your credibility I would think in my eyes at least and yes, look at those who thought he was defendable.
0 -
I cannot wait to hear what any of the jurors have to say, if they choose to talk. I was surprised it looks like at least five of the 12 are from the Upper East Side. I think I heard Juror 1, a salesman, was the foreman, tho don’t quote me on that. I was very surprised a verdict was rendered so quickly. I thought for sure it wouldn’t happen till next week. It would seem they had to be mostly all on the same page once they sifted through the evidence and deliberations began, then maybe they hashed out a few of the finer details. Honestly, it really seemed like all the evidence pointed to Trump being guilty. He absolutely knew what was going on and why. They found him guilty because he was, not because they had some vendetta against him.
0 -
divine,
My bestie, the former prosecutor/assistant AG, absolutely stated that there’d be a verdict before the weekend as jurors do not like to have this hanging over their heads during the weekend. We’re FaceTiming in a few minutes and I am looking forward to her legal analysis. Should be a great convo!
0 -
exbrnxgrl, would love to hear some of your friend's analysis, if you and she don't mind. I too thought they'd get a verdict certainly before the week=end though for that different reason — that the guilt was that evident. Never even thought about wanting it over for the week-end, but it makes sense.
0 -
1 -
Canadian here. I had my "Sunday Martini" today. Tick Tock - the crocodile is circling the boat. I fear it could get really ugly before it gets better but there is room now for hope.
0 -
My friend was extremely impressed by the prosecution’s presentation of the case and simply dumbfounded by Todd Blanche and Susan Necheles (pronunciation: necklace). Necheles is the woman who cross examined Stormy Daniel’s. She is aware of her reputation in NY’s legal circles and was surprised when Necheles did not deliver the summation as she is known to give excellent summations. Turns out, according to gossip, that trump is mad at Necheles as she lost the NY tax fraud case and “punished” her by having Blanche give the summation. His summation has been panned by everyone from legal experts to my mail carrier. How’d that punishment work out, Donnie?
1 -
From a Daily Beast article: While it is not true that fast verdicts are always pro-defense or pro-prosecution, they do indicate that the evidence has been powerful for one side or the other, because it is not easy for twelve people to agree on the guilt of a defendant.
ExBronxGirl, I love hearing what your bestie former prosecutor/assistant AG (and your mail carrier! 😀) has to say about this trial. The Daily Beast article seems to concur with your friend; I will copy and paste all of it in a other post. I was worried there might be a hold-out juror, taking deliberations into next week. For me, Susan Necheles will always be the attorney who put on the record that Donald Trump has been referred to as the orange turd.
Every Christmas, dh gifts me a bottle of champagne and we drink it on New Year’s Day. This year, we were going thru too much sadness (family illnesses and death) to celebrate that way, so it remained unopened. We didn’t crack it on Valentine’s Day or even for our 35th wedding anniversary last month. Dh was so worried Trump would not be convicted, but when he was, we popped the cork and had a glass of bubbly. I know it’s only a battle won and not the war, but we’ll take the win for now.
2 -
Here’s Who Trump Should Blame: His LawyersShan Wu/Daily Beast
By the time the jury reached its verdict finding former President Donald J. Trump guilty on all 34 counts of the charges brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office, there was little doubt there would be no acquittal forthcoming for the former president. Deliberating for less than two days, the jury’s speed in reaching a decision was noteworthy and likely due to the strength of the case.
While it is not true that fast verdicts are always pro-defense or pro-prosecution, they do indicate that the evidence has been powerful for one side or the other, because it is not easy for twelve people to agree on the guilt of a defendant.
There was little doubt that there would be an acquittal because acquittals happen when either the prosecution makes a misstep, such as having a problem with a witness, or chooses to bring a case where the direct evidence is weak and where the defense is able to present a coherent powerful counter-narrative. As the trial progressed it was obvious that neither of those scenarios were likely.
Starting with the opening statement of Trump lead defense counsel, Todd Blanche, who managed to draw objections that were sustained by Judge Juan Merchan, the defense stumbled out of the gate and kept stumbling. It’s rare for there to be objections during an opening statement due in equal parts to professional courtesy and because it is actually hard to say something outside the bounds given that the opening is merely a promise of what the jury will see.
Blanche managed to blunder into this unusual problem only because he apparently tried to raise points such as an advice-of-counsel defense which the judge had already rejected. The cross-examination by both defense counsel. Blanche and Susan Necheles, then only worsened matters as each in their own way managed to bolster the prosecution rather than weaken it.
Necheles cross-examined actor/director Stormy Daniels in a bullying, shaming style that utterly undermined any advantage to having a female cross-examine another female to avoid the optics of a man being harsh towards a female witness. Such a strategy is often used in sex crimes cases, which this was not. But Necheles managed to give it the feel of one with Daniels being the brave victim in the face of a sexist, misogynistic attack that essentially tried to imply that Daniels’ work in the adult film industry made her morally unfit to be believed.
The offensive nature of Necheles’ tactics was itself enough to turn the jury against Trump’s team, but Daniels made it even easier by shining during cross-examination, and repeatedly slam-dunking Necheles’ questions in the experienced lawyer’s face.
Daniels was arguably a witness that had little material to say about the main elements of the charges—falsification of business records in order to interfere with an election—given that she had no knowledge of those facts. But, perhaps, at the insistence of Trump, Necheles turned what could have been a very minor part of the case into a bright display of Trump’s misogyny and arrogance.
“Blanche chose to apparently channel his inner-Trump by literally yelling at Cohen that he was a ‘liar.’ Such displays by a lawyer doing cross-examination are seldom effective.”— Shan Wu
Blanche continued this pattern of failed cross-examination in his efforts at attacking the testimony of Michael Cohen—Trump’s former fixer-attorney—who was a central witness in the prosecution’s case. Cohen, who carried the baggage of having been convicted for lying to Congress about many of the very facts of this case as well as being convicted for tax fraud and campaign finance violations, was a good target for cross-examination.But instead of using these questions about his credibility to surgically raise doubt about particular aspects of his testimony, Blanche chose to apparently channel his inner Trump by literally yelling at Cohen that he was a “liar.” Such displays by a lawyer during cross-examination are seldom effective and proved particularly humiliating for Blanche given that he made Cohen—known to be volatile—look calm and reasonable in comparison to Blanche himself.
Blanche’s closing continued his ranting about Cohen’s honesty, coming up with terms like Cohen being the “G.L.O.A.T”—greatest liar of all time. In short, Blanche relied on the idea that a person who has been dishonest in the past is always dishonest, instead of showing how and where he was being dishonest in this case.
In contrast, the prosecution presented an overwhelming case in methodical fashion. Their presentation of Cohen—with his potential vulnerabilities—was prefaced by a slew of corroborating testimony from witnesses and paper trails that followed the money. In so doing, they armored Cohen from Blanche’s attacks because the jury did not have to take Cohen’s word alone. They had receipts. Lots of them.
“The prosecution, trial, and conviction of Donald Trump was one example of justice being brought against the powerful. It is a scenario that is too infrequent in the world and in our country.”— Shan Wu
Lead prosecutor Joshua Steinglass presented a masterly summation that lasted some four hours. Tirelessly and clearly weaving together the weeks of testimony for the jury, Steinglass even rhetorically asked the jury if they could hang in there with him as his closing argument went into the evening. That last touch helped him establish a rapport that Blanche failed so badly to do with the jury.Many critics of this case have disparaged it as being the “weakest” case against Trump; in my view much of that criticism is rooted in misogyny and privileged views of what kind of case is “worthy” of bringing against a rich, powerful man. The way justice should work is that prosecutions take place or don’t take place because of the facts surrounding the criminal acts, not the power or gender of the defendant.
There will of course be appeals of Trump’s historic conviction and we do not yet know the outcomes of those. But what we do know is that the prosecution, trial, and conviction of Donald J. Trump was one example of justice being brought against the powerful. It is a scenario that is too infrequent in the world and in our country. But the fact that it did happen is a testament to the strength of American democracy and the integrity and skill of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.
1 -
1 -
1 -
0 -
1 -
2 -
1 -
The True Believers will never be swayed. But I hope there are still some Republicans who had plugged their noses and voted for him in the past, who just can't vote for a convicted felon. I can't see how this conviction could be a plus to Independents, and perhaps it will energize the Democratic base.
1 -
"The way justice should work is that prosecutions take place or don’t take place because of the facts surrounding the criminal acts, not the power or gender of the defendant". Karma is a bitch as is Mother Nature. He will most likely whine that the jury was not composed of his peers but anyone would be hard pressed to find 12 individuals as corrupt, uncaring and delusional as he is.
As much as I would like to believe that those who now won't vote for the Loon, will they in reality vote for Biden or not vote at all? If they are true to their convictions and vote for Biden, kudos to them as having a moral compass. But, there are those who will remain loyal to being a Republican and not vote which in essence is a vote for the Loon.
Noticed that those who expected but did not get a pardon from the Loon were some of the ones who jumped on his bandwagon first. Meanwhile what happened to the Gaetz underage sex case case? That case has been dragging on forever.
Loved the memes especially the phone call one.
1 -
My greatest accomplishments shall never be known, perhaps even to me. Having made someone smile and see the world a bit brighter, having given someone hope for the future, having helped someone see potential inside him or herself that he or she never might have seen otherwise, having helped someone to see just how beautiful he or she really is-- these to me are the achievements that most can help this world to be a brighter, more loving place.
tom walsh
1 -
Divine, good to hear you found occasion for your campaign. I know we all felt a sense of some justification. It isn't over yet, but it is a huge relief that people did their job in a very upright fashion — no matter how the Loon and his ignorant followers will try and play it. Hard to watch many of the Reps. do what they are doing right now — denigrating the rule of law and making gross insinuations about a jury. They just aren't naming the Loon because they know he is guilty as sin but the only hope they have is marching forward in the same direction they have been going with the Loon so far. They are operating in some real iffy territory for themselves. Makes one wonder just why would you choose the most unrealistic item which has in fact over and over caused you one loss after the other. These people appear to me (and oh how I hope to many, many others) as people desperate to wrest control however they can but with complete disregard for the other human souls around them who do not want anything like what they are telling us they do.
Hope did work out this time. As fragile and frightening as it sometimes seemed — the people of New York, peers (whether the Loon or others like it or not) of the Loon called Trump out for his crimes and demanded justice for themselves and their fellow patriots and New York. No matter that justice for some time did seem a bit delayed in the end justice was not denied. All that remains is the July 11th. verdict of punishment.
I too Betrayal, wonder just how many of the Reps. will handle this. Then again, there are things to be seen and duly noted between now and July and now and final nomination time. Trump is senile and that won't get better. I've been wondering for a while now, will it be the idiocy of the Reps. people or will it be the total disability of Trump to even function by election time. Hard to tell for sure what will be the tipping point should it come.
Interesting times are coming. I really don't see the Loon getting near the cooperation he once seemed to command. I think many of his own people realize he just ain't what he used to be and he won't be coming back.
1 -
2 -
1 -
We cannot know the percentage of voters who truly grasp the gravity that democracy is on the line in this election. My husband never liked Trump. But he hated Bill Clinton who deceived steel workers when he ran for election, and since dh was a steel worker, he was never going to vote for Hillary, either, because of Bill. Now he sees how his non-vote for either candidate gave us Trump for four years. The next time, I told him he had to cast a vote for Biden, a non-vote or “other” would not do. I think we are all wondering how many people comprehend this is the same situation. Some say Biden does not represent them, but will not vote for Trump either. How can they not see that their non vote for Biden or Trump could give them a Trump win and that he will not represent them and it will be devastating for our country?
Btw, the charges for Gaetz were dropped last year.
2 -
Well now, he grabbed one too many didn't he and he got brought down for it, by not one but two.
1 -
2 -
1 -
3 -
OMG the fiasco of the Trump news conference. His morning comb-over didn't work and he is only spending long. long minutes touting everything he has said all along — with all the same tired, stupid lies that his group will eagerly believe. He has a small group of followers with him so you can sometimes hear the cheers and agreement — oh how they love his lies.
But he was convicted on truth and to that degree his kids can lead some great little clapping sessions which will do nothing, and Trump will do nothing with this. He will have no influence (other than the slight possibly of a negative one ) on anyone who really matters. He says he wasn't allowed to testify — and so he is doing all his testifying now. He is protesting too much which is how he always ends up making more of a mess and turning a lot of people off, not ON.
Guess that is sort of his right, but few people could call a press conference and really get away with this. The fact in my opinion is that in the end I don't think it will move the needle much at all. He is covering all very old ground and had no proven facts that could clear him in any way which would be the only reason to spend this time and resources for people. He just needs to rant it all out for his own purpose thinking he will change minds that likely won't get even the slightest movement. In fact, he never has other than to cement his demise with some point or other. He runs people's patience into the ground.
0 -
That was exhausting!
3
