Trump's Troubles

I would consider finding Trump in contempt and deferring sentencing until the end of the trial or the next instance of contemptuous behavior.

 

I would have never guess that tbh.

 

Most of Cohen's testimony will be corroborated by other witnesses or supported by documentation starting with the fact he used his home equity line of credit to fund the $130K the NE used to pay off Stormy.

 

I thought of that too. Lots of permutations. But that may not deter

 

I laughed but you are correct. Not sure if that is legal

 

House arrest would be counter-productive. Less to do with greater internet access.

 

Is something were to happen and Trump was acquitted, it would be funny to see him sentenced to jail for contempt.

 

I’m saying it’s no slam dunk. But if Pecker says what you say he will say, strongly and credibly, it’ll make the defense that much more difficult.

 

Lisa Rubin also of the opinion that DT is purposely trying to bait the Judge

 

In one of his other cases:

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-generals-trump-brief-actually-makes-a-compelling-case/

With the Supreme Court set to begin arguments on Donald Trump’s immunity claims this Thursday and the landmark decision likely to be handed down no later than the end of June, the Deep State weighed in. That itself is a scary thing, but even more frightening is this: What if they are right this time?

Fourteen retired four-star generals, admirals, and other military leaders (including the former NSA head Michael Hayden, who certainly knows a thing or two about illegal orders) filed an amici brief with the Supreme Court, arguing against former President Trump’s claims of immunity in his criminal cases, particularly those dealing with J6.

Trump argues the charges against him related to J6 should be thrown out because he was acting as president at the time. Prosecutors denounced the idea, with the generals taking a side with their brief. Amicus curiae is a Latin term translating to “friend of the court.” It refers to a person or organization that is not a party to a case but offers information or expertise to assist the court in making a decision, although they do not have the same legal standing as briefs submitted by the parties directly involved in the case. They can be, as in this case, an argument by a third party for deciding the case one way or another. The generals et al. are decidedly against Trump having immunity, as any good Deep Stater would be.

They argue Trump should not be granted immunity by the Court for three reasons: The claimed immunity would undermine the national commitment to civilian control of the military; Trump’s immunity would undermine the military’s adherence to the rule of law, its orderly functioning, and public trust; and Trump's claimed immunity, by implicating the peaceful transition of power in particular, threatens national security.



It was interesting that both this amicas curiae and Trump's defense referenced My Lai, arriving at very different conclusions based on the same event.

 

Meantime, one pastor actually has moral clarity and consistency. If more followed suit Trump would be an afterthought.

 

I'm encouraged by how badly this trial is going for Trump. I'd expect all the others would go just as bad if only they got before a jury.

 

Agreed. I read a book, Not in it to Win it, by pastor Andy Stanley that carries this same message. In it, Stanley laments how many American Christians to be perverting their priorities using God to service their political and social battles. Here is one relevant passage: “Our nation’s challenges do not stem from the church’s inability to convince unbelievers to behave like believers. Our challenges stem from the church’s inability to convince believers to behave like believers.”

 

I am amused to see not a single family member has attended the trial proceedings so far. Even Jeffry Dahlmers parents showed up every day to his trial.

His family is like the rest of us they hate him. Probably not going to get a red cent from him when he mercifully is no longer with us/them

 

He pled guilty to multiple crimes, some were tax evasion (I think related to taxi medallions), but some of the pleading was also related to this porn-star hush money.

I’m pretty sure those were federal charges though, so the election “campaign finance” related charge for example might not apply - or at least not in the same way depending on whatever NY state law is about such payments. If the feds had charged for those it would have been even more clear cut. But the feds took a pass.