Jonathan Turley
·
6h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Replying to @JonathanTurley
...Merchan is allowing the prosecutors to repeatedly illicit a statement from Cohen that it is not true when he said that there was no campaign violation. He is overruling defense objections. So the jury is hearing over and over again on the existence of a violation...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Merchan just allowed Cohen to testify on the legality of payments to Daniels. He then overruled another objection to prosecutors saying that he pleaded guilty to campaign violations...
4:23 PM · May 20, 2024 //

In case you've a hankering for whiplash, the prosecution also introduced a waiver of attorney-client privilege between Cohen and Costello, in which Cohen indicated he never considered Costello his attorney, and contradicted his previous testimony that their (multiple) communications were privileged. //

here's an explainer from CNN regarding what the prosecution is attempting to prove:

Prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump falsified business records with the intent to commit or conceal another crime, but they don’t have to prove that Trump committed that crime. The prosecution's theory is that the second crime could be in violation of federal and state election laws or state tax laws regarding how the reimbursements to Trump's ex-fixer and attorney Michael Cohen were handled.

In other words, the prosecution doesn't need to prove that Trump actually committed an underlying crime — just that he falsified the records with the intent to commit or conceal said crime (which could be election law violations or state tax law violations). Assuming that Merchan doesn't direct a verdict on this (and there's little indication that he's inclined to do such), the jury instructions here are going to be key. //

Claudius54
an hour ago edited
... a porn star, a lying thief and an eye roller take the witness stand ...

[fill in your punchline here] //

Claudius54
2 hours ago
"While Merchan's rulings throughout the trial have largely favored the prosecution (and questions regarding his bias are understandable), that comment hints at Merchan believing the jury won't find Cohen credible."

Um ... I thought that lying under oath was considered perjury. If I read above correctly, the judge knows that Cohen lied and is willing to roll the dice and hope the jury realises that Cohen was untruthful rather than applying a remedy as a "matter of law"?? I this the gold standard in jurisprudence these days?

What exactly has the prosecution credibly proven (and provided evidence) that warrants a felony conviction? I predict that the jury will find Trump guilty ... of being Trump. //

bk
2 hours ago
Merchan: "I don't see any probative value for impeachment."
Unlike the "probative value" of all the tawdry BS testimony from Stormy Daniels. //

RSB
22 minutes ago
So this was fun.

Cohen's admission of felony grand larceny was interesting and especially as he says the prosecutor was aware of it and that they did not tell Trump of the theft. This goes outside the usual plea deal routine where someone pleads to a crime and gets immunity or other consideration for testimony. If true Bragg is open to criminal charges as is Cohen.

Merchan holding the directed verdict motion for consideration was also interesting. He has to see all the legal issues in the case. For example, contrary to CNNs thinking (which is what Susie recounted not her own thoughts) the prosecution DOES have to specify the underlying offense and must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump intended to commit that exact offense AND that he was aware it was an offense. Add in the utter lack of credibility of Cohen (which he alluded to) and he may (unlikely true) be thinking about deep sixing this whole thing. //

AdeleInTexas 41 minutes ago edited

After several weeks of trial evidence of a crime, maybe multiple felonies, has finally been uncovered — and Cohen was the perpetrator. https://x.com/bennyjohnson/...