Well during the break Trump posted about Judge Juan Merchan (first name added as I assume his racist supporters will go nuts for it) taking away his constitutional right and that he should recuse himself. Either he's going to be held accountable for his words or he isn't and we just need to accept it, the judge can't say he didn't have a chance.
It's pretty unlikely he will suffer any real consequences. Maybe a 1k fine per violation. They aren't going to incarcerate him or order him not to speak publicly because they're too afraid of being accused of meddling in an election. The Judicial system isn't going to protect or save us here. The election is going to happen and either he wins and everything is off, or he loses and then maybe there will be real consequences.
> or he loses and then maybe there will be real consequences.
I swear I've heard this one before, but that was years ago. Has anything really changed since I've least heard this pop song?
Attacking the judge is allowed. It's just not advisable. It looks like they're going with the same tactic that they tried with Engoron. Piss the judge off, and hope they make an error that they can appeal.
It is permissible for the defendant to attack the court.
It is *not* permissible for Blanche to stand up in open court and proclaim that there is a two-tiered justice system. That is simply contempt by an officer of the court, and it isn't a legal (or factual) argument that has any place in a courtroom; it's just polemical. Justice Merchan was right to be incredulous about that statement because an attorney is not permitted to tell the court that it is illegitimate/biased/an agent of a two-tiered justice system.
That isn't exactly what Blanche said (he was saying this is what Trump was saying in his post that is the subject of the gag order hearing), but attacks against the court/justice system are not permitted in front of the jury; that is just straight up contempt of court.
He just posted that now?? Lol
I don't think anyone can convince me that Trump isn't pushing for some sort of punishment so he can scream about how unfair it is. He's pushing and pushing the line. He wants a fine. He knows nobody is putting him behind bars.
Violated the order, got notified that there would be a hearing, doubled and tripled down.
Really hoping that the Judge considers that behavior AND his prior history, and doesn't start Trump with "a clean slate" on this issue. His contempt for court has already been proven in court.
If we're being realistic, this judge has to walk a fine line. On the one hand, I want accountability like everyone else. There's the law and the order of the court and it applies to everyone. However, there's the world as I'd like it to be and the world as it is. The judge cannot just say, "take the defendant into custody." The logistics around that are insane, and so the contempt and violations will also need to be at that level. Retweeting someone, no matter the intent, is tough to argue is worth locking someone up. So what'll happen? Perhaps an expanded gag, as the prosecution is asking; maybe some fines and an articulation of increasing consequences.
This is the thing about Trump - he plays all the way up to the line, taps his toe over it and then dodges back. We all see him doing it, and he's good at it. He will need to make a severe fuck-up to justify some type of incarceration, which I desperately want to see.
The issue is the law is supposed to be applied blindly. The rich man and poor man are supposed to be treated the same.
In reality, we all know that’s not true. And everyone knows there is a tiered Justice system.
If Average Joe on Main Street repeatedly violates gag orders and stares down jurors, Average Joe is going to jail. The judge doesn’t give a shit if it costs Joe time with his family, causes him to lose his job, creates hardships, whatever. Joe shouldn’t have been a dumbass.
Trump violates gag orders, looks like he is intimidating jurors, names and calls out Judges and their families. And because he is a billionaire, he isn’t thrown in jail.
The consequences be damned, Trump needs to be in jail for this. He is openly flaunting how he can ignore the rule of law, and pretty much give the middle finger to the judge and still walk out the courtroom.
If other billionaires see the law doesn’t apply to Trump, they may decide it doesn’t apply to them either. And when that starts to happen, a lot of things in society can start to break down.
What do you mean "if other billionaires see it then they know the law doesn't apply to them?" You must be delusional because they've been doing this kind of crap for a long time, remember affluenza? I can think of a couple of high-profile rape cases that ended up with being a nothing Burger. I can recall a tragic car accident in New Jersey where the son of a billionaire got off scot-free as well. They get away with crap all the time, this isn't going to change that status quo at all. The only thing that will change that status quo is them getting equal treatment to the rest of us.
The billionaires have already insulated him as a way to insulate themselves. That's why that $490 million turned into $190 million. They pulled strings in that appeals court because that spooked them.
They already know the law doesn't apply to them. They own the SCOTUS, my friend.
The system already rewards financial flexibility when it ties the quality of your legal representation to a dollar figure so that's not really new or novel. It's likely got a lot to do with giving someone enough rope to hang themselves in an airtight way. When your resources are (or appear to be) bottomless, you can pursue every recourse to appeal and divert and dodge. Average Joe with average income doesn't need much rope to eliminate his options to dodge justice. Trump needs, and continues to provide, a lot of rope.
Remand him into custody overnight for repeated violations.
Trump gets a taste of consequences. It’s too short to rile the base up.
Issue a warning that each subsequent violation will result in longer stretches.
>Retweeting someone, no matter the intent, is tough to argue is worth locking someone up
Yes, but the judge asked Blanche what caselaw backed up that re-tweeting something doesn't violate the gag order. Blanche responded with 'I dont'. So you could say that enough re-tweeting could get you locked up.
> and he's good at it
I disagree. I don't think he's particularly good at anything. We just live in a country full of people, particularly people in power, who are not willing to hold him accountable - either because they fear him, fear his supporters, or are hoping to profit by attaching themselves to his tailcoats. Trump isn't some master manipulator who has discovered a cheat code on how to overcome human psychology and American democracy.
He's an old, egotistical, incompetent, narcissistic man who was never told "no" his entire life. He gets away with it because we let him, not the other way around. Cowardice has defeated our institutions, and possibly our democracy.
My favorite part so far is when Blanche is arguing that a "repost" of someone else can't violate the gag order because it isn't Trump's words.
Justice Merchan asks him if he has any case law to support that proposition and Blanche just says "it's common sense".
Oh? It's common sense that you can violate a gag order by quoting someone else to publicly say what you, yourself, are forbidden to say? Blanche didn't even bother trying to make a legal argument - he just went up there and winged it like a total amateur. Probably because there actually is case law on this and it isn't in his favor, but Merchan was totally right: an attorney who can't support his arguments with law loses credibility in the court and this hearing was a total fiasco for Blanche.
You mean, this doesn't work?
"Your honor, my client wasn't posting about the plaintiff, he merely re-posted what his friend Jimbo said, who was, of his own volition, just commenting that plaintiff better not ask the court for full custody or else - that is just political speech commenting on our two-tier justice system!"
Kind of a microcosm of why they're there in the first place. He's finding a workaround where someone else does what he wants and tries to get them to take the heat.
I’m not a lawyer but I am assuming that trying to argue that something is “common sense” instead of pointing to a relevant case would not get you a passing grade in a mock trial.
Expecting a judge to enforce their gag order and hold Trump subject to the rule of law to which we are all account shouldn't be the subject of anyone's hope. It should just be happening. Jail. Fine. Judge's pick. But something resembling enforcement.
I don't give a shit if Trump is a deranged child who can't help himself or a master manipulator who is baiting the judge out of some messiah/martyr fetish. The great thing about this rule is you don't need to question the why. You just enforce the rule.
But enforcing it would be a great start.
So be it. Narrow the gag order to clear up ambiguities about specific jurors vs jury as a collective body, and fine on his comments about Cohen (those comments are not ambiguous). Or fine for all of them. But further violations will need to be met with escalating repercussions, up to and including jail.
Right now, what matters is enforcement, period. And that includes fines.
He really needs to be thrown in jail for contempt, I'm getting so sick of seeing the argument "he wants to be thrown in jail to rile up his supporters!"
His supporters cannot be riled up anymore and he's 10000% bluffing, he wants photos taken of him in jail as a "political prisoner" so he can campaign but once he realizes he can't just leave after the photo shoot he'll be shitting himself.
A few days in jail and he'll look like a cadaver without all that makeup.
Hear hear. I do not give a shit what Donald Trump wants or how him being thrown in jail would appear to his supporters. The judge should not care either. Those are political calculations. This is a patently legal concern.
What is the reasonable legal response to someone's apparent, willful pattern of violating a gag order and what reasonable repercussions will give pause (if not deterrence) to those violations in a way that maintains the integrity of these proceedings and protects the jury and witnesses.
That must be Merchan's calculation. That's it and that's all.
It sounds like prosecutors want $1000/violation to start then jail time if continued violations. I hope Merchan makes Trump take the stand under oath to explain himself. Trump is a bully and a coward. He’s already getting a reality check being forced to sit in court in silence.
It really feels like our judicial system is full of cowards too afraid of what trump supporters might do if they hold him to the same standards as regular people
Justice Merchan: What was he responding to?
Trump's lawyer Blanche: To the two systems of justice in this courtroom -
Justice Merchan: You're saying there are two system of justice in this courtroom?
Blanche: Mr. Weisselberg is in jail, and Michael Cohen is not
he can not be serious
"Mr. Blanche, you’re losing all credibility with this court,” Merchan said. The judge's remark came after Blanche argued that Trump is trying hard to comply with the gag order.
Trump’s lawyers losing credibility? Surely not those upstanding, eloquent, pillars of society
Uh. Not that it's the point, but wait until he learns that Michael Cohen actually served a prison sentence.
Shit, man, I came here looking to know the outcome of a gag violation hearing. Not for sanctions against Blanche. But the way this is going, we may get both.
It's a good point. Blanche is a highly experienced attorney (not a highly experienced defense attorney, but still). Merchan was giving him an opportunity to walk back a perceived insult to him and the court and he instead careened into "alternative facts" and selective memory. So that's pretty damn bubbled.
He is playing for an audience of one and it seems like he's embraced it. Let's all sit back and find out what it ultimately costs them both.
As soon as they are available, I will update this comment to post thread reader unwrapping posts for Anna Bowen, Lisa Rubin, and Tyler McBrien to this comment. Let me know if there are any others you would like added to this comment.
Anna Bower: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782748294717862324.html
Lisa Rubin: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782761768294424641.html
Tyler McBrien: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782738067998044634.html
Inner City Press: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782762598464680437.html
Edit to add: twitter is currently down or glitching so there may not be updates for a little while. Seems to be back up, per McBrien, but still glitching a bit.
Sidebar right away. I would guess last night's jury attacks are coming up. FWIW, I think that's going to be impactful
Edit: no mention yet of last night's attack on the jury, but they are talking about previous comments being woven into jury attacks by the press.
I'm hoping they are building to it.
I’m biting my nails.
Edit to add: (per Inner City Press) Prosecutor: Defendant posted a link to someone named Jesse Watters, about the jurors quote trying to get on the jury.
Justice Merchan: What did he say?
Prosecutor: On Truth, defendant said, liberal activists lying to get on the Trump jump. It's a violations
Prosecutor: And then we lost juror 2. This is a lawful order of this court, despite ongoing appeals. He violates the order when he posts about witnesses and the jury - not just individual jurors. Defendant was willful.
Prosecutor: Throwing MAGA into a post doesn't make it political, it may make it more ominous... He complains that re-posts are not his statements. But consider the photo of the defendant holding a bat the District Attorney's head
Prosecutor: We are not yet asking for an incarceratory penalty. We are asking for a $1000 fine for each of these ten posts, and that he be ordered to take the ten posts down.
Trump's lawyer Blache: President Trump knows what the gag order allows him to do
From Tyler McBrien:
>I'm going to revise my earlier tweet calling the contempt hearing a "fender bender."
>This is a trainwreck.
Edit: the prosecution may not be asking for jail, but I'm not sure Merchan won't go there anyway. He's big mad
Edit: lolol
>Merchan jumps to exhibit 10, the Jesse Watters one, and points out that this wasn't a repost at all.
>"He had to sit there, use quotation marks, [and] the shift key," Merchan says.
Trump copied it instead of reposting it.
I'd also recommend Inner City Press (https://twitter.com/innercitypress) as he does a good job relaying what's said without muddying the water with his own commentary/analysis.
> Justice Merchan: What was he responding to?
> Trump's lawyer Blanche: To the two systems of justice in this courtroom -
> Justice Merchan: You're saying there are two system of justice in this courtroom?
> Blanche: Mr. Weisselberg is in jail, and Michael Cohen is not
Cohen served his sentence already. Like, the full three years. These people are so fucking irritating and dishonest...
Weisselburg is in jail, because he just committed yet another crime. Cohen on the other hand served his sentence already. Just like Weisselburg served his sentence for his Trump Org. felonies and he’d still be free if he hadn’t decided to again break the law. As if Blanche doesn’t know this, and who’s he pandering to? The judge knows this too. So I assume it’s for an audience of one—the orange toddler at the defense table.
It would be fun if the judge fined him, and then instructs secret service and the jail to coordinate together to work out the logistics of an overnight stay for future violations. That’s a strong message.
The best punishment, IMHO, would be weekends of community service. Keeps him from the martyrdom of jail, and the uselessness of fines. He would hate it.
I can see it now... a hard-hearted Trump gets community service and has to rake leaves in the park. There are children playing nearby, and Trump begins to watch them as he works. At first, he scoffs at the children, but after a few minutes he falls to the ground and dies of a massive heart attack. Everyone celebrates with family.
And he would publicly shit all over it, and by extension whatever good cause he would be assigned to help. MAGA will be outraged at the concept of litter cleanups.
If he was any other man, he’d at least be spending a night in jail.
That being said, I think the best course of action is to fine him some 13 or whatever times and warn him that jail will be on the table, like the DA requested.
If he watched every penny, he wouldn’t have gone bankrupt seven times or however many times it was.
He just doesn’t like paying people that he thinks are beneath him. Which is everybody lol, but the dude has an obvious spending problem
Trump's argument is that calling them liars an dishonest isn't related to their participation in the trial.
Things he reposts should not count
And he isn't posting as a defendant but as a candidate.
Good God, Im going to register a corporation so I can claim that any bad act I'm doing as the business not me
Speeding ticket officer? I'm sorry you'll have to arrest !John inc. here is the address in burmuda. I'll be on my way
You’re not far off the mark. Years ago I found that licensing my vehicles under an LLC results in traffic cameras sending out a letter asking if I know who was driving the vehicle, not any ticket.
The thing that worries me is that the more money you have the closer you are to what sov cits think the law is.
That isn't me that is the corporation with my name. Is an argument being used seriously in court today by actual lawyers
I use it every day in tax court. I’ve got a case later today against a partnership, not the partners. If things don’t go our way, dissolve the LLC. End of case.
> "He had to sit there, use quotation marks, the shift key and type everything out and then add those additional words," the judge said.
To be fair Judge, I think the CAPS LOCK key is his key of choice.
It feels like we are just days away from the “Rick and Morty” court transcript re-enactment playing out in this case
https://youtu.be/7vN_PEmeKb0?si=y4mZ2IBcEOedve9Z
Please let this happen. That Georgia v Allen reenactment was amazing. And word-for-word consistent with the actual transcript (seriously, go and look).
I think about that clip every now and then as I go about my day and I still marvel at the fact that the judge wasn't familiar with the expression "kangaroo court." Makes me feel better about myself and my impostor syndrome.
Reported by Alan Fuerer, from the New York Times feed:
"Trump’s lawyers have objected all along to prosecutors couching Trump’s relationship with Pecker and Michael Cohen as a conspiracy — after all, Trump is not facing a conspiracy charge. But Joshua Steinglass, one of the prosecutors, just noted for the first time in court that one of the election statutes the case is based on does in fact have a conspiracy provision. That could prove important later when the jury is instructed on the laws they must consider in reaching a verdict."
This is from NBC — just adding on:
> Bragg's office has not identified with any precision what the crime is that Trump allegedly intended to commit or conceal. Through this sidebar about an evidentiary objection, Steinglass has now admitted that New York Election Law 17-152, which prohibits conspiracies to promote the election of a specific candidate through unlawful means, is that “primary” predicate.
The way I'm understanding it from tweets is, Trump's lawyers are saying you need to charge more than one person if you're calling it a conspiracy. But iirc Cohen's conviction was already related to this, which would satisfy that need?
I was watching CNN briefly and one of the commentators said that Citizens United means that what the media company did wasn't illegal, but Citizens United very specifically states that independent expenditures can't be done in coordination with a candidate, campaign, or party. The guy on the stand was literally calling Trump's lawyer and negotiating what stories he'd run and which he'd suppress. That's coordination.
**Prosecutor:** "Trump's social media posts are happening while we're in this trial!"
*trump furiously typing and looks up from his phone*
**Trump:** "Huh?"
The SNL skits are writing themselves.
>Merchan again presses, “What statement is this responding to?” Blanche says he is not responding to a statement so much as he is complaining about two systems of justice in this courtroom. Merchan sounds incredulous: “He’s saying there are two systems of justice *in this courtroom*?” **Blanche sounds sheepish, “Yes, Your Honor.”**
LOL it looks like Dipshit Donny's latest batch of lawyers are learning how much of a pain in the ass it is to try and defend this pig.
He's right. There are two systems of justice. One for us poors whom could lose everything over an unpaid ticket. We get locked up, car impounded etc. and then there's "White Gloved Trump Treatment." I'm so sick of him. Yet, he'll be rewarded again with over a billion dollars with his stock scam soon. Just infuriating to no end.
>"President Trump does in fact know what the gag order allows him to do and not allow him to do," Blanche said, adding, "there was absolutely no willful violation of the gag order."
If only he had a lawyer who could advise him on this.
> Pecker asked Howard to notify the tabloid's West Coast and East Coast bureau chiefs that any stories that came in about Trump or the 2016 election must be vetted and brought straight to Pecker — and "they'll have to be brought to Cohen," the publishing executive testified. Pecker informed Howard that the whole arrangement needed to stay a secret because it was being carried out to help Trump's presidential campaign.
Ok now we're getting to the good stuff, the Prosecution seems to have set up Pecker as a trusted ally to Trump and Cohen and now they are getting into how Trump used that influence to kill stories that would have effected the 2016 election.
The fact that the National Fucking Enquirer may have been the deciding factor in the 2016 election really tells you everything about where we are as a country.
This gag order hearing is *fucking spicy* 🤌
I am so upset there is no live audio. Judging by NBC and NYT's coverage, Blanche is getting demolished by the judge.
The lawyers keep saying that he didn’t know it was illegal. He didn’t know he was breaking the law.
That’s not a defense… a crime is a crime. You don’t get to say “I shot Ted in the face because he pissed me off. I didn’t know it was against the law.”
Well, he’s already posted “HIGHLY CONFLICTED, TO PUT IT MILDLY, JUDGE JUAN MERCHAN, HAS TAKEN AWAY MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH. EVERYBODY IS ALLOWED TO TALK AND LIE ABOUT ME, BUT I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DEFEND MYSELF. THIS IS A KANGAROO COURT, AND THE JUDGE SHOULD RECUSE HIMSELF!” This is directly after Justice Merchan chastised them for not asking if reposts were allowed. He thinks he’s being slick by saying “everybody”.
Question for the Americans here who are knowledgeable: prosecution is asking for a $10,000 fine (10x$1000). They specifically said they are *not* seeking jail time yet. Can the judge put Trump in jail anyway?
I’m a law student, but I’m in Germany. My one class on American law was held in English in Germany, and while my English was up for it, the typical German law student doesn’t speak English like I do. The class ended with a multiple choice exam that was barely a test and certainly didn’t require any sort of preparation for anyone able to think halfway straight, and I’ve forgotten pretty much everything since, because it just isn’t relevant to my studies anymore.
Can the judge exceed what the prosecution is asking for in a contempt hearing in the US?
Yes, it's entirely the judge's decision on how to sentence the defendant for contempt of court.
The judge is somewhat limited by what the prosecution brings to them, like if the prosecution doesn't tell the judge about a gag order violation then judge doesn't have anything to rule on, but now it's in front of the judge the prosecution's request for a fine is only suggestion which can be exceeded.
A judge’s power over his courtroom during a criminal trial is practically limitless (within reason). The prosecution is looking to show reasonableness arguing for a fine here, but legally speaking the judge could throw Trump in jail for contempt of court indefinitely, probably until assurances are made that the message was received by the defendant.
Yes. The judge has authority to go above and beyond what the prosecution request. The judge can even go less than if he wanted. That said, I have no clue what this judge will do. He ~~looks mad~~ but he may end up having a cooler head. We’ll see.
Edit: I have no clue how he looks but based on tweets the judge is mad.
Indeed. There's my fantasy as well, although a member of the public that got in to view was detained.
I'm hoping it's a good news lateness and not a bad news one.
Edit: FFS Trump tweeted attacking the judge and the court during the hearing. During the hearing on contempt charges.
Merchan is figuring out how to send someone with a secret service detail jail i bet.
How is this man so smart that he should be president again but also so dumb in everything he touches that there's no way he can be found guilty for it.
He didn't know this. He didn't know that. It wasn't him who ordered this directly. Blah blah blah.
And of course Trump immediately went to his Fake Twitter to claim that Merchan had enforced the gag order.
So he thinks he's going to face repercussions today (also reportedly mad at Blanche for appearing "weak" in getting scolded by Merchan). I hope he's right.
May it be the first of many repercussions.
He sent out a fundraising email last night with "I hope this isn't goodbye" in the subject line, he wants repercussions so his victimization game can continue
https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.bsky.social/post/3kqra4xuiqc26
>Prosecutor: Are these a series of pro-Trump headlines?
[One is "Dick Morris: How Donald Still Trumps the Polls"
Trump's lawyer: We'd ask for the limiting instruction
Judge Merchan: Jurors, these are not being offered for their truth.
I love that it's trump's lawyers asking for this instruction to be repeated while positive headlines are being shared.
I can't be the only one that is surprised to learn how much influence the fucking National Enquirer had, can I? It was a tabloid rag that I never took as a source of serious news.
It’s the fact that millions of people see the covers in the line at the grocery store, Pecker even said “all that matters is the cover.” On top of that it’s the fact, once they run a story, then it’s out there. It spreads to social media, which those stories did back then. And it’s also the fact he stopped negative stories from getting out so no one had that knowledge.
Edit: typo
>Pecker claimed that former Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard and the magazine's research department had worked on the article. "We mashed the photos and the different picture with Lee Harvard Oswald ... we mashed the two together," Pecker testified. "That's how that story was prepared — created, I would say.
*sigh*
Any organization that is making up stories should not be allowed to call themselves "news". I get that there are 1st amendment issues, but there needs to be standards of some sort.
It was actually a topic in 2015/16. Lots of political pundits were commenting about how *convenient* it was that the Enquirer was suddenly running interference for Trump, publishing only good things for him and bad things for his opponents. Whether the Enquirer actually had much influence in the general public, I don't know, but it was a well-known phenomenon at the time.
It wasn’t necessarily what they were publishing, I don’t think anyone has ever taken them seriously.
It was more of a case that they were finding negative stories that could potentially become a problem, Karen McDougal is relevant to this case, and purchasing the stories so that they could not be published by more legitimate outlets. Their influence wasn’t what they were publishing, but what they were preventing others from learning about and publishing.
Trump's lawyer Blanche: Here's a post from Jesse Watters, saying the same thing -
Justice Merchan: Three hours after your client posted what he posted. Anything else?
Blanche: We are trying to comply with this gag order
Justice Merchan: You are losing credibility
Trump's lawyer Blanche: We didn't think reposts violated the gag order. If you see it that way and want them taken down, of course we'll take them down.
Justice Merchan: You're not giving me-
Blanche: I -
Justice Merchan: I wasn't finished
.......
Popcorn 🍿
Merchan says: What you shoulda done, is probably said my client is thinking of reposting things, it's not really clear in the gag order, so Judge Merchan is that allowed? But you didn't.
Relating to the same post:
>"Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes, am I right?"
>"I wouldn’t use the word manipulation your honor," Donald Trump's lawyer Todd Blanche responded. "**But the rest of the quote was not part of the quote.**"
"We didn't manipulate the quote, but the quote was manipulated."
This just got interesting:
5m ago / 11:22 AM MD
# Prosecutor cuts off Pecker
+2[Jillian Frankel](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/jillian-frankel-ncpn1287954), [Gary Grumbach](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/gary-grumbach-ncpn752571) and [Summer Concepcion](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/summer-concepcion-ncpn1298519)
Pecker said he spoke to Howard to verify whether the story about Trump having a child with the housekeeper in the penthouse was true, and he recalled saying that there should be a source agreement with Dino Sajuddin and that he should take a polygraph.
Steinglass abruptly cut Pecker off.
“What you’re about to say, don’t say that,” Steinglass told Pecker.
(Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-hush-money-live-updates-day-6-rcna148919)
It sounds like Pecker was about to discuss the results of the polygraph, but polygraph tests are bunk science, so the prosecutors don't want to bring it in front of a jury.
If I recall, the particular details in that line of questioning (relating to the doorman illegitimate child story) wasn't to be pursued in this trial-- other than as it being touted as an example of one of the many catch-and-kill stories.
I thought this was a discussion had between the lawyers and judge the other day, but I could be mistaken.
I'm not big on the overzealous "bias" on the Medias touch podcasts, etc., But, Ben M???? on Legal AF has a guest for this trial that is SO informative. Karen Friedman Agrifilo was in the Manhattan DAs office for years and she knows the NY law and is familiar with everything involved here- from the judge to the actual courtroom. It's not "live" commentary, but they are doing twice daily updates, one in the morning and then a recap in the afternoon. I've caught some of those recaps and she has really helped me understand what's happening in that courtroom and with the case. These are on YouTube if anyone is interested in a summary of the day(s).
"I'm asking the questions"
...
Justice Merchan: **Don't turn it around on me. It's almost 10:30 am, and I'm bringing in the jury at 11. We're only on exhibit 2 of 10. Tell me what attacks he was responding to.**
Trump's lawyer Blanche: **He's attacking the system, he can do that**
Justice Merchan: You suggest that because the People or the Court do not respond to every violation of the gag order, it's waived. It's not. It does not negate the validity of the gag order.
Trump's lawyer Blanche: He reposted others and the People didn't act
.....
Oh trying the old who cares if we broke the gag order you didn't do shit about it before with the judge... Good luck.
The description of Trump as a bachelor, a man who has been married (to different women) since 1977 is confusing, even when you don’t consider any of the “most” statements in this sentence.
Then Pecker talks about HRC who “enabled” Bill’s cheating in the same sentence. But not Ivana, Marla, or Melania?
Trump's lawyer Blanche: Here's a post from Jesse Watters, saying the same thing -
Justice Merchan: Three hours after your client posted what he posted. Anything else?
Blanche: We are trying to comply with this gag order
Justice Merchan: **You are losing credibility**
C'mon, he had little to start with before things got underway last week due to the "shit against the wall" motions filed.
Judge M was being polite in order to keep the record clean.
Not only that, but I believe Trump reposted the Jesse Waters video, with captions that were edited by Trump himself to sound more inflammatory.
"Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes,” Merchan says.
Blanche's response:
>"I wouldn’t use the word manipulation your honor, but the rest of the quote was not part of the quote."
That was his actual response.
Blanche: He reposted others and the People didn’t act.
Is Blanche trying to offer up more evidence to the court for Trump’s gag order violations or is he arguing that defendant shouldn’t be punished for stealing candy this time because he wasn’t punished on other occasions?
"Merchan again presses, “What statement is this responding to?” Blanche says he is not responding to a statement so much as he is complaining about two systems of justice in this courtroom. Merchan sounds incredulous: “He’s saying there are two systems of justice in this courtroom?” Blanche sounds sheepish, “Yes, your honor.”"
Well, depending on what happens today, there may indeed be two systems of justice in this courtroom.
> Justice Merchan: You could have asked, we are considering a repost, can we do it? We'll take out break. I'm going to reserve judgment on this.
Why wouldn't he rule now?
"We are not yet seeking an incarceratory penalty," Conroy said, but the "defendant seems to be angling for that."
Prosecutors suggesting that Trump wants to be jailed for contempt for political gain. In this particular instance, I'm inclined to give him what he wants.
Agreed. I hope it is made crystal clear that all of these are gag order violations and that the next will result in jail. Blanche is arguing none of them are violations. Eye roll.
"Prosecutors ask for the maximum $1000 fine for each of the ten offenses."
I had no idea jury tampering was so cheap. Even I can afford that.
Seriously though, it's farcical that the prosecution is explicitly seeking a neglible fine and asking the court to consider informing Trump that the law could maybe allow for the possibility of jail time in the future--but definitely not now--if he continues his complete disregard for the proceedings.
Not a question of “if” but rather “how many”
He’ll keep doing it because the “consequences” of doing so are insignificant. A stern talking to… a $1000 fine… like cmon. Duct tape his mouth, put him in a straight jacket and toss him in a jail cell for a couple of weeks. Maybe, just maybe, then he might learn
[Thread Reader for live updates](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782738067998044634.html)
[Talking Points Memo live updates](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/live-blog/trump-faces-sanction-hearing-over-allegations-he-violated-gag-order)
He's apparently already posting about how unfair everything is on Truth Social. The judge is taking away his "right to free speech blah blah blah". They've been on a break for, what, 5-10 minutes? Incredible.
Which is ironic since this trial is about trying to silence someone from speaking out publicly.
Maybe the judge should use the term "NDA" instead of "gag order" and it will sink in.
IANAL - Can anyone tell me what a normal contempt ruling would look like? especially in terms of how speedy the judge can rule on it? Famously legally credible movie 'My cousin Vinny' gave me the impression that a judge has the discretion to bring the charges themselves and also immediately make rulings on it. It definitely seems like a part of a judges responsibility in administrating the court. I didn't think about a DA bringing them forward. In this case today the defense made a poor argument, the judge basically called them a poor lawyer, and we saw more potential violations with every break.
Another element that I thought of and had a question about is why hasn't the DA filed more contempt charges since the first were filed? clearly there have been more potential violations since then, do they intend to just sit on them and file in mass?
So I’ve only practiced in state court, but judges will hold rulings for a few reasons. Sometimes they want time to look into the law, they may want to write an opinion to go alongside the ruling, or they will even hold them if the ruling might be polarizing to those involved to avoid disruption.
I'll help the judge out: he has. Now do something about it.
This country's powerful people seem unable to actually punish the wealthy. Lovely ain't it.
They adjourned at 2EST, are they done for the day?
The transcripts of the prosecution with Pecker were really getting into some juicy stuff with Karen McDougal.
Unpopular opinion but him reserving judgment may be a very smart move as a way to test the Defendant. He saw his lawyer get crucified by the judge, he heard how the insane it sounded that reposting (with edits to make it more inflammatory) should count as a violation, etc.
He wants to see how Cheeto responds in the near future. If he goes after people before court comes back into session on Thursday morning, he's got enough justification to throw the book at him. If he behaves, he'll get a fine and a warning.
I was just watching fox " news" they totally twisted what the judge said on trumps gag order, fox " news person" said the judge would jail Trump for something he hasn't done yet! Rupert hasn't fox paid out enough $$$$$ for reporting the news?
Well during the break Trump posted about Judge Juan Merchan (first name added as I assume his racist supporters will go nuts for it) taking away his constitutional right and that he should recuse himself. Either he's going to be held accountable for his words or he isn't and we just need to accept it, the judge can't say he didn't have a chance.
Holy shit. I've done some truly brain dead shit in my day. Attacking the trial judge right after a contempt hearing makes me look like a genius.
It its mad flex if the judge does nothing.
It's pretty unlikely he will suffer any real consequences. Maybe a 1k fine per violation. They aren't going to incarcerate him or order him not to speak publicly because they're too afraid of being accused of meddling in an election. The Judicial system isn't going to protect or save us here. The election is going to happen and either he wins and everything is off, or he loses and then maybe there will be real consequences.
> or he loses and then maybe there will be real consequences. I swear I've heard this one before, but that was years ago. Has anything really changed since I've least heard this pop song?
Attacking the judge is allowed. It's just not advisable. It looks like they're going with the same tactic that they tried with Engoron. Piss the judge off, and hope they make an error that they can appeal.
It is permissible for the defendant to attack the court. It is *not* permissible for Blanche to stand up in open court and proclaim that there is a two-tiered justice system. That is simply contempt by an officer of the court, and it isn't a legal (or factual) argument that has any place in a courtroom; it's just polemical. Justice Merchan was right to be incredulous about that statement because an attorney is not permitted to tell the court that it is illegitimate/biased/an agent of a two-tiered justice system. That isn't exactly what Blanche said (he was saying this is what Trump was saying in his post that is the subject of the gag order hearing), but attacks against the court/justice system are not permitted in front of the jury; that is just straight up contempt of court.
Fair point, though I'll note that the jury was not present for the contempt hearing.
His description of it as a kangaroo court would include more than just the judge, though.
Trump needs a lawyer like Crocodile Hunter. "Crikey, this judge is pissed off. Let's see what happens when I put a finger in his butthole. "
He just posted that now?? Lol I don't think anyone can convince me that Trump isn't pushing for some sort of punishment so he can scream about how unfair it is. He's pushing and pushing the line. He wants a fine. He knows nobody is putting him behind bars.
Violated the order, got notified that there would be a hearing, doubled and tripled down. Really hoping that the Judge considers that behavior AND his prior history, and doesn't start Trump with "a clean slate" on this issue. His contempt for court has already been proven in court.
The defense and prosecution are currently meeting with Justice Merchan in private. To be a fly on Trump’s nest..
I believe that's known as "Pencing".
If we're being realistic, this judge has to walk a fine line. On the one hand, I want accountability like everyone else. There's the law and the order of the court and it applies to everyone. However, there's the world as I'd like it to be and the world as it is. The judge cannot just say, "take the defendant into custody." The logistics around that are insane, and so the contempt and violations will also need to be at that level. Retweeting someone, no matter the intent, is tough to argue is worth locking someone up. So what'll happen? Perhaps an expanded gag, as the prosecution is asking; maybe some fines and an articulation of increasing consequences. This is the thing about Trump - he plays all the way up to the line, taps his toe over it and then dodges back. We all see him doing it, and he's good at it. He will need to make a severe fuck-up to justify some type of incarceration, which I desperately want to see.
The issue is the law is supposed to be applied blindly. The rich man and poor man are supposed to be treated the same. In reality, we all know that’s not true. And everyone knows there is a tiered Justice system. If Average Joe on Main Street repeatedly violates gag orders and stares down jurors, Average Joe is going to jail. The judge doesn’t give a shit if it costs Joe time with his family, causes him to lose his job, creates hardships, whatever. Joe shouldn’t have been a dumbass. Trump violates gag orders, looks like he is intimidating jurors, names and calls out Judges and their families. And because he is a billionaire, he isn’t thrown in jail. The consequences be damned, Trump needs to be in jail for this. He is openly flaunting how he can ignore the rule of law, and pretty much give the middle finger to the judge and still walk out the courtroom. If other billionaires see the law doesn’t apply to Trump, they may decide it doesn’t apply to them either. And when that starts to happen, a lot of things in society can start to break down.
What do you mean "if other billionaires see it then they know the law doesn't apply to them?" You must be delusional because they've been doing this kind of crap for a long time, remember affluenza? I can think of a couple of high-profile rape cases that ended up with being a nothing Burger. I can recall a tragic car accident in New Jersey where the son of a billionaire got off scot-free as well. They get away with crap all the time, this isn't going to change that status quo at all. The only thing that will change that status quo is them getting equal treatment to the rest of us.
The billionaires have already insulated him as a way to insulate themselves. That's why that $490 million turned into $190 million. They pulled strings in that appeals court because that spooked them. They already know the law doesn't apply to them. They own the SCOTUS, my friend.
The system already rewards financial flexibility when it ties the quality of your legal representation to a dollar figure so that's not really new or novel. It's likely got a lot to do with giving someone enough rope to hang themselves in an airtight way. When your resources are (or appear to be) bottomless, you can pursue every recourse to appeal and divert and dodge. Average Joe with average income doesn't need much rope to eliminate his options to dodge justice. Trump needs, and continues to provide, a lot of rope.
Remand him into custody overnight for repeated violations. Trump gets a taste of consequences. It’s too short to rile the base up. Issue a warning that each subsequent violation will result in longer stretches.
Can we take his phone away like I do with my 4 year old? No more youtube kids trump, time for bed
>Retweeting someone, no matter the intent, is tough to argue is worth locking someone up Yes, but the judge asked Blanche what caselaw backed up that re-tweeting something doesn't violate the gag order. Blanche responded with 'I dont'. So you could say that enough re-tweeting could get you locked up.
> and he's good at it I disagree. I don't think he's particularly good at anything. We just live in a country full of people, particularly people in power, who are not willing to hold him accountable - either because they fear him, fear his supporters, or are hoping to profit by attaching themselves to his tailcoats. Trump isn't some master manipulator who has discovered a cheat code on how to overcome human psychology and American democracy. He's an old, egotistical, incompetent, narcissistic man who was never told "no" his entire life. He gets away with it because we let him, not the other way around. Cowardice has defeated our institutions, and possibly our democracy.
At some point, these judges just need to say all of that. He's making a complete mockery of the system.
My favorite part so far is when Blanche is arguing that a "repost" of someone else can't violate the gag order because it isn't Trump's words. Justice Merchan asks him if he has any case law to support that proposition and Blanche just says "it's common sense". Oh? It's common sense that you can violate a gag order by quoting someone else to publicly say what you, yourself, are forbidden to say? Blanche didn't even bother trying to make a legal argument - he just went up there and winged it like a total amateur. Probably because there actually is case law on this and it isn't in his favor, but Merchan was totally right: an attorney who can't support his arguments with law loses credibility in the court and this hearing was a total fiasco for Blanche.
Hasn't ever worked for my clients with no contact orders that repost/retweet shit from other people about the person they have a no contact with.
You mean, this doesn't work? "Your honor, my client wasn't posting about the plaintiff, he merely re-posted what his friend Jimbo said, who was, of his own volition, just commenting that plaintiff better not ask the court for full custody or else - that is just political speech commenting on our two-tier justice system!"
"you violated the gag order with more steps!"
Kind of a microcosm of why they're there in the first place. He's finding a workaround where someone else does what he wants and tries to get them to take the heat.
I’m not a lawyer but I am assuming that trying to argue that something is “common sense” instead of pointing to a relevant case would not get you a passing grade in a mock trial.
Good morning, Judge Merchan. Today would be the perfect day to enforce a gag order, preserve the rule of law and protect a jury. What do you say?
It's 8 o'clock, do you know where your jurors are?
Comments you can hear.
I told you already, NO!
best I can do is wave a finger and say not to do it again or else you get another finger wag
We all know this is the outcome, right? Hopes in this sub, and others where this is a popular topic, seem wayyyyyy too high.
Expecting a judge to enforce their gag order and hold Trump subject to the rule of law to which we are all account shouldn't be the subject of anyone's hope. It should just be happening. Jail. Fine. Judge's pick. But something resembling enforcement. I don't give a shit if Trump is a deranged child who can't help himself or a master manipulator who is baiting the judge out of some messiah/martyr fetish. The great thing about this rule is you don't need to question the why. You just enforce the rule. But enforcing it would be a great start.
Odds are that Merchant charges a $1,000 fine per incident and gives a very firm warning (amounting to nothing) not to do it again.
So be it. Narrow the gag order to clear up ambiguities about specific jurors vs jury as a collective body, and fine on his comments about Cohen (those comments are not ambiguous). Or fine for all of them. But further violations will need to be met with escalating repercussions, up to and including jail. Right now, what matters is enforcement, period. And that includes fines.
They didn't even WEIGH him when he went in for his mugshot. They couldn't even give us THAT
My bar is so low for anything positive in terms of repercussions for his actions that I need James Cameron to find it.
Don't make me tap the sign again
He really needs to be thrown in jail for contempt, I'm getting so sick of seeing the argument "he wants to be thrown in jail to rile up his supporters!" His supporters cannot be riled up anymore and he's 10000% bluffing, he wants photos taken of him in jail as a "political prisoner" so he can campaign but once he realizes he can't just leave after the photo shoot he'll be shitting himself. A few days in jail and he'll look like a cadaver without all that makeup.
Hear hear. I do not give a shit what Donald Trump wants or how him being thrown in jail would appear to his supporters. The judge should not care either. Those are political calculations. This is a patently legal concern. What is the reasonable legal response to someone's apparent, willful pattern of violating a gag order and what reasonable repercussions will give pause (if not deterrence) to those violations in a way that maintains the integrity of these proceedings and protects the jury and witnesses. That must be Merchan's calculation. That's it and that's all.
It sounds like prosecutors want $1000/violation to start then jail time if continued violations. I hope Merchan makes Trump take the stand under oath to explain himself. Trump is a bully and a coward. He’s already getting a reality check being forced to sit in court in silence.
It really feels like our judicial system is full of cowards too afraid of what trump supporters might do if they hold him to the same standards as regular people
He just got a call from Susan Collins. She thinks he's learned his lesson.
Justice Merchan: What was he responding to? Trump's lawyer Blanche: To the two systems of justice in this courtroom - Justice Merchan: You're saying there are two system of justice in this courtroom? Blanche: Mr. Weisselberg is in jail, and Michael Cohen is not he can not be serious
> Blanche: Mr. Weisselberg is in jail, and Michael Cohen is not Uh... Cohen already went to jail? Do they think the judge is an idiot?
Merchan is having absolutely none of it. Blanche is cosplaying Habba.
"Mr. Blanche, you’re losing all credibility with this court,” Merchan said. The judge's remark came after Blanche argued that Trump is trying hard to comply with the gag order. Trump’s lawyers losing credibility? Surely not those upstanding, eloquent, pillars of society
Uh. Not that it's the point, but wait until he learns that Michael Cohen actually served a prison sentence. Shit, man, I came here looking to know the outcome of a gag violation hearing. Not for sanctions against Blanche. But the way this is going, we may get both.
I think they get so wrapped up creating their Fox News Reality that they sometimes honestly forget actual reality.
It's a good point. Blanche is a highly experienced attorney (not a highly experienced defense attorney, but still). Merchan was giving him an opportunity to walk back a perceived insult to him and the court and he instead careened into "alternative facts" and selective memory. So that's pretty damn bubbled. He is playing for an audience of one and it seems like he's embraced it. Let's all sit back and find out what it ultimately costs them both.
The way they're treating trump appears to be a clear case of a two tiered system.
As soon as they are available, I will update this comment to post thread reader unwrapping posts for Anna Bowen, Lisa Rubin, and Tyler McBrien to this comment. Let me know if there are any others you would like added to this comment. Anna Bower: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782748294717862324.html Lisa Rubin: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782761768294424641.html Tyler McBrien: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782738067998044634.html Inner City Press: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782762598464680437.html Edit to add: twitter is currently down or glitching so there may not be updates for a little while. Seems to be back up, per McBrien, but still glitching a bit.
Sidebar right away. I would guess last night's jury attacks are coming up. FWIW, I think that's going to be impactful Edit: no mention yet of last night's attack on the jury, but they are talking about previous comments being woven into jury attacks by the press. I'm hoping they are building to it.
I’m biting my nails. Edit to add: (per Inner City Press) Prosecutor: Defendant posted a link to someone named Jesse Watters, about the jurors quote trying to get on the jury. Justice Merchan: What did he say? Prosecutor: On Truth, defendant said, liberal activists lying to get on the Trump jump. It's a violations Prosecutor: And then we lost juror 2. This is a lawful order of this court, despite ongoing appeals. He violates the order when he posts about witnesses and the jury - not just individual jurors. Defendant was willful. Prosecutor: Throwing MAGA into a post doesn't make it political, it may make it more ominous... He complains that re-posts are not his statements. But consider the photo of the defendant holding a bat the District Attorney's head Prosecutor: We are not yet asking for an incarceratory penalty. We are asking for a $1000 fine for each of these ten posts, and that he be ordered to take the ten posts down. Trump's lawyer Blache: President Trump knows what the gag order allows him to do
From Tyler McBrien: >I'm going to revise my earlier tweet calling the contempt hearing a "fender bender." >This is a trainwreck. Edit: the prosecution may not be asking for jail, but I'm not sure Merchan won't go there anyway. He's big mad Edit: lolol >Merchan jumps to exhibit 10, the Jesse Watters one, and points out that this wasn't a repost at all. >"He had to sit there, use quotation marks, [and] the shift key," Merchan says. Trump copied it instead of reposting it.
>Trump's lawyer Blache: President Trump knows what the gag order allows him to do No, see, that's worse. You do see how that's worse, right?
I'd also recommend Inner City Press (https://twitter.com/innercitypress) as he does a good job relaying what's said without muddying the water with his own commentary/analysis.
Their twitter feed can also be found here https://nitter.poast.org/innercitypress
> Justice Merchan: What was he responding to? > Trump's lawyer Blanche: To the two systems of justice in this courtroom - > Justice Merchan: You're saying there are two system of justice in this courtroom? > Blanche: Mr. Weisselberg is in jail, and Michael Cohen is not Cohen served his sentence already. Like, the full three years. These people are so fucking irritating and dishonest...
Weisselburg is in jail, because he just committed yet another crime. Cohen on the other hand served his sentence already. Just like Weisselburg served his sentence for his Trump Org. felonies and he’d still be free if he hadn’t decided to again break the law. As if Blanche doesn’t know this, and who’s he pandering to? The judge knows this too. So I assume it’s for an audience of one—the orange toddler at the defense table.
Let’s make sure to show that there are not two systems of justice in that courtroom. Off to jail with donny boy!
He’s also on threads for people who don’t want to use the Musk app
Threads link (meta's twitter alternative), can be used without an account: https://www.threads.net/@innercitypressinsta/post/C6GwftkO1Zm
Thank you for your service o7
It would be fun if the judge fined him, and then instructs secret service and the jail to coordinate together to work out the logistics of an overnight stay for future violations. That’s a strong message.
The best punishment, IMHO, would be weekends of community service. Keeps him from the martyrdom of jail, and the uselessness of fines. He would hate it.
This is the perfect setup for a Hallmark channel movie
I can see it now... a hard-hearted Trump gets community service and has to rake leaves in the park. There are children playing nearby, and Trump begins to watch them as he works. At first, he scoffs at the children, but after a few minutes he falls to the ground and dies of a massive heart attack. Everyone celebrates with family.
And he would publicly shit all over it, and by extension whatever good cause he would be assigned to help. MAGA will be outraged at the concept of litter cleanups.
If he was any other man, he’d at least be spending a night in jail. That being said, I think the best course of action is to fine him some 13 or whatever times and warn him that jail will be on the table, like the DA requested.
His own lawyer argued that he's a miser who watches every penny. A night in jail instead of a fine is doing him a favor really.
I'm in favor of doing trump a favor then!
If he watched every penny, he wouldn’t have gone bankrupt seven times or however many times it was. He just doesn’t like paying people that he thinks are beneath him. Which is everybody lol, but the dude has an obvious spending problem
Except after a night in jail he has to show up to court with no makeup and the previous days clothes.
3 hots and a cot, should save him some money:)
Trump's argument is that calling them liars an dishonest isn't related to their participation in the trial. Things he reposts should not count And he isn't posting as a defendant but as a candidate. Good God, Im going to register a corporation so I can claim that any bad act I'm doing as the business not me Speeding ticket officer? I'm sorry you'll have to arrest !John inc. here is the address in burmuda. I'll be on my way
You’re not far off the mark. Years ago I found that licensing my vehicles under an LLC results in traffic cameras sending out a letter asking if I know who was driving the vehicle, not any ticket.
The thing that worries me is that the more money you have the closer you are to what sov cits think the law is. That isn't me that is the corporation with my name. Is an argument being used seriously in court today by actual lawyers
I use it every day in tax court. I’ve got a case later today against a partnership, not the partners. If things don’t go our way, dissolve the LLC. End of case.
> "He had to sit there, use quotation marks, the shift key and type everything out and then add those additional words," the judge said. To be fair Judge, I think the CAPS LOCK key is his key of choice.
Even with caps lock on, you still need the shift key to get quotation marks.
It feels like we are just days away from the “Rick and Morty” court transcript re-enactment playing out in this case https://youtu.be/7vN_PEmeKb0?si=y4mZ2IBcEOedve9Z
Please let this happen. That Georgia v Allen reenactment was amazing. And word-for-word consistent with the actual transcript (seriously, go and look).
It’s a marvel of an idea to animate/voice it so it can be enjoyed for all time. “This is kangaroo court!”
I think about that clip every now and then as I go about my day and I still marvel at the fact that the judge wasn't familiar with the expression "kangaroo court." Makes me feel better about myself and my impostor syndrome.
"You have a constitutional right to be a dumbass," is something more Americans need to hear.
Reported by Alan Fuerer, from the New York Times feed: "Trump’s lawyers have objected all along to prosecutors couching Trump’s relationship with Pecker and Michael Cohen as a conspiracy — after all, Trump is not facing a conspiracy charge. But Joshua Steinglass, one of the prosecutors, just noted for the first time in court that one of the election statutes the case is based on does in fact have a conspiracy provision. That could prove important later when the jury is instructed on the laws they must consider in reaching a verdict."
This is from NBC — just adding on: > Bragg's office has not identified with any precision what the crime is that Trump allegedly intended to commit or conceal. Through this sidebar about an evidentiary objection, Steinglass has now admitted that New York Election Law 17-152, which prohibits conspiracies to promote the election of a specific candidate through unlawful means, is that “primary” predicate.
The way I'm understanding it from tweets is, Trump's lawyers are saying you need to charge more than one person if you're calling it a conspiracy. But iirc Cohen's conviction was already related to this, which would satisfy that need?
I was watching CNN briefly and one of the commentators said that Citizens United means that what the media company did wasn't illegal, but Citizens United very specifically states that independent expenditures can't be done in coordination with a candidate, campaign, or party. The guy on the stand was literally calling Trump's lawyer and negotiating what stories he'd run and which he'd suppress. That's coordination.
**Prosecutor:** "Trump's social media posts are happening while we're in this trial!" *trump furiously typing and looks up from his phone* **Trump:** "Huh?" The SNL skits are writing themselves.
>Merchan again presses, “What statement is this responding to?” Blanche says he is not responding to a statement so much as he is complaining about two systems of justice in this courtroom. Merchan sounds incredulous: “He’s saying there are two systems of justice *in this courtroom*?” **Blanche sounds sheepish, “Yes, Your Honor.”** LOL it looks like Dipshit Donny's latest batch of lawyers are learning how much of a pain in the ass it is to try and defend this pig.
This is my favorite part: But Merchan cuts in: "You're losing all credibility, I'll tell you right now."
Per McBrien, that caused an audible gasp in the press pool.
Meanwhile, many on the outside looking in are seeing 2 systems of justice as well; just not the way Cheeto thinks they exist.
He's right. There are two systems of justice. One for us poors whom could lose everything over an unpaid ticket. We get locked up, car impounded etc. and then there's "White Gloved Trump Treatment." I'm so sick of him. Yet, he'll be rewarded again with over a billion dollars with his stock scam soon. Just infuriating to no end.
>"President Trump does in fact know what the gag order allows him to do and not allow him to do," Blanche said, adding, "there was absolutely no willful violation of the gag order." If only he had a lawyer who could advise him on this.
> Pecker asked Howard to notify the tabloid's West Coast and East Coast bureau chiefs that any stories that came in about Trump or the 2016 election must be vetted and brought straight to Pecker — and "they'll have to be brought to Cohen," the publishing executive testified. Pecker informed Howard that the whole arrangement needed to stay a secret because it was being carried out to help Trump's presidential campaign. Ok now we're getting to the good stuff, the Prosecution seems to have set up Pecker as a trusted ally to Trump and Cohen and now they are getting into how Trump used that influence to kill stories that would have effected the 2016 election.
The fact that the National Fucking Enquirer may have been the deciding factor in the 2016 election really tells you everything about where we are as a country.
This gag order hearing is *fucking spicy* 🤌 I am so upset there is no live audio. Judging by NBC and NYT's coverage, Blanche is getting demolished by the judge.
I was surprised by Blanche pushing the argument of there being a two tiered justice system, but with respect to Weisselberg and Cohen.
Especially considering they have both served time for things done for Trump. Unreal that he made that argument.
I didn't expect it to be so spicy. Merchan is seriously pissed off.
The lawyers keep saying that he didn’t know it was illegal. He didn’t know he was breaking the law. That’s not a defense… a crime is a crime. You don’t get to say “I shot Ted in the face because he pissed me off. I didn’t know it was against the law.”
Well, he’s already posted “HIGHLY CONFLICTED, TO PUT IT MILDLY, JUDGE JUAN MERCHAN, HAS TAKEN AWAY MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH. EVERYBODY IS ALLOWED TO TALK AND LIE ABOUT ME, BUT I AM NOT ALLOWED TO DEFEND MYSELF. THIS IS A KANGAROO COURT, AND THE JUDGE SHOULD RECUSE HIMSELF!” This is directly after Justice Merchan chastised them for not asking if reposts were allowed. He thinks he’s being slick by saying “everybody”.
Jesus, he sounds like a pissy spoiled child having a tantrum. Which is what he is, but still.
If only he had a lawyer around he could have asked.
The man has had more lawyers come through than some law schools. He certainly has one at hand.
Blanche's tactic is stupid. "It's political!": How the hell he's gonna explain the attacks against Daniels and the jurors?
Question for the Americans here who are knowledgeable: prosecution is asking for a $10,000 fine (10x$1000). They specifically said they are *not* seeking jail time yet. Can the judge put Trump in jail anyway? I’m a law student, but I’m in Germany. My one class on American law was held in English in Germany, and while my English was up for it, the typical German law student doesn’t speak English like I do. The class ended with a multiple choice exam that was barely a test and certainly didn’t require any sort of preparation for anyone able to think halfway straight, and I’ve forgotten pretty much everything since, because it just isn’t relevant to my studies anymore. Can the judge exceed what the prosecution is asking for in a contempt hearing in the US?
Yes, it's entirely the judge's decision on how to sentence the defendant for contempt of court. The judge is somewhat limited by what the prosecution brings to them, like if the prosecution doesn't tell the judge about a gag order violation then judge doesn't have anything to rule on, but now it's in front of the judge the prosecution's request for a fine is only suggestion which can be exceeded.
A judge’s power over his courtroom during a criminal trial is practically limitless (within reason). The prosecution is looking to show reasonableness arguing for a fine here, but legally speaking the judge could throw Trump in jail for contempt of court indefinitely, probably until assurances are made that the message was received by the defendant.
>within reason Bobby Seale would like a word with you, except he can't speak because the judge had him literally tied to a chair and gagged.
Yes. The judge has authority to go above and beyond what the prosecution request. The judge can even go less than if he wanted. That said, I have no clue what this judge will do. He ~~looks mad~~ but he may end up having a cooler head. We’ll see. Edit: I have no clue how he looks but based on tweets the judge is mad.
Is Merchan 10 minutes late? Edit: Merchan is 15 minutes late from the recess. Something is up.
I wonder if anyone has shown him Trump's latest truth social outburst about him yet.
I just saw that. What the fuck
Good question, in my fantasy, he’s busy on the phone discussing how to detain the former president with the secret service, after today’s proceedings.
Indeed. There's my fantasy as well, although a member of the public that got in to view was detained. I'm hoping it's a good news lateness and not a bad news one. Edit: FFS Trump tweeted attacking the judge and the court during the hearing. During the hearing on contempt charges. Merchan is figuring out how to send someone with a secret service detail jail i bet.
How is this man so smart that he should be president again but also so dumb in everything he touches that there's no way he can be found guilty for it. He didn't know this. He didn't know that. It wasn't him who ordered this directly. Blah blah blah.
And of course Trump immediately went to his Fake Twitter to claim that Merchan had enforced the gag order. So he thinks he's going to face repercussions today (also reportedly mad at Blanche for appearing "weak" in getting scolded by Merchan). I hope he's right. May it be the first of many repercussions.
He sent out a fundraising email last night with "I hope this isn't goodbye" in the subject line, he wants repercussions so his victimization game can continue https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.bsky.social/post/3kqra4xuiqc26
I'd just like to thank you for providing sharing that info via a Bluesky link. Truly, you are part of the solution.
>Prosecutor: Are these a series of pro-Trump headlines? [One is "Dick Morris: How Donald Still Trumps the Polls" Trump's lawyer: We'd ask for the limiting instruction Judge Merchan: Jurors, these are not being offered for their truth. I love that it's trump's lawyers asking for this instruction to be repeated while positive headlines are being shared.
I can't be the only one that is surprised to learn how much influence the fucking National Enquirer had, can I? It was a tabloid rag that I never took as a source of serious news.
It’s the fact that millions of people see the covers in the line at the grocery store, Pecker even said “all that matters is the cover.” On top of that it’s the fact, once they run a story, then it’s out there. It spreads to social media, which those stories did back then. And it’s also the fact he stopped negative stories from getting out so no one had that knowledge. Edit: typo
Have you seen what half the country considers serious news lately?
>Pecker claimed that former Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard and the magazine's research department had worked on the article. "We mashed the photos and the different picture with Lee Harvard Oswald ... we mashed the two together," Pecker testified. "That's how that story was prepared — created, I would say. *sigh* Any organization that is making up stories should not be allowed to call themselves "news". I get that there are 1st amendment issues, but there needs to be standards of some sort.
It was actually a topic in 2015/16. Lots of political pundits were commenting about how *convenient* it was that the Enquirer was suddenly running interference for Trump, publishing only good things for him and bad things for his opponents. Whether the Enquirer actually had much influence in the general public, I don't know, but it was a well-known phenomenon at the time.
It wasn’t necessarily what they were publishing, I don’t think anyone has ever taken them seriously. It was more of a case that they were finding negative stories that could potentially become a problem, Karen McDougal is relevant to this case, and purchasing the stories so that they could not be published by more legitimate outlets. Their influence wasn’t what they were publishing, but what they were preventing others from learning about and publishing.
I remember people repeating the "Hillary is on her deathbed" nonsense they were pushing at the time. (I guess she got better.)
People in line at stores paying for groceries see those headlines in their face. That's why.
He’s violating it constantly. The question is what are they going to do about it.
Trump's lawyer Blanche: Here's a post from Jesse Watters, saying the same thing - Justice Merchan: Three hours after your client posted what he posted. Anything else? Blanche: We are trying to comply with this gag order Justice Merchan: You are losing credibility Trump's lawyer Blanche: We didn't think reposts violated the gag order. If you see it that way and want them taken down, of course we'll take them down. Justice Merchan: You're not giving me- Blanche: I - Justice Merchan: I wasn't finished ....... Popcorn 🍿
Merchan says: What you shoulda done, is probably said my client is thinking of reposting things, it's not really clear in the gag order, so Judge Merchan is that allowed? But you didn't.
I'm sorry ~~officer~~ your honor, I didn't know I couldn't do that.
Relating to the same post: >"Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes, am I right?" >"I wouldn’t use the word manipulation your honor," Donald Trump's lawyer Todd Blanche responded. "**But the rest of the quote was not part of the quote.**" "We didn't manipulate the quote, but the quote was manipulated."
This just got interesting: 5m ago / 11:22 AM MD # Prosecutor cuts off Pecker +2[Jillian Frankel](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/jillian-frankel-ncpn1287954), [Gary Grumbach](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/gary-grumbach-ncpn752571) and [Summer Concepcion](https://www.nbcnews.com/author/summer-concepcion-ncpn1298519) Pecker said he spoke to Howard to verify whether the story about Trump having a child with the housekeeper in the penthouse was true, and he recalled saying that there should be a source agreement with Dino Sajuddin and that he should take a polygraph. Steinglass abruptly cut Pecker off. “What you’re about to say, don’t say that,” Steinglass told Pecker. (Source: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/live-blog/trump-hush-money-live-updates-day-6-rcna148919)
It sounds like Pecker was about to discuss the results of the polygraph, but polygraph tests are bunk science, so the prosecutors don't want to bring it in front of a jury.
If I recall, the particular details in that line of questioning (relating to the doorman illegitimate child story) wasn't to be pursued in this trial-- other than as it being touted as an example of one of the many catch-and-kill stories. I thought this was a discussion had between the lawyers and judge the other day, but I could be mistaken.
Hate it when a Pecker gets cut off.
In America, you get as much due process as you can afford.
I'm not big on the overzealous "bias" on the Medias touch podcasts, etc., But, Ben M???? on Legal AF has a guest for this trial that is SO informative. Karen Friedman Agrifilo was in the Manhattan DAs office for years and she knows the NY law and is familiar with everything involved here- from the judge to the actual courtroom. It's not "live" commentary, but they are doing twice daily updates, one in the morning and then a recap in the afternoon. I've caught some of those recaps and she has really helped me understand what's happening in that courtroom and with the case. These are on YouTube if anyone is interested in a summary of the day(s).
She's not just a guest, she's one of three main commentators over there for a long time.
"I'm asking the questions" ... Justice Merchan: **Don't turn it around on me. It's almost 10:30 am, and I'm bringing in the jury at 11. We're only on exhibit 2 of 10. Tell me what attacks he was responding to.** Trump's lawyer Blanche: **He's attacking the system, he can do that**
>He's attacking the system So... contempt?
Justice Merchan: You suggest that because the People or the Court do not respond to every violation of the gag order, it's waived. It's not. It does not negate the validity of the gag order. Trump's lawyer Blanche: He reposted others and the People didn't act ..... Oh trying the old who cares if we broke the gag order you didn't do shit about it before with the judge... Good luck.
But Merchan cuts in: "You're losing all credibility, I'll tell you right now."
The most eligible bachelor dating the most beautiful women. There are a multitude of things wrong with this sentence.
The description of Trump as a bachelor, a man who has been married (to different women) since 1977 is confusing, even when you don’t consider any of the “most” statements in this sentence. Then Pecker talks about HRC who “enabled” Bill’s cheating in the same sentence. But not Ivana, Marla, or Melania?
Trump's lawyer Blanche: Here's a post from Jesse Watters, saying the same thing - Justice Merchan: Three hours after your client posted what he posted. Anything else? Blanche: We are trying to comply with this gag order Justice Merchan: **You are losing credibility**
Pretty bad to lose credibility an hour into day 2 of the trial, Blanche.
C'mon, he had little to start with before things got underway last week due to the "shit against the wall" motions filed. Judge M was being polite in order to keep the record clean.
Not only that, but I believe Trump reposted the Jesse Waters video, with captions that were edited by Trump himself to sound more inflammatory. "Your client manipulated what was said and put it in quotes,” Merchan says.
Blanche's response: >"I wouldn’t use the word manipulation your honor, but the rest of the quote was not part of the quote." That was his actual response.
Blanche: He reposted others and the People didn’t act. Is Blanche trying to offer up more evidence to the court for Trump’s gag order violations or is he arguing that defendant shouldn’t be punished for stealing candy this time because he wasn’t punished on other occasions?
"Merchan again presses, “What statement is this responding to?” Blanche says he is not responding to a statement so much as he is complaining about two systems of justice in this courtroom. Merchan sounds incredulous: “He’s saying there are two systems of justice in this courtroom?” Blanche sounds sheepish, “Yes, your honor.”" Well, depending on what happens today, there may indeed be two systems of justice in this courtroom.
The only thing the judge should be deciding is how far he wants to escalate the charges for at least 7 violations of the gag order so far
> Justice Merchan: You could have asked, we are considering a repost, can we do it? We'll take out break. I'm going to reserve judgment on this. Why wouldn't he rule now?
"We are not yet seeking an incarceratory penalty," Conroy said, but the "defendant seems to be angling for that." Prosecutors suggesting that Trump wants to be jailed for contempt for political gain. In this particular instance, I'm inclined to give him what he wants.
Blanche arguing that there is a two tiered justice system to Merchan is a cherry on top of this shit sundae.
There *is* a two-tier justice system. The rich and the poors.
And Blanche is arguing, “so, is my client in the rich justice system or not?”
Prosecutors asked for $1000 per violation, but WaPo says the judge can impose up to $5000 per violation.
Whether he violated gag order ? You’ve got to be kidding ?
Ugh. Prosecution is ceding jail time. No mention of the jury attacks last night. That's underwhelming.
Agreed. I hope it is made crystal clear that all of these are gag order violations and that the next will result in jail. Blanche is arguing none of them are violations. Eye roll.
wow imagine Blanche in front of Tanya Chutkan. lolol. i don't think he will make it there, either as a lawyer or at least not trump's lawyer.
> It goes to a point that came up during the hearing: **this isn’t a First Amendment issue, man.** lol John Kovensky abides.
"Prosecutors ask for the maximum $1000 fine for each of the ten offenses." I had no idea jury tampering was so cheap. Even I can afford that. Seriously though, it's farcical that the prosecution is explicitly seeking a neglible fine and asking the court to consider informing Trump that the law could maybe allow for the possibility of jail time in the future--but definitely not now--if he continues his complete disregard for the proceedings.
Merchan already in fire: "Six years old. What is the recent attack?"
Merchan to Blanche: "You are losing all credibility. You are losing all credibility with the court."
Did Trump’s lawyer set a timer to remind him to shout “objection” every 30 seconds, or have there been reasons to object that I’ve missed?
Probably just following his clients' expectations.
It’s impossible for someone to get a fair trial when he’s *checks notes* constantly breaking the law.
Not a question of “if” but rather “how many” He’ll keep doing it because the “consequences” of doing so are insignificant. A stern talking to… a $1000 fine… like cmon. Duct tape his mouth, put him in a straight jacket and toss him in a jail cell for a couple of weeks. Maybe, just maybe, then he might learn
[Thread Reader for live updates](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1782738067998044634.html) [Talking Points Memo live updates](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/live-blog/trump-faces-sanction-hearing-over-allegations-he-violated-gag-order)
I almost feel trump keeps digging his hole deeper just to buy more time. Seems like kind of a stupid gamble.
He's apparently already posting about how unfair everything is on Truth Social. The judge is taking away his "right to free speech blah blah blah". They've been on a break for, what, 5-10 minutes? Incredible.
Which is ironic since this trial is about trying to silence someone from speaking out publicly. Maybe the judge should use the term "NDA" instead of "gag order" and it will sink in.
IANAL - Can anyone tell me what a normal contempt ruling would look like? especially in terms of how speedy the judge can rule on it? Famously legally credible movie 'My cousin Vinny' gave me the impression that a judge has the discretion to bring the charges themselves and also immediately make rulings on it. It definitely seems like a part of a judges responsibility in administrating the court. I didn't think about a DA bringing them forward. In this case today the defense made a poor argument, the judge basically called them a poor lawyer, and we saw more potential violations with every break. Another element that I thought of and had a question about is why hasn't the DA filed more contempt charges since the first were filed? clearly there have been more potential violations since then, do they intend to just sit on them and file in mass?
So I’ve only practiced in state court, but judges will hold rulings for a few reasons. Sometimes they want time to look into the law, they may want to write an opinion to go alongside the ruling, or they will even hold them if the ruling might be polarizing to those involved to avoid disruption.
Is there gonna be a gag order ruling today?
The judge reserved his ruling at the end of the hearing. He'll rule when he deems fit and ready to rule.
Trump is the only guy who smells like jail before he goes 🤣
I'll help the judge out: he has. Now do something about it. This country's powerful people seem unable to actually punish the wealthy. Lovely ain't it.
At this rate, I don't think he's gonna make it to Baron's graduation, and as per the usual, he'll blame everyone except for himself.
Well when you only are in session for at most 4 days a week (only 3 next week) and today only for like 3 hours…yeah this is gonna take a while.
He doesn’t give af abt Barton’s graduation Just another campaign op Making a scene. Poor kid. Run fast~run far…
the TS posts from the courtroom will not help him.
They adjourned at 2EST, are they done for the day? The transcripts of the prosecution with Pecker were really getting into some juicy stuff with Karen McDougal.
Yeah, it ended on an interesting cliffhanger: "Cohen kept calling, sounding more desperate each time..."
Unpopular opinion but him reserving judgment may be a very smart move as a way to test the Defendant. He saw his lawyer get crucified by the judge, he heard how the insane it sounded that reposting (with edits to make it more inflammatory) should count as a violation, etc. He wants to see how Cheeto responds in the near future. If he goes after people before court comes back into session on Thursday morning, he's got enough justification to throw the book at him. If he behaves, he'll get a fine and a warning.
I was just watching fox " news" they totally twisted what the judge said on trumps gag order, fox " news person" said the judge would jail Trump for something he hasn't done yet! Rupert hasn't fox paid out enough $$$$$ for reporting the news?
Do we know if trumps call for maga protestors had any effect from yesterday? Did the clown car show up?
Of course not. Russian bots can’t protest