SwigAg11 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

dallasiteinsa02 said:

---

He isn't getting a not guilty. At best a hung jury. Bragg vows to refile and tries to tie him up in September/October.

---

You may be right.

How ****ed would that be if they declare a mistrial and turn around and try and redo this case with 160-days until election.

News cycle reflects that it's 1:30 am at the bar and desperation is in the air.

---

Would Merchan oversee a retrial or a different judge?

---

Switching horses in midstream would be unprecedented, imo.

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is explaining the concept of "grossing up" to the jury.
Former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg "disguised the reimbursement as income so that means (Michael) Cohen will have to pay tax," Steinglass says.
"Did anything you've learned about Donald Trump at this trial make you think he would pay someone double what he owes them?" the prosecutor asks.
"These documents are so damning, you almost have to laugh at the way Mr. (Todd) Blanche tries to explain to you that this wasn't fraud," Steinglass says.

---

SwigAg11 said:

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

dallasiteinsa02 said:

---

He isn't getting a not guilty. At best a hung jury. Bragg vows to refile and tries to tie him up in September/October.

---

You may be right.

How ****ed would that be if they declare a mistrial and turn around and try and redo this case with 160-days until election.

News cycle reflects that it's 1:30 am at the bar and desperation is in the air.

---

Would Merchan oversee a retrial or a different judge?

---

Merchan should probably quit worrying about Trump and worry about some nut case who sees this for what it is.

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass brings up the handwritten notes by former Trump Org. CFO Allen Weisselberg and former Trump Org. controller Jeffrey McConney.

Quote:

---

"They are the smoking guns. They completely blow out of the water the defense claim that the payments [are for] legal services rendered. I'm almost speechless that they're trying to make this argument," Steinglass says.

---

Steinglass referenced a passage from one of Trump's book "Think Like a Billionaire" in which Trump called Weisselberg "a loyal employee" and "one of the toughest people in business when it comes to money."
Steinglass says Trump's lawyers have to tell the jury "with a straight face" that the handwritten notes from Weisselberg and McConney do not prove that the payments were for a reimbursement to Cohen in part for the Daniels hush money payment.
Steinglass is now walking jurors through Weisselberg's notes, saying that the documents stated explicitly that the $130,000 and $50,000 reimbursements would be "grossed up" for taxes.
Jurors are all quite alert, mostly looking directly at Steinglass.
Steinglass notes again that the $50,000 Red Finch repayment was more than Cohen should have been paid. "That may matter for his character but it does not matter for the crimes the defendant is charged with," he says.

Quote:

---

Steinglass, pointing to the handwritten scribbles, says that "Weisselberg details just how he, the defendant and Cohen are going to commit this crime. They are acting in concert."

---

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass brings up the handwritten notes by former Trump Org. CFO Allen Weisselberg and former Trump Org. controller Jeffrey McConney.

Quote:

---

"They are the smoking guns. They completely blow out of the water the defense claim that the payments [are for] legal services rendered. I'm almost speechless that they're trying to make this argument," Steinglass says.

---

Steinglass referenced a passage from one of Trump's book "Think Like a Billionaire" in which Trump called Weisselberg "a loyal employee" and "one of the toughest people in business when it comes to money."
Steinglass says Trump's lawyers have to tell the jury "with a straight face" that the handwritten notes from Weisselberg and McConney do not prove that the payments were for a reimbursement to Cohen in part for the Daniels hush money payment.
Steinglass is now walking jurors through Weisselberg's notes, saying that the documents stated explicitly that the $130,000 and $50,000 reimbursements would be "grossed up" for taxes.
Jurors are all quite alert, mostly looking directly at Steinglass.
Steinglass notes again that the $50,000 Red Finch repayment was more than Cohen should have been paid. "That may matter for his character but it does not matter for the crimes the defendant is charged with," he says.

Quote:

---

Steinglass, pointing to the handwritten scribbles, says that "Weisselberg details just how he, the defendant and Cohen are going to commit this crime. They are acting in concert."

---

---

---

But is any of that illegal? They make it sound like it is, but I don't think it is actually illegal on Trump's part.

Quote:

---

But is any of that illegal? They make it sound like it is, but I don't think it is actually illegal on Trump's part.

---

More stupid than anything else as it artificially inflated his income. Trump Org had no control over how Cohen reported that on his taxes.

Daveintx said:

---

Just think....

This is all because the left can not understand people not wanting to see Hillary take charge back in 2016

---

Possibly!

But it's likely waaaay more than that.

This is pure hatred. It's likely about 40% of the country, at least, only get their news and information from the various local and national news operations. If you're watching cable, it's not only news, but tons of "experts". If it's local, it's generally 30 seconds to 1 minutes of pure news facts with no details which makes it impossible for anyone to be well educated on this case.

Then, when you take 8 years of thoroughly one-sided news headlines with tons of adjectives and little information of why, when, or where, then you have a heavily emotional populace, which 50% were to start with. You add that 50% which can't think critically, add 8 years of "hitler", "Russiagate","impeachment", and everything these folks can't understand, then you have pure hatred.

They don't care what the charge is, they don't know what the indictment says, and don't care what the judge says. To me, I'm just hoping one of the two lawyers on the jury have the ability to see beyond their own bias, because I'm 100% sure they've been getting phone calls, or have been contacted in the last three weeks.

Quote:

---

Joshua Steinglass shows the jury a transcript of Michael Cohen's testimony about his February 2017 meeting with Donald Trump at the Oval Office when Cohen testified that Trump told him to make sure he dealt with Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization CFO, and that there'd be a check for January and February forthcoming.
Steinglass acknowledges Cohen testified there was talk about a retainer agreement but the plan was always to disguise the reimbursement as income.
The prosecutor sarcastically said maybe if they created a fake retainer document it would "give them more cover."
He then told the jury they'd be considering 35 instead of 34 counts because it'd be another falsified business record.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says Michael Cohen "probably did more legal work in the first three months of 2018 then he did in all of 2017," but he still wasn't paid at all in 2018.
"If he was still doing legal work, why wasn't he paid a dime in 2018?" he asks.
Steinglass says, "When the reimbursement was done, the payments stopped."
"Cohen spent more time being cross-examined in this trial than he did doing legal work for Donald Trump in 2017," Steinglass says.

---

Because he didn't send an invoice in early 2018 and was raided in April?

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says Michael Cohen got a "pretty cool title" and used the title of personal attorney to the president to generate millions in consulting business.

Quote:

---

"He was getting paid to provide access" to Donald Trump.
"He was making way more money than any government job would pay and don't I know that," Steinglass quipped.

---

If jurors still have any doubt, "the defendant has himself repeatedly admitted that the payments were reimbursements," the prosecutor says.

---

Isn't that called unregistered lobbying?

Steinglass's 4 hour closing boiled down into a single sentence....

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass pulls up a footnote from the 2018 Office of Government Ethics form, laughing mockingly that Trump attorney Todd Blanche used the form to suggest everything was above board.

Quote:

---

The footnote says, "ln 2016 expenses were incurred by one of Donald J. Trump's attorneys, Michael Cohen. Mr. Cohen sought reimbursement of those expenses and Mr. Trump fully reimbursed Mr. Cohen in 2017."

---

Steinglass raises his voice as he knocks the defense argument Cohen was paid for legal work, noting all of the documents match up to what Cohen was promised to be reimbursed.

Quote:

---

"Despite this mountain of evidence … the amount he was paid just happens to magically match, down to the penny, the reimbursement shown in evidence. Does anyone believe that?" Steinglass says.

---

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is going over the vouchers and check stubs that show the payments to Michael Cohen in the Trump Organization system as generated by Accounts Payable employee Deborah Tarasoff.
Steinglass says Tarasoff is "not in on it she does what she's told" and enters the payments as retainers as she was instructed.
But he says these are falsified business records.
"He didn't really pay a lawyer. He paid a porn star by funneling money through a lawyer."
The prosecutor added: "I know what you're thinking, is this guy gonna go through every" month of checks?
Some jurors smile at that comment.
Steinglass says he is not. He's just going to show one set of checks paid by the trust and one signed by Donald Trump.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is showing the jury a December 2017 check cut to Michael Cohen. He points out Trump's signature he signed "by hand using his distinctive sharpie."
"It's easy to throw just a bunch of mud on the wall and see what sticks but what is the defense actually saying here," Steinglass says.
He says that they argue Trump didn't know about the reimbursement, it was all cooked up by former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and Cohen.

Quote:

---

"That's crazy," Steinglass says, noting that Weisselberg could only approve invoices up to $10,000 and "no one could sign the Donald Trump checks besides Donald Trump."

---

Steinglass points out that the December 2017 check to Cohen was notated for services rendered in the month of December and yet was cut on December 1 at 9:11 a.m.
The prosecutor then asked rhetorically how someone can do that much work to earn $35,000 in 11 minutes.

---

A crooked lawyer overbilling his client?

Quote:

---

Joshua Steinglass tells jurors "Don't buy the bogus narrative the defense is selling" that the defendant is too busy, referring to Donald Trump.
The prosecutor says that Trump was in charge of the company for 40 years and his "entire business philosophy" is to be involved in everything, down to "negotiating the cost of the light bulbs."

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass challenges why Donald Trump would go through a complicated multistep workaround to get his personal checks to him for signing at the White House through employees' personal home addresses.
"Because Mr. Trump wanted to retain control over his $80 cable bill because that's who he is."
Steinglass added: "He's frugal."

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass has pulled up excerpts from one of Donald Trump's books, reading to the jury testimony they heard earlier about the former president's views on his finances.
"Always look at the numbers yourself. If things turn grim you're the one left holding the check book," the excerpt reads.
"It's this combination of frugality and attention to detail that led Mr. Trump to keep tight reins on his checks in particular," Steinglass said.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is still reading a few book passages to the jury.
He says the philosophy explained in the books is backed up by testimony from witnesses people who worked for Trump and people who knew him.
Jurors are still all focused on Steinglass.

---

Focused? Or staring him down to shut him up?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass pulls up a footnote from the 2018 Office of Government Ethics form, laughing mockingly that Trump attorney Todd Blanche used the form to suggest everything was above board.

Quote:

---

The footnote says, "ln 2016 expenses were incurred by one of Donald J. Trump's attorneys, Michael Cohen. Mr. Cohen sought reimbursement of those expenses and Mr. Trump fully reimbursed Mr. Cohen in 2017."

---

Steinglass raises his voice as he knocks the defense argument Cohen was paid for legal work, noting all of the documents match up to what Cohen was promised to be reimbursed.

Quote:

---

"Despite this mountain of evidence … the amount he was paid just happens to magically match, down to the penny, the reimbursement shown in evidence. Does anyone believe that?" Steinglass says.

---

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is going over the vouchers and check stubs that show the payments to Michael Cohen in the Trump Organization system as generated by Accounts Payable employee Deborah Tarasoff.
Steinglass says Tarasoff is "not in on it she does what she's told" and enters the payments as retainers as she was instructed.
But he says these are falsified business records.
"He didn't really pay a lawyer. He paid a porn star by funneling money through a lawyer."
The prosecutor added: "I know what you're thinking, is this guy gonna go through every" month of checks?
Some jurors smile at that comment.
Steinglass says he is not. He's just going to show one set of checks paid by the trust and one signed by Donald Trump.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is showing the jury a December 2017 check cut to Michael Cohen. He points out Trump's signature he signed "by hand using his distinctive sharpie."
"It's easy to throw just a bunch of mud on the wall and see what sticks but what is the defense actually saying here," Steinglass says.
He says that they argue Trump didn't know about the reimbursement, it was all cooked up by former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and Cohen.

Quote:

---

"That's crazy," Steinglass says, noting that Weisselberg could only approve invoices up to $10,000 and "no one could sign the Donald Trump checks besides Donald Trump."

---

Steinglass points out that the December 2017 check to Cohen was notated for services rendered in the month of December and yet was cut on December 1 at 9:11 a.m.
The prosecutor then asked rhetorically how someone can do that much work to earn $35,000 in 11 minutes.

---

A crooked lawyer overbilling his client?

Quote:

---

Joshua Steinglass tells jurors "Don't buy the bogus narrative the defense is selling" that the defendant is too busy, referring to Donald Trump.
The prosecutor says that Trump was in charge of the company for 40 years and his "entire business philosophy" is to be involved in everything, down to "negotiating the cost of the light bulbs."

---

---

Which is exactly how Donald Trump ended up letting Cohen steal $60,000 from him.

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass reads another excerpt from one of Donald Trump's books about signing checks.

Quote:

---

"When you sign a check yourself, you're seeing what's really going on inside your business, and if people see your signature at the bottom of the check, they know you're watching them, and they screw you less because they have proof that you care about the details."

---

Reminder: Trump attorney Todd Blanche this morning claimed that a focus on decade-old book passages was a "red flag."

---

Although I will give Steinglass a hat tip for using Trump's words from a book to tie him back in here at the end of his closing, Blanche is also correct in using something old and far removed is not persuasive.

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is moving onto the Wall Street Journal article on January 12, 2018, breaking the story that Michael Cohen made the payment to Stormy Daniels.

And he says "there was a cover up of the cover up," which takes us into 2018.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua. Steinglass calls Hope Hicks' testimony about the conversation she had with Donald Trump "devastating."
Steinglass was pointing to Hicks' testimony about the conversation she had with Trump about the Wall Street Journal story on Jan 12, 2018, breaking the story that Michael Cohen made the payment to Stormy Daniels: "I think Mr. Trump's opinion was it was better to be dealing with it now, and that it would have been bad to have that story come out before the election."
Steinglass then suggests that Hicks, once a longtime trusted aide in Trump's inner circle, burst into tears right after testifying to this because she realized how bad the testimony was for Trump.
Judge Juan Merchan overrules Trump lawyer Todd Blanche's objection to this suggestion.

---

WTF? MERCHAN, YOU JERK!

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass pulls up texts from Michael Cohen to Maggie Haberman of the New York Times in February 2018:
"Big boss just approved me responding to complaint and statement. Please start writing and I will call you soon."
Steinglass says this shows Trump approved the misleading statement that stated Trump Org. and the Trump campaign was not a party to the transaction between Cohen and Stormy Daniels.
Steinglass also raising again a text from Jay Sekulow sent to Cohen over Signal: "Client says thanks for what you do."

---

Quote:

---

Donald Trump has his back completely turned to prosecutor Joshua Steinglass as he's making his closing argument.

---

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

So the prosecutor enters the mind of a witness and tells the jury how the witness feels?

Thats allowed now?

---

Only in Merchan's court that I know of. There are ways to attack credibility without using the Vulcan Mind Meld theory.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

So the prosecutor enters the mind of a witness and tells the jury how the witness feels?

Thats allowed now?

---

It is in this judge's court. Anything to get that conviction he promised his daughter

Interestingly, when reading the CNN version it seems like "WTF, that's not allowed!!" but inner city press version shows something that was not objectionable

Prosecutor: The defendant wrote, I try to sign as many checks as possible. Hope Hicks put the nail in Mr. Trump and then cried -
Trump's lawyer Blanche: Objection.
Justice Merchan: Overruled.
Prosecutor; The defendant cared about the election, not his family.

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) May 28, 2024

Will need to see what the transcript says!

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass explains how Donald Trump's personal account is an enterprise and can have falsified business records.
Trump's personal account is "the hub of a wheel with 500 spokes" as it receives funds from Trump-owned entities and disburses funds to those entities when needed.
He says Judge Juan Merchan will instruct them as to the definition of an enterprise.

Quote:

---

"New York is the business capital of the world, and whether you're a private enterprise or public enterprise, you have an obligation to keep proper books and records," Steinglass says, in effect defending the legitimacy of the charges.

---

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass just asked the jury if they are good to go a little longer. Several jurors nod yes and the one who has been smiling all day smiled wider.

"All right," Steinglass says.

---

Bet she won the jury betting pool as to how long they would be held tonight. LOL.

Quote:

---

The prosecutor is now talking about Michael Cohen's relationship with Donald Trump.
"Cohen knew where the bodies were buried. It was essential to keep him loyal," Joshua Steinglass says.
Trump's tweets are up on the screen.

Quote:

---

April 21, 2018 - "Most people will flip if the government lets them out of trouble. sorry i don't see michael doing that."

---

Steinglass says Cohen interpreted that as a message the way anyone would. He also reminds the jury that Trump was still paying Cohen's legal bills at the time.

---

Heavens, I'm tired of this! STFU Steinglass!

Quote:

---

Bet she won the jury betting pool as to how long they would be held tonight. LOL.

---

Im Gipper said:

---

Interestingly, when reading the CNN version it seems like "WTF, that's not allowed!!" but inner city press version shows something that was not objectionable

Prosecutor: The defendant wrote, I try to sign as many checks as possible. Hope Hicks put the nail in Mr. Trump and then cried -
Trump's lawyer Blanche: Objection.
Justice Merchan: Overruled.
Prosecutor; The defendant cared about the election, not his family.

— Inner City Press (@innercitypress) May 28, 2024

Will need to see what the transcript says!

---

Still improper.

Im Gipper said:

---

Quote:

---

Bet she won the jury betting pool as to how long they would be held tonight. LOL.

---

---

You know they have a pool going by now.

But not objectionable.
He's allowed to comment on the weight of the evidence, which is what he's doing with that comment.

Quote:

---

Around the same time of Trump's April 2018 tweet, Michael Cohen met with attorney Robert Costello, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass reminds the jury
"Cohen never really trusted Costello. Can you really blame him? You saw Costello testify," Steinglass says.
Costello told the jury "under oath" that he was only acting in Cohen's best interest, which Steinglass calls now "a bold faced lie."

Quote:

---

"Cohen wasn't playing Costello, Costello was playing Cohen," Steinglass says after showing the jury the email Costello exchanged with a partner in which they discussed getting Cohen "on the right page without giving him the appearance that we are following instructions from Giuliani or the president."

---

"His demeanor on the stand is something you can take into account. That's a fact when you are assessing his credibility," Steinglass says.
Costello was an attorney who advised Cohen in the weeks following the FBI raid on Cohen's home and office. He took the stand for the defense last week.

Judge Juan Merchan admonished Costello and threatened to remove him from the stand after he audibly complained when the judge sustained objections to the questions he was being asked.

---

Im Gipper said:

---

But not objectionable.
He's allowed to comment on the weight of the evidence, which is what he's doing with that comment.

---

Disagree. But that's what lawyers do, after all.

A hypo for you: Blanche says in his summation: You all saw Hope Hicks after the prosecution was finished grilling her, didn't you? She was telling the truth as she knew it and had told them the same yet she was so afraid of the prosecution, ask youself why was that?"

I don't think it's a difference maker, but to me the Costello testimony was not helpful for Trump. He's already established Cohen was a liar. There's a chance the jury didn't like Costello antics.


But like I said, don't think it ultimately matters for the verdict.

Quote:

---

Trump attorney Todd Blanche objects when Joshua Steinglass begins reading Michael Cohen's testimony about his guilty plea, which includes referencing the Federal Election Campaign Act.
Before the objection, Steinglass says it's disingenuous for the defense to tell the jurors that they should not believe Cohen because he repeatedly denied paying Stormy Daniels at all or with his own funds.

Quote:

---

"Those lies were told at the defendant's direction and at his behest and for his benefit" Steinglass says, with a tone expressing incredulity at the notion, calling it "chutzpah" from Trump's legal team.

---

Judge Juan Merchan asks them to approach the bench.

---

BMX Bandit said:

---

I don't think it's a difference maker, but to me the Costello testimony was not helpful for Trump. He's already established Cohen was a liar. There's a chance the jury didn't like Costello antics.


But like I said, don't think it ultimately matters for the verdict.

---

Agree but the reason it was not helpful because of the judge's antics. Have you watched Dersh's take on this? He was in the front row behind Trump and he was outraged about the judge.

aggiehawg said:

---

Im Gipper said:

---

But not objectionable.
He's allowed to comment on the weight of the evidence, which is what he's doing with that comment.

---

Disagree. But that's what lawyers do, after all.

A hypo for you: Blanche says in his summation: You all saw Hope Hicks after the prosecution was finished grilling her, didn't you? She was telling the truth as she knew it and had told them the same yet she was so afraid of the prosecution, ask youself why was that?"

---

I'll answer for him.

Your comparison is going off the CNN version. The twitter version comparison wouid be Blanche said:

Mrs Hicks explained how this was not fraud despite tough questioning, and then cried

You are adding a lot that's not in the Inner City version.

dallasiteinsa02 said:

---

He isn't getting a not guilty. At best a hung jury. Bragg vows to refile and tries to tie him up in September/October.

---

Not even Merchan and his DNC-purchased rubber stamp would approve that.

Quote:

---

The twitter version comparison wouid be Blanche said:

Mrs Hicks explained how this was not fraud despite tough questioning, and then cried

---

Blanche said? What are you talking about?

Prosecution referred to her crying, not defense.