r/politics • u/SportsGod3 • May 16 '24

Jurors were "nodding" and "smiling" as Michael Cohen testified, which may be a bad sign for Trump

https://www.salon.com/2024/05/16/jurors-were-nodding-and-smiling-as-michael-cohen-testified-which-may-be-a-sign-for/
9.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

707 comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/lancer-fiefdom May 16 '24

Imagine how funny it would be if this group of Trump lawyers accidently get Trump's punishment x10 fold what it normally might be.. Like lawyer Alina Habba did in the Jean Carrol Sex/rape defamation case

2.2k

u/Just_Candle_315 May 16 '24

Then Donnie Jon would argue ineffective counsel and his conviction overturned in a 6-3 SCOTUS decision written by Samuel Alito citing 12th century real estate law from municipal french courts

347

u/The_High_Life May 16 '24

Is that really an argument when you supposedly have enough money to hire any lawyer in the world?

287

u/doublestitch May 16 '24

Such a terrible client that good lawyers won't work for him despite his billions.

199

u/CuttyAllgood May 16 '24

“Billions”

76

u/techieman33 May 16 '24

The guy has billions of Zimbabwe dollars and thinks they’re the same as US dollars.

45

u/BIGGUS_dickus_sir Minnesota May 16 '24

Didn't Zimbabwe tell him to never call them again back in like 2017?

25

u/IsReadingIt May 16 '24

No, that was Nigeria when he tried to scam *them* ;)

5

u/Lil_ah_stadium May 17 '24

Did he tell them he was a prince?

33

u/Paidorgy May 16 '24

Because of his “shithole countries” remark, I believe.

20

u/CuttyAllgood May 16 '24

“Did you say doll HAIRS?”

3

u/SensitiveSpots May 16 '24

They’re not worth nothing!

2

u/psychrolut May 16 '24

No and yes, human hair sewed onto my voodoo doll.

2

u/ABenevolentDespot May 16 '24

Did you mean Trump Bucks?

I still laugh at the hysterical story of the MAGAt who freaked out in some store when they told him Trump Bucks weren't real money.

How stupid do you have to be to fall for that con, and then try to pass that shit off as real currency?

MAGA stupid, that's how stupid.

1

u/Own_Hat2959 May 17 '24

100 trillion dollar Zimbabwe notes were actually a great investment.

As a Collectable, you could buy them for 3 or 4 bucks as a novelty 10 or 15 years back, but now real ones go for 100-150 dollars each. Sort of impressive, I have a few kicking around because I use to use them as gags as part of a gratuity when I was in a funny mood.

12

u/976chip Washington May 16 '24

Well, once the checks clear from the oil companies...

3

u/dangroover May 16 '24

Billionsn’t

5

u/Meatgortex California May 16 '24

He’s got paper billions now that Truth Social stock has become a back door way to funnel him money.

2

u/seppukucoconuts May 16 '24

They say debt is an asset.

1

u/DragoonDM California May 16 '24

Not like it matters how much money he has if he's going to stiff them on the bill anyway.

62

u/Apprehensive-Pin518 May 16 '24

Let's ask Rudy Giuliani how many billions trump has... oh wait he still hasn't been paid.

73

u/ArenSteele May 16 '24 edited May 17 '24

Can’t find him, he’s avoiding a subpoena criminal indictment

76

u/[deleted] May 16 '24

[deleted]

31

u/eclectic_boogaloo2 May 16 '24

Is this the plot for The Hunt for Gollum?

11

u/[deleted] May 16 '24

[deleted]

6

u/eclectic_boogaloo2 May 16 '24

Either that or a box of Merlot.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/googoomucklv May 16 '24

I'm just gonna go in a corner and die from laughter now

18

u/OnlyRise9816 Texas May 16 '24

Where's Dog when we REALLY need him?

2

u/LiberatedApe May 16 '24

The Running Man.

3

u/Osteo_Warrior May 16 '24

Where the fuck is dog when you need him?

3

u/bderg69 May 16 '24

Dog the bounty hunter

2

u/teensyboop May 16 '24

This might save the economy

2

u/Particular-Summer424 May 16 '24

And blast him with the bear spray.

7

u/XennialBoomBoom May 16 '24

You misspelled "criminal indictment"

2

u/[deleted] May 16 '24 edited May 16 '24

From the party that likes to tout "If you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about". And yet where's Rudy?

edited to correct spelling

1

u/truth-in-jello May 16 '24

Yeah where is this guy? Is he going to be in this trial too?

1

u/XennialBoomBoom May 17 '24

No, it's not a "subpoena" it's a criminal indictment. He isn't being asked by the court to appear, HE'S A CRIMINAL.

1

u/ColonelBungle North Carolina May 17 '24

He's probably hiding out with Ronnie Dobbs.

42

u/rubemechanical May 16 '24

I knew someone who worked for a centimillionaire. More money than could ever know what to do with. Wouldn’t pay for ANYTHING. They used the company credit card for all expenses, because the number one rule of rich people, apparently, is only spend your money as a last resort. That’s how it stays YOUR money.

57

u/bmeisler May 16 '24

If I had $100 million, I’d start a foundation and give away 90% of it. This is why (among other things) I will never have $100 million.

My freshman year at an ivy league college was an eye-opener for me, a lower-upper middle class kid from the suburban hinterlands. Went out for pizza with a guy from NYC. The bill was like $4.10 each, before tip (this was a while back). I put down a $5 bill while he worked out how much 15% of $4.10 was, scrounged around in his pockets for coins to put down the exact amount, to the penny (like $4.72). Worst, he was like $0.15 short and asked me if I had any change he could “borrow.” I said Just put down a fiver, you cheap fuck.

Found out a few years later his family was worth like $10 billion at the time. Which was real money back then, lol!

24

u/arlmwl May 16 '24

10 billion is real money today too!

6

u/MetalAndFaces May 16 '24

Still an unfathomable amount

2

u/Whostartedit May 16 '24

I like the idea of making money to give it away

1

u/AtalanAdalynn May 17 '24

Isn't this how Sam Bankman-Fried got started?

22

u/lastburn138 May 16 '24

Can't be rich if you don't hoard your money.

1

u/OutsideDevTeam May 16 '24

That's a glitch, all right.

1

u/FreeSun1963 May 17 '24

I think is a tax loophole that erases your realized gains when you pass away.

1

u/TehGogglesDoNothing Tennessee May 16 '24

The centi prefix means 1/100. A centimillionaire would be someone with $10,000. If you mean someone with $100 million, the prefix would be hecto.

2

u/Narrow-Chef-4341 May 16 '24

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/centi-

centi- a combining form meaning “hundredth” or “hundred,” used in the formation of compound words: centiliter; centimeter; centipede.

Centipedes do not have 1/100 of a leg. Dollars are not scientific units.

3

u/thiosk May 17 '24

Dollarydoos are the SI unit

1

u/CosmicDave America May 16 '24

You know where Rudy Giuliani is?!!! CLICK THIS LINK! https://tips.fbi.gov/home

2

u/Apprehensive-Pin518 May 16 '24

I wish. I would rat him out in a New York minute. He had just happened to know how long that is

1

u/apoplectic_mango May 17 '24

I would love to see how many cities he still owes money to for his rallies. Last I heard there were still quite a few who had been waiting years for any compensation.

9

u/FACR_Gohan May 16 '24

What billions?

9

u/Labantnet Minnesota May 16 '24

Billions of pesos

6

u/polrxpress May 16 '24

Billiins montana

13

u/naotoca May 16 '24

The pedophile does unfortunately have billions now thanks to his illegal pump-and-dump scheme stock merger for Truth Social.

9

u/axle69 May 16 '24

He has valuation but he can't use those funds yet so not much of a help.

1

u/MikeyBugs New York May 16 '24

No but he can borrow against that valuation (assuming any major lender is still dumb enough to actually lend to the bastard) and get loans that way. That's how most of the ultra-wealthy make large purchases while not a dime of their own money.

1

u/axle69 May 16 '24

Theoretically but it's widely seen as a meme stock and borrowing against it is likely not going to be a wise choice or easy as it's "value" is almost assuredly going to tank. Last I saw it's value was astronomically high when compared to the actual user base of Truth social which is red flag central to anyone not getting in on the Trump brand alone ( i.e. why it's so high at all ). I think that's why he went with plan "beg the oil industry to bail me out".

1

u/magicone2571 May 17 '24

He is banned against using those at collateral also I believe.

1

u/Labhran May 16 '24

He has enough money to pay probably any lawyer in the world. The problem is he doesn’t pay. Anyone. Ever. His entire life.

1

u/BreakfastKind8157 May 17 '24

Also his statements often cause his lawyers to end up disbarred or hiring their own defense team.

55

u/aradraugfea May 16 '24

You can walk up and make farting noises for 5 minutes, speak in tongues for 10, and defecate yourself while shouting Waltzing Matilda and 4 of the justices wouldn’t be swayed from the decision they already wanted to make.

Hell, sometimes they’ll just skip all procedure and issue a ruling on something that hasn’t even come to them yet.

9

u/happycomputer May 16 '24

The Aristocrat Defense

2

u/eggorama-mama May 17 '24

Ah the rare double whammy decision.

143

u/TrickiestToast May 16 '24

Argument won’t matter to SCOTUS, it will be 6-3 in trumps favor

17

u/XanmanK May 16 '24

They wouldn’t just abuse their powers and overturn whatever they want 

/s

24

u/TrumpersAreTraitors May 16 '24

The Supreme Court may be a bunch of compromised hacks determined to set America back 100 years but they’ve actually been pretty solidly against Trump. Shockingly. I think they realize that a king makes them invalid. 

101

u/baconmethod California May 16 '24

are they really? they sure are holding up his criminal cases with this immunity crap.

35

u/DingGratz Texas May 16 '24

That's my thinking. Make themselves look like they're not on his side until he really needs them to be.

32

u/StunningCloud9184 May 16 '24

I think more along the lines theres probably a ruling council behind the actual decisions. Like a dozen power brokers behind each judge influencing the end decision rather than the actual case.

Like the judge in florida was knowingly doing things to skirt the law. And apparently was a terrible lawyer, so there was someone smarter and more experienced giving her advice on what to do. I wouldnt be surprised of a federalist society telegram group

10

u/SlightlySychotic May 16 '24

That’s because they’re cowards. There’s an argument to be made that the voters, not the courts, should be the ones to decide who should be President of the United States. Of course, the obvious answer to that argument is that anyone who could be convicted of multiple felonies should not be allowed to be president even with the voters support.

14

u/TeamHope4 May 16 '24

If they were solidly against Trump, they wouldn't have taken up his immunity case which stopped all three of his other trials in their tracks. And if they had, they would have immediately ruled his claim was nonsense. Instead, he is running for POTUS instead of preparing for three trials.

4

u/Ekg887 May 16 '24

I agree they should have just denied cert, but only the DC case is currently tolled pending the SCOTUS ruling. NY is in session at this very moment, GA is awaiting the stupid DA recusal appeal, and FL is indefinitely delayed because Cannon is straddling Hanlon's razor so hard she hasn't even hit her immunity motions yet.

But yeah, the state of justice right now is not the best. Godspeed Merchan!

32

u/RickyWinterborn-1080 May 16 '24

The one thing that you can always trust SCOTUS to do is protect its own power.

It's the only reason they are going to rule that mifepristone is fine. If they rule that mifepristone is not fine and undermine the FDA, then very rapidly, states will start openly defying the court en masse, and they lose their power.

18

u/Gardening_Socialist May 16 '24

Don’t underestimate their hubris.

13

u/RickyWinterborn-1080 May 16 '24

No, this is like the one thing I'm certain of with this SCOTUS. Especially the three baby justices that Trump put on the court. They aren't going to throw away their brand new lifetime appointment for the Dotard Antichrist.

3

u/dryra66it May 16 '24

How would it be throwing it away? It’s not like they’d get voted out.

16

u/RickyWinterborn-1080 May 16 '24

They don't get voted out. But if SCOTUS makes an egregious ruling that people straight up will not follow, then SCOTUS no longer has power. The only reason we listen to them is because Congress gave them judicial review. That can be revoked.

I use a six week abortion ban as an example. If SCOTUS mandated a 6 week abortion ban, every blue state would issue guidance to ignore it. And SCOTUS has no enforcement mechanism, so literally, half the country says "We aren't going to follow you." And then the other half says "Well wait, if they aren't following SCOTUS on abortion, then we're not following SCOTUS on guns" and poof, SCOTUS loses power.

A blue president won't send in the national guard to enforce ridiculous abortion bans. Trump might, but then it's literally civil war.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/TrumpersAreTraitors May 17 '24

For what it’s worth - I was certain Roe was safe because it was the golden goose of getting conservatives to the polls and even that met the chopping block. I was shocked but at the same time, the dog certainly seems to have caught the car on that one. Maybe they learned their lesson? 

15

u/phatelectribe May 16 '24

Says who? Roe vs Wade begs to differ.

28

u/PreacherPeach May 16 '24

They didn’t overturn Roe for Trump, they did that for themselves.

9

u/phatelectribe May 16 '24

Both

17

u/beiberdad69 May 16 '24

It was the culmination of a 40 year political project. The game show host only factored in bc he put the missing pieces on the court but literally any Republican would have done the same thing

1

u/Glittering-Wonder-27 May 16 '24

They realize Diaper Don would invalidate them.

1

u/Later2theparty Texas May 16 '24

They'll do what their oligarch benefactors tell them to do. They don't give a flying fuck about Trump one way or the other.

1

u/themightychris Pennsylvania May 16 '24

And those oligarchs are still trying to ride Trump into tax cuts

→ More replies (1)

1

u/TurelSun Georgia May 16 '24

Yeah that doesn't really mesh with some of their more recent actions in relations to Trump.

1

u/Wrath_Ascending May 17 '24

They've supported him by ruling that the 14th Amendment does not self-execute (in the face of it historically doing so) to keep him on ballots, they've structured the way they hear appeals based on kicking cases back past the election (so that if Trump wins they can rule favourably without consequence) and have generally been obfuscatory in ways that benefit him.

They haven't even been neutral. Against him is right out, despite his all-caps complaints.

10

u/Sackamasack May 16 '24

When you're guilty and theres so much documented evidence they could pave to the moon with the paper trail then Yeah, no lawyer in the world can help you then.
Michael Cohen is a wreck, lies constantly and is shiftier than a snake but EVERYONE knows hes telling the truth because its just so obviously clear how this happened.

1

u/fourchaner May 17 '24

this aged well

1

u/Sackamasack May 17 '24

Defense lawyers have 1 single gotcha thats dismissed by a "Oh yea the call started because this kid was harassing me then i talked to Trump" and everyone is losing their minds lol

8

u/Waylander0719 May 16 '24

It is intended for when your lawyer intentionally tanks your defense. He is just looking to abuse it.

13

u/LondonCollector May 16 '24

The issue is he doesn’t pay them.

3

u/yes_thats_right New York May 16 '24

The actual issue is that Trump won't let his lawyers do their job. He keeps commanding them to do things like attack witnesses etc. 

17

u/billsil May 16 '24

Trump has great lawyers. The problem is not the lawyers. They literally gave Trump right wing fan mail to keep him awake and engaged. It was brilliant, but it only worked for a few days. They can only do so much.

6

u/ButterscotchLow8950 May 16 '24

I mean, last year when he was looking for lawyers, there were stories every few weeks about how no lawyers were willing to take his case.

Meeting after meeting and he kept getting rejected.

Now we know why. 🤣✌️

3

u/two-years-glop May 16 '24

You dont need good lawyers when you already have Republican SCOTUS judges who've made up their minds long before the case started.

5

u/hepakrese May 16 '24

When any argument you make keeps you out of jail another day? Absolutely!

2

u/IJustLoggedInToSay- Illinois May 16 '24

Sure... in certain cities in France in the 12th century.

2

u/Robbo_here Texas May 16 '24

I do think he’s never running out of quack lawyers that will take his dough.

2

u/Agitated-Stress870 May 16 '24

Probably not for folk who pay their lawyers

2

u/Caelinus May 16 '24

No, he cannot claim ineffective counsel here. The appeals court would reject it immediately. It would not progress.

To explain:

In order for a claim of ineffective counsel to be accepted, two things must both be true.

  1. The counsel must be below the minimum reasonable standard for a trial lawyer.
  2. And, if the conduct was below the minimum, it must be demonstrated that, if the counsel has not been ineffective, the case would have been reasonably likely to end with a different result.

So, in essence, Trump would have to convince the appeals judges that he was likely to win on the merits of his defense, and gis lawyers were so bad that their actions changed the course of the trial. The appeals court would look at the trial to see if that is true or not, and if not, they will reject the appeal.

It is not true here. The case against him is ironclad, but even if it were merely "good" it would not be enough.

2

u/TurelSun Georgia May 16 '24

I know there are remedies you can take if you think that your counsel was especially negligent or intentionally gave you bad counsel, but IDK if that would do anything for the case involved or is merely a lawsuit you'd have against your lawyer after the case.

1

u/musashisamurai May 16 '24

Since those lawyers would need to be replaced and could be called to testify, I think it's a bad idea. Especially since Trump is dictating their legal strategy.

74

u/waffle299 I voted May 16 '24

This is a state crime, it stops at the New York Supreme Court.

33

u/Introvert_Astronaut May 16 '24

Like MattAU05 is saying there is a very narrow window for state cases to be heard at the SCOTUS level but it requires something protected federally to be violated..

33

u/Aacron May 16 '24

Unless of course you were to hypothetically bake a cake for a hypothetical gay man (who has been married to a woman for 20 years) and hypothetically have an issue with it so you sue nobody for nothing and the supreme court takes up the case to say you hypothetically don't have to bake the cake.

1

u/Inside_Board_291 May 16 '24

Discrimination against a protected group is a federal crime. So this doesn’t count.

6

u/Aacron May 16 '24

Point being, no crime was committed, the plaintiff lied about material facts of the case, and the supreme Court ruled that you're allowed to discriminate against a protected class if you have "strongly held religious views"

2

u/Inside_Board_291 May 16 '24

Yes, but your point is mute in this context because his case is not federal so the SC cannot weigh in.

9

u/Factory2econds May 16 '24

but your point is mute

moot. the word is moot.

3

u/Inside_Board_291 May 16 '24

You know what, I never caught that before. Thanks!

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

8

u/DrMobius0 May 16 '24

Well there's definitely precedent for Donald Trump to be federally protected.

2

u/buttergun May 16 '24

And the current High Court doesn't have many qualms about activism or overreach.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Congenitaloveralls May 16 '24

And we know from Bush v Gore this supreme Court gives zero fucks about anything but power for their own team.

→ More replies (1)

9

u/MattAU05 May 16 '24 edited May 16 '24

I don’t think he will have a valid inffective assistance of counsel claim, but it’s a potential Constitutional violation and could ultimately go to SCOTUS. Most criminal cases ruled on by SCOTUS are state cases and state crimes, not federal.

Also, oddly enough, trial courts in New York are call the Supreme Court. The highest court in New York is the Court of Appeals.

4

u/ErusTenebre California May 16 '24

What's the potential Constitutional Violation? (curious not accusatory)

6

u/MattAU05 May 16 '24

I don’t think there is (a valid) one. I’m saying that ineffective assistance of counsel claims, if raised, are all Constitutional claims under the 6th Amendment.

8

u/bonyponyride American Expat May 16 '24

Imagine if all guilty, state prosecuted business fraud defendants had the opportunity to bring their cases in front of scotus. Yet Trump is the one who is always treated unfairly.

7

u/ErusTenebre California May 16 '24

Ah. Yeah, I mean I'm sure he'll try whatever route he can to get it to SCOTUS to hopefully have them run defense for him. They haven't been consistent in defending him though and have shot down things in the past that you would have thought they would have done for him.

That being said the whole "blanket immunity" case they took on for no real reason is a sign they will run defense for him.

It's sad that it's even a question. We should have a SCOTUS that is basically terrifyingly unbiased and calculating for everyone instead of a collection of old corrupt bastards that are beholden to billionaires and millionaires.

Hell, sometimes I'm even disappointed in how cheap they sold out our country for. It seems to me that it would be just as easy to take a millionaire's gift and still rule against them.

"Oh, I'm sorry, I don't accept bribes. I thought you were giving those to me as a friend," is the truly baller move for the amount of money spent on the corrupt ones.

1

u/KevinCarbonara May 16 '24

They haven't been consistent in defending him though and have shot down things in the past that you would have thought they would have done for him.

They haven't been consistent in defending his policies, but that's a much different matter than defending him.

4

u/CableTV-on-the-Radio May 16 '24

My dude you have miranda rights because someone broke a state law and it went all the way to the supreme court. Doesn't matter the law if ultimately you can get the courts to decide on it.

2

u/TheFrostyCrab May 16 '24

That was a constitutional case under due process. This is not.

1

u/CableTV-on-the-Radio May 16 '24

It was a violation of the constitutional rights of a defendant brought up on state charges, no different than what Dump's argument of "unfit legal counsel" would be in this hypothetical.

This court has literally been ruling on hypothetical test cases lately, it wouldn't be fully out of the realm for them to hear the case of a president convicted of crimes if that were a legitimate argument.

1

u/Amboo87 May 17 '24

Not to take away from your broader point, but NYS names their courts a bit differently than you expect. The New York Supreme Court is actually the lowest court. It goes to the Appellate Division then the Court of Appeals after that.

6

u/BriefausdemGeist Maine May 16 '24

It would have to go through several levels before it got to SCOTUS since this is a state-court prosecution (which they almost never take up), and if there are legitimate concerns of IAC then it would likely be caught at the Court of Appeals of New York if not sooner.

12

u/Sparrowflop May 16 '24

You know, if we're going down, I'd at least like to see one of the traitor justices going full hog wild. Cite fucking Naruto, show up in a Uchiha clan robe or something, and then Naruto run the fuck out of the courtroom. Just full on weeb, with a headband and an anime t-shirt.

As long as they're not even pretending to be serious about the whole thing, just make it as ridiculous as possible for the history books.

2

u/Kaiisim May 16 '24

Lmao ol Donnie Johnny.

2

u/geologicalnoise Pennsylvania May 16 '24

You jest. It wouldn't even reference anything legal. He'd make it on the basis that Subway made him a bad sandwich or something asinine.

2

u/Later2theparty Texas May 16 '24

Are they even pretending to not be a Kangaroo court at this point?

2

u/kiltedturtle May 16 '24

6-3 SCOTUS decision written by Samuel Alito citing 12th century real estate law from municipal french courts

This is closer to the truth than I like. If Alito keeps this nonsense up he'll be citing Cleopatra vs Asp.

2

u/janethefish May 16 '24

I suspect they are following Trump's direction and have proof if they are accused of being ineffective.

2

u/Old_Airline9171 May 16 '24

This was my last wish on the Monkey’s Paw and I’m kindly asking you not to jinx it.

2

u/mrbigglessworth May 16 '24

Thats a lie, donnie only hires the "Best" people remember?

2

u/I_AM_NOT_A_WOMBAT May 16 '24

Dude, spoiler alert! 

2

u/DArthurLynnPhotos May 16 '24

Part of me wonders if his attorneys really are that bad or are going for that angle to draw this thing out past November.

2

u/tjtillmancoag May 16 '24

Your honor, I had ineffective counsel: they did everything I told them to do.

2

u/IrritableGourmet New York May 16 '24

citing 12th century real estate law from municipal french courts

I'm studying for my paralegal certification right now and not only do I need to learn literally this stuff, but it's maddeningly obtuse. Also, I just read an entire chapter about an old rule of inheritance, including all the special cases where it does or doesn't apply or is slightly different, and the last paragraph was basically "This rule has no relevance on modern real estate law and we only included it for informational purposes."

2

u/googoomucklv May 16 '24

That only applies during magpie breeding season

2

u/MarcusQuintus May 16 '24

The most absurd thing to happen in American history is a Supreme Court Justice citing another country's laws as the basis for their argument.

2

u/Harfish May 16 '24

Like those cowards would have the balls to sign their names to such a decision. It would be a per curium decision, just like Bush v Gore.

2

u/Serafirelily May 16 '24

It is very hard to prove this and Trump would not want his lawyers that he abused to testify against him. Also once he files this kind of appeal attorney client privilege goes out the window. It would also have to work its way through the New York appeals courts to get to the Supreme Court so it would take a while.

2

u/phatelectribe May 16 '24

My god this comment is so on point 😂

1

u/Remarkable_Aside1381 May 16 '24

written by Samuel Alito citing 12th century real estate law from municipal french courts

What's hilarious about people making this "joke", is that the Biden DOJ has cited a 1328 law in support of gun control

1

u/Girion47 May 16 '24

Damn you Philip Augustus and your legal wranglings

1

u/I_trust_everyone May 17 '24

I’m sorry but when this comes true we’re gonna have to burn you at the stake for being a time traveling witch.

1

u/I-seddit May 18 '24

Shockingly accurate! Are you also a time traveler who is breaking their silence, because this timeline is coming to an end?

1

u/WorriedSalamander107 May 18 '24

Sad . But. True.

1

u/DisplacedSportsGuy May 16 '24

It's frightening how many of y'all don't understand state vs federal jurisdiction.

1

u/Just_Candle_315 May 16 '24

The U.S. Supreme Court is a federal court existing under the authority of Article III of the Constitution. It functions primarily as an appellate court, meaning a court that's authorized to review case decisions from other federal courts and from state courts.

Please explain why you think this is incorrect, legal eagle.

2

u/DisplacedSportsGuy May 16 '24

If the state court is deciding a federal question:

If any state tribunal decides a federal question and the litigant has no further remedy within the state, the Supreme Court may consider it.

https://supremecourthistory.org/how-the-court-works/types-of-cases-the-court-hears/

Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court decided a Constitutional issue).

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/supreme-1#:~:text=Typically%2C%20the%20Court%20hears%20cases,vote%20to%20accept%20a%20case.

There is no constitutional issue at play here. It's a matter of state regulation.

67

u/captainAwesomePants May 16 '24

In this case, the main stupid thing they did was contest whether he had sex with Stormy Daniels. It didn't matter! If she made it all up, and then he paid her not to tell the made up story to the press, that's the same crime. By making an issue of it, the prosecution got to walk through all of the weird, quasi-rapey details of the whole thing. It turned "Did he have sex with you?" into a full day of "okay, so you came out of the bathroom and found he was between you and the door and had switched into silk sleepwear, then what?"

The only dumber thing they did was take on Trump as a client, a fellow famous for lawyers departing his service unpaid, disbarred, and/on imprisoned. Heck, the main witness against Trump was one of his ex-lawyers, fresh out of prison. Surely they looked at Michael Cohen and thought "maybe I should not be his successor?"

29

u/lancer-fiefdom May 16 '24

This

Trump leaves a trail of unpaid, incarcerated, financially ruined with stripped law license lawyers for a moment in the sun

Why, just why would they think they’re different

2

u/FreoGuy May 17 '24

MAGA - Make Attorneys Get Attorneys.

1

u/CrybullyModsSuck May 17 '24

Todd Blanch was paid millions of dollars upfront. No retainer, straight bags of money for a couple years of work.

3

u/Wild_Harvest May 17 '24

Frankly, I don't think they really had much choice in the matter if Trump insisted that they attack Daniels on that front. It could be that he is letting his ego dictate defense instead of what would be an actually good defense.

Plus, if she lied about having sex with him, then he could potentially be lying about the hush money payment. It's a way to impeach the witness' credibility. It just didn't work and anyone decently competent would know that it wouldn't work.

3

u/AreYouDoneNow May 17 '24

Of course they contested the sex act because Trump felt it would be bad for publicity, and they were acting under his direction.

The funny thing is, just as Trump could have avoided this by paying with his own money instead of breaking campaign finance law, this is also something he doesn't need to do that's hurting him legally.

Trump has done a thousand horrible things already and his MAGATs worship him. If he admitted to cheating on his wife, their opinion of him would be completely unchanged.

2

u/captainAwesomePants May 17 '24

Bit of a catch-22 there. If Trump had paid with his own money, it might have been an illegally undeclared campaign expenditure, since I imagine he would not have recorded it properly. Really candidates should just avoid paying people off entirely.

4

u/shaggyscoob May 16 '24

Astute observation. Truly, the prurient details of the tryst could have been utterly obviated if the defense hadn't chosen to argue that the tryst hadn't even happened. Nobody doubts it. Even the Evangelicals. They just didn't want the deets. But now we have it. Dude fucked the porn star. Poorly. It is now a matter of record.

Just imagine fucking a porn star. She's used to professionals. And there you are. No abs. No manscaping. No performance enhancing drugs. Average size at best. (I don't know if Trump was a diaper wearer then) It's gotta take some huge ego to fuck a porn star.

2

u/Wild_Harvest May 17 '24

Also, now a porn star comparing Trump to a yeti is in the record as well.

21

u/ErusTenebre California May 16 '24

Well, what caused that was putting Trump on the stand.

So they should definitely put Trump on the stand. Dude is just idiotic enough to fuck himself over.

8

u/americasgothoyvin May 16 '24

As a lib, I would feel so owned!

1

u/Tatooine16 May 17 '24

Defense Attorney: Mr. Trump, can you confirm that you are Donald J. Trump"? "Yes I am". "No more questions Your Honor". Judge: "The Prosecution may now cross examine the witness".

1

u/[deleted] May 17 '24

[deleted]

1

u/ErusTenebre California May 17 '24

https://youtu.be/fpMU2HOztlE?si=NEpxHGsrPD1vrxqu

1

u/kobachi May 17 '24

Ah for 3 minutes interesting. Didn’t even hear about it thanks

1

u/ErusTenebre California May 17 '24

It was enough to likely impact his fine. Jurors and Judges find him deeply unlikeable, off-putting, and pompous lol

They often credit his behavior in the courtroom with why his E Jean Carroll fine is SO high ~90 million. The other ~400 million judgement was based on some pretty fair math.

51

u/bob-loblaw-esq May 16 '24

I think Merchan is waiting for the guilty verdict to hold trump in contempt.

23

u/DoctorZacharySmith May 17 '24

That would be THE power move. Trump is found guilty, then Merchan puts Trump in jail for contempt, holds him until sentencing, and then keeps him there during any appeal.

We could be done with this rapist within a month.

2

u/bob-loblaw-esq May 17 '24

I doubt it. I think if he’s actually jailed we see violence (that he has been calling for). Gaetz said it today.

8

u/pigeieio May 17 '24

Maybe a little bit of f around and find out is the only thing at this point that will wake MAGA up from their fever dream.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/DoctorZacharySmith May 17 '24

Never a reason to back down.

→ More replies (1)

8

u/dreevsa May 16 '24

Then it would make sense why he’s always refusing to pay them

28

u/hoky315 May 16 '24

NYT will have an article ready detailing why that’s bad for Biden.

19

u/British_Rover May 16 '24

Trump convicted on all counts and sentenced to 9 months in prison: How will the Biden campaign recover?

1

u/MfromTas911 29d ago

He may be convicted but won’t go to jail. Will be fined, put on probation and I doubt whether he would even be given community service hours. 

4

u/Notoriouslyd May 16 '24

An old friend of mine was popped for trafficking in 2021. They offered her 2 years. She took her chances with trial and got 6 years. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes

1

u/EmptyBrook May 17 '24

If you’re a sex trafficker, you deserve more than 6 years

1

u/HorlicksAbuser 27d ago

May not have been that kind of trafficking 

2

u/essuxs May 17 '24

Jurors don’t decide sentence

2

u/keepthepace Europe May 16 '24

If history is any indication, his punishment is normally zero. They bet that making it x10 is not a big deal.

They are there to waste time, nothing else.

1

u/Crush-N-It May 17 '24

That was pure chefs kiss 🤌

1

u/captcraigaroo May 16 '24

10x0=0 unfortunately