Califan007 The Constipated

33 minutes ago, TradeTheBeal! said:

Cant believe you missed “Reeko” here.

The Jury has been dismissed for the day, apparently...won't be back until Thursday.

I guess this is an important distinction legally...

Alright, slightly juicy stuff lol...

Quote

"Prosecution asks Pecker is he knows who Dino Sajudin is. He was the doorman at Trump's penthouse and Dino claimed that "Trump fathered an illegitimate child with his housekeeper." To me, that's Dino the Doorman."

 

"Pecker immediately calls Cohen and gives him Dino's name and the name of the housekeeper. Cohen says it's absolutely not true, but I'll check it out."

 

"Cohen calls Pecker back. Cohen says that Dino and the housekeeper were on the payroll. He asks Pecker to check out the story. Cohen later advised that he had discussed the story with Trump."

 

"Pecker asked Dylan Howard to please verify if the story was true or not."

 

"Pecker says he spoke about the payoff of Sajudin with Michael Cohen, who asked: "Who's going to pay for it?" "I'll pay for it," Pecker recalls him saying. "He said, 'The boss will be very pleased,'" a remark Pecker sees he understood to be "Donald Trump." I called Cohen and I told him that we have to go forward with the story. Cohen asked "how much?" Dylan negotiated a price of $30K with Dino. Cohen then asked: "Who's going to pay for it? Pecker said I'll pay for it. Cohen said: "Thank you very much, the Boss will be pleased."

 

"Cohen said that Trump offered to take a DNA test. But Pecker said that wouldn't be necessary. Pecker said he would have held the story until after the election in November. He and Cohen agreed to this arrangement. All convos were directly with Cohen."

2 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

 

I agree with your line of thinking here. I was just saying what the defense will in part use.

Ohhhhhh....gotcha. 👍

8 minutes ago, mcsluggo said:

 

prosecuting THAT would be the rico trial of the century

Or the stinko trial of the century...

And they're back. Not sure what's happening, though lol...not seeing much tweeting outside of the DA saying they won't pursue any further questioning about Bannon, at least not at the moment, due to the objections raised by Trump's attorneys.

Also:

Just now, @DCGoldPants said:

 

We already know that his lawyers and he will say that what they did here isn't illegal and just part of politics and business. 

 

I don't think that's the point...

I think what they are doing is strongly establishing Trump's apparatus for dealing with issues that hurt his campaign and that Cohen was an important and vital part of that apparatus. It disintegrates the argument that Trump simply paid Cohen for legal services, and sets the foundation for all the claims the prosecution made in their opening arguments. It also helps set up Cohen's testimony as being truthful, and for someone like him corroboration of the evidence he provides is absolutely vital.

Pt. 3, mostly about National Inquirer headlines and stories printed at Trump's request:

Quote

"Prosecutor: What did you understand to be the relation between Michael Cohen and the campaign?

"Trump's lawyer: Objection! Justice Merchan: Overruled."

"Pecker: Cohen was physically there in Trump Tower, the campaign office."

"Prosecutor: I introduce these articles" 

 

"Prosecutor: I show you these: "Bungling Surgeon Ben Carson Left Sponge in Patient's Brain!" "Ted Cruz Shamed by Porn Start" Did you run this in the National Enquirer?"

"Pecker: Oh Yes. We would sent the PDFs to Michael Cohen, pre-publication"

 

"(Another) headline: "Ted Cruz Sex Scandal - 5 Secret Mistresses! The romps that are rocking his presidential campaign!"

 

"More Enquirer headlines, now slamming Marco Rubio. "SHADY LADY WHO COULD RUIN MARCO RUBIO!" Rubio was rising in the polls at the time, the prosecutor notes."

 

"Pecker: "After the republican debates and based on the success that some of the other candidates had, I would receive a call from Michael Cohen, and he would direct me and direct Dylan Howard which candidate and which direction we should go.” 

 

"Prosecutor: Did Steve Bannon ever pitch articles to you?"

"Trump's lawyer: Objection? Justice Merchan: Overruled"

"Prosecutor: Did Steve Bannon ever ask you to run any article?"

"Trump's lawyer: Objection, may I be heard at the sidebar [Whispered sidebar ensues, then:] "

"Justice Merchan: Jurors we're going to have to discuss this, you may step out. [Jurors leave] "

 

Here we go, pt. 2:

Quote

"Trying to pierce Pecker's claim that the arrangement was mutually beneficial, ADA Steinglass notes that catch-and-kill of the alleged affairs didn't benefit AMI's magazines.

 

"Q: The purpose of that component was to benefit the campaign? Pecker agrees."

 

"Pecker: It was of the utmost importance that this had to be kept quiet. Leaks in our organization are prevalent. And I didn't want anyone else to know about this agreement with Trump."

 

 

Pecker inspects another exhibit: Enquirer headlines trashing Trump's rivals. "My conversations with Michael Cohen, and Michael Cohen would call me and say, 'We would like for you to write a negative article on [...] let's say, for the sake of argument, Ted Cruz...or Ben Carson, and we would embellish it from there." He clarifies that, "we," here, is the National Enquirer." 

 

Here we go...

Quote

"Pecker delivers blockbuster account of Trump Tower meeting with Trump and Cohen: Trump “asked me what can I do and what my magazines can do to help the campaign." Pecker said he could "publish positive stories about Trump" and "negative stories about his opponents." 

 

"Pecker: I would run and publish positive stories about Mr. Trump and I would publish negative stories about his opponents. Pecker told Trump: I will be the eyes and ears for you bc I know that [theTrump Org.] had a very small staff. I said that anything I hear in the marketplace, if I hear anything negative about you, I would notify Michael Cohen as I did over the last several years. And Cohen would be able to have them killed in another magazine or have them not be published or they'd have to purchased."

 

"Pecker: "I was the person who thought that a lot of women would come out to try to sell their stories because Mr. Trump was well known as the most eligible bachelor. And dated the most beautiful women. And it was clear that based on my past experience that when someone was running for public office like this, it is very common for these women to call up magazine like the National Enquirer to try to sell their stories.” 

 

"So far, Pecker's testimony aligns snugly with what prosecutors promised the evidence would show during opening statements."

More Pecker (that's what she said!)...

Quote

"After Trump announced his candidacy, Pecker's contact with Cohen increased. Contact at a minimum of every week and if there was something going on, even more."

 

Pecker: When Mr Trump launched the Apprentice and Celebrity Apprentice, “the interest in Mr. Trump through my magazines, basically the national enquirer, skyrocketed.”

 

(prosecution is establishing that email addresses did indeed belong to him and Cohen) 

 

"The August 2015 Trump Tower Meeting: Trump, Hope Hicks, Michael Cohen and Pecker were present. Hicks came in and out of the meeting. Cohen said that "The Boss" wanted to see Pecker. Cohen would refer to Trump as "The Boss." Most of the time I received a call from Cohen it was b/c he wanted something."

 

LOL @ the bold lol...that'll be all over the interwebs soon.

Pecker testimony...

Quote

"Court is back in session. Let's see if Merchan rules from the bench on the contempt motion before bringing the jury back in." 

 

"Ok so the jury is coming back into the courtroom. David Pecker has resumed his place in the witness stand."

 

"Pecker: "I have had a great relationship with Mr. Trump over the years." He recounts his longtime business relationship, starting with an idea for a magazine called Trump Style."

(talking about Pecker buying the National Enquirer, Trump being a close friend, Trump sending Pecker (heh) the ratings for The Apprentice so he could print them in the National Inquirer, etc.)

 

"Pecker was introduced to Cohen in 2007 by Trump. Trump said that Cohen had "done a lot of great things for me" and Trump said that all contact should go through Michael Cohen from now on. If there were any rumors in the marketplace about Trump and his family, that Pecker should let Cohen know."

6 minutes ago, China said:

Reserve decision?  WTF is he waiting for?  The more time he takes, the more time Trump has to intimidate witnesses and the jury.  BS.

 

 

To that point lol:

"So at 11:00 a.m. ET, Trump posts on Truth Social calling Judge Merchan's courtroom a "kangaroo court" and calling on Merchan to recuse himself. Trump also assails the gag order, (falsely) claiming that he cannot defend himself.

This while we await a ruling from Judge Merchan on Trump's 10 violations of the gag order..."

"Merchan says he's going to "reserve decision on this," after brutal arguments for the defense."

Trump supporters on Twitter are not handling the judge's comments too well lol...

2 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

Can't the prosecution use anything he says in the hallway during the trial against him DURING the trial?

I was wondering that, too...or at least, wondering if the prosecutors did indeed use that stuff but it wasn't posted on twitter.

Merchan's getting snarky lol...

Quote

Now, Merchan asks Blanche (if this is) what Jesse Watters, in fact, said. 

 

Blanche: No. 

 

Merchan: "So your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes? 

 

Blanche: I wouldn't say it was a manipulation.  

 

Merchan: This isn't a repost at all. Your client had to type it out. Use the shift-key and all.

Yikes...might have been wrong earlier--judge is being pretty direct here:

Quote

Merchan: Do you have any caselaw you want to hand up or any other arguments you'd like to make? 

 

Blanche: This gag order: we are trying to comply with it. There is no doubt that Trump is being very careful with your Honor's Order. 

 

Merchan: You are losing all credibility with the court, I have to tell you right now. Is there anything else you want to tell the court? 

 

Katie's Sidebar: It is never a good day for a lawyer if the judge presiding over your jury trial tells you that you are losing all credibility with the court. You don't ever want to trash your reputation or lose your credibility over a case or client or a client's position.

Quote

Katie's Sidebar: Todd Blanche is struggling to respond to Judge Merchan. Trump sits there with a frown on his face. 

 

Blanche argues that the People aren't claiming that Trump violates the gag order each time he reposts. 

 

Merchan responds that just b/c the People don't seek to hold Trump in contempt for each violation doesn't mean that he hasn't violated the court order.  

 

Merchan: What is your caselaw that supports your position that your client can repost and that doesn't violate the gag order? 

 

Blanche: I don't have any cases. It's just common sense. 

 

Katie's Sidebar: DON'T do this in court. 

 

Merchan: Reposting is not passive conduct. Someone had to do something.

Now Blanche is talking...

Quote

Now, Blanche gets up for Trump and argues that Trump knows what the gag order says and nothing that he posted violated the gag order.

 

Blanche: Trump's repost regarding Avenatti's comments on the gag order's hypocrisy - Michael Cohen responded directly to Avenatti's tweet and he did so politically and not about the trial. Trump is allowed to respond to political attacks. 

 

Judge Merchan: Please provide the timeline for these posts. Cohen's post was at 9:21 and that precedes Avenatti's post which was at 10:07, correct?

 

Blanche: Yes.

 

Merchan: So your position is that Trump's repost is political b/c Cohen references a pardon? 

 

Merchan: You believe that everything Avenatti said does not relate to the trial? But the word "pardon" by Cohen makes it political and authorizes your client to respond?

 

Blanche: Yes. 

 

MERCHAN: “Have you spoken with Mr. Avenatti about what he means [in his tweet]?”

 

BLANCHE: “No, of course not.”

 

MERCHAN: Then how can you interpret what he believes?

Contempt update...doesn't seem like a very strong argument, unfortunately:

Quote

Judge Merchan asks the Prosecution: what is the connection between the posts and the gag order's language about "making public statements about known or reasonably foreseeable witnesses concerning their potential participation...in this criminal proceeding"?

 

Prosecution: What Fox News Jesse Watters' said on tv about the prospective jurors/jurors versus what Trump posted are different in that Trump's Truth Social post was slightly modified in a way and it violates the gag order.

 

Trump posted the following: "They're catching undercover liberal activists lying to the judge just to get on the Trump jury." According to the prosecutor, Watters did NOT say this; Watters only said, "They're catching undercover liberal activists lying to the judge."

 

Prosecutor: There's no doubt that the Defendant made these posts. Defendant took what Jesse Watters said and added to it 40 minutes after Watters said part of the statement. It shows careful deliberation and willfulness in making the Truth Social post.

 

ADA Conroy: “Throwing a ‘MAGA’ into a post doesn’t make it political. It may make it more ominous.”

EDITED to add in an additional comment.

Twitter appears to be ****ing up right now...

Also, here's a screenshot of the graphic from that video showing where each of the jurors get their news--I had not seen this before, so posting it in case anyone else had not seen it, either: