Quote:

---

If that's the case, it wouldn't seem very good for Trump because they are already essentially to the point of believing Cohen, just need Peckers testimony to corroborate to satisfy their desire to convict.

---

Or if Pecker does not corroborate Cohen's testimony of criminality, the case against Trump falls apart.

How exactly does Pecker's testimony corroborate anything Cohen said?

HTownAg98 said:

---

Aggie_2463 said:

---

I haven't been following this that closely, so forgive me for asking....

If he is found guilty, is he looking at jail time for an extended time?

---

In theory, yes. But he won't be spending any time in jail. I'd bet money on it.

---

Agreed. It's a sham. All the demo-rats care about is being able to say he's a convicted felon to further push their narrative of orange man bad. He can still run for POTUS even if he's behind bars. The question is how will the RNC and the delegates react if he's found guilty, and more so if he has to serve a few mos. at some white-collar estate. To me, the timing is horrible.

jrdaustin said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Jurors are now leaving the courtroom after Judge Juan Merchan dismissed them for the day.

Merchan tells the attorneys they can't leave the courtroom until they agree on the transcript that will be read back tomorrow.

---

---

Why do both sides have to agree to the transcript of the jury instructions. Sounds like a renegotiating of the jury instructions.

Wouldn't Merchan be obligated to take the court reporter's record and re-read directly from the record?

---

If Pecker testified for an extended period of time, the court would likely answer the jury's question by reading only a portion of his testimony, not the entire testimony that covered other topics as well. I would expect both sides are telling the court what pages and lines should be included in the portion to be read back to the jury. Much of that will overlap but each side will likely have additional parts of Pecker's testimony that they want to be included.

Ahh, so they're being asked to agree on Pecker's testimony being read back, not Merchan's instructions to the jury.

Thanks.

AggieUSMC said:

---

How exactly does Pecker's testimony corroborate anything Cohen said?

---

Pecker dealt with Cohen more often and directly with him on the Karen McDougal life story which has absoutely nothing to do with this case and the current charges. McDougal herself never testified.

Jurors are going down the wrong path, in my view.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Aggie_2463 said:

---

I haven't been following this that closely, so forgive me for asking....

If he is found guilty, is he looking at jail time for an extended time?

---

In theory, yes. But he won't be spending any time in jail. I'd bet money on it.

---

I think the judge wants him in Rikers really, really badly. Seems pretty evident. I think he'd have him thrown in immediately. Alvin Bragg won't go for anything less certainly.

The fact they're asking to hear any of this, imho, is a bad sign for The Donald because it means they're actually parsing through Cohen's testimony as opposed to having reached the conclusion 99.9 percent of us would come to -- that he's a lying POS whose every word should be ignored.

Process crime and first time offender is probation..

Username checks out

Quote:

---

Jurors deliberated for over 4 hours on Wednesday and sent two notes with requests: re-read testimony and to re-hear Judge Juan Merchan's jury instructions.
The first note contained four requests, according to Merchan.

• David Pecker's testimony regarding a phone conversation with Donald Trump while Pecker was in the investor meeting.
• Pecker's testimony about the decision not to finalize and fund the assignment of Karen McDougal's life rights.
• Pecker's testimony regarding a Trump Tower meeting.
• Michael Cohen's testimony regarding the Trump Tower meeting.

The second note came shortly after the first and jurors requested to re-hear jury instructions.
"We the jury request to rehear the judge's instructions," the note read.

---

IIRC, Pecker had put McDougal on cover of one of his other publications and it had sold quite well so he was making money off of the deal and was happy.

VaultingChemist said:

---

Quote:

---

If that's the case, it wouldn't seem very good for Trump because they are already essentially to the point of believing Cohen, just need Peckers testimony to corroborate to satisfy their desire to convict.

---

Or if Pecker does not corroborate Cohen's testimony of criminality, the case against Trump falls apart.

---

I believe during the closing arguments, Trump's lawyer argued something to the effect of Pecker's testimony as proof Cohen lied during this trial. I don't remember the exacts, though.

Usually. Do you really think they'll pass up putting him in jail for 30, 60, 90 days minimum? That's 1-3 months with no fundraisers he can attend, rallies he can oversee and all his conversations are recorded. He won't have unlimited access to lawyers and campaign officials. If you really think this is just about justice then you haven't been paying attention. If you put him in Rikers, or any prison, for 90 days that gives him less than 2 months to campaign personally for President. The incentive to cripple him is monstrously high. One of the many reasons this is such an insane case.

Reality Check said:

---

The fact they're asking to hear any of this, imho, is a bad sign for The Donald because it means they're actually parsing through Cohen's testimony as opposed to having reached the conclusion 99.9 percent of us would come to -- that he's a lying POS whose every word should be ignored.

---

It doesn't mean all twelve of them think that.

birdman said:

---

Reality Check said:

---

The fact they're asking to hear any of this, imho, is a bad sign for The Donald because it means they're actually parsing through Cohen's testimony as opposed to having reached the conclusion 99.9 percent of us would come to -- that he's a lying POS whose every word should be ignored.

---

It doesn't mean all twelve of them think that.

---

It certainly means they aren't all just throwing out Cohen's testimony. At least a portion of the jury is looking for something that corroborates Cohen's testimony, which means a Not Guilty is very unlikely. It means they (maybe not all, but likely more than one) are buying the prosecution argument that it doesn't matter if Cohen is a liar. Of course, it's also possible they find something that proves he lied, but I think it's unlikely they are looking to prove him a liar.

I already see how this plays out if at least one juror isn't as competent as a high school junior. So, if guilty.

-Judge will announce sentencing on June 27 am (day of first debate). Coincidence? Hell no.
-Sentence to 4 mos. in jail, beginning immediately.
-Let's sleepy joe off the hook and they can say..."sorry, can't debate a criminal/inmate."
-4 mos. sentence takes us to end Oct. allowing zero time for campaigning, debates, etc.

In this scenario, what does the RNC/delegates do?

jt2hunt said:

---

Process crime and first time offender is probation..

---

One would think. They will 100% ask for remand.

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

I already see how this plays out if at least one juror isn't as competent as a high school junior. So, if guilty.

-Judge will announce sentencing on June 27 am (day of first debate). Coincidence? Hell no.
-Sentence to 4 mos. in jail, beginning immediately.
-Let's sleepy joe off the hook and they can say..."sorry, can't debate a criminal/inmate."
-4 mos. sentence takes us to end Oct. allowing zero time for campaigning, debates, etc.

In this scenario, what does the RNC/delegates do?

---

I think you'll see some sort of violence if they throw him in prison before the election. I hope not but unless the republicans have something to stop him from going to jail I'm not sure anyone will be able to stop it.

Reality Check said:

---

AustinAg2K said:

---

BadMoonRisin said:

---

---

This is misleading. He did specifically say they have to be unanimous to convict. They don't have to agree on the second crime (which raises to a felony), but they do have to agree that Trump falsified records to cover up a second crime. They also have to agree that there is a second crime. They could all agree that he falsified records, but one could not agree that it was covering up a second crime and that would be a hung jury. The only thing they don't have to agree on is what that second crime is.

---

MERCHAN: We find you guilty, in accordance with the U.S. Constitution and New York Law, of committing Crime A to conceal your commission of Crime B.

TRUMP: What was Crime B?

MERCHAN: Meh... doesn't matter. You're guilty of committing Crime A to conceal your commission of it.

TRUMP: No, seriously... my Sixth Amendment right says I have the right to know "the nature of the charges and evidence against you." So what charges was I facing to constitute Crime B and what evidence do you have against me?

MERCHAN::Shut up, Orange Man.

---

This isn't terribly uncommon, at least not in Texas.

Take a felony murder case for example where the defendant is accused of beating the victim to death. Intent to inflect harm is not required to convict of murder if the reckless act was committed during the commission of another felony.

Let's say kidnapping and sexual assault were also alleged as the two underlying felonies. If 4 jurors think the victim was sexually assaulted and kidnapped, 4 jurors believe the sex was consensual but not the subsequent transport of the victim, and the final 4 jurors feel that the victim voluntarily agreed to travel with the defendant but was raped along the way, it's a murder conviction despite there being disagreement as to which felonies were involved.

The conviction is because the jury was unanimous that the death occurred during the commission of a felony.

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

I already see how this plays out if at least one juror isn't as competent as a high school junior. So, if guilty.

-Judge will announce sentencing on June 27 am (day of first debate). Coincidence? Hell no.
-Sentence to 4 mos. in jail, beginning immediately.
-Let's sleepy joe off the hook and they can say..."sorry, can't debate a criminal/inmate."
-4 mos. sentence takes us to end Oct. allowing zero time for campaigning, debates, etc.

In this scenario, what does the RNC/delegates do?

---

Would the secret service just let Trump go to prison? Not sure they would.

MagnumLoad said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

Martin Cash said:

---

Just heard that the jury was not allowed to take the court's charge with them into the jury room.

That is absolutely insane. This is truly banana republic level.

---

Wow. If that's the case can the SCOTUS not weigh in now and throw this thing out? Seems like there should be a judicial check and balance during a trial vs. after via appeal for this level of misconduct.

---

Don't expect SCOTUS to do anything regarding this case.

---

And that is concerning. Trampling the Constitution should be adequate to weigh in.

---

Roberts despises Trump and won't lift a finger to help him. They may get around to fixing the issues with the laws involved, but they will have no sense of urgency to do anything in time to help trump.

Democrat Commies won't stop until they plunge us into a civil war.

Hopefully, people who are non-Leftists do NOT TAKE THE BAIT.

Don't give them what they want. Trump goes to jail, and becomes a martyr.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Marxists funded the election of radical DAs in blue megacities for this reason. Political opponents will be prosecuted from now on. It's open season now. A significant turning point in American history. Recall that Venezuela did this right before it collapsed. Major corps saw this and pulled out the country entirely. NY has publicly abandoned the rule of law and god willing we'll see companies start to abandon NY.

---

If the Right wants to stop this, they must be willing to do the same thing to their political opponents in Red areas. Fear of it happening to them will be the only thing that stops the Left. You can't "live & let live/point out the hypocrisy/turn the other cheek/that's not who we are" your way out of this.

Roberts also cares about norms. You throw Trump in jail and the next wave of "Republicans Crazies" elected will make the current "crazies" seem like libs. SCOTUS would be ruling on rabid federalism and Republican State Lawfare from now until the end of time. They're going to HAVE to take it up, and quickly if the NY Appeals court doesn't get its ass in gear.

RogerFurlong said:

---

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

I already see how this plays out if at least one juror isn't as competent as a high school junior. So, if guilty.

-Judge will announce sentencing on June 27 am (day of first debate). Coincidence? Hell no.
-Sentence to 4 mos. in jail, beginning immediately.
-Let's sleepy joe off the hook and they can say..."sorry, can't debate a criminal/inmate."
-4 mos. sentence takes us to end Oct. allowing zero time for campaigning, debates, etc.

In this scenario, what does the RNC/delegates do?

---

I think you'll see some sort of violence if they throw him in prison before the election. I hope not but unless the republicans have something to stop him from going to jail I'm not sure anyone will be able to stop it.

---

The country ends if Trump is convicted and the conviction results in:

1) Overturning the 2024 likely election outcome
2) Trump being incarcerated long term in any capacity.

Gov's Abbott, DeSantis, Stitt, Noem, Landry, Ivey, Lee, Parson, Sanders, should consider secession in EITHER scenario.

Page 30 of this thread has salient portions of Pecker's cross examination by Bove.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3455338/30

AustinAg2K said:

---

VaultingChemist said:

---

Quote:

---

If that's the case, it wouldn't seem very good for Trump because they are already essentially to the point of believing Cohen, just need Peckers testimony to corroborate to satisfy their desire to convict.

---

Or if Pecker does not corroborate Cohen's testimony of criminality, the case against Trump falls apart.

---

I believe during the closing arguments, Trump's lawyer argued something to the effect of Pecker's testimony as proof Cohen lied during this trial. I don't remember the exacts, though.

---

He did and I remembered that Miss Hawk had an angry red face post that Cohen said things that were directly contradictory of Peckers testimony.

The jurors may be looking for themselves on Cohen's lies to them?

Ducks4brkfast said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

Tramp96 said:

---

So whereas all the pundits and legal eagles have been saying that Michael Cohen is the key to the entire case by the prosecution, it appears to me that the jury is thinking Pecker is?

---

Seems to me that they want to consider whether Pecker and Cohen's stories align.

---

I'd make a list. What do we have actual corroboration on, and what do we not?

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Page 30 of this thread has salient portions of Pecker's cross examination by Bove.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3455338/30

---

Would be interesting to know if the portions of the testimony they are wanting to hear were from the direct or the cross.

TheEternalOptimist said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

I already see how this plays out if at least one juror isn't as competent as a high school junior. So, if guilty.

-Judge will announce sentencing on June 27 am (day of first debate). Coincidence? Hell no.
-Sentence to 4 mos. in jail, beginning immediately.
-Let's sleepy joe off the hook and they can say..."sorry, can't debate a criminal/inmate."
-4 mos. sentence takes us to end Oct. allowing zero time for campaigning, debates, etc.

In this scenario, what does the RNC/delegates do?

---

I think you'll see some sort of violence if they throw him in prison before the election. I hope not but unless the republicans have something to stop him from going to jail I'm not sure anyone will be able to stop it.

---

The country ends if Trump is convicted and the conviction results in:

1) Overturning the 2024 likely election outcome
2) Trump being incarcerated long term in any capacity.

Gov's Abbott, DeSantis, Stitt, Noem, Landry, Ivey, Lee, Parson, Sanders, should consider secession in EITHER scenario.

---

Wishful thinkin. I am convinced that R have no testicular fortitude to kick the D in "desnuts". I fear this is going to be the downfall of our country. If the Rep return the favor or if the Dem get their conviction, (either way) how do we ever get back to a "lawful Society" as the fore fathers fought for?

txags92 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Page 30 of this thread has salient portions of Pecker's cross examination by Bove.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3455338/30

---

Would be interesting to know if the portions of the testimony they are wanting to hear were from the direct or the cross.

---

Perfect timing.

Quote:

---

Judge Juan Merchan is back on the bench.
"OK, where do we stand?" he asks.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says they have made a lot of progress but there are a few issues they may need him to get involved with.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is listing the transcript page numbers that will be read for three of the four requests from the jury.
Steinglass outlines the page numbers to be read for the first two requests.
When Judge Juan Merchan asks about the third request, Steinglass says, "This is the tough one."
Merchan says to skip it for now and go to the fourth one. Steinglass then lists the page numbers for the fourth request.

---

Quote:

---

The parties disagree about the excerpts that answer the third jury readback request David Pecker's testimony about the Trump Tower meeting.
They're going over the first passage in dispute. They agree on what page and line to start but not where it should end.
Prosecutors want an extra page of testimony to include what happened after the meeting and the execution of the plan hatched at the meeting.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says they tried to draw a line between the substance of the meeting and what happened afterward.

---

Quote:

---

Attorney Todd Blanche says the defense believes they should keep the readback narrow to the request and what happened after the meeting isn't directly responsive to the request.

Judge Juan Merchan says he understands why Blanche would be concerned over most of the portion the prosecutors want to add.

---

Quote:

---

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says the readback testimony for the jury as it stands is about 35 pages.
Judge Juan Merchan asks the parties to get the excerpt line numbers sent to him via his clerk and he will get back to them about the disputes.
The judge asked everyone to be ready to go at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow.

---

Quote:

---

udge Juan Merchan is off the bench, and court is out of session.

Trump is now standing to leave the courtroom.

---

rgag12 said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

NDA's are not illegal

---

Kinda where I keep getting stuck. NDA's are used all the time and it isn't uncommon for someone to be paid $$ in return for keeping confidential information private. Not sure how the public was somehow harmed, or owed, this information.

---

It's all tied to election interference. From my casual and infrequent observations, seems like they're saying that the information that they were trying to bury somehow was going to swing the election in Hillary's favor, thus it was election interference.

Again, the real law that was broken was Trump existing.

---

I think proven by the fact that Hillary destroyed evidence under subpoena (email outside of FOIA) and nothing happened. Or the damn Steele Dossier....those aren't election interference?

agAngeldad said:

---

TheEternalOptimist said:

---

RogerFurlong said:

---

KatyAggie2000 said:

---

I already see how this plays out if at least one juror isn't as competent as a high school junior. So, if guilty.

-Judge will announce sentencing on June 27 am (day of first debate). Coincidence? Hell no.
-Sentence to 4 mos. in jail, beginning immediately.
-Let's sleepy joe off the hook and they can say..."sorry, can't debate a criminal/inmate."
-4 mos. sentence takes us to end Oct. allowing zero time for campaigning, debates, etc.

In this scenario, what does the RNC/delegates do?

---

I think you'll see some sort of violence if they throw him in prison before the election. I hope not but unless the republicans have something to stop him from going to jail I'm not sure anyone will be able to stop it.

---

The country ends if Trump is convicted and the conviction results in:

1) Overturning the 2024 likely election outcome
2) Trump being incarcerated long term in any capacity.

Gov's Abbott, DeSantis, Stitt, Noem, Landry, Ivey, Lee, Parson, Sanders, should consider secession in EITHER scenario.

---

Wishful thinkin. I am convinced that R have no testicular fortitude to kick the D in "desnuts". I fear this is going to be the downfall of our country. If the Rep return the favor or if the Dem get their conviction, (either way) how do we ever get back to a "lawful Society" as the fore fathers fought for?

---

By watering the tree of liberty as suggested by Jefferson.