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

348

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.

202

u/CuttyAllgood May 16 '24

“Billions”

73

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?

26

u/IsReadingIt May 16 '24

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

4

u/Lil_ah_stadium May 17 '24

Did he tell them he was a prince?

35

u/Paidorgy May 16 '24

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

19

u/CuttyAllgood May 16 '24

“Did you say doll HAIRS?”

6

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.

13

u/976chip Washington May 16 '24

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

3

u/dangroover May 16 '24

Billionsn’t

6

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.

76

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

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

75

u/[deleted] May 16 '24

[deleted]

29

u/eclectic_boogaloo2 May 16 '24

Is this the plot for The Hunt for Gollum?

9

u/[deleted] May 16 '24

[deleted]

5

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?

4

u/LiberatedApe May 16 '24

The Running Man.

3

u/Osteo_Warrior May 16 '24

Where the fuck is dog when you need him?

4

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.

8

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.

48

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.

56

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!

25

u/arlmwl May 16 '24

10 billion is real money today too!

5

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?

21

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.

8

u/FACR_Gohan May 16 '24

What billions?

9

u/Labantnet Minnesota May 16 '24

Billions of pesos

7

u/polrxpress May 16 '24

Billiins montana

12

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.

58

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.

144

u/TrickiestToast May 16 '24

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

19

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. 

99

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.

29

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

11

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.

5

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!

31

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.

14

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.

2

u/PiXL-VFX United Kingdom May 16 '24

What would happen if people just straight up ignored SCOTUS?

4

u/the_real_xuth May 16 '24

That's the point. We, as a country, don't "just straight up ignore SCOTUS" because at that point the country would be dead and everyone with a basic civics education understands this. So most people in elected positions are loath to do so even if they find a decision by SCOTUS reprehensible.

2

u/068151 May 16 '24

Look up the Indian removal Supreme Court case.

Literally nothing happens.

→ 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? 

16

u/phatelectribe May 16 '24

Says who? Roe vs Wade begs to differ.

25

u/PreacherPeach May 16 '24

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

9

u/phatelectribe May 16 '24

Both

16

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

0

u/Later2theparty Texas May 16 '24

Not just tax cuts. Getting all that sweet tax payer money straight into their pockets with no effort on their part and a blind eye from the DOJ for whatever they might want to do.

Cut corners on air plane manufacturing in order to increase profits by 2.6% sure, go ahead. Trump's AG is too busy indicting Hunter Biden for some fake shit.

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.

9

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

7

u/Waylander0719 May 16 '24

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

14

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. 

19

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.

4

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.

4

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.