Donald Trump Announces 2016 White House Bid

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
We hear reports from old Donnie about it being cold in the court room. Would it be out of order to suggest that if he paid all of his fines and judgments, they would be able to turn up the heat. Having increased the heat by one half degree, he would whine that he is too hot. Oh, is his female side coming out. The $9,000 fine he received this week only adds to his need to whine. He is not spending his money as the MAGA group keep sending him money so he can push the limit. I think the judge should not send him to JAIL, send him to SCHOOL for 30 days, at Rikers Island , charge him a million dollars a month while at school, teach him (opps sorry) try to teach him that if he worked within the law, his court cases may diminish, only from now on. The thought behind charging him, it is like university, if you pay a fee to attend, you will learn more.
Hush money trial judge raises threat of jail as he finds Trump violated gag order, fines him $9K
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Jake Offenhartz and Colleen Long
Published Apr 30, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 6 minute read

NEW YORK — Donald Trump was held in contempt of court Tuesday and fined $9,000 for repeatedly violating a gag order that barred him from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and some others connected to his New York hush money case. If he does it again, the judge warned, he could be jailed.


Prosecutors had alleged 10 violations, but New York Judge Juan M. Merchan found there were nine. Trump stared down at the table in front of him as the judge read the ruling, frowning slightly.


It was a stinging rebuke of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee’s insistence that he was exercising his free speech rights and a reminder that he’s a criminal defendant subject to the harsh realities of trial procedure. And the judge’s remarkable threat to jail a former president signaled that Trump’s already precarious legal standing could further spiral depending on his behavior during the remainder of the trial.

Merchan wrote that he is “keenly aware of, and protective of,” Trump’s First Amendment rights, “particularly given his candidacy for the office of President of the United States.”


“It is critically important that defendant’s legitimate free speech rights not be curtailed, that he be able to fully campaign for the office which he seeks and that he be able to respond and defend himself against political attacks,” Merchan wrote.

Still, he warned that the court would not tolerate “willful violations of its lawful orders and that if necessary and appropriate under the circumstances, it will impose an incarceratory punishment.”

With that statement, the judge drew nearer the specter of Trump becoming the first former president of the United States behind bars.

“This gag order is totally unconstitutional,” Trump said as court adjourned after a day that included testimony from a Hollywood lawyer who negotiated two of the hush money deals at issue in the case. “I’m the Republican candidate for president of the United States … and I’m sitting in a courthouse all day long listening to this stuff.”


Trump is used to having constant access to his social media bullhorn to slam opponents and speak his mind. After he was banned from Twitter following the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol by his supporters, Trump launched his own platform, where his posts wouldn’t be blocked or restricted. He has long tried to distance himself from controversial messages he’s amplified to his millions of followers by insisting they’re “only retweets.”

But he does have experience with gag orders, which were also imposed in other legal matters. After he was found to have violated orders in his civil fraud trial, he paid more than $15,000 in fines.

Trump also is subject to a gag order in his federal criminal election interference case in Washington. That order limits what he can say about known or reasonably foreseeable witnesses in the case and about court staff and other lawyers, though an appeals court freed him to speak about special counsel Jack Smith, who brought the case.


Tuesday’s ruling in New York came at the start of the second week of testimony in the historic case, which involves allegations that Trump and his associates took part in an illegal scheme to influence the 2016 presidential campaign by purchasing and then burying seamy stories. The payouts went to a doorman with a torrid yarn; ex-Playboy model Karen McDougal, who had accusations of an affair; and to porn performer Stormy Daniels, who alleged a sexual encounter with Trump. He has pleaded not guilty and says the stories are all fake.

Trump deleted, as ordered, the offending posts from his Truth Social account and campaign website and has until Friday to pay the fine. The judge was also weighing other alleged gag-order violations by Trump and will hear arguments Thursday. He also announced that he will halt the trial on May 17 to allow Trump to attend his son Barron’s high school graduation.


Of the 10 posts, the one Merchan ruled was not a violation came on April 10, a post referring to witnesses Michael Cohen and Daniels as “sleaze bags.” Merchan said Trump’s contention that he was responding to previous posts by Cohen “is sufficient to give” him pause on whether the post was a violation.

Merchan cautioned that the gag order “not be used as a sword instead of a shield by potential witnesses” and that if people who are protected by the order, like Cohen, continue to attack Trump “it becomes apparent” they don’t need the gag order’s protection.

Cohen, Trump’s former attorney, has said he will refrain from commenting about Trump until after he testifies. On Tuesday, he said in a text message to The Associated Press: “Judge Merchan’s decision elucidates that this behavior will not be tolerated and that no one is above the law.”


In other developments, testimony resumed Tuesday with a banker who helped Cohen open accounts, including one used to buy Daniels’ silence. Trump’s attorneys have suggested that the payments were aimed at protecting his name and his family — not influencing the outcome of the presidential election.

Jurors also began hearing from Keith Davidson, a lawyer who represented McDougal and Daniels in their negotiations with the National Enquirer and Cohen. He testified that he arranged a meeting at his Los Angeles office during the summer of 2016 to see whether the tabloid’s parent company American Media, Inc. was interested in McDougal’s story. At first they demurred, saying she “lacked documentary evidence of the interaction,” Davidson testified.


But the tabloid at the behest of publisher David Pecker eventually bought the rights, and Davidson testified that he understood — and McDougal preferred — it would never be published. Asked why American Media Inc., would buy a story it didn’t intend to run, Davidson said he was aware of two reasons.

“One explanation I was given is they were trying to build Karen into a brand and didn’t want to diminish her brand,” he said. “And the second was an unspoken understanding that there was an affiliation between David Pecker and Donald Trump and that AMI wouldn’t run this story, any story related to Karen, because it would hurt Donald Trump.”

As for Daniels, the October 2016 leak of Trump’s 2005 “Access Hollywood” tape — in which Trump bragged about grabbing women sexually without asking permission — had “tremendous influence” on the marketability of her story. Before the video was made public, “there was very little if any interest” in her claims, Davidson told jurors.


A deal was reached with the tabloid for Daniels story, but the Enquirer backed out. Though Pecker testified that he had agreed to serve as the Trump campaign’s “eyes and ears” by helping to squelch unflattering rumors and claims about Trump and women, he drew the line with Daniels after paying out $180,000 to scoop up and sit on stories. Davidson began negotiating with Cohen directly, hiked up the price to $130,000, and reached a deal.

But Daniels and Davidson grew frustrated as weeks passed and instead of the money, she got excuses from Cohen about broken computers, Secret Service “firewalls” and the Jewish holiday of Yom Kippur.

“I thought he was trying to kick the can down the road until after the election,” Davidson said.


While Cohen never explicitly said he was negotiating the deal on Trump’s behalf, Davidson felt the implication was clear.

“Every single time I talked to Michael Cohen, he leaned on his close affiliation with Donald Trump,” Davidson said. Plus, he figured that Trump “was the beneficiary of this contract.”

The GOP presidential hopeful is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with the hush money payments. The detailed evidence on business transactions and bank accounts is setting the stage for testimony from Cohen, who went to federal prison after pleading guilty in 2018 to campaign finance violations and other crimes.

The trial — the first of Trump’s four criminal cases to come before a jury — is expected to last for another month or more.

— Long reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Zeke Miller in Washington and Jill Colvin in New York contributed to this report.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Donald Trump roasts former AG Bill Barr after thanking him for endorsement

Author of the article:Mark Daniell
Published Apr 30, 2024 • 3 minute read

After Bill Barr proudly declared he’ll vote for Donald Trump in this fall’s U.S. election, the former president thanked his onetime attorney general for the endorsement by roasting him in humiliating fashion.


A staunch critic of Trump following his 2020 election defeat, Barr appeared on Fox News earlier this month and told viewers he’ll vote for a Trump-led Republican ticket.

“I’ve said all along, given two bad choices, I think it’s my duty to pick the person I think would do the least harm to the country,” said Barr. “And in my mind, I will vote the Republican ticket. Trump may be playing Russian roulette, but a continuation of the Biden administration is national suicide in my opinion.”

In a subsequent interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Barr said Trump is getting his vote because current U.S. president Joe Biden is “unfit for office.”

“I think Trump would do less damage than Biden, and I think all this stuff about a threat to democracy – I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration,” he said on The Source.


“Just to be clear, you’re voting for someone who you believe tried to subvert the peaceful transfer of power, that can’t even achieve his own policies, that lied about the election even after his attorney general told him that the election wasn’t stolen. … You’re going to vote for someone who is facing 88 criminal counts?” Collins said pressing Barr on his support for Trump.

“The answer to the question is yes,” Barr countered. “I’m supporting the Republican ticket … Between Biden and Trump, I will vote for Trump because I believe he will do less damage over the four years.”

In 2021, Barr accused Trump of “inexcusable” behaviour during the Jan. 6 Capitol Riots. “The president’s conduct yesterday was a betrayal of his office,” Barr said the day after the insurrectionist attack.


Later, he described Trump’s claims that the 2020 election had been rigged as “bulls—.”

Last summer, in the leadup to the Republican primaries, Barr said he wouldn’t back a second Trump presidency. “I have made clear that I strongly oppose Trump for the nomination and will not endorse Trump,” Barr told NBC News.

Now, with Trump the presumptive Republican nominee, Barr has backtracked.

“I think the real threat to democracy is the progressive movement and the Biden administration,” he told Collins.


Trump gleefully accepted Barr’s backing by mocking his former attorney general.

“Wow! Former A.G. Bill Barr, who let a lot of great people down by not investigating Voter Fraud in our Country, has just Endorsed me for President despite the fact that I called him ‘Weak, Slow Moving, Lethargic, Gutless, and Lazy,'” Trump wrote in a Truth Social post. “Based on the fact that I greatly appreciate his wholehearted Endorsement, I am removing the word ‘Lethargic’ from my statement,” he continued. “Thank you Bill. MAGA2024!”


Trump also ridiculed Saturday Night Live star Colin Jost for his hosting gig at the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner over the weekend.

“The White House Correspondents’ Dinner was really bad. Colin Jost BOMBED, and Crooked Joe was an absolute disaster! Doesn’t get much worse than this!,” Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The harsh review came after Jost joked about Trump’s appearance in courtroom sketches during his hush money trail. “Every sketch of Trump looks like the Grinch had sex with the Lorax,” Jost teased.

At another point during the dinner, Jost told the crowd: “Can we just acknowledge how refreshing it is to see a president of the United States at an event that doesn’t begin with a bailiff saying ‘all rise’?”

Meanwhile, Biden had some fun at Trump’s expense as well saying, “I’m a grown man running against a six-year-old.”

During his presidency, Trump never once attended the White House Correspondents’ dinner.

mdaniell@postmedia.com
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Man who bragged he ’fed’ officer to mob of Capitol rioters gets nearly 5 years
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael Kunzelman
Published May 02, 2024 • 3 minute read

WASHINGTON — A Georgia business owner who bragged that he “fed” a police officer to a mob of rioters storming the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, was sentenced on Thursday to nearly five years in prison for his repeated attacks on law enforcement during the insurrection.


Jack Wade Whitton struck an officer with a metal crutch and dragged him — head first and face down — into the crowd on the Capitol’s Lower West Terrace. Whitton later boasted in a text message that he “fed him to the people.”


Roughly 20 minutes later, Whitton tried to pull a second officer into the crowd, prosecutors say. He also kicked at, threatened and threw a construction pylon at officers trying to hold off the mob of then-President Donald Trump’s supporters.

“You’re gonna die tonight!” he shouted at police after striking an officer’s riot shield.

Whitton, of Locust Grove, Georgia, expressed remorse for his “horrible” actions on Jan. 6 before U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras sentenced him to four years and nine months in prison. The 33-year-old will get credit for the three years that he has been jailed since his arrest.


“I tell you with confidence: I have changed,” Whitton told the judge.

Whitton, who pleaded guilty to an assault charge last year, told the judge that he has never been a “political person.”

“I’ve never been a troublemaker. I’ve always been a hard worker and a law-abiding citizen,” he said.

The judge said the videos of Whitton attacking police are “gruesome.”

“You really were out of control,” the judge told him.

Prosecutors recommended a prison sentence of eight years and one month for Whitton, who owned and operated his own fence building company before his April 2021 arrest.

“Whitton looked for opportunities to attack: In his three documented assaults, he was either a leader or a solitary actor,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing.


Videos show that contemporaneous attacks on police by Whitton and a co-defendant, Justin Jersey, “ignited the rageful onslaught of violence that followed” on the Lower West Terrace, prosecutors said.

“As Whitton and Jersey commenced their assaults, the tenor of the crowd audibly changed,” they wrote. “Other rioters surged towards the Archway and joined the attack, throwing objects at the officers and striking at them with makeshift weapons such as a hockey stick, a pieces of wood, a flagpole, and a police riot shield.”

Whitton was among nine defendants charged in the same attack. Two co-defendants, Logan Barnhart and Jeffrey Sabol, helped Whitton drag an officer into the crowd before other rioters beat the officer with a flagpole and a stolen police baton.


That evening, Whitton texted somebody images of his bloodied hands.

“This is from a bad cop,” he wrote. “Yea I fed him to the people. (I don’t know) his status. And don’t care (to be honest).”

Defense attorney Komron Jon Maknoon said Whitton traveled to Washington to support his girlfriend because she wanted to “witness an historic event” on Jan. 6, when Trump, a Republican, held a rally as Congress was about to certify his 2020 presidential election loss to Joe Biden, a Democrat.

“While his motives were not politically driven, he does possess a genuine love for his country and shares the desire for a free and fair election, much like any other citizen,” Maknoon wrote.

The judge previously sentenced seven of Whitton’s co-defendants to prison terms ranging from two years and six months to five years and 10 months.

More than 1,350 people have been charged with federal crimes related to the Capitol riot. Over 850 of them have been sentenced, with roughly two-thirds receiving a term of imprisonment ranging from a few days to 22 years.

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Capitol insurrection at https://apnews.com/hub/capitol-siege.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Jurors in Trump hush money trial hear recording of pivotal call on plan to buy affair story
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak, Philip Marcelo, Eric Tucker and Jake Offenhartz
Published May 02, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 6 minute read

NEW YORK — Jurors in the hush money trial of Donald Trump heard a recording Thursday of him discussing with his then-lawyer and personal fixer a plan to purchase the silence of a Playboy model who has said she had an affair with the former president.


A visibly irritated Trump leaned forward at the defence table, and jurors appeared riveted as prosecutors played the September 2016 recording that attorney Michael Cohen secretly made of himself briefing his celebrity client on a plan to buy Karen McDougal’s story of an extramarital relationship.


Though the recording surfaced years ago, it is perhaps the most colorful piece of evidence presented to jurors so far to connect Trump to the hush money payments at the center of his criminal trial in Manhattan. It followed hours of testimony from a lawyer who negotiated the deal for McDougal’s silence and admitted to being stunned that his hidden-hand efforts might have contributed to Trump’s White House victory.


“What have we done?” attorney Keith Davidson texted the then-editor of the National Enquirer, which had buried stories of sexual encounters to prevent them surfacing in the final days of the bitterly contested presidential race. “Oh my god,” came the response from Dylan Howard.

“There was an understanding that our efforts may have in some way…our activities may have in some way assisted the presidential campaign of Donald Trump,” Davidson told jurors, though he acknowledged under cross-examination that he dealt directly with Cohen and never Trump.

The testimony from Davidson was designed to directly connect the hush money payments to Trump’s presidential ambitions and to bolster prosecutors’ argument that the case is about interference in the 2016 election rather than simply sex and money. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has sought to establish that link not just to secure a conviction but also to persuade the public of the significance of the case, which may be the only one of four Trump prosecutions to reach trial this year.


“This is sort of gallows humour. It was on election night as the results were coming in,” Davidson explained. “There was sort of surprise amongst the broadcasters and others that Mr. Trump was leading in the polls, and there was a growing sense that folks were about ready to call the election.”

Davidson is seen as a vital building block for the prosecution’s case that Trump and his allies schemed to bury unflattering stories in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. He represented both McDougal and porn actor Stormy Daniels in negotiations that resulted in the purchase of rights to their claims of sexual encounters with Trump and those stories getting squelched, a tabloid industry practice known as “catch-and-kill.”


Davidson is one of multiple key players testifying in advance of Cohen, the star prosecution witness who paid Daniels $130,000 for her silence and also recorded himself, weeks before the election, telling Trump about a plan to purchase the rights to McDougal’s story from the National Enquirer so it would never come out. The tabloid had previously bought McDougal’s story to bury it on Trump’s behalf.

At one point in the recording, Cohen revealed that he had spoken to then-Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg about “how to set the whole thing up with funding.” To which Trump can be heard responding: “What do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?”

Trump can be heard suggesting that the payment be made with cash, prompting Cohen to object by saying “no” multiple times. Trump can then be heard saying “check” before the recording cuts off.


Trump’s lawyers sought earlier in the day to blunt the potential harm of Davidson’s testimony by getting him to acknowledge that he never had any interactions with Trump — only Cohen. In fact, Davidson said, he had never been in the same room as Trump until his testimony.

He also said he was unfamiliar with the Trump Organization’s record-keeping practices and that any impressions he had of Trump himself came through others.

“I had no personal interactions with Donald Trump. It either came from my clients, Mr. Cohen or some other source, but certainly not him,” Davidson said.

The line of questioning from Trump attorney Emil Bove appeared intended to cast Trump as removed from the negotiations and to suggest that Cohen was handling the hush-money matters on his own.


Bove also noted that Davidson had been involved in similar payments for clients that had nothing to do with presidential politics, grilling him about previous instances in which he solicited money to suppress embarrassing stories, including one involving wrestler Hulk Hogan.

By the time Davidson negotiated hush money payments for McDougal and Daniels, he was “pretty well versed in coming right up to the line without committing extortion, right?” Bove asked

“I had familiarized myself with the law,” Davidson replied.

Also Thursday, jurors viewed a confidential agreement requiring Daniels to keep quiet about her claims that she had a tryst with the married Trump a decade earlier. The agreement, dated less than two weeks before the 2016 presidential election, called for her to receive $130,000 in exchange for her silence.


The money was paid by Cohen, and the agreement referred to both Trump and Daniels with pseudonyms: David Dennison and Peggy Peterson.

“It is understood and agreed that the true name and identity of the person referred to as ‘DAVID DENNISON’ in the Settlement Agreement is Donald Trump,” the document stated, with Trump’s name written in by hand.

After the payment was made, Trump’s company reimbursed Cohen and logged the payments to him as legal expenses, prosecutors have said in charging the former president with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records — a charge punishable by up to four years in prison.

While testifying Thursday, Davidson also recalled Cohen ranting to him about Trump in a phone conversation about a month after the 2016 election, complaining that he had been passed over for a job in the new administration and that Trump had yet to reimburse him for the Daniels payment.


He also recalled Cohen telling him that he and Trump were “very upset” when The Wall Street Journal published an article that exposed a separate $150,000 National Enquirer arrangement with McDougal, who has said she and Trump had an affair, just days before the election.

“He wanted to know who the source of the article was, why someone would be the source of this type of article. He was very upset about the timing,” Davidson said of Cohen. “He stated that his boss was very upset, and he threatened to sue Karen McDougal.”

Trump has pleaded not guilty and denied relationships with either woman, as well as any wrongdoing in the case.

Before the start of testimony, prosecutors requested $1,000 fines for each of four comments by Trump that they say violated a judge’s gag order barring him from attacking witnesses, jurors and others closely connected to the case. Such a penalty would be on top of a $9,000 fine that Judge Juan M. Merchan imposed Tuesday related to nine separate violations that he found.


Merchan did not immediately rule on the request for fresh sanctions, though he indicated he was not particularly concerned about one of the four statements flagged by prosecutors.

The prospect of further punishment underscores the challenges Trump the presidential candidate faces in adjusting to the role of criminal defendant subject to rigid courtroom protocol that he does not control. It also remains to be seen whether any rebuke from the court will lead Trump to adjust his behavior given the campaign trail benefit he believes he derives from painting the case as politically motivated.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Hope Hicks, ex-Trump adviser, recounts fear in 2016 campaign over impact of ’Access Hollywood’ tape
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak, Jake Offenhartz, Philip Marcelo and Alanna Durkin Richer
Published May 03, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 5 minute read

NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign was seized with worry about the potential political damage from a tape that showed Trump bragging about grabbing women sexually without their permission, longtime Trump adviser Hope Hicks testified Friday at his hush money trial.


Hicks, a former White House official, was compelled to testify by Manhattan prosecutors, who are hoping her remarks bolster their argument that the uproar over the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape hastened Trump’s then-lawyer to pay off porn actor Stormy Daniels to bury a negative story that could imperil his 2016 presidential bid.

Once one of Trump’s closest confidants, Hicks provided a window into the chaotic fallout over the tape’s release just days before a crucial debate with Democrat Hillary Clinton. It was recorded in 2005 but was not seen by the public until Oct. 7, 2016, about a month before Election Day. Hicks described being stunned and huddling with other Trump advisers after learning about the tape’s existence from the Washington Post reporter who broke the story. Hicks forwarded the reporter’s request to campaign leadership with the recommendation to “deny, deny, deny,” she said.


“I had a good sense to believe this was going to be a massive story and that it was going to dominate the news cycle for the next several days,” Hicks testified. “This was a damaging development.”

She added: “This was just pulling us backwards in a way that was going to be hard to overcome.”

Prosecutors called her to the witness stand to strengthen their case alleging Trump worked to prevent damaging stories about his personal life from becoming public as part of a scheme to illegally influence the 2016 presidential election. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has sought to establish that link not just to secure a conviction but also to persuade the public of the significance of the case, which may be the only one of four Trump prosecutions to reach trial this year.


Hicks told jurors that Trump claimed he did not know anything about his then-attorney Michael Cohen paying $130,000 to Daniels to prevent her from going public with claims of a sexual encounter with Trump. But, Hicks said, Trump eventually came to believe that burying Daniels’ story was prudent, saying he thought “it would have been bad to have that story come out before the election.”

At other points, Hicks’ testimony appeared to help the defence’s contention that the former president was trying to protect his reputation and family — not his campaign — by shielding them from embarrassing stories about his personal life. Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the case, which he has slammed as an effort to derail his campaign to reclaim the White House in November.


Under questioning by Trump’s attorney, Hicks told jurors that he was worried about the effect of the “Access Hollywood” tape on his family. And when the Wall Street Journal published a story revealing ex-Playboy Model Karen McDougal’s affair allegations right before the election, Hicks said Trump was concerned about his wife seeing the story and asked Hicks to make sure newspapers weren’t delivered to their residence that morning.

But when asked if Trump was also worried about the story’s impact on the campaign, Hicks responded that everything they spoke about during that time was viewed through the lens of the campaign. Trump would often asking her, “How is it playing?” as a way of gauging how his appearances, speeches and policies were landing with voters, she said.


Hicks’ proximity to Trump over the years has made her a figure of interest to congressional and criminal investigators alike, who have sought her testimony on multiple occasions on topics ranging from Russian election interference to Trump’s election loss and the subsequent Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

She appeared reluctant to be in the courtroom, taking a deep breath as she stepped up to the microphone and acknowledging she was “really nervous.” She later started crying on the witness stand, forcing the court to take a brief break, when Trump lawyer Emil Bove started to ask her to reflect on her time at the Trump Organization before he brought her onto his 2016 campaign.

Referring to her former boss as “Mr. Trump” and later “President Trump” when speaking about their time in the White House, she told the court she last communicated with him in the summer or fall of 2022. While no longer in Trump’s inner circle, Hicks spoke about the former president in glowing terms as the prosecutor began questioning her about her background.


She recounted how the political firestorm that ensued after the release of the tape was so intense that it knocked an actual storm out of the headlines. Before the tape became public, the news was dominated by a Category 4 hurricane that was charging toward the East Coast.

“I don’t think anybody remembers” where that hurricane hit, Hicks told jurors.

Hurricane Matthew, which hit Haiti and Cuba as a Category 4 storm, made landfall in South Carolina as a Category 1 hurricane on Oct. 8, 2016, the day after the “Access Hollywood” tape was made public.

Prosecutors have spent the week using detailed testimony about meetings, email exchanges, business transactions and bank accounts to build on the foundation of their case charging Trump with 34 counts of falsifying internal Trump Organization business records. They are setting the stage for pivotal testimony from Cohen, who paid Daniels for her silence before he went to prison for the hush money scheme.


Testimony will resume Monday. The trial could last another month or more, with important witnesses who have yet to be called, including Cohen and Daniels.

One of the most pivotal pieces of evidence disclosed to jurors this week was a recording of a meeting between Trump and Cohen before the 2016 election in which they discussed a plan to purchase the rights to McDougal’s story from the National Enquirer so that it would never come out. The tabloid had previously bought McDougal’s story to bury it on Trump’s behalf.

At one point, Trump can be heard saying: “What do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?”

In a victory for Trump just as court was ending for the week, Judge Juan M. Merchan denied a request by prosecutors to ask Trump, should he choose to testify, about being held in contempt of court for gag order violations in the case. Merchan said allowing it would be “so prejudicial it would be very, very difficult for the jury to look past that.”

Trump this week paid his $9,000 fine for violating the gag order that bars him from making public statements about witnesses, jurors and some others connected to the case.

His attorney, Todd Blanche, told the judge Friday they are appealing the finding that Trump violated the gag order. Blanche said that they took particular issue with penalties for what are known as reposts — instances where Trump shared someone else’s post with his followers.

— Associated Press writers Eric Tucker and Colleen Long in Washington and Ruth Brown and Michelle Price in New York contributed to this report.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Trump says Biden is running a ’Gestapo’ administration. It’s his latest reference to Nazi Germany
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Bill Barrow And Lisa Mascaro
Published May 05, 2024 • 5 minute read

ATLANTA — Donald Trump told Republican donors at his Florida resort this weekend that President Joe Biden is running a “Gestapo administration,” the latest example of the former president employing the language of Nazi Germany in his campaign rhetoric.


The remarks Saturday at Mar-a-Lago were described by people who attended the event and spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the private session.


The “Gestapo” comment, one person said, came as Trump renewed his complaint that Biden’s White House is behind the multiple criminal prosecutions of the presumptive GOP nominee, including his ongoing hush money and fraud trial in New York and additional cases stemming from his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

The Gestapo was the secret police force of the Third Reich that squelched political opposition generally and, specifically, targeted Jewish people for arrest during the Holocaust.

Republican Gov. Doug Burgum of North Dakota, appearing Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union,” essentially confirmed Trump’s statement, but tried to diminish its importance.

“This was a short comment deep into the thing that wasn’t really central to what he was talking about,” said Burgum, who is among the contenders to be Trump’s running mate.



Burgum affirmed that Trump drew the parallel as part of his accusation that Biden’s White House is behind his legal troubles. “A majority of Americans,” Burgum said, “feel like the trial that he’s in right now is politically motivated.”

The New York Times first reported Trump’s comments after obtaining an audio recording of the Mar-a-Lago event.

“These people are running a Gestapo administration,” Trump told GOP donors, according to the newspaper. “It’s the only way they’re going to win.”

Biden’s reelection campaign blasted the reference.

“Trump is once again making despicable and insulting comments about the Holocaust, while in the same breath attacking law enforcement, celebrating political violence, and threatening our democracy,” said James Singer, spokesman for the Democrat’s campaign, in a statement.


Trump’s campaign did not immediately respond to an Associated Press request for comment. The AP has not obtained audio of Trump’s speech at the fundraiser.

Previously in the 2024 campaign, Trump has called political opponents “vermin” and said migrants who cross the U.S.-Mexico border are “poisoning the blood of our country,” rhetoric that echoes Adolf Hitler’s statements during his authoritarian rule of Germany.

“I know nothing about Hitler,” Trump insisted in a December interview on conservative talk radio. “I have no idea what Hitler said other than (what) I’ve seen on the news. And that’s a very, entirely different thing than what I’m saying.”

A second person who was at Mar-a-Lago this weekend described to the AP a stem-winding luncheon appearance in which Trump mixed his grievances with optimistic GOP cheerleading.


Speaking for at least 90 minutes, Trump promised “the gloves are coming off” against Biden, the second Republican recalled. At another point, Trump called up several GOP congressional figures to the stage and referred to the many Republicans vying to be his vice presidential pick.

“They’re lining up and begging,” Trump said, according to one attendee.

Several presumed contenders circulated in the crowd and were given strategic speaking roles or lead panel discussions. Among the standouts, the Republican said, were Republican Sens. Tim Scott of South Carolina, Marco Rubio of Florida and JD Vance of Ohio.

Trump, the person said, singled out Rubio for special praise and referenced a “Florida problem,” referring to a constitutional requirement that the president and vice president not claim the same state as their residences.


Rubio and Scott both demurred when asked about their prospects on the Sunday talk shows.

On “Fox News Sunday,” Rubio sidestepped a question about whether he would be willing to move to another state to join the GOP ticket.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., was in attendance, as well, shoring up support from Trump. Johnson coordinated one of the legal challenges against the 2020 election that Trump lost to Biden, but the speaker now faces the threat of his own ouster by far-right Republicans led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia.

With his time on stage, Johnson said the U.S. needs a “strong man” in the White House, one attendee told the AP.

The Republican National Committee said after the event that joint fundraising efforts by the RNC and the campaign for April topped $76 million, by far the best monthly effort of this campaign cycle and a step toward closing Biden’s financial advantage. RNC Chairman Michael Whatley hailed an uptick in small-dollar donors, but the Mar-a-Lago event clearly focused on the party’s deepest pockets. At one point, one attendee said, Trump offered an open microphone to anyone who immediately pledged a $1 million contribution to the party. Two people eventually agreed, the source said.


Additionally, the Times reported that Trump told his audience that Democrats effectively purchase votes through economic safety net programs, while repeating his false claims that U.S. elections are riddled with systemic fraud.

“When you are Democrat, you start off essentially at 40% because you have civil service, you have the unions and you have welfare,” Trump said, according to the Times. “And don’t underestimate welfare. They get welfare to vote, and then they cheat on top of that — they cheat.”

Biden’s victory was affirmed by multiple recounts across many battleground states, and Trump’s assertions of fraud were rejected by multiple state and federal courts, including by judges he nominated to the bench. Trump’s efforts to overturn the election and his role in his supporters’ riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, are the subject of two additional indictments.


Trump is not the first Republican presidential candidate to privately connect social programs with Democrats’ electoral fortunes. In 2012, then-GOP nominee Mitt Romney was captured on tape at a fundraising event declaring that Democrat Barack Obama had a built in advantage because of people he said did not have to pay federal income taxes.

“There are 47% of the people who will vote for the president (Obama) no matter what” because they are “dependent upon government” and “believe that they are victims,” Romney said, adding that “my job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

Obama’s campaign, with Biden as vice president, used those comments to bolster Democrats’ argument that Romney, a wealthy businessman, was out of touch with most Americans. Obama was reelected.

— Mascaro reported from Washington.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Trump fined $1,000 for gag order violation in hush money case
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Eric Tucker And Jake Offenhartz
Published May 06, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 6 minute read

NEW YORK (AP) — The judge presiding over Donald Trump’s hush money trial fined him $1,000 on Monday and warned that future gag order violations could send him to jail, while jurors heard detailed testimony for the first time about the financial reimbursements at the center of the case.


The testimony from Jeffrey McConney, the former Trump Organization controller, provided a mechanical but vital recitation of how the company reimbursed payments meant to suppress embarrassing stories from surfacing during the 2016 presidential campaign and then logged them as legal expenses in a manner that Manhattan prosecutors said broke the law.


McConney’s appearance on the witness stand came as the first criminal trial involving a former American president entered its third week of testimony. His account lacked the human drama offered Friday by longtime Trump aide Hope Hicks, but it nonetheless yielded an important building block for prosecutors trying to pull back the curtain on what they say was a corporate records cover-up of transactions designed to protect Trump’s presidential bid during a pivotal stretch of the race.


At the center of the testimony, and the case itself, is a $130,000 payment from Trump attorney and personal fixer Michael Cohen to porn actor Stormy Daniels to stifle her claims of an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump a decade earlier.

The 34 felony counts of falsifying business records accuse Trump of labeling the money paid to Cohen in his company’s records as legal fees. Prosecutors contend that by paying him income and giving him extra to account for taxes, the Trump executives were able conceal the reimbursement.

McConney and another witness testified that the reimbursement checks were drawn from Trump’s personal account. Yet even as jurors witnessed the checks and other documentary evidence, prosecutors did not elicit testimony Monday showing that Trump himself dictated that the payments would be logged as legal expenses, a designation that prosecutors contend was intentionally deceptive.


McConney acknowledged during cross-examination that Trump never asked him to log the reimbursements as legal expenses or discussed the matter with him at all. And another witness, Deborah Tarsoff, a Trump Organization accounts payable supervisor, said under questioning that she did not get permission to cut the checks in question from Trump himself.

“You never had any reason to believe that President Trump was hiding anything or anything like that?” asked Trump attorney Todd Blanche.

”Correct,” Tarasoff replied.

The testimony followed a stern warning from Judge Juan M. Merchan that additional violations of a gag order barring Trump from inflammatory out-of-court comments about witnesses, jurors and others closely connected to the case could result in jail time.


The $1,000 fine imposed Monday marks the second time since the trial began last month that Trump has been sanctioned for violating the gag order. He was fined $9,000 last week, $1,000 for each of nine violations.

“It appears that the $1,000 fines are not serving as a deterrent. Therefore going forward, this court will have to consider a jail sanction,” Merchan said before jurors were brought into the courtroom. Trump’s statements, the judge added, “threaten to interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitute a direct attack on the rule of law. I cannot allow that to continue.”

Trump sat forward in his seat, glowering at the judge as he handed down the ruling. When the judge finished speaking, Trump shook his head twice and crossed his arms.


Yet even as Merchan warned of jail time in his most pointed and direct admonition, he also made clear his reservations about a step that he described as a “last resort.”

“The last thing I want to do is put you in jail,” Merchan said. “You are the former president of the United States and possibly the next president as well. There are many reasons why incarceration is truly a last resort for me. To take that step would be disruptive to these proceedings.”

The latest violation stems from an April 22 interview with television channel Real America’s Voice in which Trump criticized the speed at which the jury was picked and claimed, without evidence, that it was stacked with Democrats.

Once testimony resumed, McConney recounted conversations with longtime Trump Organization finance chief Allen Weisselberg in January 2017 about reimbursing Cohen for a $130,000 payment intended to buy Daniels’ silence over her account of a sexual encounter at a 2006 celebrity golf outing in Lake Tahoe, California.


Weisselberg “said we had to get some money to Michael, we had to reimburse Michael. He tossed a pad toward me, and I started taking notes on what he said,” McConney testified. “That’s how I found out about it.”

“He kind of threw the pad at me and said, ‘Take this down,”’ said McConney, who worked for Trump’s company for about 36 years, retiring last year after he was granted immunity to testify for the prosecution at the Trump Organization’s New York criminal tax fraud trial.

A bank statement displayed in court showed Cohen paying $130,000 to Keith Davidson, Daniels’ lawyer, on Oct. 27, 2016, out of an account for an entity Cohen created for the purpose.

Weisselberg’s handwritten notes spell out a plan to pay Cohen $420,000, which included a base reimbursement that was then doubled to reflect anticipated taxes as well as a $60,000 bonus and an expense that prosecutors have described as a technology contract.


McConney’s own notes, taken on the notepad he said Weisselberg threw at him, were also shown in court. After calculations that laid out that Cohen would get $35,000 a month for 12 months, McConney wrote: “wire monthly from DJT.”

Asked what that meant, McConney said: “That was out of the president’s personal bank account.”

Trump is accused of falsifying business records by labeling the money paid to Cohen in his company’s records as legal fees. Prosecutors contend that by paying him income and giving him extra to account for taxes, the Trump executives were able conceal the reimbursement.

McConney testified that he had instructed an accounting department employee to record the reimbursements to Cohen as a legal expense.


But McConney acknowledged under cross-examination that Trump never directed him to log Cohen’s payments as legal expenses, nor did Weisselberg relay to him that Trump wanted them logged that way.

“Allen never told me that,” McConney testified. In fact, McConney said he never spoke to Trump about the reimbursement issue at all. Defense lawyer Emil Bove also suggested to McConney that the “legal expenses” label was not duplicitous because Cohen was in fact a lawyer.

“OK,” McConney responded, prompting laughter throughout the courtroom. “Sure. Yes.”

After paying the first two checks to Cohen through a trust, the remainder of the checks, beginning in April 2017, were paid from Trump’s personal account, McConney testified.


With Trump, the only signatory to that account, now in the White House, the change in funding source necessitated “a whole new process for us,” McConney added.

Tarasoff, the other witness who testified Monday, said that once Trump became president, payments from his personal account had to first be delivered, via FedEX, to his new residence in Washington.

“We would send them to the White House for him to sign,” she said.

The checks would then return with Trump’s sharpie signature. “I’d pull them apart, mail out the check and file the backup,” she said, meaning putting the invoice into the Trump Organization’s filing system.

Prosecutors are continuing to build toward their star witness, Cohen, who pleaded guilty to federal charges related to the hush money payments. He is expected to undergo a bruising cross-examination from defense attorneys seeking to undermine his credibility with jurors.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Stormy Daniels describes meeting Trump during occasionally graphic testimony in hush money trial
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak, Jennifer Peltz, Eric Tucker And Jake Offenhartz
Published May 07, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 6 minute read

NEW YORK (AP) — Stormy Daniels took the witness stand Tuesday at Donald Trump’s hush money trial, describing for jurors a sexual encounter the porn actor says she had with him in 2006 that resulted in her being paid off to keep silent during the presidential race 10 years later.


Jurors appeared riveted as Daniels offered a detailed and at times graphic account of the encounter Trump has denied. Trump stared straight ahead when Daniels entered the courtroom, later whispering to his lawyers and shaking his head as she testified.


The testimony was by far the most-awaited spectacle in a trial that has toggled between tabloidesque elements and dry record-keeping details. A courtroom appearance by a porn actor who says she had an intimate encounter with a former American president added to the long line of historic firsts in a landmark case laden with claims of sex, payoffs and cover-ups and unfolding as the presumptive Republican nominee makes another bid for the White House.

Daniels veered into salacious details despite the repeated objections of defense lawyers, who after the lunch break demanded for the first time a mistrial over what they said were prejudicial and irrelevant comments.


“This is the kind of testimony that makes it impossible to come back from,” defense lawyer Todd Blanche said. “How can we come back from this in a way that’s fair to President Trump?”

The judge rejected the request and said defense lawyers should have raised more objections during the testimony. The Trump team later in the day used its opportunity to question Daniels to paint her as motivated by personal animus and profiting off her claims against Trump.

“Am I correct that you hate President Trump?” defense lawyer Susan Necheles asked Daniels.

“Yes,” she acknowledged.

Daniels’ statements are central to the case because in the final weeks of Trump’s 2016 Republican presidential campaign, his then-lawyer and personal fixer, Michael Cohen, paid her $130,000 to keep quiet about what she says was an awkward and unexpected sexual encounter with Trump in July 2006 at a celebrity golf outing in Lake Tahoe. Trump has pleaded not guilty.


Led by a prosecutor’s questioning, Daniels described how an initial meeting at a golf tournament, where they discussed the adult film industry, progressed to a “brief” sexual encounter that she said Trump initiated after inviting her to dinner and back to his hotel suite.

She said she didn’t feel physically or verbally threatened, though she knew his bodyguard was outside the suite. There was also what she perceived as an imbalance of power: Trump “was bigger and blocking the way.”

At the time, Trump was married to his wife, Melania, who has not been in court for the trial. She said Trump told her that they did not sleep in the same room, prompting him to shake his head at the defense table.

After it ended, Daniels said, “It was really hard to get my shoes because my hands were shaking so hard.”


“He said, ‘Oh, it was great. Let’s get together again, honey bunch,”’ Daniels continued. “I just wanted to leave.”

In the years since the encounter was disclosed, Daniels has emerged as a vocal Trump antagonist, sharing her story innumerable times and criticizing the former president with mocking and pejorative jabs. But there was no precedent for Tuesday’s events, when she came face-to-face with Trump and was asked under oath in an austere courtroom to describe her experiences to a jury weighing whether to convict a former American president of felony crimes for the first time in history.

She said she met Trump because the adult film studio she worked for at the time sponsored one of the holes on the golf course. They chatted about the adult film industry and her directing abilities when Trump’s group passed through. The celebrity real estate developer remarked that she must be “the smart one” if she was making films, Daniels recalled.


Later, in an area known as the “gift room,” where celebrity golfers collected gift bags and swag, Trump remembered her as “the smart one” and asked her to dinner, Daniels said.

She said her then-publicist suggested in a phone call that Trump’s invitation was a good excuse to skip a work dinner and would “make a great story” and perhaps help her career.

“What could possibly go wrong?” she recalled the publicist saying.

She said the two saw each other periodically in the ensuing years, when she said she spurned Trump’s advances. She testified that she learned from her agent in 2011, several years after she and Trump were last in touch, that the story had made its way to a magazine.

She said she agreed to an interview for $15,000 because “I’d rather make the money than somebody make money off of me, and at least I could control the narrative.” The story never ran, but later that year, she was alarmed when an item turned up on a website.


Perhaps seeking to preempt defense claims that she was in urgent need of a massive payout, Daniels testified that she was in the best financial shape of her life, directing 10 films a year, when she authorized her manager to shop her story during the 2016 presidential election cycle.

She said she had no intent of approaching Cohen or Trump to have them pay her for her story.

“My motivation wasn’t money,” she said. “It was to get the story out,” she testified.

But Necheles zeroed in on that point, pressing Daniels on the fact that she owes Trump hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees stemming from an unsuccessful defamation lawsuit and that she tweeted in 2022 that she “will go to jail before I pay a penny.”

“That was me saying, ‘I will not pay for telling the truth,”’ Daniels testified Tuesday.


Testimony so far has made clear that at the time of the payment to Daniels, Trump and his campaign were reeling from the October 2016 publication of the never-before-seen 2005 “Access Hollywood” footage in which he boasted about grabbing women’s genitals without their permission.

The candidate spoke with Cohen and Hope Hicks, his campaign’s press secretary, by phone the next day as they sought to limit damage from the tape and keep his alleged affairs out of the press, according to testimony.

Before that video was made public, “there was very little if any interest” in her claims, according to testimony earlier in the trial from her then-lawyer, Keith Davidson. A deal was reached with the National Enquirer for Daniels’ story, but the tabloid backed out. Davidson began negotiating with Cohen directly, hiked up the price to $130,000, and reached a deal.


After the deadline for the $130,000 payment from Cohen came and went, she authorized Davidson to cancel the deal. He did, by email, according to documents shown in court. But about two weeks later, the deal was revived.

Daniels testified that she ended up with about $96,000 of the $130,000 payment, after her lawyer and agent got their cuts.

She also said she was steadfast in abiding by her nondisclosure agreement with Cohen, declining to comment to The Wall Street Journal for a November 2016 story that reported she had been in discussions to tell her story on “Good Morning America” but that nothing had come of it. She also declined when the newspaper asked her for comment before it broke the news of her hush money arrangement in 2018.

After that story was published, her life turned into “chaos,” she testified.

“I was front and foremost everywhere,” she recalled.

Prosecutors are building toward their star witness, Cohen, who pleaded guilty to federal charges related to the hush money payments.

Trump is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in connection with the hush money payments. The trial is the first of his four criminal cases to reach a jury.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
New York model and Trump supporter is RNC's newest spokeswoman
Author of the article:postmedia News
Published May 07, 2024 • 1 minute read

New York City model Elizabeth Pipko is the Republican National Committee's newest spokeswoman.
New York City model Elizabeth Pipko is the Republican National Committee's newest spokeswoman. PHOTO BY ELIZABETH PIPKO /Instagram
Elizabeth Pipko is back in Donald Trump’s corner.

The sexy 28-year-old New York City model is the Republican National Committee’s newest spokeswoman.


She is tasked with helping Trump, 77, get elected U.S. President for a second time. And the Sports Illustrated beauty is ready for battle.

“The things he’s been through have been unreal,” Pipko told the New York Post. “A lot of people look at what he’s up against every day and see his real character.”



The RNC, which is chaired by North Carolina Republican Michael Whatley and co-chaired by daughter-in-law Lara Trump following Ronna McDaniel’s ouster earlier this year, will work in sync with the Trump campaign.

Pipko, the daughter of Jewish-Russian immigrants, was employed on Trump’s campaign for president in 2016 as a volunteer services coordinator.

Eight years later, the 2024 election is shaping up to be the most consequential for the future of the country, a rematch with 81-year-old Democratic President Joe Biden.

“This is one of the biggest elections in this country’s history,” Pipko said.

“Only in this country can a daughter of immigrants who arrived here with nothing get a chance to make some kind of a difference like this. So when you get that chance, you take it.”

Pipko, who has been modelling since she was 17, has also appeared in the pages of Maxim and Esquire.

But vocally supporting Trump in 2019 has harmed her once thriving modelling career.

“I lost everything — all of my connections,” she said, which included her agents, photographers and friends.

“I tell people my modelling career prepared me for politics, as they’re both equally brutal. Every world I’ve been in is cutthroat.”
1715259734846.png
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Stormy Daniels delivers sordid testimony about Trump, but trial hinges on business records
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Michael R. Sisak, Jake Offenhartz, Jennifer Peltz and Colleen Long
Published May 09, 2024 • Last updated 3 days ago • 6 minute read

NEW YORK — Donald Trump’s defence attorney on Thursday accused Stormy Daniels of slowly altering the details of an alleged 2006 sexual encounter with Trump, trying to convince jurors that a key prosecution witness in the former president’s hush money criminal trial cannot be believed.


“You have made all of this up, right?” lawyer Susan Necheles asked.


“No,” Daniels shot back.

As the jury looked on, the two women traded barbs over what Necheles said were inconsistencies in Daniels’ description of the encounter with Trump in a Nevada hotel suite. He denies the whole story.

But despite all the talk over what may have happened in that hotel room, despite the discomfiting testimony by the adult film actor that she consented to sex in part because of a “power imbalance,” the case against Trump doesn’t rise or fall on whether her account is true or even believable. It’s a trial about money changing hands — business transactions — and whether those payments were made to illegally influence the 2016 election.


Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying internal Trump Organization business records. The charges stem from paperwork such as invoices and checks that were deemed legal expenses in company records. Prosecutors say those payments largely were reimbursements to Trump attorney Michael Cohen, who paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet.

The testimony over the past three weeks has seesawed between bookkeepers and bankers relaying the nuts and bolts of check-paying procedures and wire transfers to unflattering, seamy stories about Trump and the tabloid world machinations meant to keep them secret.

This criminal case could be the only one against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee to go to trial before voters decide in November whether to send him back to the White House. Trump has pleaded not guilty and casts himself as the victim of a politically tainted justice system working to deny him another term.


Meanwhile, as the threat of jail looms over Trump following his repeated gag order violations, his attorneys are fighting Judge Juan M. Merchan’s order and seeking a fast decision in an appeals court. If the court refuses to lift the gag order, Trump’s lawyers want permission to take their appeal to the state’s high court.

At the same time, they also asked Merchan to modify the order so Trump could publicly respond to Daniels’ testimony and made a second request for a mistrial based on what they argued was her “extremely prejudicial testimony” that has “has nothing to do with the false business records” charges. Merchan rejected both.

“My concern is not just with protecting Ms. Daniels or a witness who has already testified. My concern is with protecting the integrity of these proceedings as a whole,” Merchan said in refusing to change the gag order.


Turning away the mistrial request, Merchan said Trump’s lawyers had opened to door to detailed testimony about the alleged sexual encounter when they asserted in their opening statement that no sex had occurred. “Your denial puts the jury in the position of choosing who they believe.”

“The more specificity Ms. Daniels can provide about the encounter, the more the jury can weigh about whether the encounter did occur and if so, whether they choose to credit Ms. Daniels’ story,” Merchan said.

Trump fumed outside the courtroom at the end of the day.

“I’m innocent,” he said. “I’m being held in this court with a corrupt judge who’s totally conflicted.”

At the time of the payment to Daniels, Trump and his campaign were reeling from the October 2016 publication of the never-before-seen 2005 “Access Hollywood” footage in which he boasted about grabbing women without their permission.


Prosecutors have argued that the political firestorm over the “Access Hollywood” tape hastened Cohen’s payment to keep Daniels from going public with her claims that could further hurt Trump in the eyes of female voters.

The tape rattled the Republican National Committee leadership, and “there were conversations about how it would be possible to replace him as the candidate if it came to that,” according to testimony from Madeleine Westerhout, a Trump aide who was working at the RNC when the recording leaked.

Daniels was on the stand for 7 1/2 hours over two days. During questioning from prosecutors, she relayed in graphic detail what she said happened during their encounter, after the two met at a celebrity golf outing at Lake Tahoe where sponsors included the adult film studio where she worked.


Trump scowled and shook his head through much of Daniels’ description, including how she found him sitting on the hotel bed in his underwear after she returned from the bathroom and that he did not use a condom. The judge told Trump’s lawyers on Tuesday that he could hear him “cursing audibly.”

Trump’s lawyers sought to paint Daniels as a liar and extortionist who’s trying to take down Trump after drawing money and fame from her claims. And they say hush money payments made on his behalf were an effort to protect his reputation and family — not his campaign — by shielding them from embarrassing stories about his personal life.

On Thursday, Necheles grilled Daniels on her description of the encounter in which she described fear and discomfort even as she consented to sex. She testified earlier this week that while she wasn’t physically menaced, she felt a “power imbalance” as Trump, in his hotel bedroom, stood between her and the door and propositioned her.


As for whether she felt compelled to have sex with him, she reiterated Thursday that he didn’t drug her or physically threaten her. But, she said, “My own insecurities, in that moment, kept me from saying no.”

Necheles suggested that her work in porn meant her story about being shocked and frightened by Trump’s alleged sexual advances was not believable.

“You’ve acted and had sex in over 200 porn movies, right?” Necheles asked. “And there are naked men and women having sex, including yourself, in those movies, right?”

Necheles continued, “But according to you, seeing a man sitting on a bed in a T-shirt and boxers was so upsetting that you got lightheaded.”

The experience with Trump was different from porn for a number of reasons, Daniels explained, including the fact that Trump was more than twice her age and larger than she and that she was not expecting to find him undressed when she emerged from the bathroom.


“I came out of the bathroom and saw an older man in his underwear that I wasn’t expecting to see there,” she said.

Necheles pressed her on why she accepted the payout to keep quiet instead of going public.

“Why didn’t you do that?” she asked, wondering why Daniels didn’t hold a news conference as she had planned.

“Because we were running out of time,” Daniels said.

Did she mean, Necheles asked, that she was running out of time to use the claim to make money?

“To get the story out,” Daniels countered. The negotiations were happening in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign.

She testified that she never spoke with Trump about payment, and said she had no knowledge of whether Trump was aware of or involved in the transaction.


“You have no personal knowledge about his involvement in that transaction or what he did or didn’t do,” Necheles asked.

“Not directly, no,” Daniels responded.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger later asked Daniels, “Have you been telling lies about Mr. Trump or the truth about Mr. Trump?”

“The truth,” said Daniels, who also said that although she has made money since her story emerged, she also has had to spend a lot to hire security, move homes and take other precautions, and she still owes Trump hundreds of thousands of dollars in attorneys’ fees.

“On balance, has publicly telling the truth about Mr. Trump been a net positive or net negative in your life?” Hoffinger asked.

“Negative,” Daniels replied quietly.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
Third week of testimony in Trump’s hush money trial draws to close
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Jake Offenhartz, Jennifer Peltz, Michael R. Sisak And Alanna Durkin Richer
Published May 10, 2024 • 4 minute read

NEW YORK — In the wake of salacious testimony from porn actor Stormy Daniels, prosecutors in Donald Trump’s hush money trial narrowed their focus to checks and phone records Friday as they laid the groundwork for jurors to hear from their star witness: Michael Cohen, Trump’s former attorney.


With the third week of testimony drawing to a close, the case that ultimately hinges on record-keeping returned to deeply technical testimony — a sharp contrast from Daniels’ dramatic, if not downright seamy, account of an alleged sexual encounter with Trump that riveted jurors earlier this week. Trump denies they ever had sex.


Daniels’ story of an alleged sexual encounter with Trump was a crucial building block for prosecutors, who are seeking to show that the Republican and his allies buried unflattering stories in the waning weeks of the 2016 presidential election in an effort to illegally influence the race.

Trump walked out of the court in a rage Thursday, angrily telling reporters, “I’m innocent.” His attorneys pushed for a mistrial over the level of tawdry details Daniels went into on the witness stand, but Judge Juan M. Merchan denied the request.


Prosecutors have been building up their case before jurors hear from Cohen, Trump’s onetime fixer-turned-foe who arranged the $130,000 payout to Daniels — he says at Trump’s direction. Cohen is expected to take the witness stand next week.

He’s likely to be on the stand for several days as defense lawyers seize on the disbarred lawyer’s criminal history to try to convince jurors he can’t be trusted. Cohen served prison time for crimes including tax evasion and campaign-finance violations related to the hush money scheme.

Witnesses in the case have seesawed between bookkeepers and bankers with often dry testimony to Daniels and others with unflattering stories about Trump and the tabloid world machinations meant to keep them secret. Despite all the drama, in the end, the trial is about money changing hands — business transactions — and whether those payments were made to illegally influence the 2016 election.


Back on the witness stand Friday morning was Madeleine Westerhout, a former Trump White House aide. Prosecutors used Westerhout’s testimony to detail the process by which Trump got personal mail — including checks to sign — while in the White House. It’s relevant because that’s how he received and signed the checks that reimbursed Cohen for the payment to Daniels, prosecutors say.

Westerhout testified that Trump was “very upset” when The Wall Street Journal published a 2018 story about the hush money deal with Daniels.

“My understanding was that he knew it would be hurtful to his family,” Westerhout said, though she acknowledged she didn’t recall him saying so specifically. The answer, elicited by Trump lawyer Susan Necheles, goes to the defense’s argument that Daniels was paid to stay silent in order to protect Trump’s family, not his campaign.


Jurors also heard from AT&T and Verizon workers, who authenticated phone records. The dry testimony appeared to test jurors’ patience at times. One juror stifled a yawn while another stretched out his arms. Others shifted their gaze around the room or stared up at the ceiling.

Over more than 7 1/2 hours of testimony, Daniels relayed in graphic detail what she says happened after the two met at a celebrity golf outing at Lake Tahoe where sponsors included the adult film studio where she worked. Daniels explained how she felt surprise, fear and discomfort, even as she consented to sex with Trump.

During combative cross-examination, Trump’s lawyers sought to paint Daniels as a liar and extortionist who’s trying to take down the former president after drawing money and fame from her claims. Necheles pressed Daniels on why she accepted the payout to keep quiet instead of going public, and the two women traded barbs over what Necheles said were inconsistencies in Daniels’ story over the years.


“You made all this up, right?” Necheles asked Daniels.

“No,” Daniels shot back.

After Daniels stepped down from the stand Thursday, Trump’s attorneys pressed the judge to amend the gag order that prevents him from talking about witnesses in the case so he could publicly respond to what she told jurors. The judge denied that request too.

Trump on Friday also lost a bid to get records from Mark Pomerantz, a former Manhattan prosecutor who authored a book last year detailing tensions with District Attorney Alvin Bragg over whether to seek Trump’s indictment.

Prosecutors in Bragg’s office asked Merchan to reject the subpoena of Pomerantz, and the judge agreed, writing in an order that the defense requests are either overly broad and part of a “fishing expedition” or they seek information that is irrelevant to the case.


Trump is charged with 34 counts of falsifying internal Trump Organization business records. The charges stem from paperwork such as invoices and checks that were deemed legal expenses in company records. Prosecutors say those payments largely were reimbursements to Cohen for Daniels’ hush money payment.

This criminal case could be the only one of four against the presumptive Republican presidential nominee to go to trial before voters decide in November whether to send him back to the White House. Trump has pleaded not guilty and casts himself as the victim of a politically tainted justice system working to deny him another term.

Meanwhile, as the threat of jail looms over Trump following repeated gag order violations, his attorneys are fighting the judge’s order and seeking a fast decision in an appeals court. If that court refuses to lift the gag order, Trump’s lawyers want permission to take their appeal to the state’s high court.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
WABC Radio suspends Rudy Giuliani for flouting ban on discussing discredited election claims
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Jocelyn Noveck
Published May 10, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 3 minute read

NEW YORK — Rudy Giuliani was suspended Friday from WABC Radio and his daily show canceled over what the station called his repeated violation of a ban on discussing discredited 2020 election claims. Giuliani said the station’s ban is overly broad and “a clear violation of free speech.”


Giuliani issued a statement saying he had heard of WABC Radio owner John Catsimatidis’ decision through “a leak” to The New York Times. Catsimatidis confirmed his decision in a text message to The Associated Press.


Giuliani “left me no option,” Catsimatidis told the Times, saying that the former New York City mayor had been warned twice not to discuss “fallacies of the November 2020 election.”

“And I get a text from him last night, and I get a text from him this morning that he refuses not to talk about it,” the Republican businessman, who has fundraised for Donald Trump, told the newspaper.

As Trump’s personal attorney, Giuliani was a key figure in the former president’s attempts to overturn the 2020 election results and remain in office.


Giuliani disputed that he had been informed ahead of time of the ban.

“John is now telling reporters that I was informed ahead of time of these restrictions, which is demonstrably untrue,” Giuliani said in a statement. Later Friday, in a video stream on social media, Giuliani noted that he has talked repeatedly, for years, on his show about claims the election was stolen, maybe even on every program, or every other program.

“If there was such a policy, I’d be crazy to keep doing it,” Giuliani said. “You think I’m a fool?”

A letter obtained by the AP from Catsimatidis to Giuliani and dated Thursday said Giuliani was prohibited from engaging in discussions relating to the 2020 elections.

“These specific topics include, but are not limited to, the legitimacy of the election results, allegations of fraud effectuated by election workers, and your personal lawsuits relating to these allegations,” the letter said.


Ted Goodman, Giuliani’s spokesperson and adviser, said Giuliani had not known of the directive before Thursday.

“WABC’s decision comes at a very suspicious time, just months before the 2024 election, and just as John and WABC continue to be pressured by Dominion Voting Systems and the Biden regime’s lawyers,” Giuliani said in his statement.

Late last month, Giuliani was one of 18 people indicted by an Arizona grand jury for their roles in an attempt over overturn Trump’s loss in 2020. At the time, his spokesperson Goodman lambasted what he called “the continued weaponization of our justice system.”

Giuliani filed for bankruptcy in December, shortly following a jury’s verdict requiring him to pay $148 million to two former Georgia election workers for spreading lies about their role in the 2020 election. Despite the verdict, Giuliani continued to repeat his stolen election claims, insisting he did nothing wrong and suggesting he’d keep pressing his claims even if it meant losing all his money or being jailed.


The bankruptcy prompted a diverse coalition of creditors to come forward, including a supermarket employee who was thrown in jail for patting him on the back, two elections technology companies that he spread conspiracies about, a woman who says he coerced her into sex, several of his former attorneys, the IRS and Hunter Biden, who says Giuliani illegally shared his personal data.

In early April, a New York bankruptcy judge allowed Giuliani to remain in his Florida condo, declining to rule on a motion from creditors that would have forced him to sell the Palm Beach estate. But the judge hinted at more “draconian” measures if the former mayor did not comply with information requests about his spending habits. The next hearing in the case was scheduled for Tuesday.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
36,037
3,067
113
A challenging star witness in Donald Trump’s hush money trial
 

Attachments

  • A challenging star witness in Donald Trump’s hush money trial.txt
    10.4 KB · Views: 2

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,722
11,569
113
Low Earth Orbit
A challenging star witness in Donald Trump’s hush money trial
A challenging star witness in Donald Trump’s hush money trial

Author of the article:Associated Press

Jennifer Peltz And Eric Tucker

Published May 12, 2024 • 7 minute read

NEW YORK — He once said he would take a bullet for Donald Trump. Now Michael Cohen is prosecutors’ biggest piece of legal ammunition in the former president’s hush money trial.

But if Trump’s fixer-turned-foe is poised to offer jurors this week an insider’s view of the dealings at the heart of prosecutors’ case, he also is as challenging a star witness as they come.

There is his tortured history with Trump, for whom he served as personal attorney and problem-zapper until his practices came under federal investigation. That led to felony convictions and prison for Cohen but no charges against Trump, by then in the White House.

Cohen, who is expected to take the stand Monday, can address the jury as someone who has reckoned frankly with his own misdeeds and paid for them with his liberty. But jurors likely also will learn that the now-disbarred lawyer has not only pleaded guilty to lying to Congress and a bank, but recently asserted, under oath, that he wasn’t truthful even in admitting to some of those falsehoods.

And there is Cohen’s new persona — and podcast, books, and social media posts — as a relentless and sometimes crude Trump critic.

As Trump’s trial opened, prosecutors took pains to portray Cohen as just one piece of their evidence against Trump, telling jurors that corroboration would come via other witnesses, documents and the ex-president’s own recorded words. But Trump and his lawyers have assailed Cohen as an admitted liar and criminal who now makes a living off tearing down his former boss.

“What the defence is going to want the jury to focus on is the fact that he’s a liar†with a blemished past and a tetchy streak, said Richard Serafini, a Florida criminal defence lawyer and former federal and Manhattan prosecutor.

“What the prosecution is going to want to focus on is ‘everything he says is corroborated — you don’t have to like him,â€â€˜ Serafini added. “And No. 2, this is the guy Trump chose.â€

LOYALIST TURNED FOE

Cohen’s early-2000s introduction to Trump was a classic New York real estate story: Cohen was a condo board member in a Trump building and got involved on Trump’s side of a residents versus management dispute. The mogul soon brought Cohen into his company.

Cohen, who declined to comment for this story, had had an eclectic career that veered from practising personal injury law to operating a taxi fleet with his father-in-law. He ultimately functioned as both a Trump lawyer and shark-toothed loyalist.

He worked on some deal-making efforts but also spent much of his time threatening lawsuits, berating reporters and otherwise maneuvering to neutralize potential reputational dings for his boss, according to congressional testimony that Cohen gave after breaking with Trump in 2018. The rupture came after FBI raided Cohen’s home and office and Trump began to distance himself from the attorney.

Cohen soon told a federal court that he had helped candidate Trump wield the National Enquirer tabloid as a sort of house organ that flattered him, tried to flatten his opponents and bottled up seamy allegations about his personal life by buying stories or flagging them to Cohen to purchase. Trump says all the stories were false.

Those arrangements, which Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office portrays as a multipronged scheme to keep information from voters, are now under a microscope at Trump’s hush money trial. He has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records so as to veil reimbursements to Cohen for paying off porn performer Stormy Daniels. She claimed a 2006 sexual encounter with the married Trump, which the former president has denied.

Other witnesses have testified about the hush money dealings, but Cohen remains key to piecing together a case that centres on how Trump’s company compensated him for his role in the Daniels payoff

Trump’s defence maintains that Cohen was paid for legal work, not a cover-up, and that there was nothing illegal about the agreements he facilitated with Daniels and others.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,722
11,569
113
Low Earth Orbit
A WITNESS WITH HISTORY



In criminal trials, many witnesses come to the stand with their own criminal records, relationships with defendants, prior contradictory statements or something else that could affect their credibility.



Cohen has a particular set of baggage.



In testimony, he will need to explain his prior disavowals of key aspects of the hush money arrangements and to convince jurors that this time he is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.



Still in the Trump fold when the Daniels deal came to light, he initially told The New York Times that he had not been reimbursed, later acknowledging repayment — as did Trump, who had previously said he did not even know about the Daniels payout.



Then, in the course of two federal guilty pleas, Cohen admitted to tax evasion, orchestrating illegal campaign contributions in the form of hush money payments, and lying to Congress about his work on a possible Trump real estate project in Moscow. He also pleaded guilty to signing off on a home equity loan application that understated his financial liabilities.



While many types of convictions may be used to question a witness’ credibility, when crimes involve dishonesty, “there’s a treasure trove of stuff there for a cross-examiner,†Serafini said.



Moreover, Cohen raised new questions about his credibility while testifying last fall in Trump’s civil fraud trial. During a testy cross-examination — he answered some questions with a lawyerly “objection†or “asked and answered†— Cohen insisted he was not quite guilty of tax evasion or the loan application falsehood. Ultimately, he testified that he had lied to the now-deceased federal judge who took his plea.



The fraud trial judge found Cohen’s testimony credible, noting that it was corroborated by other evidence. But a federal judge suggested that Cohen perjured himself either in his testimony or his guilty plea.



Since splitting with Trump, Cohen has confronted his past lies head-on. His podcast’s title — “Mea Culpa†— gestures at a reckoning with his crimes, and he acknowledged in the foreword to his 2020 memoir that some people see him as “the least reliable narrator on the planet.â€



At his 2018 sentencing, he said his “blind loyalty†to Trump made him feel it was my duty to cover up his dirty deeds, rather than to listen to my own inner voice and my moral compass.†Outside court, he has cast himself as an avatar of anti-Trump sentiment. In social media salvos as the trial opened, Cohen used a scatological nickname for Trump, taunted him to “keep whining, crying and violating the gag order, you petulant defendant!†and commented acerbically on his defence.



The posts could give Trump’s lawyers fodder to paint Cohen as an agenda-driven witness out for revenge. In a nod to that vulnerability, Cohen posted two days after opening statements that he would cease commenting on Trump until after testifying, “out of respect†for the judge and prosecutors.



Yet in a live TikTok this past week, Cohen wore a shirt featuring a figure resembling Trump with his hands cuffed, behind bars. After Trump’s lawyers complained, Judge Juan M. Merchan exhorted prosecutors Friday to tell Cohen that the court was asking him not to make any more statements about the case or Trump.



To Jeremy Saland, a New York criminal defence lawyer and former Manhattan prosecutor, Cohen’s background is not such a hurdle for prosecutors.



“Where Cohen has the problem is: He doesn’t shut his trap,†Saland said. “He just constantly takes shots at his own credibility.â€



Prosecutors will need to persuade Cohen to be forthright, acknowledge his past wrongdoing and rein in his freewheeling commentary, Saland said, or the case can become “the Michael Cohen show.â€



Indeed, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche used his opening statement to hammer on Cohen’s “obsession†with Trump and his admitted past lying under oath.



“You cannot make a serious decision about President Trump relying on the words of Michael Cohen,†Blanche told jurors.



But prosecutor Matthew Colangelo characterized Cohen as someone who made “mistakes,†telling jurors they could believe him nonetheless.



Meanwhile, prosecutors have pointed to remarks Trump has made about Cohen and others to accuse him of multiple violations of a gag order that bars him from commenting on witnesses, jurors and some other people connected to the case. The judge has held Trump in contempt, fined him a total of $10,000 and warned that jail could follow if he breached the order again.



Prosecutors also have not shied from testimony about Cohen’s combative personality. A banker testified that Cohen was seen as a “challenging†client who insisted everything was urgent. Daniels’ former lawyer, Keith Davidson, described his first phone call with Cohen as a screaming “barrage of insults and insinuations and allegations.â€

While such episodes might not be flattering to Cohen, eliciting them could be a way for prosecutors subtly to indicate he is not their teammate, but simply a person with information, said John Fishwick Jr., a former U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia.

“It’s a way to try to build up his credibility while you distance yourself from him,†he suggested

When Cohen takes the stand, prosecutors would be wise to address his problematic past before defence lawyers do, said New York Law School professor Anna Cominsky. She taught a course with Bragg before he became district attorney, but she offered comments as a legal observer, not someone privy to his office’s strategy.

“I imagine in their closing arguments,†Cominsky said, “that the prosecutor is going to look right at the jury and say, ‘This is not a perfect witness, but none of us are.â€â€

— Tucker reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Michael R. Sisak and Jake Offenhartz in New York contributed to this report.