Trump's Troubles

Wait a second. Is this that media collusion that we keep hearing about from the righties on here?

 

He seems to be deliberately trying to face direct contempt and hopes of provoking something that disrupts the trial. Just speculation, but it seems like it. It's almost like he wants to get beyond the fine and have the judge threaten to temporarily incarcerate him to see if he can provoke violence.

 

At the very least, I feel like they’re wanting a ruling that would give them an argument for interlocutory appeal in order to delay.

 

Makes sense

 

1. I’m unclear on the offense
2. I have not seen or heard evidence or arguments for either side.

 

I think you give him too much credit that anything he does is planned or strategic. He's just a guy who has faced no consequences for his actions over the years and continues to act as he wishes

 

Possibly. But he has seemed to stay just the side of the contempt line in the past. This seems clearly over

 

I don’t expect a guilty verdict. I think there will be heavy reliance on Cohen, and Cohen is a very sketchy witness. Trump will say he had no idea how the books were kept or how things were booked or expensed. He just paid Cohen’s bills. IMO, the State does not have an easy case at all.

 

Even if he’s guilty, it won’t change a thing. His supporters will vote for him, no matter what.

 

Ughhhh. The State didn’t strike Juror 2, who gets his news from Trump Social?!?!?! That’s an issue that leaps out to me.

 

This is the Stormy Daniels case, events that happened in ‘16. While I’m sure the court case will reveal some new items pertaining to Trump, it’s hardly new, most pertinent facts are known.

Yes, Trump ordered a payoff to a porn-star. That this illicit transaction happened is not even in dispute, right? Michael Cohen went to jail for this very crime (so the “it’s not a crime” defense seems to fall very flat based on the fact there were previous convictions ). The most credible defense to me is that he was relying on lawyers advice. But when your lawyer is labeled as more of a “fixer” than a lawyer, even that defense seems like bullshit. Nevertheless it’s a hurdle for the prosecution (perhaps THE hurdle).

 

Perhaps they were out of “strikes” at that particular point? I think a person who “only” gets news off Truth Social and X is crazy, unfortunately I don’t think any of that falls as something that would be automatically disqualifying by the court. But if the prosecution could have struck such a person and didn’t, that would seemingly be stupid on their part.

 

I thought cohen went to jail for tax evasion. But truthfully I don’t remember. Again I don’t know the particulars of this case,but sex NDAs are pretty common. Embarrassing yes to some. Illegal no, unless one party feels they did something as unwilling participant, but I don’t believe that is the charge here. But as I said initially I am unclear on what the alleged offense, and haven’t heard any evidence to support or refute

 

Pecker seems to be testifying that Trump knew about and directed his actions. That seems to undercut much of the potential defense here.

 

Knew about what? What did trump
Conspire with enquirer to do that was illegal ?

 

I’m not sure if it was illegal, but The Inquirer engaged in “hunt and kill” for Trump, meaning they would try and find (and buy) negative Trump stories, and then kill the story before it hit publications.

 

If I am understanding this tweet thread correctly, Judge Merchan, with the agreement of the parties, is proceeding directly to contempt proceedings. I thought they were originally scheduled to be held tomorrow.