Jump to content

His lawyers can call him "President Trump" if they want, but there is nothing presidential about what’s unfolding in that courtroom


Recommended Posts

Just my PSA, because I don't see a lot of news on here about this trial going on. 

 

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/trump-hush-money-trial-image-rcna149428

A lower Manhattan courtroom just dealt a fatal blow to the Trump mystique

His lawyers can call him "President Trump" if they want, but there is nothing presidential about what’s unfolding in that courtroom
0 of 30 seconds
 
 
By Symone D. Sanders-Townsend, co-host of "The Weekend"

On opening night of the Republican National Convention in 2016, Donald Trump came out onstage like a pro wrestler, amid clouds from a smoke machine and dramatic shadows.

It was the kind of image he likes to project of himself: grandiose and imposing, like the floating head of the Great and Powerful Oz ordering Dorothy to bring him the broomstick of the Wicked Witch.

 

But eight years later, the real Trump has been revealed before the world in a courtroom in lower Manhattan. Whether he was sitting in the courtroom or standing outside of it amid bad fluorescent lighting, he looked small, diminished and the very opposite of presidential.

And just as the Wizard of Oz tried desperately to distract Dorothy and her friends when he was revealed, Trump and his lawyers are trying hard to keep the public from looking at the man behind the curtain.

“We will call him ‘President Trump’ out of respect for the office that he held from 2017 to 2021,” his lawyer Todd Blanche said during opening statements this week. “And as everybody knows, it’s the office he’s running for right now."

Trump's lawyers can use whatever title they want, but there is nothing presidential about what’s unfolding in that courtroom.

Trump’s lawyers can use whatever title they want, but there is nothing presidential about what’s unfolding in that courtroom. Make no mistake, Trump’s current circumstances define him. The fact that he has spent every day court has been in session at the courthouse is the physical representation that Trump is not special. He is not above reproach and not above the law. His fate, like the fate of every other defendant in a jury trial, is in the hands of his fellow citizens.

The case, too, has diminished Trump. Focusing on his actions during the 2016 election, prosecutors have presented him as a small man, desperate to protect his reputation, colluding with the editors of a tabloid newspaper to spread smears about his opponents and pay off anyone who might share the truth about him.

The ex-president’s longtime friend, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, has already proved to be a star witness in this trial. In court testimony, Pecker detailed the steps he took to fabricate actual fake news against Trump’s political opponents and “catch and kill” damaging allegations against Trump during the 2016 election.

 
 

1714078401800_n_dw_deadline_outgirlkaren

 
 

The details have truly been stunning. I lived and worked through the 2016 presidential election, and even I learned new things when I read Pecker’s testimony.

I had to read it because — to the detriment of the American voters, there are no cameras or microphones to allow them to see and hear the testimony from inside the courtroom. That’s left the public relying on the exceptional journalists sitting inside to paint a picture of the ongoing revelations. That picture is far more damning than even the allegations that Trump cheated on his wife by having a one-night stand with an adult-film actor. (Trump has denied the affair and pleaded not guilty in the case.)

During opening statements, the Manhattan district attorney’s office argued that the case was actually about “election fraud, pure and simple.” The prosecution then described the case to the jury as an orchestrated criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election by paying people to stay silent about stories that might damage one of the two major candidates’ reputations.

It's not the only case revolving around Trump's disgraceful approach to democratic elections, either.

In the federal election interference case against Trump, special counsel Jack Smith similarly accused Trump of defrauding the country he once led. And in the Fulton County, Georgia, election interference case against Trump and his co-defendants, District Attorney Fani Willis described the sprawling RICO case as a plot to steal the 2020 election. (Trump has pleaded not guilty in both cases.)

The allegations in these cases spell out the brazen ways Trump has plotted to secure and hold on to power. They are not a coincidence, they are a pattern, and one that he will keep attempting in his third run for the White House this year.

Trump may try, just as the Wizard of Oz desperately pushed buttons and pulled levers, to maintain his failing facade before finally admitting that he was nothing more than a humbug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awesome editorial...

58 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

I had to read it because — to the detriment of the American voters, there are no cameras or microphones to allow them to see and hear the testimony from inside the courtroom. That’s left the public relying on the exceptional journalists sitting inside to paint a picture of the ongoing revelations. That picture is far more damning than even the allegations that Trump cheated on his wife by having a one-night stand with an adult-film actor. (Trump has denied the affair and pleaded not guilty in the case.)

Why are there no cameras or microphones in the courtroom?  Did Trump's attorney's not allow it?  Or did the judge make the decision?  So then those exceptional journalists can paint whatever picture they want instead of allowing the American public to witness it with their own lyin-eyes.

 

1 hour ago, BarryLaverty said:

During opening statements, the Manhattan district attorney’s office argued that the case was actually about “election fraud, pure and simple.” The prosecution then described the case to the jury as an orchestrated criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election by paying people to stay silent about stories that might damage one of the two major candidates’ reputations.

This is laughable.  By "people" they only have one instance that they can't even prove in Stormy Daniels.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't believe that they allow cameras and microphones in court in NY. 

14 minutes ago, JBizzle said:

This is laughable.  By "people" they only have one instance that they can't even prove in Stormy Daniels.

Face the Truth: Living in Denial Can Derail Your Career Aspirations

Denial is a terrible thing to go through. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

Don't believe that they allow cameras and microphones in court in NY. 

Face the Truth: Living in Denial Can Derail Your Career Aspirations

Denial is a terrible thing to go through. 

Where's the actual proof?  You have none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I've read is that the case is a big bag of nothing.  They bring in the former editor of The National Inquirer that most of the U.S. knows as hoax news that occasionally publishes an accurate story.  They are about as trustworthy as 99.9% of all of Barry's op-eds.  The whole state of New York's judicial system is a joke not only with this trial, but the recent tossing of Harvey Weinsteins conviction, unlike Trump his conviction should have held.    

  • LOL! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There hasn't been much banter about this trial circus that has been unfolding.  I have kept up with it daily.  This is simply a trial to prevent Trump from being elected by proving that he had an affair 18 years ago.  I used to honestly think that Trump had an affair with Daniels, but now I have doubts.  Why Daniels was even brought in to testify is mystifying, because that won't prove the case.  It should have been her attorney that was brought into testify about the payment.  1.  She allegedly had Trump's personal phone number as well as his bodyguard, but didn't call either for a hush payment that call was made to Michael Cohen.  Had she called Trump first, and he told her to contact his attorney that would be a different matter, but it didn't happen according to testimony.  2.  Cohen was allegedly a fixer, but as Hope Hicks stated he broke things first and then fixed them.  3.  What was the purpose to call the National Inquirer only instead of multiple news outlets that were far more legitimate and prominent.  Everyone knows the Enquirer is a rag with rumors and lies to spread except for a few stories.  3.  Trump wears a toupee, but uses a cheap brand of shampoo and conditioner ?   Pert Plus ????  I can buy that at Dollar Tree.  He doesn't use a high end shampoo or conditioner since we all know he is vain about his coiffure.  2.  She describes a gold manicure set.  Big whoop almost anyone would have that with the wealth that Trump has.  3.  The description of their sexual counter is vanilla at best, and she's a porn star ???  4.  He's an alleged germaphobe, but doesn't use a condom ?  I don't buy it now.    

  • Thanks 1
  • Roll Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Youngcoach123 said:

https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/25/politics/cnn-poll-trump-trial/index.html
 

As the first criminal prosecution of a former American president began just 13% nationwide feel Donald Trump is being treated the same as other criminal defendants, a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS finds

 

Maybe this is why no one cares about the trial.

That's a possibility. Consider this, as well. I don't know how "fairly" this trial is even being covered. Based on some of the trials I paid close attention to, and comparing that to how the media actually covered the trial, it's entirely possible that they're not entirely being straight with us.

  • LOL! 1
  • Roll Eyes 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cohen's testimony today was a joke.  Trump just told him to do it, not for the election, but to just pay the little amount for it to be over.  The Democrats don't want it to be over.  You could tell by the writing that the "journalist" was pandering to the leftist crowd praying that the jurors would believe their "Star witness".  He'll be back again tomorrow, but Trump isn't guilty.  They'll probably find him guilty in New York.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another day of well, Trump did sign the checks, but they were fraudulent invoices.  Well, Mr. Cohen you submitted those invoices not Trump and his accountants registered them.  Trump only signed the checks and to deal with the problem.  So the prosecutions star witnesses Daniels and Cohen both want Trump in jail and will say and do anything to get him there.  The testimony alone leads me to believe that Trump is not only innocent of cooking the books, but he did not sleep with Daniels when before I thought he did.  

  • LOL! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DaveTV1 said:

Another day of well, Trump did sign the checks, but they were fraudulent invoices.  Well, Mr. Cohen you submitted those invoices not Trump and his accountants registered them.  Trump only signed the checks and to deal with the problem.  So the prosecutions star witnesses Daniels and Cohen both want Trump in jail and will say and do anything to get him there.  The testimony alone leads me to believe that Trump is not only innocent of cooking the books, but he did not sleep with Daniels when before I thought he did.  

It's always hilarious when you pretend to come to some 'realization' when it's just a 'thought' you already had. Eureka! :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

It's always hilarious when you pretend to come to some 'realization' when it's just a 'thought' you already had. Eureka! :rofl:

I'm not pretending in the least.  Trump is a rich man, and I figured he had some dalliances, but Daniels waited 10 years to want to be hushed ?  Her entire motive was to bring him down, the N.Y. D.A. ran her campaign to bring him down, and since Cohen was busted for being a person that created problems and was busted himself he wants Trump jailed when he created the entire problem by trying to "fix" things that really didn't need to be fixed.  All this over $130,000 ?  I don't keep up with the porn industry, but don't they make some money at their "craft" if you call it that ?  This is a joke at best, but you buy every bit that he's guilty.  We'll see what unfolds tomorrow.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another thing, and I can't believe the Defense hasn't brought it up.  At the time all of this started right before the 2016 election 10 years after it allegedly happened.  Stormy Daniels who has one of the richest men in 2016 he was #156 falling from #121 in 2015 according to Forbes and possibly America's next president over the proverbial barrel and she only asks for the paltry sum of $130,000.  That's it ???  Not $1 million Trump would save if Melania decided to divorce him which would cost Trump hundreds of millions if not in the billions.  That was an easy shakedown for her, and she and Avenatti knew Trump would pay somebody and that's why they worked with Cohen.  Cellphones had cameras in 2006 so why didn't she take a picture of his bathroom or the bedroom.  Trump has been a celebrity since 1980 when he became a household name.  All we see are photos on the golf course.  Any schmo can walk up to a celebrity and ask to take a photo with them, and in most cases if you're not a jerk and they're not in a bad mood you can easily get one.  

  • LOL! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, DaveTV1 said:

Here's another thing, and I can't believe the Defense hasn't brought it up.  At the time all of this started right before the 2016 election 10 years after it allegedly happened.  Stormy Daniels who has one of the richest men in 2016 he was #156 falling from #121 in 2015 according to Forbes and possibly America's next president over the proverbial barrel and she only asks for the paltry sum of $130,000.  That's it ???  Not $1 million Trump would save if Melania decided to divorce him which would cost Trump hundreds of millions if not in the billions.  That was an easy shakedown for her, and she and Avenatti knew Trump would pay somebody and that's why they worked with Cohen.  Cellphones had cameras in 2006 so why didn't she take a picture of his bathroom or the bedroom.  Trump has been a celebrity since 1980 when he became a household name.  All we see are photos on the golf course.  Any schmo can walk up to a celebrity and ask to take a photo with them, and in most cases if you're not a jerk and they're not in a bad mood you can easily get one.  

Why didn't they consult with your firm, Collin Robinson???

Who Is Colin Robinson in What We Do in the Shadows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...