Comments posted organically
SelectSmart.com Homepage
Display Order:

So is Trump too much of a pants-pissing coward to debate Harris?
Politics by Ponderer     July 26, 2024 5:31 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (2 comments) [15 views]

Six House Dems vote with GOP to condemn Kamala Harris for 'border czar' role
Government by HatetheSwamp     July 26, 2024 4:26 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (12 comments) [99 views]

Benjamin Netanyahu's historic and heroic speech before the US Congress
Government by HatetheSwamp     July 24, 2024 12:37 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: oldedude (26 comments) [201 views]

Good news for Kamala and the Ds
Astrology by Indy!     July 26, 2024 1:07 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (1 comments) [59 views]

A landslide I'm still tellin' ya
Politics by Ponderer     July 26, 2024 3:39 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: HatetheSwamp (2 comments) [20 views]

Usha Vance's perfect speech introducing JD
Politics by HatetheSwamp     July 18, 2024 7:50 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (14 comments) [189 views]

A better indicator than national polls and even better than swing state polls
Politics by Curt_Anderson     July 24, 2024 8:37 am (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (17 comments) [149 views]

Anonymous comments regarding the Presidential Candidate Selector and the election
President by Curt_Anderson     March 19, 2024 10:10 am (Rating: 2.5) Last comment by: Indy! (107 comments) [3133 views]

Did the woman behind Trump know what was going down?
Entertainment by Indy!     July 25, 2024 3:40 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [47 views]

538's Harris versus Trump polls
Politics by Curt_Anderson     July 25, 2024 12:45 pm (Rating: 0.0) Last comment by: Indy! (4 comments) [41 views]

Law selectors, pages, etc.
My prediction that Trump will sabotage his own defense during closing arguments.
By Curt_Anderson
May 27, 2024 10:38 am
Category: Law

(0.0 from 0 votes)
Rules of the Post
SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com SelectSmart.com


Rate this article
5 Stars
4 Stars
3 Stars
2 Stars
1 Star
0 Stars
(5=best, 0=poor)

If this were a normal defense of a normal defendant, the defense attorneys would remind the jury that having sex with a porn star is not illegal and that paying hush money is not illegal.

In Trump's case, he is not normal. I predict that he will insist on having his lawyers deny every little thing in their summation. Trump will have them claiming to a skeptical jury that he not have sex with a porn stat and that he did not pay her hush money. The defense's denials of the inconsequential things will be less than credible thus making their denials of the actual consequential charges less than credible.

Comments Start Below


The views and claims expressed by contributors are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views and beliefs of SelectSmart.com. Not every statement made here can be assumed to be a fact.
Comments on "My prediction that Trump will sabotage his own defense during closing arguments.":

  1. by Curt_Anderson on May 28, 2024 12:44 pm
    Excerpts of the closing argument by the defense
    Todd Blanche has twice noted that Stormy Daniels had denied having sex with Trump. While technically true — she did put out a statement denying they had an affair in early 2018 — she subsequently provided her account of the sexual encounter to “60 Minutes,” in a book, in a documentary and here, on the stand, where she testified under oath.

    Trump — Blanche’s client — has repeatedly denied the tryst occurred.

    Todd Blanche is now lingering on statements from Stormy Daniels that she has testified she was coerced into making. This doesn’t seem to have much to do with the heart of the case but does seem like the kind of client-pleasing behavior we’ve seen from Blanche during the trial.

    Todd Blanche says that this case “is about documents. It’s a paper case.” It is not, he says, about an encounter with Stormy Daniels, noting — something the client likes hearing — that the defendant has denied it occurred.
    nytimes.com

  2. by HatetheSwamp on May 28, 2024 1:23 pm

    Todd Blanche has twice noted that Stormy Daniels had denied having sex with Trump. While technically true — she did put out a statement denying they had an affair in early 2018 — she subsequently provided her account of the sexual encounter to “60 Minutes,” in a book, in a documentary and here, on the stand, where she testified under oath.

    By the definition of the word, she's a liar. Heck. An EFFINliar.

  3. by Curt_Anderson on May 28, 2024 2:10 pm
    And Trump is NOT a liar???

    Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, has said multiple times that she and Trump did have sex.

    But a January 2018 letter in which Daniels denied that they had intercourse is being misleadingly cited by some conservatives on social media as proof that there is no case against Trump.

    Daniels has said that, although the letter was not true, she signed it under pressure from her representatives, who warned that her life could become “hell in many different ways” if she did not sign it.
    factcheck.org

  4. by HatetheSwamp on May 28, 2024 2:23 pm

    But a January 2018 letter in which Daniels denied that they had intercourse is being misleadingly cited by some conservatives on social media as proof that there is no case against Trump.

    What I'm hearing from "conservatives" is that her testimony was entirely irrelevant to any crime that Trump might have been charged with.

  5. by Curt_Anderson on May 28, 2024 2:31 pm
    "...her testimony was entirely irrelevant to any crime..." --HtS

    Sort of. As I said in the open of this thread, sex with a porn star is not a crime, but it's related to a crime. It's like a taxi cab driver testifying he drove the defendant to the bank which the defendant is accused of robbing. The driver didn't commit any crime, but his driving the defendant to the bank was necessary for the bank robbery to happen.

  6. by HatetheSwamp on May 28, 2024 3:56 pm

    No. Not at all.

    The only thing that is at issue is that he paid her, and why.

    Period.

  7. by Curt_Anderson on May 28, 2024 4:59 pm
    The defense team seems to realize they are losing and makes a last desperate play...

    Before he concluded, Todd Blanche asked that the jurors not send his client to prison. Now, with the jury excused, Joshua Steinglass, the prosecutor who will give his side’s closing argument, stands up and objects, describing Blanche's comment as “a blatant and wholly inappropriate effort” to attract sympathy for Trump. He asks for a curative instruction — he wants the judge to alert the jury to the issue, and remind them of their role.

    Justice Merchan then instructs the jurors that Todd Blanche’s comment about sending Trump “to prison” was “improper” and that they must disregard it. He reminds them that a prison sentence is not required in the event of a guilty verdict.
    nytimes.com

  8. by Indy! on May 28, 2024 5:38 pm

    Trump is not going to jail. Please.

  9. by HatetheSwamp on May 28, 2024 5:39 pm

    I'll see your Holy Trinity NYT and raise you a Judge Jeanine on The Five. She said that the defense closing argument was powerful and effective.

    Megyn Kelly and her panel also praised it.


    Still. Let not your heart be troubled. I repeat myself. Judge Merchan will secure a conviction with a biased and flawed jury instruction... which will be one of many grounds for the verdict to be overturned...

    ...after the election...

    ...but Trump will win this politically anyway.

  10. by HatetheSwamp on May 28, 2024 5:48 pm

    BTW, Trump attorney Todd Blanche ended his close with the most memorable line of the trial.

    Referring to Michael Cohen: "He’s the “MVP of liars” and the “GLOAT: Greatest Liar of All Time."

    I'd vote to acquit just on that.

    politico.com

  11. by Curt_Anderson on May 29, 2024 10:14 am
    The prosecution had a better, more logical wrap up of their closing argument.

    “The defense wants you to believe that Cohen went rogue, I guess,” Steinglass said. “But there are at least three reasons why you shouldn't believe that argument.”

    Steinglass laid out those reasons:

    1. Trump was a micromanager and involved himself in every detail concerning his business, campaign and finances.
    2. Cohen “was and is a self-promoter.” He wouldn’t take “Herculean efforts” on behalf of Trump, and then keep it to himself.
    3. Trump was the beneficiary of the entire scheme.
    politico.com

  12. by HatetheSwamp on May 29, 2024 11:13 am

    pb's Legal Goober #1 could not disagree more... as I already linked.

    But, Crooked Judge Merchan will have saved the day in the end

  13. by Indy! on May 30, 2024 10:17 am

    All 3 of your legal "goobers" are rightwing nuts. You might get better predictions if you expanded your "inclusiveness" to lawyers who aren't beholden to the orange monkey.

  14. by Curt_Anderson on June 2, 2024 6:44 pm
    As I correctly predicted, Trump had his lawyers deny everything even things that were not illegal but immoral and unseemly such as his sexual affairs with porn actress Stormy Daniels and the former Playboy playmate Karen McDougal.

    How Trump’s Team Blew It
    Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor, wrote:
    The trial dragged on for weeks largely because of Mr. Trump’s “deny everything” approach. A savvy defense counsel would have stipulated that Mr. Trump had an intimate affair with Ms. Daniels. Instead, the defense forced the prosecution to prove that the affair occurred and proceeded to aggressively attack Ms. Daniels, whom some of the jury likely found sympathetic in her testimony. That attack gained no ground legally for the defense — little turned on whether Mr. Trump had a sexual encounter with her — but distracted from his actual defense.


    My theory as to why Trump insisted that his lawyers deny the undeniable is because there is an infidelity clause in his pre-nuptial agreement with Melania. She might have been able to walk away from the marriage with half of everything that Trump owns (or some substantial amount: ka-ching!) had he admitted to his philandering. That leads to my latest prediction, Melania will file for divorce with the goal of utilizing the infidelity clause.



    findlaw.com
    nytimes.com

  15. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 3:34 am

    The prosecution didn't prove that Trump had an affair with Daniels... and, it didn't have to prove it anyway.

    That's just the truth, your Holy Trinity propaganda notwithstanding.

  16. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 8:30 am
    HtS,
    Do YOU think Trump had sex with Stormy?

  17. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 9:41 am

    I wasn't there. I'm sure you do.

    Interestingly, Megyn Kelly has come to doubt it... and she knows Trump. She reasons that Trump is such a crazy germaphobe that he, very possibly, wouldn't get near her.

    And, she's told numerous versions of the tale.

    I do believe Karen McDougal thing. That one's easy to believe, eh?

  18. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 9:51 am
    So if you agree with Megyn Kelly, either Trump paid her hush money or his underlings (Weiselberg and Cohen, on their own and unbeknownst to Trump) paid her for NOT having sex with him.

    Try applying Occam’s Razor to these various possibilities. You do realize the jurors are expected to draw conclusions and make decisions based on the testimony and evidence, which can be contradictory, using a "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard.


  19. by Indy! on June 3, 2024 11:19 am

    There's the problem - the GOP is so caught up in their numerous conspiracy theories they no longer have any idea what "reasonable" means (if they ever did).

  20. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 12:18 pm
    David Pecker, the former publisher of The National Enquirer, revealed during Donald J. Trump’s criminal trial on Tuesday how a team of reporters chased down a potentially explosive news tip called into the publication in 2015 that evolved into a catch-and-kill deal.

    Dino Sajudin, a former doorman at a Manhattan building managed by the Trump Organization, called the tabloid’s tip line late in 2015 and said he had overheard other employees claiming that Mr. Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock with a woman who previously worked for him.

    While the claim appeared to be false, the allegation could have damaged Mr. Trump during the campaign if it ever became public, Mr. Pecker testified in Manhattan Criminal Court...

    The fact Trump paid doesn't mean it happened.

    nytimes.com

  21. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 12:45 pm
    "The fact Trump paid doesn't mean it happened." ---HtS

    That can't be right. Trump, through his lawyers, has denied he paid anybody hush money.

    So if you believe it's a fact that Trump paid, even though Trump denies paying hush money, then you have to conclude that Trump is lying. Apparently the jury reached the same conclusion for reasons I outlined in the opening article of this thread.




  22. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 12:54 pm

    I doubt the factual authenticity of your claim.

  23. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 1:05 pm
    What “factual authenticity” of what I wrote do you doubt? That Trump denied paying hush money? Something else? Whatever it is, I can provide links to verify anything I said.

  24. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 1:24 pm

    I'm not aware that Trump denies paying anyone hush money. As you well know, on Fox News they talk all the time about Trump paying to silence the illegitimate child story.

  25. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 1:58 pm
    "I'm not aware that Trump denies paying anyone hush money." ---HtS

    I doubt the factual authenticity of your claim that you were unaware of Trump's denials regarding hush money.

    How Trump’s deny-everything strategy could hurt him at sentencing
    (AP)In addition, Trump’s constant attacks on the prosecutors, judge and court system and his aggressive trial strategy — outright denying both claims of an extramarital affair by porn actor Stormy Daniels and involvement in the subsequent scheme to buy her silence — would make any change of tune at his sentencing seem disingenuous.


    (ABC News)Blanche repeatedly sought to distance his client from any element of the state's case, including the alleged agreement to "catch-and-kill" negative stories about him, the allegedly falsified records, and the payments doled out to Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels.

    "There's no evidence at all that Donald Trump had anything to do with that," Blanche said.

    Trump says he didn’t know about payment to Stormy Daniels
    ABOARD AIR FORCE ONE (AP) — President Donald Trump said Thursday he didn’t know about the $130,000 payment his personal attorney made to Stormy Daniels, issuing a firm denial in his first public comments about the adult-film actress who alleges she had an affair with him.
    apnews.com
    abcnews.go.com
    apnews.com

  26. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 2:10 pm

    That is 100% a non sequitur.

    Didn't he acknowledge paying hush money for being a baby daddy?... which he wasn't.

    And, certainly, he acknowledged paying the porn star slut. What he did was the bubba Clinton thing. "I didn't have sex with that woman..."

  27. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 2:50 pm
    "Didn't he acknowledge paying hush money for being a baby daddy?... which he wasn't" ---HtS

    No he didn't acknowledge that. You should read past where you placed ellipses in the NY Times article. Here is where you left off.

    ...on Tuesday.

    “I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it would have to the campaign and Mr. Trump,” Mr. Pecker said, adding that it was important to have it “removed from the market.”

    The Enquirer initially reached a deal with Mr. Sajudin that would pay him $30,000 if the tip turned into a story. A contract with Mr. Sajudin was shown to the jury on Tuesday, featuring the words “Donald Trump’s illegitimate child.”

    Mr. Pecker did not immediately alert Mr. Trump or his longtime fixer, Michael D. Cohen, about the tip, but instead dispatched a team of reporters to investigate the claim. They returned saying that it appeared totally false, in part because the child strongly resembled the man she knew as her father, a Trump Organization driver.

    Mr. Cohen eventually heard about the allegation and called the tabloid’s editor, angry that its reporters would even consider the claim had merit. Mr. Pecker testified that Mr. Cohen also called him to say that Mr. Trump had offered to take a DNA test and could not be the child’s father.


    "And, certainly, he acknowledged paying the porn star slut." ---HtS

    Wrong. He hasn't acknowledged that either. Trump's attorney said the payments made to Cohen (including the $130,000 in hush money) were legal expenses. In fact, he claimed he didn't even know payments were made to Storm Daniels until later on.

    Blanche says Trump's payments to Cohen in 2017 were for legitimate legal work

    Trump insists he learned of Michael Cohen payments 'later on,' in 'Fox & Friends' exclusive




    foxnews.com
    politico.com

  28. by Ponderer on June 3, 2024 3:19 pm

    And given the mountains of evidence and testimony, I don't think the jury bought any of that intelligence-insulting bullshit for a minute of the twelve hours it took them to find Trump guilty in.

  29. by HatetheSwamp on June 3, 2024 4:55 pm

    What I know is that life-long Dem, pb Legal Goober #2 read the verdict and still doesn't know what felony Trump was found guilty of... the mountains of evidence notwithstanding.

  30. by Curt_Anderson on June 3, 2024 8:11 pm
    "What I know is that life-long Dem, pb Legal Goober #2 read the verdict and still doesn't know what felony Trump was found guilty of..." ---HtS

    Given all that you don't know, in particular the facts about this case that you were unaware of, maybe your go-to legal pundits shouldn't be ones who still don't know what felony Trump was found guilty of. Just sayin'.

  31. by HatetheSwamp on June 4, 2024 1:09 am

    Goober #2 was in the court room most days. Perhaps your Holy Trinity preachers of the TDS Gospel are pretending facts into existence.

    What pb knows is that pb's Legal Goobers have demonstrated that they have keen insight into legal events and issues. pb ain't a hapless prisoner of the preferences and prejudices that he brings with him to every moment of his life...

    ...you are.

  32. by HatetheSwamp on June 4, 2024 3:02 am

    Legal Goober #2's reasoned assessment on the bias in the Manhattan trial and where the Judge Merchan fiasco goes from here...

     View Video

Go To Top

Comment on: "My prediction that Trump will sabotage his own defense during closing arguments."


* Anonymous comments are subject to approval before they appear. Cookies Consent Policy & Privacy Statement. All Rights Reserved. SelectSmart® is a registered trademark. | Contact SelectSmart.com | Advertise on SelectSmart.com | This site is for sale!

Find old posts & articles

Articles by category:

SelectSmart.com
Report spam & abuse
 SelectSmart.com home page