News Flash: A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen, but it hangs on Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records

Procrustes Stretched

And you say, "Oh my God, am I here all alone?"
Dec 1, 2008
62,847
8,787
2,040
Positively 4th Street
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.

The prosecution has done an excellent job of proving these details. Was the information on the documents false? Absolutely. Several witnesses support the government’s claim that Mr. Trump’s payments to the lawyer were not legal fees. Mr. Trump himself tweeted in 2018 that Mr. Cohen received a “reimbursement” and said as much in a White House financial disclosure form.

The key question the jurors will soon be considering is a straightforward one: Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records? The prosecution has answered half of that question. There’s no reason to doubt the records were false. But the verdict is likely to turn on the other half — whether Mr. Trump caused the false information to appear on the invoices and vouchers. The evidence there is murkier.


If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.
 
Good gawd the man can't help himself:


May 20, 2024, 11:23 a.m. ET20 minutes ago
20 minutes ago
Susanne Craig
Reporting from inside the courthouse

Trump just sent out a fundraising appeal falsely claiming he “could even be thrown into PRISON FOR LIFE!” if the jury in this case returns a guilty verdict. He actually faces up to four years in prison, or probation.


May 20, 2024, 11:29 a.m. ET14 minutes ago
14 minutes ago
Kate Christobek
Reporting from inside the courthouse

Trump is facing 34 class E felonies, the lowest category of felonies in New York, and each count carries a maximum prison sentence of four years. If Trump were to be convicted of more than one count, and Justice Merchan sentenced him to incarceration, it is likely that the sentence would be concurrent, under which he would serve prison time for each count simultaneously. It is also possible that he could be sentenced to probation.
 
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.




If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.
No one cares about what theories the prosecution can dream up.

What evidence is there and what can they prove?

Nothing.

They can’t even say what law he broke, much less prove it.
 
No one cares about what theories the prosecution can dream up.

What evidence is there and what can they prove?

Nothing.

They can’t even say what law he broke, much less prove it.

Ignore realities all you want
:
The prosecution has done an excellent job of proving these details. Was the information on the documents false? Absolutely. Several witnesses support the government’s claim that Mr. Trump’s payments to the lawyer were not legal fees. Mr. Trump himself tweeted in 2018 that Mr. Cohen received a “reimbursement” and said as much in a White House financial disclosure form. -- The government also introduced a document in the handwriting of Allen Weisselberg, the former chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, detailing the reimbursement scheme.

What the jury hears is what is going to determine the outcome.
 
They can’t even say what law he broke, much less prove it.
Again, ignore all you want.
quote:

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

 
For months I've heard the Prosecution say that Michael Cohen is their #1 star witness against Trump.
But now since the Defense has proven that Cohen is a self admitted thief and a lying conman.
The looney tune Democrats are saying that Cohen's testimony really doesn't matter in trying to convict Trump. ... :cuckoo:
"The Trump team is essentially asking the jury to believe everyone around Trump was acting shadily except Trump himself."

Where did you hear the prosecution say that? Sounds like you just made shit up -- again.

The jury already knew that Cohen is a self admitted thief and a lying conman, as is Trump. The prosecution said as much early on. You must be posting from some cultish echo chamber.

Michael Cohen testifies that Trump approved his false 2018 statement about whether or not Cohen decided to pay Stormy Daniels of his own volition. As a bonus, Susan Hoffinger, the prosecutor, has Cohen confirm that one of Trump’s lawyers at the time was aware of the statement and texted him to tell him that Trump was grateful for all he did.

Michael Cohen has now suggested several times that he committed crimes in connection with the Stormy Daniels payoff. This is helpful for the prosecution, as they seek to prove to jurors that Trump caused the falsification of business records to conceal a second crime. That crime doesn’t need to have been committed by Trump — Cohen’s crimes are equally applicable.


The jurors look a bit more engaged than they did toward the end of the lengthy cross-examination. Almost every one of them is watching closely as Susan Hoffinger questions Cohen.
 
This is why they should have let cameras in the court room. We don’t need second hand filtered news of the case.

By the way, what news outlets are in the court room?
Interesting exchange you might want to ignore: It's about who is actually on trial:

With Susan Hoffinger asking questions, Michael Cohen is again leaning into the notion that he is a victim in all of this.

“Are you actually on trial here in this case?” Hoffinger asks Cohen. “No,” he says. Through her questions, Hoffinger makes an obvious point — that the defense sought to make Cohen look like a criminal. But ultimately, the jurors aren’t here to judge Cohen’s criminality. They are here to judge Trump.
 
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.




If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.
🥨 🥨 🥨
 
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.




If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.
"Loobin the Toobin!" Haaaaaa you get funnier by the moment!
 
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.




If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.
Did he have his dick in one hand when he wrote this? Ironic another dick posts it.
 
The thread headline from the Dainty is, of course, false.

The question is not whether Trump “caused” the entry. It isn’t even if the entry is “false” (a claim which there is zero evidence). Why? Because that would be just a misdemeanor even if true. And it’s time barred.

What the persecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt is not only that it was a false entry but that it was entered with the intent to commit (or conceal) some fantasy “other” crime.

And there is zero evidence of that.
 
Last edited:
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.




If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.
Then why was Cohen their star witness? That's the best they had? The sky is falling and you're too stupid to get out of the way of the falling pieces.
 
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin

"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"


Toobin asks "Did the former president “cause” the creation of false business records?"

Trump supporters have been attacking Trump's former long time, personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen, just as they have attacked Stormy Daniels and other prosecution witnesses -- even attacking the witnesses who are not hostile to Trump, who even showed a like or respect for the man. But as I've said before -- the case against Trump doesn't rise or fall on the testimony of Cohen alone ("We don’t have to rely on just Cohen’s word. We can believe Cohen because of the receipts, the tapes and the hard evidence.”)

Trump supporters have been attacking people for discussing the historical trial happening in real time. Attacking people for discussing a criminal trial without precedent in the history of the United States, as somehow being an unhealthy obsession with Trump. As if being focused on a former president being tried in criminal court should somehow not be upper most in discussions around the proverbial water coolers. How desperate, pathetic, and sad that is I'll leave up to others to decide.

I like what Toobin has laid out in his article. While I do not claim him as being the last word on this, his insights and opinions are well informed and well argued.




If the jury is told the in instructions what the case is really about? There will be no not guilty verdict, no hung jury. Only a well reasoned guilty verdict.


quotes from reporters inside the courthouse today:

Emil Bove, a defense lawyer, is suggesting that the prosecutors, in their proposed jury instructions, has shifted their theory of the case. It sounds like he’s talking about the state election law that underlies the felony business records charges against Trump. Justice Merchan doesn’t seem to agree, but in any case, he says, the prosecution’s proposal for jury instructions holds no weight at the moment. It is only a proposal.

“Just relax,” Merchan tells the defense lawyer, as he continues to argue. Nothing, he signals, has been determined yet.

Bove continues to argue. He can tell that the judge is frustrated, but it’s clear that Bove is, too. If he believes that the prosecution changed its theory of the case in these final weeks, it would help to explain why he’s irate. Merchan seems to understand that, as Bove continues to push for more testimony from their proposed expert witness on election law.

Trump folds his arms over his chest as Bove finishes his argument. He then starts whispering to his lawyer as Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, begins to address the court.

Matthew Colangelo, a prosecutor, stands up and fights back. He says that “there’s nothing new at all” about the theory to which the defense is objecting. In short: the charges against Trump are felonies because prosecutors have argued that he falsified business records to conceal another crime. They have signaled that other crime was seeking to promote his own election "by unlawful means," in violation of state election law. That introduces a third potential crime.

So, if you’re keeping score, that’s three potential crimes, all wrapped into each of the 34 felony charges of falsifying business records
.


Interesting day.

I enjoy watching you spin yourself in circles ever time Bragg and the leftists latest narrative fails. It’s almost as funny as this.

Get the jab you won’t get covid and can’t spread it.
Ok you can get covid but you won’t spread it.
Ok you can spread it .
When you get it won’t be as bad.

Younidiots fell for every single one.
 
I enjoy watching you spin yourself in circles ever time Bragg and the leftists latest narrative fails. It’s almost as funny as this.

Get the jab you won’t get covid and can’t spread it.
Ok you can get covid but you won’t spread it.
Ok you can spread it .
When you get it won’t be as bad.

Younidiots fell for every single one.
And it was better than "be as bad." You are far, far better off. If you want to try to play the odds and go for natural immunity, fine. That's your choice. But you don't work in our and many other businesses. That's your choice.
 

Forum List

Back
Top