Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

🧵 Tues 21 May 2024

Testimony may conclude today in Trump’s NY trial, after 5 weeks & 22 witnesses.

Yesterday the jury was introduced to , a associate & who acted as a “back-channel” for to in the summer of 2018.

Yesterday, Costello behaved so atrociously on the witness stand that Juan Merchan cleared the courtroom to admonish him & the defense attorneys. Costello is due back on the stand

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Per Maggie Haberman:

Some of Trump's team, since the start of the trial, have been noticeably confident of a . , Trump's lead lawyer, shared his thoughts about the idea w/a NY Magazine reporter who wrote a cover story about him as the trial kicked off.

The prediction that the trial will end w/that outcome has been striking, particularly since hung juries, in which jurors cannot agree on a defendant's guilt or innocence, are relatively unusual.

?

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar
Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

, Trump’s fmr White House adviser, walks in w/ a silver case bearing what appears to be a presidential seal.

With his legal team & Secret Service agents in the mix, ’s group numbers more than two dozen.

is on the stand.
Justice Merchan reminds him that he’s under oath.

, one of the prosecution’s leaders, is expected to continue her cross-examination of Costello.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

’s attitude is already brusque under cross-examination from .

Hoffinger asks Costello about his relationship w/ .

Costello confirms that he is close to & has known him for 50 yrs. Costello & his law firm recently sued Giuliani for unpaid legal bills.

👀 Hoffinger reads an email Costello sent to in which he described his relationship w/Giuliani as potentially being “very useful to you.”

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Prosecutors have argued was part of a pressure campaign on in 2018 as Cohen was considering flipping on after a federal investigation into his payment to opened.

Defense tried to muddy that story on cross -examination of Cohen. But by calling Costello, they have given prosecutors opportunity to reinforce the story, & emails shown yesterday & this morning suggest that they have ample evidence to support.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

asks if an email in which he offers to provide a “back channel” between & “speaks for itself” Costello used the phrase while [ to her yesterday].

Costello says it does not because there was more context, & offers to provide that context.

“That’s all right,” Hoffinger says, moving on to her next question. 😊

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

wrote to that there had been positive comments about him from the White House & that he had “friends in high places.” Hoffinger gets Costello to say it “definitely referred to President Trump.” 👀

The emails corroborate prosecutors’ story, suggesting that Costello was manipulating Cohen at the direction of & , while misleading Cohen so that he would not understand what was happening.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

testifies that “sometimes” his emails speak for themselves. Sometimes, the implication is & as he said earlier, they do not.
🙄 more []

🚨🚨 Costello wrote in an email that his mission was to “get Cohen on the right page without giving him the appearance that we are following instructions from Giuliani or the president.”

The jurors are paying close attention, much more so than they did to the end of 's cross-examination.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

has asked several times to offer additional context, & Susan has made clear she does not want that context, cutting him off & moving to her next question. In doing so, Hoffinger shows that she believes she has the jury on her side after the way Costello treated her & the court yesterday.

atty, Emil just insisted there was a “pending question” from Hoffinger when there wasn’t, forcing Justice to once again correct him.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

seems to be more of a witness for the prosecution — albeit a hostile one —than the defense. The emails couldn’t possibly be viewed in any way other than how prosecutors want jurors to view them: They show Costello misleading , saying something to him directly & another thing behind his back.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

has just denied that, once he began to believe that was in turn misleading him, he was angry or upset. He was, he says, “informed.”

Another email from Costello to his law partner shows that in fact, Costello was very angry at Cohen, contradicting his previous answer.

“What should I say to this asshole?” Costello asked his partner. “He is playing with the most powerful man on the planet.”

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

answers “no” when asked if he has animosity toward 😂. points out that Costello went to Washington last week to testify before Congress about Cohen, & made aggressive comments about him. Costello says he didn’t know his comments would be reported in the press [seriously?].

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

#Hoffinger’s final question is an accusation: whether #RobertCostello’s testimony to Congress was meant to #intimidate #MichaelCohen as he testified in this trial. Costello asked her to repeat the question & then denied the accusation. “No,” he said. “Ridiculous.”

#Trump atty #Bove, is on redirect. Costello testifies that Cohen said in April 2018 that he would be “eternally grateful” for the help & guidance that Costello had given him in those difficult days.

#criminal #law #TrumpTrial

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Per a pool report, confirmed that the defense will be resting today, as expected, in remarks outside the courtroom in the hallway. “We’ll be resting pretty quickly,” he said. “Resting meaning resting the case. I won’t be resting. I don’t rest. I’d like to rest sometimes but I don’t get to rest.”

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

, in his questioning, tries to reargue that was not concerned about having failed but rather not being hired, & paid, by .

Bove makes it clear that Cohen, in 2018, used the back channel to Trump that he had been provided by Costello, communicating through the lawyer to & presumably, Trump. [yeah, and?]

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

There are objections, & lawyers confer w/Justice #Merchan who made clear he does not want this testimony by #RobertCostello to turn into a “trial within a trial,” aimed at attacking a witness — #MichaelCohen.

After the sidebar, Costello says he was giving Cohen “options” & waiting for his “instructions”

#Bove: “Did you ever pressure Michael Cohen to do anything?”

Costello: “I did not”

Bove: “Did you ever have control over Michael Cohen?”

Costello: “Clearly not”

#law #Trump #TrumpTrial

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

#Bove continues to ask about #RobertCostello’s meetings w/ #MichaelCohen. Prosecutors have objected a few times, & Justice #Merchan has sustained the objections.

Costello hits on a point that defense lawyers has sought to emphasize: that he was motivated by money.

After one of Costello’s answers is stricken, Costello shakes his head. Merchan wasn’t looking.

Bove’s re-direct ends w/an objection sustained.

“Nothing further,” says Bove.

#criminal #law #Trump #TrumpTrial #MobTactics

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar
Liliki,
@Liliki@sfba.social avatar

@Nonilex
So now what?

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

@Liliki nonjury proceedings if any, closing arguments, jury instructions, deliberations (which can include requests by jurors to review evidence & testimony transcript, additional guidance on matters of law, etc) & finally verdicts on each charge.
Then of course Trump will appeal if found guilty on any of the charges.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

#Hoffinger, in a brief, final series of questions & answers, again confirms that #RobertCostello was never officially hired as #MichaelCohen’s lawyer. Costello steps down from the witness stand.

Justice #Merchan turns to the #jury & explains the upcoming schedule. Closing arguments will take a day & his instructions to them afterward will take at least an hour.

Court will be adjourned, for jurors, until a week from today.

#criminal #law #Trump #TrumpTrial #MobTactics

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

The judge reminds that they should not discuss the case or read the news about the trial in the meantime.

Court is adjourned until the afternoon when it’s expected that prosecutors & defense lawyers will srgue for their preferred versions of the during a “charging conference”.

Justice may also rule on the defense lawyers' latest attempt to the case, which they made in a motion yesterday.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

With defense resting their case, we now know definitively that did not in his own of 34 charges.

As he exited the courtroom, & raised his hand in a fist, Trump did not answer reporters’ questions about why he had not testified in the trial.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Tues afternoon, the will go into some dry legalities, as prosecutors & defense present to Justice how they want the court to instruct the as they deliberate.

The 2 sides will lay out their arguments for as it prepares to weigh the charges against — 34 counts of falsifying business records.

instructions are meant to translate doctrine into intelligible language for the 12 laypeople who will decide the case.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

give jurors guidance for applying the to they ascertained from , docs & other .

Each side filed drafts of their proposals w/the court.

Arguments before Justice occur w/o the jury.

Acc/to the NYT, Prosecutors’ instructions will ask the judge to give the jury “unusual flexibility” in determining whether was actively involved in the false record scheme.

mastodonmigration,
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online avatar

@Nonilex

"unusual flexibility" ... WTF NYT 🤦‍♂️

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Prosecutors will argue that even if didn’t personally create the records, the can find him responsible if the creation of the false records was “a reasonably foreseeable consequence of his conduct.”
this is NY []

Defense’s proposal is reportedly less focused, much like their witness questioning & opening statement.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

The afternoon session is beginning.

is back w/his posse, including ; , the fmr ldr; & the actor .

Justice asks the defense to argue on behalf of one of its many requests: to add the word “willfully” in 2 places to the on a federal which isn’t charged.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Defense proposes on campaign finance law “” (federal election campaign act) must include the word "willfully" to specify a violation.

The 34 falsifying business records charges against are charges bc prosecutors say he used the false records to try to conceal a 2nd .

That 2nd crime, prosecutors specified, is a violation of a state that forbids a person from seeking election by “unlawful means.”

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Defense & prosecution debate what types of apply. Defense asks for additions that to make it clear only should count, while prosecution suggests violations should apply, too.

rejects defense’s request to tell jurors that candidates weren’t limited in 2015 & 2016 — before 's election —— from contributing funds to their own campaigns. Prosecution called it misleading & Merchan determined it was unnecessary to explain it to the jury.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Judge says he’ll allow the defense to argue the issue on limits to individual’s contributions to their own campaign during their summation, but he won’t include it in his instructions.

Merchan reserves his final decision on the argument over the word “willfully.”

Defense argues the instructions should include the phrase “for the purpose of influencing an election” but that it should specify it’s in reference to spending related to the election.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Prosecution says that the jury needs less, not more, & that the phrase “for the purpose of influencing an election” is straightforward.

Judge proposes this sentence:

“If the payment would have been made even in the absence of the candidacy, the payment should not be treated as a contribution.”

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

atty agrees the sentence is an accurate recitation of the “irrespective rule” (found in ’s § on personal use) but defense wants examples included for the jury from the ’s prior application of the rule.


https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/making-disbursements/personal-use/

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

After arguing for 5 mins, a word in the is now plural — “crime” is now “crimes”

Defense & prosecution debate if the instructions should be available to the & .

( is asleep — )

Justice jokes they’ll next address “the most challenging issue” — how to pronounce a word.

He spelled out “eleemosynary,” which means having to do w/charity.

“Why do we even have it?” Merchan asked. The lawyers don’t know, & it’s removed.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

There’s a long back & forth about prosecutors’ proposal that the #JuryInstructions include language suggesting it was “reasonably forseeable” that false records would be created as a result of #Trump’s conduct.

Justice #Merchan says that he’s inclined NOT to include it.
— that is not good, it’s specific to #NY #law.

But he reserves judgment for now, as he did on “willfully.”

#TrumpTrial

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Justice Merchan hears arguments re the expanded .
He indicates agreement w/the defense on causing false entries when those false entries are “reasonably foreseeable” to the defendant based on his conduct.

This is related to “ to commit or conceal another ” — the 2nd crime issue.

Prosecutor argues case supports the prosecution.

atty Bove says the DA’s theory is = to "causing the causer."
(Seriously, no idea wtf he means)

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Prosecutor argues that “acting in concert w/someone” is separate from the concept of “cause” & is not redundant.

(That actually helps, so maybe it should be in the , right?)

Defense may lose a key argument:
They wanted jurors to be told that they HAD TO find had some to enter the w/ David ( ) & .

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Justice Merchan points out that the charges of falsifying business records faces includes an to conceal another . The doesn't require prosecutors to show that Trump intended to orchestrate a , but rather that by falsifying business records, he intended to hide said conspiracy.

says he will leave that instruction as is – a win for prosecutors.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Prosecution & defense argue whether the evidence at trial supported the idea that did enter a conspiracy w/ & in 2015 to suppress negative stories during his presidential campaign.
(isn’t that for the jury to decide?)

Defense suggests that there was nothing about “participating” in that meeting, & that meeting w/ The was simply “standard operating procedure” for campaigning. (Um, no)

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Justice Merchan asks, if there’s nothing wrong w/ “participating” in the meeting, why not just say he did?

Good question.

Merchan again reserves judgment on the wording addressing Trump’s participation in the — though it sounds like he’s going to side w/prosecution.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Defense argues that to reach a jurors MUST not only to agree that had falsified records to conceal a to win an election by unlawful means, but also jurors must be unanimous on what the are; making reaching a verdict nearly impossible.

Trump's attys argued that while that unanimity is not required by , Justice Merchan can use his discretion in asking for it.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Prosecution argues that would be special treatment for & he should be treated like any other defendant.

Just because the case itself is unique is not a reason for “deviating from the , it’s a reason for applying the law.”

says, “There’s no reason to rewrite the law for this case.”

CarlG,
@CarlG@esq.social avatar

@Nonilex Aah, Trump is trying the old "I am a very important man and therefore my case deserves unique jury instructions and a higher burden of proof than every other criminal defendant" defense.

Good luck with that one, Donald. It may work with FedSoc judges you appointed, but not a truly independent judiciary.

FallsMom,
@FallsMom@mastodon.coffee avatar

@CarlG

He is the very model of a modern Major-General

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

@FallsMom @CarlG pirates of penzance!

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

After a break, Justice tells the attys that they've gone through his concerns about & asks prosecutors & defense about theirs.

Merchan denies defense’s ask for instruction that NDAs not being illegal (no shit), & notes there’s been plenty of testimony to that point & they can argue it on summation.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

atty also asks for about setting aside any preexisting prejudice they may have against .

was going to deny the request (that’s what jury selection was for), but prosecution offers a version w/more neutral language, & Merchan agrees.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

argues for a limiting instruction about the “legitimate purpose” of testimony about the tape.

The testimony was used to show that the publication of the tape changed ’s view on the need to silence the story.

asks defense for specific transcript pages at issue, but said for now he agrees w/the prosecution that it’s unnecessary.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Re , it’s of note, that the week before the NY began, atty made multiple efforts to delay in appeals court, arguing daily for postponing.

This afternoon Bove has offered many arguments which seem obvious to be denied by Justice .

Seems pretty clear he’s just trying to draw this out as long as possible.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

And there it is, signifies he’s losing patience w/ Bove as he continues to argue a decided issue. Bove insists it’s important, & generously Merchan gives him another chance to speak. But now Merchan repeats his previous decisions on the issue above is harping on, namely that was ’s atty when the charged conduct took place.

this should not be an issue in any court. It’s called [ to
.]

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Justice : “My answer hasn’t changed, & honestly I find it disingenuous for you to make the argument at this point.”

Merchan tells not to stand up again [patience lost]

Merchan: “I let you speak.”

Now, Justice Merchan says, it is your turn to speak.

Bove says that he is not being disingenuous, & clarifies that he’s making his argument for the record — [for appeal]

Merchan tells Bove [again] that he’s repeating himself..

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

next argues for instruction about “the involvement” of [other] counsel, even though ruled before the trial that could not argue that he believed the acts were legal because lawyers were involved.

Bove says there was evidence presented that makes the instruction appropriate & it goes specifically to intent.

🚨Prosecutor Colangelo notes that under NY , one predicate to obtaining such an instruction is that the defendant himself testifies.🤣

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

argues the instruction proposed about fmr publisher ’s legal consult w/his attorney is irrelevant, because Pecker testified that he didn’t reveal all of the facts to AMI’s general counsel when he consulted them & therefore his attys couldn’t provide proper legal advice.

Bove argues that what matters is Pecker told Trump that he had been told the McDougal agreement was “bulletproof,” & Trump relied it.

(Um, hella hearsay regardless)

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

Justice tells the attys he will get them a final version of the by end of the day Thurs.

Court is adjourned.

Testimony in the is over.

The jury will be back in a week for closing arguments.

Thanks for reading 🥰

mastodonmigration,
@mastodonmigration@mastodon.online avatar

@Nonilex

Excellent job today! Really helpful commentary getting us through the jury instruction arguments.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar
WizardBear,
@WizardBear@mstdn.social avatar

@Nonilex TY for your posts and commentary. Very helpful. Love both you and @GottaLaff here. All the best to you both.

GottaLaff,
@GottaLaff@mastodon.social avatar
CarlG,
@CarlG@esq.social avatar

@Nonilex Bove is like the frickin' Energizer Bunny. But unlike with batteries, persistence here is not to be applauded.

Trump could have invoked the "advice of counsel" defense, but didn't want to have to meet his disclosure obligations to use it. Raising the same issue repeatedly by calling it a slightly different name is, as Merchan aptly put it, "disingenuous."

i_gvf,
@i_gvf@mastodon.world avatar

@Nonilex How long until Trump claims the "gag order" blocked him from testify?

Surely he can't let that juicy lie go unsaid.

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

@i_gvf oh he’s been saying that since its inception.

cynblogger,
@cynblogger@sfba.social avatar

@Nonilex
I bet his mouth would like a good rest now & then.

donray,
@donray@mastodon.online avatar

@Nonilex

Good ol’ — who wore a medal from Hungarian Nazi collaborators to tRump’s inaugural ball.

qotca,
@qotca@mastodon.social avatar

@Nonilex

JOE PISCOPO

😂😂😂

GreenFire,
@GreenFire@mstdn.social avatar

@qotca @Nonilex
I know. I thought that Joe Piscopo's name was thrown in as just a joke, but I guess he is really desperate for attention.

That Pam Bondi's name can be brought up by our media without highlighting her "alleged" corruption each time is a travesty though that's more crucial for our democracy.

GreenFire,
@GreenFire@mstdn.social avatar

@qotca @Nonilex
In March 2016, CREW discovered that the Trump Foundation had broken the law by giving an illegal $25,000 contribution to a political group supporting Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. Charitable foundations like the Trump Foundation are not allowed to engage in politics. Even more problematic was the fact that the contribution was given as Bondi’s office was deciding whether to take legal action related to Trump University.
https://www.citizensforethics.org/reports-investigations/crew-investigations/the-trump-foundation-pam-bondi-scandal/

Liliki,
@Liliki@sfba.social avatar

@Nonilex
What makes them so sure they'll get a hung jury, have they tampered with the jury?
I'd start investigating that.
And if trump's lawyers are blabbing about the jury and making "predictions", doesn't that fall under juror intimidation? Does that gag order include trump's lawyers?

Nonilex,
@Nonilex@masto.ai avatar

@Liliki all good questions

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • Law
  • DreamBathrooms
  • InstantRegret
  • ethstaker
  • magazineikmin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • rosin
  • modclub
  • Youngstown
  • ngwrru68w68
  • slotface
  • osvaldo12
  • kavyap
  • mdbf
  • thenastyranch
  • JUstTest
  • everett
  • cubers
  • cisconetworking
  • normalnudes
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • khanakhh
  • tacticalgear
  • tester
  • provamag3
  • megavids
  • Leos
  • lostlight
  • All magazines