Trump: Set to declare 2024 presidential bid tonight; will indictments follow soon?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Trump's Legal Problems

    New York Civil Court Case # 2 (Of 2)


    Click image for larger version  Name:	Justice 2.jpg Views:	0 Size:	7.8 KB ID:	233414

    1. Trial

    Alleged: Civil Fraud (Falsifying Corporate Documents # 2) - in order to get "ill-gotten gains," Trump issued false financial statements and false business records to inflate the value of his assets.Trump had fraudulently done this to obtain favourable loans and other benefits.

    Prosecutor: New York attorney general, Letitia James

    Criminal Court Conviction: Judge Arthur F. Engoron - convicted Trump personally of civil fraud: levied a financial penalty and other punishments - Trump personally to pay $ 454 million in disgorgement for "ill-gotten gains." Interest on the penalty is running.

    2. The Appeal

    -
    filed Monday, March 18,2024


    A. The Posting of a Bond to Appeal

    Appeal Court Ruling: Trump must show financial viability - stay will be granted on collection on the paying of the $464 million judgment IF Trump posts a security bond

    Appeals Court Preliminary Ruling (Mon., 24/3/25): On Trump request: Bond amount is lowered from $ 554 million to $175 million.

    Bond Filed (24/4/1)

    $175 million bond - surety company, Knight Specialty Insurance Company (KSIC) - posted on Trump's behalf - allowed Trump to fend off a possible seizure of his properties or other assets following the $464 million judgment (including interest)

    Update (24/4/22)

    Bond Additional Terms (By Parties' Settlement)

    The defense agreed to the conditions proposed by the attorney general, granting Knight Insurance Group exclusive control of the $175 million, while submitting to the jurisdiction of the New York state court and promising not to move the money into mutual funds or engage in any other financial maneuverings.

    So the bond is now considered solid and sufficient; the appeal can move forward.

    B. Appeal Briefs

    - to be submitted in early July.

    C. Appeal Hearing

    - the appeal itself is expected to take several months.

    Bob A
    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Wednesday, 24th April, 2024, 06:04 AM.

    Comment


    • Trump

      Legal Cases Summary

      Click image for larger version

Name:	Justice 2.jpg
Views:	128
Size:	7.8 KB
ID:	233438


      Civil Court

      # 1 – Defamation of Ms. Carroll

      # 2 – Falsifying Corporate Documents # 2 (For Personal Gain)


      Criminal Court

      # 1 – Insurrection

      # 2 – Georgia Election Count Interference

      # 3 – Falsifying Corporate Documents # 1 (To Hide Hush Money payments)

      # 4 – Mishandling Presidential Government Documents

      Bob A

      Comment


      • Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4) – Falsifying Corp. Docs # 1 (Hush Money)

        24/4/23



        Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James. Senior Counsel to the DA is Matthew Colangelo.

        Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1

        34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper. Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
        Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

        Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

        Interim Motions & Decisions (prior to trial): See Post # 231 (24/4/12)

        Start of Trial (Mon. 24/4/15) - Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan

        Expected Unfolding of Trial

        Among the witnesses expected to testify are Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime fixer turned major accuser, whose credibility will be a big issue; Hope Hicks, Trump’s former press secretary, who could help corroborate Cohen’s testimony; Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels), the porn star who received $130,000 in payments Trump is charged with laundering through Cohen; Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate of the year who also received hush money; and David Pecker, the National Enquirer chief testifying for the prosecution, whose catch-and-kill scheme to bury dirt on Trump will open a window on how tabloid journalism, well, changed world history.

        The trial overall is estimated to take about 8 weeks.

        Live Trial Updates : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

        This is the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

        Trial Opening Statement - Prosecutor

        “This is a case about a criminal conspiracy,” Mr. Colangelo told the jury. “The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election.”

        Mr. Colangelo then began to unfold, step by step, how Mr. Trump and Mr. David Pecker, [National Enquirer former CEO, then good friend of Trump] using the Enquirer, conceived a scheme “to influence the presidential election by concealing negative information” about Mr. Trump with the help of his former personal lawyer [and now current nemesis], Michael Cohen. The prosecutor called him Mr. Trump’s “former fixer.”

        The three men met in August 2015 at Trump Tower and cooked up a three-point plan to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election, the prosecution alleged. The Enquirer would run “headline after headline that extolled the defendant’s virtues,” Mr. Colangelo argued.

        Update (24/4/23)

        First Prosecution Witness: Mr. David Pecker, former National Enquirer publisher.

        2nd day on the stand (Tues., 24/4/22): testified that he suppressed Trump stories.At a 2015 meeting at the Trump Tower, he agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign by buying up scandalous stories about the real estate mogul and suppressing them.

        https://www.theglobeandmail.com/worl...mhAW4S4QM2hoOG


        Bob A

        Comment


        • Click image for larger version

Name:	Messenger_creation_2ec292bc-0eb5-47e4-a810-d9054beeaef2.jpeg
Views:	111
Size:	20.6 KB
ID:	233460
          "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
          "Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
          "If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey

          Comment


          • Legal Problems - Criminal # 1 (Of 4) – Insurrection

            24/4/25

            Charge: “Criminal Enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election (Interference in Georgia Presidential Election Count)


            Substantive Issue # 1 - The Sarbanes-Oxley Law

            Relevant Current Case Before the USA Supreme Court: USA vs Fischer

            Special Prosecutor, Jack Smith, decided to charge more than 350 January 6 defendants with violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was signed into law in 2002 in the wake of the implosions of Enron and WorldCom. The law is intended to punish crooks for “corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding.”

            The Nine [members of the USASC] mulled whether a law that punishes anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record” is applicable to those who rioted at the Capitol, like Joseph Fischer, a police officer by trade. He pleaded guilty to multiple felonies, but contends that the Sarbanes-Oxley charges are instances of unlawful prosecutorial overreach. As his lawyer, Frederick William Ulrich, put it, that statute is “Enron-driven.”

            The high court appeared open to that argument. Justice Clarence Thomas telegraphed that the government could be acting selectively, observing that “there have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings. Has the government applied this provision to other protests?” To that, Solicitor General Prelogar claimed that there has never been anything like January 6.

            Justice Samuel Alito allowed that “what happened on Jan. 6 was very, very serious” but told General Prelogar that “we need to find out what are the outer reaches of this statute under your interpretation.” The solicitor general called one of the words at issue, “otherwise,” a “classic catchall.” Fischer’s counsel, though, finds it to be more of a “dragnet.” "

            Relevance to Trump Case

            USA S.C. Argument by Jack Smith, Special Prosecutor, against Trump

            "Even if the Nine dismiss the Sarbanes-Oxley charges against the January 6 defendants, Mr. Smith is likely to argue that they should stick against Mr. Trump, who did not himself set foot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Instead, the special counsel argues, he engaged in the kind of obstruction contemplated by the statute. Two of the four charges Mr. Trump faces are based on Sarbanes-Oxley.

            The relevant subsection mandates that someone is criminally culpable if “he alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.” The special counsel argues that the certification of the results of the 2020 election were such a proceeding.

            Mr. Smith’s accusation that Mr. Trump pursued a “conspiracy to corruptly obstruct and impede the January 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified” could insulate the special counsel’s case from any Supreme Court ruling in the Fischer, or other, case, that upends the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the other defendants similarly charged."

            The 45th president could ...be sent to jail for as much as 20 years under this draconian law known as Sarbanes-Oxley.

            https://www.nysun.com/article/suprem...0%202024-04-16

            Update (Today, Thursday, 24/4/25)

            Substantive Issue # 2 – Presidential Immunity

            USA Supreme Court Hearing – Today (24/4/25)

            The Supreme Court is hearing arguments over whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

            It’s a historic day for the court, with the justices having an opportunity to decide once and for all whether former presidents can be prosecuted for official acts they take while in the White House.

            But between a decades-old court case about Richard Nixon, and an obscure constitutional provision about presidential impeachments, there are likely to be some unfamiliar concepts and terms thrown about.

            Central to Trump’s immunity argument is the claim that only a former president who was impeached and convicted by the Senate can be criminally prosecuted. Trump was impeached over his efforts to undo the election in the run-up to the violent riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. But he was acquitted, not convicted, by the Senate in 2021.

            Listen live on apnews.com/live/trump-supreme-court-arguments-updates or the court’s website at supremecourt.gov.or https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

            https://apnews.com/article/trump-sup...%20Subscribers

            Bob A
            Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Monday, 10th June, 2024, 11:02 AM.

            Comment


            • Trump's Legal Problems - Civil Court # 1 (Of 2) – Defamation

              24/4/25

              Court: New York Federal District Court

              Plaintiff: E. Jean Carroll

              Defendant: Donald Trump

              Trial Judge - Judge Lewis Kaplan

              Civil Judgment – defamation found; compensation of $ 83.3 million in favour of writer E. Jean Carroll

              Post Judgment Application by Trump: to immediately suspend the verdict and to delay payment.

              Kaplan Ruling: Motion denied.

              Update (24/4/25)

              Application by Trump for New Trial:Judge denies request; upholds $ 83.3 Million Judgment.

              https://www.nysun.com/article/judge-denies-trumps-request-for-new-trial-in-e-jean-carroll-sex-assault-and-defamation-case-upholds-83-3-million-judgment?lctg=1508233562&recognized_email=bobarm111%40gmail.com&utm_source=MG&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Evening%20Sun%20%202024-04-25

              Bob A

              Comment


              • Legal Problems - Criminal # 1 (Of 4) – Insurrection

                24/4/26

                Charge: “Criminal Enterprise” to overturn the results of the 2020 election (Interference in Georgia Presidential Election Count)

                Issues

                1. Procedural
                – now in Georgia Court of Appeals:

                Fani Willis, Georgia District Attorney - overseeing case against Trump; hired lead "Prosecutor", Nathan Wade - DA "Official" impropriety alleged by Trump lawyers since she was alleged to be in a relationship with Nathan when she hired him. She cannot continue as DA.

                2. Substantive

                Issue # 1 - The Sarbanes-Oxley Law


                Relevant Current Case Before the USA Supreme Court: USA vs Fischer

                Special Prosecutor, Jack Smith, decided to charge more than 350 January 6 defendants with violations of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was signed into law in 2002 in the wake of the implosions of Enron and WorldCom. The law is intended to punish crooks for “corruptly obstructing, influencing, or impeding an official proceeding.”

                The Nine [members of the USASC] mulled whether a law that punishes anyone who “alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record” is applicable to those who rioted at the Capitol, like Joseph Fischer, a police officer by trade. He pleaded guilty to multiple felonies, but contends that the Sarbanes-Oxley charges are instances of unlawful prosecutorial overreach. As his lawyer, Frederick William Ulrich, put it, that statute is “Enron-driven.”

                The high court appeared open to that argument. Justice Clarence Thomas telegraphed that the government could be acting selectively, observing that “there have been many violent protests that have interfered with proceedings. Has the government applied this provision to other protests?” To that, Solicitor General Prelogar claimed that there has never been anything like January 6.

                Justice Samuel Alito allowed that “what happened on Jan. 6 was very, very serious” but told General Prelogar that “we need to find out what are the outer reaches of this statute under your interpretation.” The solicitor general called one of the words at issue, “otherwise,” a “classic catchall.” Fischer’s counsel, though, finds it to be more of a “dragnet.” "

                Relevance to Trump Case

                USA S.C. Argument by Jack Smith, Special Prosecutor, against Trump

                "Even if the Nine dismiss the Sarbanes-Oxley charges against the January 6 defendants, Mr. Smith is likely to argue that they should stick against Mr. Trump, who did not himself set foot at the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Instead, the special counsel argues, he engaged in the kind of obstruction contemplated by the statute. Two of the four charges Mr. Trump faces are based on Sarbanes-Oxley.

                The relevant subsection mandates that someone is criminally culpable if “he alters, destroys, mutilates, or conceals a record, document, or other object, or attempts to do so, with the intent to impair the object’s integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding.” The special counsel argues that the certification of the results of the 2020 election were such a proceeding.

                Mr. Smith’s accusation that Mr. Trump pursued a “conspiracy to corruptly obstruct and impede the January 6 congressional proceeding at which the collected results of the presidential election are counted and certified” could insulate the special counsel’s case from any Supreme Court ruling in the Fischer, or other, case, that upends the Department of Justice’s prosecution of the other defendants similarly charged."

                The 45th president could ...be sent to jail for as much as 20 years under this draconian law known as Sarbanes-Oxley.

                https://www.nysun.com/article/suprem...0%202024-04-16

                Issue # 2 – Presidential Immunity

                USA Supreme Court Hearing

                The Supreme Court is hearing arguments over whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

                It’s a historic day for the court, with the justices having an opportunity to decide once and for all whether former presidents can be prosecuted for official acts they take while in the White House.

                But between a decades-old court case about Richard Nixon, and an obscure constitutional provision about presidential impeachments, there are likely to be some unfamiliar concepts and terms thrown about.

                Central to Trump’s immunity argument is the claim that only a former president who was impeached and convicted by the Senate can be criminally prosecuted. Trump was impeached over his efforts to undo the election in the run-up to the violent riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. But he was acquitted, not convicted, by the Senate in 2021.

                Appeal Hearing Update (from Thursday, 24/4/25)

                The justices appeared likely to reject Trump’s absolute immunity claim, but several justices did suggest the case may have to be sent back for more legal wrangling before it could go to trial. Such a ruling would be a victory for Trump as it would almost certainly delay the trial until after the election.

                Live Hearing:

                1. apnews.com/live/trump-supreme-court-arguments-updates, or

                2. the court’s website at supremecourt.gov.,or

                3. https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

                Bob A

                Comment


                • Trump - Some Financial Background

                  Bob Gillanders Post on Fb (24/4/29)

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQM1m_In5n0

                  Bob A

                  Comment


                  • The year 2024 may show whether Donald Trump will wind up holding the courage of his convictions!!

                    He was found guilty of contempt of court on Tuesday, April 30, and fined $9,000 by the trial judge, who warned him that a repeat offense on this front may lead to jail time.

                    Comment


                    • "Trump, Wooing Libertarian Voters, Agrees To Speak at Party’s Convention"

                      https://www.nysun.com/article/trump-...ht-over-rfk-jr

                      Bob A

                      Comment


                      • Trump's Legal Problems – Criminal # 4 (Of 4) – Mishandling Presidential Government Docs
                        24/3/12

                        Charge: 32 charges under the Espionage Act - Illegal handling of Presidential documents (At his Florida Home, Mar-a-Lago).The Espionage Act was passed in 1917.

                        https://www.nysun.com/article/trump-...0%202024-03-11

                        Trial Judge: Judge Aileen Cannon

                        Application for Summary Dismissal (Thurs., March 14, 2024) - President Trump contended that the Espionage Act under which he is criminally charged is fatally flawed, an argument that, if vindicated, could mean the end of the case against him. He argued that the Espionage Act is unconstitutional as applied to former presidents.

                        Judgment: Reserved

                        Appeal Prospects: It could lead to the Supreme Court weighing the law under which whistle-blowers Daniel Ellsberg, Chelsea Manning, and Edward Snowden were prosecuted, and a communist couple, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, were put to death.

                        Update (24/5/5)

                        Application by Co-Defendant, Walt Nauta: for an extension of a deadline to file papers under the Classified Information Procedure Act (CIPA).

                        Prosecutor Response: Prosecutors in a court filing said that in some of the boxes FBI agents seized from President Trump’s Florida resort, the order of papers has been changed from shortly after the seizure.

                        Prosecutors compared scans of the boxes done in 2022 under orders from Judge Cannon to the present state of the boxes and noticed that the order is not the same.

                        “There are some boxes where the order of items within that box is not the same as in the associated scans,” Mr. Smith’s team said.

                        The Prosecutor theorized: “The boxes contain items smaller than standard paper such as index cards, books, and stationary, which shift easily when the boxes are carried, especially because many of the boxes are not full.”

                        Note: About a month earlier, Judge Cannon had asked the Prosecution: whether the boxes were “in their original, intact form as seized,”. The Prosecutor had wrongly answered: “they are, with one exception; and that is that the classified documents have been removed and placeholders have been put in the documents.”


                        Bob A
                        Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Sunday, 5th May, 2024, 08:49 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Trump's New York 'Mistresses' cover-up trial' resumed this Monday, with the Judge once again warning the former president about his attacks on personnel associated with the trial.

                          The really spicy prosecution witnesses will start to appear this week! Trump is suffering!

                          Comment


                          • Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4) – Falsifying Corp. Docs # 1 (Hush Money)

                            Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James. Senior Counsel to the DA is Matthew Colangelo, with Ms. Susan Hoffinger.

                            Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1

                            34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper. Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
                            Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

                            Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

                            Interim Motions & Decisions (prior to trial): See Post # 231 (24/4/12)

                            Start of Trial (Mon. 24/4/15) - Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan

                            Expected Unfolding of Trial

                            Among the witnesses expected to testify are Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime fixer turned major accuser, whose credibility will be a big issue; Hope Hicks, Trump’s former press secretary, who could help corroborate Cohen’s testimony; Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels), the porn star who received $130,000 in payments Trump is charged with laundering through Cohen; Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate of the year who also received hush money; and David Pecker, the National Enquirer chief testifying for the prosecution, whose catch-and-kill scheme to bury dirt on Trump will open a window on how tabloid journalism, well, changed world history.

                            The trial overall is estimated to take about 8 weeks.

                            Live Trial Updates : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

                            This is the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

                            Trial Opening Statement - Prosecutor

                            “This is a case about a criminal conspiracy,” Mr. Colangelo told the jury. “The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election.”

                            Mr. Colangelo then began to unfold, step by step, how Mr. Trump and Mr. David Pecker, [National Enquirer former CEO, then good friend of Trump] using the Enquirer, conceived a scheme “to influence the presidential election by concealing negative information” about Mr. Trump with the help of his former personal lawyer [and now current nemesis], Michael Cohen. The prosecutor called him Mr. Trump’s “former fixer.”

                            The three men met in August 2015 at Trump Tower and cooked up a three-point plan to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election, the prosecution alleged. The Enquirer would run “headline after headline that extolled the defendant’s virtues,” Mr. Colangelo argued.

                            Witnesses for Prosecution

                            1st Witness: Mr. David Pecker, former National Enquirer publisher.

                            Testified that he suppressed Trump stories.At a 2015 meeting at the Trump Tower, he agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign by buying up scandalous stories about the real estate mogul and suppressing them.

                            Update (24/5/7)

                            Witness: Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) - American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.

                            Stormy Daniels is not central to the prosecution’s case, but her encounter with Trump led to a hush-money payment that turned into 34 felony charges against a former president.

                            Examination in Chief: During a very tense morning (24/5/7), she quickly led the jury through a lot of testimony — some of it very explicit. She said that she didn’t want money for her account of having had sex with Trump and that she wanted to “get the story out.” But she did strike a deal, accepting money to stay silent.

                            Cross-examination: The tension ramped up again. Daniels attempted to fight back as the defense lawyer implied she had lied and sometimes outright accused her of doing so.

                            Court adjourned; will continue, Thursday, May 9.

                            https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/05...d396a4debfd6ce

                            Bob A
                            Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Wednesday, 8th May, 2024, 05:56 AM.

                            Comment


                            • Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4) – Falsifying Corp. Docs # 1 (Hush Money)

                              Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James. Senior Counsel to the DA is Matthew Colangelo, with Ms. Susan Hoffinger.

                              Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1

                              34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper. Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
                              Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

                              Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

                              Interim Motions & Decisions (prior to trial): See Post # 231 (24/4/12)

                              Start of Trial (Mon. 24/4/15) - Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan

                              Expected Unfolding of Trial

                              Among the witnesses expected to testify are Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime fixer turned major accuser, whose credibility will be a big issue; Hope Hicks, Trump’s former press secretary, who could help corroborate Cohen’s testimony; Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels), the porn star who received $130,000 in payments Trump is charged with laundering through Cohen; Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate of the year who also received hush money; and David Pecker, the National Enquirer chief testifying for the prosecution, whose catch-and-kill scheme to bury dirt on Trump will open a window on how tabloid journalism, well, changed world history.

                              The trial overall is estimated to take about 8 weeks.

                              Live Trial Updates : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

                              This is the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

                              Trial Opening Statement - Prosecutor

                              “This is a case about a criminal conspiracy,” Mr. Colangelo told the jury. “The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election.”

                              Mr. Colangelo then began to unfold, step by step, how Mr. Trump and Mr. David Pecker, [National Enquirer former CEO, then good friend of Trump] using the Enquirer, conceived a scheme “to influence the presidential election by concealing negative information” about Mr. Trump with the help of his former personal lawyer [and now current nemesis], Michael Cohen. The prosecutor called him Mr. Trump’s “former fixer.”

                              The three men met in August 2015 at Trump Tower and cooked up a three-point plan to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election, the prosecution alleged. The Enquirer would run “headline after headline that extolled the defendant’s virtues,” Mr. Colangelo argued.

                              Witnesses for Prosecution

                              1st Witness: Mr. David Pecker, former National Enquirer publisher.

                              Testified that he suppressed Trump stories.At a 2015 meeting at the Trump Tower, he agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign by buying up scandalous stories about the real estate mogul and suppressing them.

                              Update (24/5/7)

                              Witness: Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) - American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.

                              Stormy Daniels is not central to the prosecution’s case, but her encounter with Trump led to a hush-money payment that turned into 34 felony charges against a former president.

                              Examination in Chief: During a very tense morning (24/5/7), she quickly led the jury through a lot of testimony — some of it very explicit. She said that she didn’t want money for her account of having had sex with Trump and that she wanted to “get the story out.” But she did strike a deal, accepting money to stay silent.

                              Update (24/5/9)

                              Cross-examination: Clifford fought back as the defense lawyer implied she had lied and sometimes outright accused her of doing so. Stephanie seemed to hold her own. She is now finished.

                              Next Issue

                              Trump's instructions to company that some payments out were "legal expenses" when they were in fact reimbursement instalments to Michael Cohen, his lawyer, who paid the $ 130,000 "hush money" to Clifford (Allegation). If Trump had used his own money, rather than corporate money, there would be no case!

                              Bob A
                              Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 9th May, 2024, 01:30 PM.

                              Comment


                              • Legal Problems - Criminal Case # 3 (Of 4) – Falsifying Corp. Docs # 1 (Hush Money)

                                Prosecutor: Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, under New York Attorney General, Letitia James. Senior Counsel to the DA is Matthew Colangelo, with Ms. Susan Hoffinger.

                                Manhattan Criminal Court Charge: Falsifying corporate documents # 1

                                34 counts of falsification of New York business records in an attempt to cover up hush-money payments to Stephanie A. Gregory Clifford, known professionally as Stormy Daniels, an American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper. Stephanie claims she had an extramarital affair with Trump, which he vehemently denies.
                                Mr. Bragg further accuses Mr. Trump of trying to hide “damaging information and unlawful activity from American voters before and after the 2016 election". Public disclosure of this could have derailed Trump's stunning victory in the 2016 presidential election.

                                Note: Mr. Bragg seeks a "felony" conviction for what would normally be a "misdemeanor". He argues that the intent to commit or conceal another crime (By making the illegal hush money payment), including breaking “state and federal election laws,” raises the charge to a felony, punishable by up to four years in prison, under New York law.

                                Interim Motions & Decisions (prior to trial): See Post # 231 (24/4/12)

                                Start of Trial (Mon. 24/4/15) - Trial Judge Juan Manuel Marchan

                                Expected Unfolding of Trial

                                Among the witnesses expected to testify are Michael Cohen, Trump’s longtime fixer turned major accuser, whose credibility will be a big issue; Hope Hicks, Trump’s former press secretary, who could help corroborate Cohen’s testimony; Stephanie Clifford (Stormy Daniels), the porn star who received $130,000 in payments Trump is charged with laundering through Cohen; Karen McDougal, a former Playboy playmate of the year who also received hush money; and David Pecker, the National Enquirer chief testifying for the prosecution, whose catch-and-kill scheme to bury dirt on Trump will open a window on how tabloid journalism, well, changed world history.

                                The trial overall is estimated to take about 8 weeks.

                                Live Trial Updates : https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04...d396a4debfd6ce

                                This is the first criminal prosecution of a former American president. It may be the only one of the 4 current criminal cases against Trump where the trial gets started in 2024.

                                Trial Opening Statement - Prosecutor

                                “This is a case about a criminal conspiracy,” Mr. Colangelo told the jury. “The defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election.”

                                Mr. Colangelo then began to unfold, step by step, how Mr. Trump and Mr. David Pecker, [National Enquirer former CEO, then good friend of Trump] using the Enquirer, conceived a scheme “to influence the presidential election by concealing negative information” about Mr. Trump with the help of his former personal lawyer [and now current nemesis], Michael Cohen. The prosecutor called him Mr. Trump’s “former fixer.”

                                The three men met in August 2015 at Trump Tower and cooked up a three-point plan to help Mr. Trump win the 2016 election, the prosecution alleged. The Enquirer would run “headline after headline that extolled the defendant’s virtues,” Mr. Colangelo argued.

                                Witnesses for Prosecution

                                Witness: Mr. David Pecker, former National Enquirer publisher.

                                Testified that he suppressed Trump stories.At a 2015 meeting at the Trump Tower, he agreed to be the “eyes and ears” of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign by buying up scandalous stories about the real estate mogul and suppressing them.

                                Witness: Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels) - American pornographic film actress, director and former stripper.

                                Stormy Daniels is not central to the prosecution’s case, but her encounter with Trump led to a hush-money payment that turned into 34 felony charges against a former president. She held her own with Trump the Trump lawyer and continue to assert she was telling the truth, despite minor factual variations from prior statements. She said that she didn’t want money for her account of having had sex with Trump and that she wanted to “get the story out.” But she did strike a deal, accepting money to stay silent.

                                Next Issue

                                Trump's instructions to company that some payments out were "legal expenses" when they were in fact reimbursement instalments to Michael Cohen, his lawyer, who paid the $ 130,000 "hush money" to Clifford (Allegation). If Trump had used his own money, rather than corporate money, there would be no case!

                                Update (24/5/9)

                                Trump Motion (24/5/9):
                                request for a mistrial based on the argument that Daniels' changed her story about the alleged encounter - dismissed

                                Trump Motion (24/5/9): seeking to modify an existing gag order so the former president could talk publicly about Daniels - dismissed

                                Bob A

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X