Orange Duce

[old salt]

It was such a stellar idea to stage the Stormy Show, they're not calling Karen McDougal.

Make America Horny Again.

Karen McDougal I think was always a backup if things didn't go well with Daniels. I think the prosecution is feeling very good about how things went yesterday. Why the defense is so exercised about McDougal now not on the witness list seems a strange reaction. Guess they had something planned for Karen as well, and the prosecution screwed up their plans.

The defense probably concluded that the testimony of Hope Hicks & Madeleine Westerhout were favorable for Trump & they likely anticipated that Karen McDougal would also be a sympathetic witness. She came across that way in her public interviews. She was not a one night stand, said she loved Trump & did not appear to want to harm him or get revenge like Daniels did. That's probably why the Prosecution did not call her.

[wayfarer]

Did a parasite die in your brain?

Campaign finance violation was Cohen paying off Stormy, not MacDougal. Trump would be on the hook for misdemeanor business falsification charges but this fraud was in support of campaign finance violation that Cohen plead guilty to and went to jail for.

Why didn’t Trump just pay off Stormy himself? He paid Cohen more than double what Cohen paid her due to ‘gross up’ to cover Cohen’s loan interest and tax liability. My only guess is he takes so much pride in not paying any taxes - he wanted the expense write off.

What a ghoulish tool. Your republican nominee for president. Puke.

[cradleandshoot]

Did a parasite die in your brain?

Campaign finance violation was Cohen paying off Stormy, not MacDougal. Trump would be on the hook for misdemeanor business falsification charges but this fraud was in support of campaign finance violation that Cohen plead guilty too and went to jail for.

Why didn’t Trump just pay off Stormy himself? He paid Cohen more than double what Cohen paid her due to ‘gross up’ to cover Cohen’s loan interest and tax liability. My only guess is he takes so much pride in not paying any taxes - he wanted the expense write off.

What a ghoulish tool. Your republican nominee for president. Puke.

So if trump wasn't running for POTUS would all of these court cases be happening??

[wayfarer]

No. Because he wouldn’t have orchestrated a campaign finance violation. The world would have been a better, safer place if he just kept busy running his businesses into bankruptcy. Grifting MAGA donations was too hard to pass up for him.

[Seacoaster(1)]

It is also now absolutely clear, in the record of a criminal trial, that Trump was doing personal and Trump Organization business in the White House (putting aside the grifting bribe center established a few blocks away). He spoke with his CFO "everyday." Signed checks on TO accounts and personal accounts for business everyday. Why doesn't anyone care? You know to a moral certainty that if Obama had done this -- operated a for-profit enterprise while sitting at the Resolute Desk -- the right would swallow their tongues in spasms of outrage. But the cult doesn't care because the orange chosen one is doing it? The corrosive effect of this guy, and his followers' stupefying indulgence for his conduct, is really off the charts.

[Olderbarndog]

It is also now absolutely clear, in the record of a criminal trial, that Trump was doing personal and Trump Organization business in the White House (putting aside the grifting bribe center established a few blocks away). He spoke with his CFO "everyday." Signed checks on TO accounts and personal accounts for business everyday. Why doesn't anyone care? You know to a moral certainty that if Obama had done this -- operated a for-profit enterprise while sitting at the Resolute Desk -- the right would swallow their tongues in spasms of outrage. But the cult doesn't care because the orange chosen one is doing it? The corrosive effect of this guy, and his followers' stupefying indulgence for his conduct, is really off the charts.

My understanding of financial matters is pretty limited, of human nature much broader. So, if Mr. Trump had tapped his own piggy bank and paid in cash???? Just asking.

[Seacoaster(1)]

It is also now absolutely clear, in the record of a criminal trial, that Trump was doing personal and Trump Organization business in the White House (putting aside the grifting bribe center established a few blocks away). He spoke with his CFO "everyday." Signed checks on TO accounts and personal accounts for business everyday. Why doesn't anyone care? You know to a moral certainty that if Obama had done this -- operated a for-profit enterprise while sitting at the Resolute Desk -- the right would swallow their tongues in spasms of outrage. But the cult doesn't care because the orange chosen one is doing it? The corrosive effect of this guy, and his followers' stupefying indulgence for his conduct, is really off the charts.

My understanding of financial matters is pretty limited, of human nature much broader. So, if Mr. Trump had tapped his own piggy bank and paid in cash???? Just asking.

Honestly, not sure what you're asking.

[cradleandshoot]

The 64 thousand dollar question is how do define what a legal expense is?

[dislaxxic]

It is also now absolutely clear, in the record of a criminal trial, that Trump was doing personal and Trump Organization business in the White House (putting aside the grifting bribe center established a few blocks away). He spoke with his CFO "everyday." Signed checks on TO accounts and personal accounts for business everyday. Why doesn't anyone care? You know to a moral certainty that if Obama had done this -- operated a for-profit enterprise while sitting at the Resolute Desk -- the right would swallow their tongues in spasms of outrage. But the cult doesn't care because the orange chosen one is doing it? The corrosive effect of this guy, and his followers' stupefying indulgence for his conduct, is really off the charts.

My understanding of financial matters is pretty limited, of human nature much broader. So, if Mr. Trump had tapped his own piggy bank and paid in cash???? Just asking.

Good point OBD...he's not only a crime family Don, but a really DUMASS one at that!

..

[cradleandshoot]

It is also now absolutely clear, in the record of a criminal trial, that Trump was doing personal and Trump Organization business in the White House (putting aside the grifting bribe center established a few blocks away). He spoke with his CFO "everyday." Signed checks on TO accounts and personal accounts for business everyday. Why doesn't anyone care? You know to a moral certainty that if Obama had done this -- operated a for-profit enterprise while sitting at the Resolute Desk -- the right would swallow their tongues in spasms of outrage. But the cult doesn't care because the orange chosen one is doing it? The corrosive effect of this guy, and his followers' stupefying indulgence for his conduct, is really off the charts.

My understanding of financial matters is pretty limited, of human nature much broader. So, if Mr. Trump had tapped his own piggy bank and paid in cash???? Just asking.

Good point OBD...he's not only a crime family Don, but a really DUMASS one at that!

..

Is he related to Don Corleone? I'm gonna make you an offer you can't refuse.

[njbill]

It was such a stellar idea to stage the Stormy Show, they're not calling Karen McDougal.

Make America Horny Again.

Karen McDougal I think was always a backup if things didn't go well with Daniels. I think the prosecution is feeling very good about how things went yesterday. Why the defense is so exercised about McDougal now not on the witness list seems a strange reaction. Guess they had something planned for Karen as well, and the prosecution screwed up their plans.

I think the defense’s McDougal motion yesterday was prompted 100% by the client. There has been reporting all along that Trump is much more concerned with what McDougal has to say in terms of Melania management since evidently he had a year-long affair with her. She has little to none of the hard edge that Stormy has. We saw how upset Trump got with Stormy’s testimony. I think you could multiply that by 100 if McDougal took the stand.

With the strange witness rule that they have in this case (you evidently don’t need to tell the other side who you are going to call and when), there are probably lots and lots (scores?) of names on the prosecution’s witness list who haven’t been called as yet. For trial preparation purposes, you would really like to know who is coming up and when. The fact that they made this motion about only one witness strongly suggests to me that the directive came from Trump.

There was a point where I thought they might finish with McDougal, that is, go out on a high note with a witness the jury may like after what very probably will be an unlikable witness in Michael Cohen. But I’m not surprised they aren’t calling her. Factually, she is really only very tangentially related to the case. While this situation is not completely analogous to the recent Harvey Weinstein ruling, there would be some risk that calling McDougal could result in a reversal on appeal.

[ggait]

In light of peckers credible testimony, there’s really no need to call mcdougal.

[Seacoaster(1)]

In light of peckers credible testimony, there’s really no need to call mcdougal.

This is really a sentence one dreams of being able to write.

[MDlaxfan76]

It is also now absolutely clear, in the record of a criminal trial, that Trump was doing personal and Trump Organization business in the White House (putting aside the grifting bribe center established a few blocks away). He spoke with his CFO "everyday." Signed checks on TO accounts and personal accounts for business everyday. Why doesn't anyone care? You know to a moral certainty that if Obama had done this -- operated a for-profit enterprise while sitting at the Resolute Desk -- the right would swallow their tongues in spasms of outrage. But the cult doesn't care because the orange chosen one is doing it? The corrosive effect of this guy, and his followers' stupefying indulgence for his conduct, is really off the charts.

My understanding of financial matters is pretty limited, of human nature much broader. So, if Mr. Trump had tapped his own piggy bank and paid in cash???? Just asking.

Honestly, not sure what you're asking.

OBdog may be asking whether it would be a crime to have paid Stormy directly out of his personal checking account, no go between, and not taken it as a business deduction or in any other way tried to hide what it was, a hush money payment? Not "legal services".

Assuming it's clear that it was at least in part to prevent the story from coming out prior to the election, it would still have been a campaign violation unless it was reported as a donation of value to the campaign...which as candidate he's free to do. But he obviously didn't want public disclosure that he'd done it, which the campaign law transparency would have outed, eventually.

But if he didn't report it, campaign law violation...I don't recall whether misdemeanor or felony but nowhere as serious as what he did instead which was to go through all sorts of machinations to hide it.

The defense would have had the argument that this wasn't because of the election and, without all the subterfuge, that at least might have been plausible, albeit, hmmm. But the subterfuge makes this clearly an effort to deceive and makes all the defense arguments super questionable, whereas the testimony about intent to bury pre-election is much more compelling.

I think the grossing up so that Cohen could pay taxes on it is the by far most damning evidence of the intent to hide. Pretending it was payment for actual legal services is totally phony and obviously so. And that intent to hide what they'd done, which was to bury a story pre-election, as they'd done with another story, compounds greatly the offense.

[njbill]

The part of Cohen's upcoming testimony that most intrigues me is what he will say about what he and Trump knew about the falsification of the business records. It seems to me the prosecution has already abundantly proven the records were false, but that all they have to date is inferences and common sense that Trump knew. Enough to get to a jury at this point? Not sure.

Cohen knew the scheme was illegal (he was right and served time for the crime). It makes sense to me that he would want to know how the payments to him were going to be booked at the Trump Org. If the sh*t ever hit the fan (as it did), he would have known that the prosecutors would look at TO records to see what they said. So Cohen would be keenly interested in what the evidence against him would be. If he testifies that he and Trump discussed that the payments would be recorded on the books as "legal payments," Trump is dead, unless of course there is a Trumpist hold out on the jury. The defense would have the very heavy lift of convincing the jury that Cohen made up the conversation with Trump about the falsified records. Even with all the baggage Cohen has, I doubt they can do that. But I'm not on the jury and it is within the realm of possibility that a juror could genuinely feel there is reasonable doubt about that part of Cohen's testimony.

A key bit of info I am missing, though, is whether Cohen is on record anywhere about whether he discussed the false business records with Trump and, if so, what was said. If he is on record, I image Cohen will have to be wed to his previous statements. Thinking about that, you'd certainly think he would have been asked about this in his grand jury testimony.

I am now wondering who the state will call after Cohen. If he goes well, they will probably rest. If he doesn't, they will need an "air freshener" witness to close with. Who might that be? Don't know.

[MDlaxfan76]

Perhaps some more paperwork witnesses?
We haven't really known who all these witnesses would be so far in that regard, so there could be more.

[njbill]

Maybe. Ideally, you'd like to go out on a high note. Start strong (they did with Pecker) and end strong. A paper witness would be blah. But you can't always orchestrate things as you'd necessarily like. Like your family, you can't pick your witnesses.

[MDlaxfan76]

Maybe. Ideally, you'd like to go out on a high note. Start strong (they did with Pecker) and end strong. A paper witness would be blah. But you can't always orchestrate things as you'd necessarily like. Like your family, you can't pick your witnesses.

This might be a complete list of who the Judge read to the jurors.
https://www.justsecurity.org/94696/trum ... witnesses/

Long list but many probably wouldn't be prosecution witnesses.

[jhu72]

Did a parasite die in your brain?

Campaign finance violation was Cohen paying off Stormy, not MacDougal. Trump would be on the hook for misdemeanor business falsification charges but this fraud was in support of campaign finance violation that Cohen plead guilty to and went to jail for.

Why didn’t Trump just pay off Stormy himself? He paid Cohen more than double what Cohen paid her due to ‘gross up’ to cover Cohen’s loan interest and tax liability. My only guess is he takes so much pride in not paying any taxes - he wanted the expense write off.

What a ghoulish tool. Your republican nominee for president. Puke.

... you make a good point. The only thing MacDougal could add was credibility to Daniels testimony in terms of Trump's behavior with women. Don't think Stormy's testimony really needed it. MacDougal could be seen as piling on a part of the case that is not real relevant to the trial, Trump's proclivity for infidelity.

[njbill]

Maybe. Ideally, you'd like to go out on a high note. Start strong (they did with Pecker) and end strong. A paper witness would be blah. But you can't always orchestrate things as you'd necessarily like. Like your family, you can't pick your witnesses.

This might be a complete list of who the Judge read to the jurors.
https://www.justsecurity.org/94696/trum ... witnesses/

Long list but many probably wouldn't be prosecution witnesses.

Thanks. Maybe Melania will be the last witness.

I never was admitted in NY and never practiced criminal law. But at trials and hearings I had, you always knew who the other side was going to call next. They would tell you. You might start out before trial with a long list like the one you cited, but once you got into trial, you would be told who would or might be called the next day. Now, I did civil work and don't remember if that was simply courtesy or protocol. Don't remember it actually being in a pre-trial order.

What I have heard is that the prosecution successfully argued to the judge that they shouldn't be required to tell the defense whom they are going to call next because of the risk that Trump would tweet about the witness or get his goons to harass the witness or worse.

All reasonable fears, but why not a rule that the prosecution has to tell the defense team who is coming up, but that the defense can't tell anyone (including Trump, himself) other than lawyers on the team and their staff? In civil litigation, sometimes you would designate documents in discovery as being for "attorney's eyes only." In such case, the attorney couldn't show the document to the client. Don't know why they couldn't have a similar rule for witnesses here.

Maybe criminal practice in NY state courts is different. Just seems that it would put the other side at a real disadvantage to not know who is coming next, especially for the big witnesses like Pecker, Stormy, and Cohen. (I assume the same rule will apply when the defense is putting on their case.)