They have to PROVE Trump was trying to commit fraud when he paid Cohen with his private funds. Hard to prove that when he CHOSE to pay by to check to keep it on the up and up. First time EVER an attorney for a client testifies before a court a client should go to jail for following said attorney's advice. Can't make it up.

(05-15-2024 11:33 AM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  FEC investigated and said it was all done correctly. There is no Federal crime. Does anyone think if there was they wouldn't be going after him for it?

Would have been a small fine. Not nearly the chit show going on now. Don’t give the basturds the benefit of doubt.

(05-15-2024 02:53 PM)Eagleaidaholic Wrote:  They have to PROVE Trump was trying to commit fraud when he paid Cohen with his private funds. Hard to prove that when he CHOSE to pay by to check to keep it on the up and up. First time EVER an attorney for a client testifies before a court a client should go to jail for following said attorney's advice. Can't make it up.

Trump has caused the prog filth to pull a lot of firsts out of their bag of third world tricks.

(05-15-2024 02:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  TA, nobody is discounting his opinion. But it's just HIS opinion. And it's my opinion that unless you're there in the courtroom day after day and looking at the jury and how things are being played for them, it's hard to rely on anyone's opinion from simply reading transcripts.

I said from the beginning that he wasn't in the courtroom, and it was his opinion. But it's certainly an informed opinion, and certainly not from a Trump fan, and his opinion reflects that of many analysts who also don't have a political bias, or happen to lean left.

I was hoping you would tell me where you think his argument doesn't make sense.

(05-15-2024 03:43 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-15-2024 02:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  TA, nobody is discounting his opinion. But it's just HIS opinion. And it's my opinion that unless you're there in the courtroom day after day and looking at the jury and how things are being played for them, it's hard to rely on anyone's opinion from simply reading transcripts.

I said from the beginning that he wasn't in the courtroom, and it was his opinion. But it's certainly an informed opinion, and certainly not from a Trump fan, and his opinion reflects that of many analysts who also don't have a political bias, or happen to lean left.

I was hoping you would tell me where you think his argument doesn't make sense.

Good luck getting anything but "reeee" from his ass.

(05-15-2024 03:44 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  

(05-15-2024 03:43 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-15-2024 02:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  TA, nobody is discounting his opinion. But it's just HIS opinion. And it's my opinion that unless you're there in the courtroom day after day and looking at the jury and how things are being played for them, it's hard to rely on anyone's opinion from simply reading transcripts.

I said from the beginning that he wasn't in the courtroom, and it was his opinion. But it's certainly an informed opinion, and certainly not from a Trump fan, and his opinion reflects that of many analysts who also don't have a political bias, or happen to lean left.

I was hoping you would tell me where you think his argument doesn't make sense.

Good luck getting anything but "reeee" from his ass.

Co-sign

Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I just watched another analysis that said trumps team keeps referring to Cohen as the Defendant rather than the witness...in a trial where their guy is the defendant.

Seems like they're grasping at straws.

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

The facts in this case don't really matter. It's all about the jury. I'll be shocked if they rule for Trump.

A jury in LA found OJ innocent and openly celebrated afterwards, that they got one of their own, off. I suspect that when this is all over, you'll have a similar response from these "jurors", celebrating that they "got Trump".

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

(05-16-2024 01:39 PM)oruvoice Wrote:  The facts in this case don't really matter. It's all about the jury. I'll be shocked if they rule for Trump.

A jury in LA found OJ innocent and openly celebrated afterwards, that they got one of their own, off. I suspect that when this is all over, you'll have a similar response from these "jurors", celebrating that they "got Trump".

Exactly what MacCallum was implying without saying it out loud.

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

Exactly. This venue was carefully selected because they knew the vast majority of any potential jury pool would overwhelmingly be made up of Trump haters who would have already made up their mind to convict long before the prosecution even began to present its case. The only hope Trump has is that one or two reasonable folks are on the jury and that those one or two jurors are stout enough mentally to withstand the pressure and doxing that will follow them if they vote their actual conscience based on the evidence presented in court. Martha's observations are exactly what I would expect. There are are maybe 2--perhaps 3 at most---who might actually be the type of people who will attempt to do their proper duty as an unbiased juror. My guess is they will want to be fair jurors----but will buckle once they begin to feel the pressure from the other jurors---especially once the the hateful violence inducing doxing by the press really gets rolling.

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

I think if it goes to jury there’s a stronger likelihood of it being a hung jury than a straight conviction. It’ll probably will be just one person but that’ll be enough. Likely a man that doesn’t like or care for him but knows this is ridiculous and will say no 33 times

I say “if it goes” because there is the option of the judge as bias as he is, doesn’t want his case overturned in appeals on all of the missteps he took and will mistrial it himself. He did his job - he got Trump away from the campaign trail and got the news focused on his legal troubles - but none of that has hurt him or helped Biden. So he can just scuttle it and wash his hands of it

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

Of course not. The defense is wasting their time since they already have their minds made up. About what? Who knows since no crime has been proven much less exposed.

(05-16-2024 02:32 PM)Was SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

Of course not. The defense is wasting their time since they already have their minds made up. About what? Who knows since no crime has been proven much less exposed.

The left is trying extremely hard to destroy the nation. How do you make sane reasonable people everywhere decide to revolt. Deny due process and do it publicly so that everyone sees it.

The trial isn't about Trump. It's about destroying trust in a legal system which until "hate crimes" treated everyone the same "blindly". It's phase 2 after phase 1, destroy faith in the vote and you destroy the Republic which relies upon a democratic process to determine leadership.

None of this folks is a damned accident, or merely the result of stupid people in positions of power, because smarter people appointed them so that their stupid would erode the confidence of the public in the systems for which public trust is essential for their operation.

All of it is to provoke revolution and never forget that!

(05-16-2024 02:18 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

I think if it goes to jury there’s a stronger likelihood of it being a hung jury than a straight conviction. It’ll probably will be just one person but that’ll be enough. Likely a man that doesn’t like or care for him but knows this is ridiculous and will say no 33 times

I say “if it goes” because there is the option of the judge as bias as he is, doesn’t want his case overturned in appeals on all of the missteps he took and will mistrial it himself. He did his job - he got Trump away from the campaign trail and got the news focused on his legal troubles - but none of that has hurt him or helped Biden. So he can just scuttle it and wash his hands of it

I don't disagree with any of that. I think a hung jury is more likely than the judge doing anything. He wouldn't call a mistrial, but he could render a directed verdict, if he rules that the prosecution didn't prove its case.

But given his rulings to date, that seems highly unlikely.

I say the best chance Trump has is the two attorneys on the jury may have enough moxie to hang the jury by themselves, or convince the others to acquit.

Having said all that, I'm not the least bit convinced any of that will actually happen. NYC is 90% hard over Dems.

(05-16-2024 02:39 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 02:18 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

I think if it goes to jury there’s a stronger likelihood of it being a hung jury than a straight conviction. It’ll probably will be just one person but that’ll be enough. Likely a man that doesn’t like or care for him but knows this is ridiculous and will say no 33 times

I say “if it goes” because there is the option of the judge as bias as he is, doesn’t want his case overturned in appeals on all of the missteps he took and will mistrial it himself. He did his job - he got Trump away from the campaign trail and got the news focused on his legal troubles - but none of that has hurt him or helped Biden. So he can just scuttle it and wash his hands of it

I don't disagree with any of that. I think a hung jury is more likely than the judge doing anything. He wouldn't call a mistrial, but he could render a directed verdict, if he rules that the prosecution didn't prove its case.

But given his rulings to date, that seems highly unlikely.

I say the best chance Trump has is the two attorneys on the jury may have enough moxie to hang the jury by themselves, or convince the others to acquit.

Having said all that, I'm not the least bit convinced any of that will actually happen. NYC is 90% hard over Dems.

I agree it’s all an odds game here. No one really knows with absolute certainty even though we know manhattan is pretty bias overall

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

Trump is getting convicted. That jury pool is a 2 foot putt for the prosecution.

(05-16-2024 09:18 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:59 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:23 PM)BigTigerMike Wrote:  

(05-16-2024 01:17 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Back to the trial. Martha MacCallum of Fox News has been in the courtroom all day while Trump's defense attorney cross-examines Cohen.

She thinks, looking at the jurors, that it is not going well for Trump. The cross is, in her words, too detailed, too meandering, and the jury has mostly checked out, looks bored, easily distracted, etc.

She says a few are taking notes, but most are not paying attention to the cross at all. And this after they paid rapt attention to the prosecution's case.

Not that any of that is a surprise...

I think Cooper is probably right.

What MacCallum is saying is that the jury isn't paying attention!

Trump is getting convicted. That jury pool is a 2 foot putt for the prosecution.

That's my gut instinct, too. The jury pool is just too biased.

There is, IMO, 0% chance he is acquitted.

However, I do think there is some chance of a hung jury, mainly b/c this trial has been such a legal disaster for all the reasons already discussed.

Matt Gaetz had an interesting take yesterday, after sitting in court all day yesterday watching the jurors.

He said 8 of them would vote to convict Trump under any circumstances, regardless of all testimony.

He said maybe 3 were on the fence.

BUT...he thinks there is at least one person on the jury who would probably vote to acquit. He said that juror had anti-Cohen reactions all day, and laughed when Blanche caught Cohen in the blatant lie about the phone call.

Due to that, he thinks there will be a hung jury. We'll see.

P.S. An update on MacCallum's take. She said after the trial adjourned for the day that, in the morning, she thought Blanche was going into too much detail and covering the same ground over and over, and it seemed obvious he was losing the jury, all but maybe 2 of them who were still taking notes.

However, when Blanche finally slammed the door on Cohen's lack of credibility, just before lunch, MacCallum said the jury was fully engaged, and then she understood why Blanche had seemingly beaten a dead horse all morning.

However, she stopped short of making any prediction.

Meanwhile, on the All Dem All the Time networks, several commentators came over to Trump's side quite dramatically. Anderson Cooper for sure, and several other guest commentators I didn't know.