Dante
"The Libido for the Ugly"
Opinion
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin
"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"
www.nytimes.com
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.
Guest Essay
Jeffrey Toobin
"A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen"

Opinion | A Trump Conviction Doesn’t Hang on Michael Cohen
As provocative as the testimony has been, this case may turn on something a great deal more mundane.
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.