Trump's lawyer is making a lot of noise, but doesn't this get down to the details of the gag order? Can anyone summarize that?
*** Official Trump Hush Money Trial Thread ***
617,227 Views |
6875 Replies |
Last: 6 days ago by Ellis Wyatt
Reminder: Cohen has petitioned five times to have his probation terminated early. Each time he has been denied, with the judge stating Cohen's loose relationship with the truth in his history of making false statements under oath. Classic were-you-lying-then-or-are-you-lying-now?Quote:
Judge Juan Merchan, speaking about Donald Trump's comments on Michael Cohen, said "using the name is not prohibited, making a connection to the trial is prohibited."
Trump attorney Todd Blanche argued the post in question has "nothing to do with this case," but rather, "it has to do with the system and the fact that President Trump very strongly believes the people should have prosecuted Mr. Cohen for lying."
Merchan then asked if Trump is "attacking Michael Cohen's credibility, like he was attacking Ms. Daniel's credibility?"
Blanche said no, Trump is "attacking the people and the system for not prosecuting Michael Cohen for lying."
"There are two systems of justice," Blanche said, noting Allen Weisselberg is in jail for lying under oath and "Cohen is going to be a witness."
Quote:
Moving onto the post about the jury and Jesse Watters, Judge Juan Merchan asked: "Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes, am I right?"
"I wouldn't use the word manipulation your honor," Donald Trump's lawyer Todd Blanche responded. "But the rest of the quote was not part of the quote."
Merchan said that Trump's post on the jury was not a repost.
"This is something that was said on TV and your client had to type it out. He had to sit there, use quotation marks, the shift key and type every thing out and then add those additional words," the judge said.
Blanche acknowledged that Trump's post about the jury was not a repost.
"You're losing all credibility with the court," Merchan told Blanche.
From Reuters
If accurate, Trump is in contempt.
Quote:
The March 26 order prevents Trump from making public statements about witnesses concerning their potential testimony, about jurors or prospective jurors, and about prosecutors, court staff and their family members if those statements are meant to interfere with the case.
On April 1, Merchan extended the gag order to cover his own family members and family members of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, whose office charged Trump. The order does not restrict Trump's statements about Merchan and Bragg.
If accurate, Trump is in contempt.
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
fc2112 said:
Trump's lawyer is making a lot of noise, but doesn't this get down to the details of the gag order? Can anyone summarize that?
That was less than persuasive by defense counsel Blanche. I expect a fine of $10,000 imposed by Merchan.Quote:
The judge overseeing Donald Trump's first criminal trial will consider this morning whether the former president should be fined for repeatedly violating the gag order barring Trump from publicly discussing witnesses or jurors in the criminal hush money case.
Here's what to know about the gag order imposed on Trump by Judge Juan Merchan in late March:
Why was it imposed? Merchan implemented the gag order because, he said, the former president has a history of making "threatening, inflammatory, denigrating" statements against people at all levels of the justice system, including jurors. According to CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig, the fundamental reason for the gag order is to protect members of the jury.
What does it do? The ruling limits the former president from making statements about potential witnesses in his hush money criminal trial. It prevents Trump from criticizing his former attorney, Michael Cohen, or adult film star Stormy Daniels, who will be witnesses at trial. But it does not prevent Trump from talking about New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who is a public figure, or Merchan himself.
Merchan also ruled that Trump can't make statements about attorneys, court staff or the family members of prosecutors, lawyers, family members of the court and family members of the Manhattan district attorney. Trump is also barred from making statements about any potential or actual juror.
What does Trump say? Trump and his attorneys have argued that as the leading Republican candidate for president, Trump's speech should not be restricted as he appeals to voters in the 2024 election. When Merchan expanded the original order to include family members of the court in early April, Trump's lawyers indicated they would appeal it, arguing it went too far.
Quote:
Judge Juan Merchan says that when attorney Todd Blanche claims Trump got "too close to the line" with reposts, they should have told him that "my client is thinking of reposting something."
After Blanche sat back down, he passed a note to Trump, who is reading it.
Quote:
After hearing from prosecutors and Donald Trump's attorneys, Judge Juan Merchan said he he is reserving a decision on the gag order violations.
The court is now in a short break.
Quote:
As court was breaking, Judge Juan Merchan said he plans to go from 11 a.m. ET to 2 p.m. ET straight with the jury.
Here's a thought....why doesn't Trump just keep his trap shut and let his lawyers do the talking! Trump should just keep sleep/farting during the trial if he really has to be there. He's better at that.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
bc his voice has far more reach than his lawyers....any other obvious questions? His lawyers talking to a jury that most likely 75%+ hate Trump already being New Yorkers isn't going to change their opinion. 0% chance the outcome of this trial will be based on the facts.Opalka said:Here's a thought....why doesn't Trump just keep his trap shut and let his lawyers do the talking! Trump should just keep sleep/farting during the trial if he really has to be there. He's better at that.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
i know i have a reputation as a cm on here, but i genuinely believe what they're doing to trump here sets a dangerous precedent.
if they can go after trump on this, they can go after anyone who cheats on his pregnant wife with a porn star and then pays her off to stay quiet about it while he runs for office. chilling.
if they can go after trump on this, they can go after anyone who cheats on his pregnant wife with a porn star and then pays her off to stay quiet about it while he runs for office. chilling.
Judge Marsupial is creating chaos with this gag order that could end up taking months to sort out, appeal, re-gag, gag me with a spoon, ridiculous.
Opalka said:Here's a thought....why doesn't Trump just keep his trap shut and let his lawyers do the talking! Trump should just keep sleep/farting during the trial if he really has to be there. He's better at that.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
I think he does it because he knows it bothers weak minded liberals.
None of that is an actual crime, though. If it were, wouldn't censoring the NY Post over the Hunter Biden laptop be the same? Finding classified documents in Biden's offices and garage on the eve of the election being squelched and hidden?Quote:
David Pecker will be back on the stand on Tuesday to continue testimony in the hush money trial against former President Donald Trump. Not only is he the first witness to answer questions from the prosecution, but he is also a critical piece of how the state is trying to prove criminal intent, one former federal prosecutor said.
Criminal intent means that "not just an act happened, but an act happened for a purpose," said Elliot Williams, a CNN legal analyst. "The defendant did something wrong to carry out some criminal purpose."
As the then-chairman of American Media Inc., which publishes the National Enquirer, Pecker was involved in numerous "catch-and-kill" schemes he orchestrated on behalf of Trump, and he allegedly helped broker the deal with adult film star Stormy Daniels which is at the center of the case.Williams said it's likely that prosecutors will focus much of their questioning trying to uncover what was discussed in meetings between Pecker and Trump. The question at the heart of the argument, Williams said, is if the payments were intended to conceal information from voters, "or was it just Donald Trump saying, 'Well, you know, this is embarrassing to my wife and my kids, I really want to keep this hidden.'"Quote:
"It's not just the catch-and-kill payments, but catch-and-kill payments for the purpose of concealing information from voters in the context of an election," Williams explained, referring to the 2016 presidential election.
Because he's in a campaign. When you are in a campaign, you are supposed to talk about the issues of the day.Opalka said:Here's a thought....why doesn't Trump just keep his trap shut and let his lawyers do the talking! Trump should just keep sleep/farting during the trial if he really has to be there. He's better at that.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
Some things are just not that hard.
LOL OLD
No doubt in my mind trump will be found in contempt. A gag order won't work on him, lol. Fine him some small amount allowable by New York law and move on.
I still don't see where the crime is in this trial. Its not against the law to be a scumbag.
I still don't see where the crime is in this trial. Its not against the law to be a scumbag.
The issues of the day seem to be the border, Gaza, the economy, inflation, Ukraine, I could go on. But instead, he wants to talk about how Cohen is a liar. It's free airtime to go after Biden, and he's using it to go after that dumbass Cohen.Science Denier said:Because he's in a campaign. When you are in a campaign, you are supposed to talk about the issues of the day.Opalka said:Here's a thought....why doesn't Trump just keep his trap shut and let his lawyers do the talking! Trump should just keep sleep/farting during the trial if he really has to be there. He's better at that.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
Some things are just not that hard.
I think this is a horrible overreach by the DA but I disagree that a majority of the country would be upset if he's jailed. This is sadly a country of morons.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
Here's my WAG. That stack of papers are other examples of the National Enquirer having leads on stories, paying for them but then not running them.Quote:
As we wait for the judge to return to the bench, Trump has resumed chatting with his attorney Todd Blanche. They are looking at the stack of papers Trump brought in with him.
Why? Because it was a tabloid that routinely operated that way. Anyone really believe that the Enquirer didn't have any inkling about what Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, Bill Cosby and Michael Jackson were up to years and years before? Hush money and exclusive contracts are routine in the tabloid business. What difference does it make if the subject of the story is in Hollywood or an professional athlete or a political figure?
If that is illegal for one, it would be illegal for all of them, wouldn't it?
Quote:
David Pecker testified that he's known Donald Trump since the late 1980s.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked him to identify him in the courtroom. Pecker smiled, pointed over to the defense table and said, "He's sitting, wearing, I think, a dark blue suit."
Trump leaned back in his chair and gave a smirk to Pecker as he pointed to Trump.
Why? Because Trump's being on the cover sold copies. That's why. He made a lot of money with Trump as the subject.Quote:
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asks David Pecker to explain his relationship with Trump.
"I've had a great relationship with Mr. Trump over the years," Pecker says.
LOL. This court has no credibility to begin with. This entire prosecution is a complete embarrassment and clown show designed solely as election interference.Quote:
"You're losing all credibility with the court," Merchan told Blanche.
Quote:
David Pecker said back in 1989, he "had an idea of creating a magazine called Trump Style and I presented it to Mr. Trump, and he liked the idea a lot. He just questioned me 'Who was going to pay for it?'"
Quote:
Prior to acquiring the National Enquirer in 1999, David Pecker said he had "a lot of dealing and discussion with Mr. Trump as a celebrity in his own right."
"At that time he was very helpful, introducing me to other executives and other people in New York," Pecker said, adding that Donald Trump would advise him of events and parties he could either attend himself or send his editors to.
Quote:
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is now asking David Pecker about "The Apprentice."
David Pecker said the show was "an instant success" and he had a number of conversations with Trump about the show.
"He was always kind enough to send me the content," the show's ratings, Pecker said, "and I was able to publish that in the National Enquirer."
Trump would share the ratings and show information for the Apprentice with Pecker who would publish the information in the National Enquirer and other magazines. It was "a mutually beneficial relationship," Pecker said noting he didn't have to pay for it but Trump got the publicity for the show in return.
Pretty ordinary for the tabloid business.Quote:
When asked, David Pecker confirmed he considered Donald Trump a friend at least until 2017.
Well, yeah. Trump was in the news everyday.Quote:
David Pecker said before 2015, he saw Donald Trump monthly or maybe quarterly.
But after Trump announced he was running for president, "I saw Mr. Trump more frequently," Pecker said.
So? Did Pecker ever read the invoices?Quote:
David Pecker is testifying that he saw Trump review and sign invoices and checks.
He described sitting in Trump's office when Trump's assistant Rhona Graff walked in and gave him invoices and checks to sign.
"I noticed that he reviewed the invoice and looked at the check and he would sign them," Pecker testified.
Polls clearly show the majority of Americans (and yes including a percentage of decent democrats) believe all of the Trump indictments are a political scam....So yes a majority of American's would not view it favorably to put Trump in jail for speaking. It would only feed the narrative which is already apparent that Joe and posse are the facists in this races. Just like with the indictments Trumps support increased. I think even the judge and prosecution understand throwing him in jail for speaking would only increase his support more.jja79 said:I think this is a horrible overreach by the DA but I disagree that a majority of the country would be upset if he's jailed. This is sadly a country of morons.Gyles Marrett said:
TBH....$1k per offense is worth it to Trump to keep speaking. Dare thiem to jail him, that won't go over well with the majority of the country. Jailing the leading candidate for president to keep him from talking.
Quote:
David Pecker says he first met Michael Cohen at a bar mitzvah in 2000.
Donald Trump introduced Cohen as his new hire to Pecker in 2007, Pecker testified.
Pecker said Trump told him "that now my contacts should go through Michael Cohen."Quote:
"If there was any rumors in the marketplace about Mr. Trump or his family or any negative stories that were coming out or things that I heard overall that I would go through, I would call Michael Cohen directly," he testified.
Again, so?Quote:
In 2015 after Trump announced his candidacy, David Pecker said his contact with Michael Cohen increased to "a minimum of every week."
"If there was an issue, it could be daily," Pecker said of his contact with Cohen.
Quote:
"Do you know somebody named Hope Hicks?" prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked David Pecker.
"Yes, I do," Pecker replied.
Pecker said he knew Hicks when she worked for Ivanka's company and did public relations for Star Magazine, before she became Trump's campaign communications director.
Pecker was in the business of selling his paper. Does this surprise anybody?Quote:
After Donald Trump's campaign for president began in 2015, David Pecker said interest in Trump through his magazines "skyrocketed."
Pecker said they did research on potential covers to see what would sell the best. It was Trump, viewed "as the boss" in a boardroom, Pecker said.
aggiehawg said:Well, yeah. Trump was in the news everyday.Quote:
David Pecker said before 2015, he saw Donald Trump monthly or maybe quarterly.
But after Trump announced he was running for president, "I saw Mr. Trump more frequently," Pecker said.
Trump has been in the news the last 40+ years. It just got more intense the last 10. The man has always been around.
Ags77 said:
No doubt in my mind trump will be found in contempt. A gag order won't work on him, lol. Fine him some small amount allowable by New York law and move on.
I still don't see where the crime is in this trial. Its not against the law to be a scumbag.
Well, he's not a scumbag either so everything is bull**** about what they've been doing to him. It's people like you that are pushing all this crap because they don't like him. That's all this is about. That and trying to prevent him from being president again by throwing everything but the kitchen sink and actually now they're throwing the kitchen sink. Pathetic.
LOL. That wasn't an exclusive invite. All of the press was there.Quote:
Prosecutors have submitted an email from Michael Cohen as evidence.
On June 2, 2015, Cohen personally invited David Pecker to Donald Trump's campaign announcement event.
In the email, Cohen asks Pecker to attend the event.
"No one deserves to be there more than you," the email says.
"As a friend, I would love if you could make it. Let me know so I can save you a seat next to me on the atrium floor," the email says.
Hold up! I call BS. There is no way Trump said this is what he wanted to see!
I'm Gipper
The August 2015 Trump Tower Meeting: Trump, Hope Hicks, Michael Cohen and Pecker were present. Hicks came in and out of the meeting.
— Katie Phang (@KatiePhang) April 23, 2024
Cohen said that "The Boss" wanted to see Pecker. Cohen would refer to Trump as "The Boss." Most of the time I received a call from Cohen it…
I'm Gipper
Misty water-colored memories.
annie88 said:Ags77 said:
No doubt in my mind trump will be found in contempt. A gag order won't work on him, lol. Fine him some small amount allowable by New York law and move on.
I still don't see where the crime is in this trial. Its not against the law to be a scumbag.
Well, he's not a scumbag either so everything is bull**** about what they've been doing to him. It's people like you that are pushing all this crap because they don't like him. That's all this is about. That and trying to prevent him from being president again by throwing everything but the kitchen sink and actually now they're throwing the kitchen sink. Pathetic.
You and I will just have to respectfully agree to disagree if you don't think Trump is a scumbag.
I agree this trial is a lot about nothing. He slept with a porn star and tried to cover it up. Where is the crime ? Disgusting behavior, yes. But a crime ?
If you got rid of all the scumbags in DC, there wouldn't be many people left.
Or list off any list of non-crimes for which you can be gone after over politics and then it really is chilling.Old McDonald said:
i know i have a reputation as a cm on here, but i genuinely believe what they're doing to trump here sets a dangerous precedent.
if they can go after trump on this, they can go after anyone who cheats on his pregnant wife with a porn star and then pays her off to stay quiet about it while he runs for office. chilling.
and that's a hard trend to break, if you're a decent person with morals what do you have to gain by running for an office in DC. You only get rich at the job being corrupt.Rockdoc said:
If you got rid of all the scumbags in DC, there wouldn't be many people left.