The firm of former Clinton campaign general counsel Marc Elias has lost another election case in a spectacular fashion. The Chief Judge of the Western District of Wisconsin, James Peterson (an Obama appointee), did not just reject but ridiculed the Elias Law Group challenge to a witness requirement for absentee voting. Elias has been previously sanctioned in court and accused of lying in the Steele dossier scandal by journalists and others.
U.S. District Judge James Peterson ruled against the lawsuit brought by the Elias Law Group, arguing that the witness requirement violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The state statute under § 6.87(2) describes what the witness must certify. The statute first sets forth in two sentences what the voter must certify on the ballot envelope. The first requirement concerns the voter certifying that he or she meets the requirements for voting generally and for voting absentee in Wisconsin.
The second requirement is certification that the voter followed the process for preparing the absentee ballot. These are the called the “first voter certification” and the “witness certification.”
The witness certification refers to a witness certifying “all of the above,” which is obviously referring to the language on preparing the absentee ballot.
Elias argued that it requires certification of everything that preceded it on the details of the voter’s record etc.
In the court’s opinion, Judge Peterson expresses disbelief at the lunacy of the Elias argument, writing:
“Normally, the court would begin by searching for other textual clues in the statute. But in this case, the most obvious problem with plaintiffs’ interpretation is that it simply does not make any sense.”
The court then notes that:
“Under plaintiffs’ interpretation, every witness would have to determine the voter’s age, residence, citizenship, criminal history, whether the voter is unable or unwilling to vote in person, whether the voter has voted at another location or is planning to do so, whether the voter is capable of understanding the objective of the voting process, whether the voter is under a guardianship, and, if so, whether a court has determined that the voter is competent. See Wis. Stat. §§ 6.02 and 6.03. Many witnesses would be unable to independently verify much of the required information. The statute allows any adult U.S. citizen to serve as a witness, suggesting that a wide variety of people should be able to do the job…It makes no sense to interpret § 6.87 in a way that would make compliance virtually impossible.
If plaintiffs’ interpretation were correct, it would mean that countless absentee ballots over decades were invalid because the witness certified that the voter was qualified to vote and met the other requirements in the first voter certification, even though the witness had no basis for such a certification.”
However, it gets even wackier. They argued that a simple witness requirement constituted a type of illegal vouching under the Voting Rights Act. This is a reference to the Jim Crow era when a registered voter had to vouch for a new voter, a system meant to prevent African Americans from voting.
The case adds to a long litany of losses and controversies for Elias. That record includes allegations of lying to reporters and subverting voters.
Elias featured prominently in the filings of Special Counsel John Durham. It was Elias who made the key funding available to Fusion GPS, which in turn enlisted Steele to produce his now discredited dossier on Trump and his campaign.
During the campaign, reporters did ask about the possible connection to the campaign, but Clinton campaign officials denied any involvement. Weeks after the election, journalists discovered that the Clinton campaign hid payments for the Steele dossier as “legal fees” among the $5.6 million paid to Perkins Coie.
New York Times reporter Ken Vogel said at the time that Elias denied involvement in the anti-Trump dossier. When Vogel tried to report the story, he said, Elias “pushed back vigorously, saying ‘You (or your sources) are wrong.’” Times reporter Maggie Haberman declared, “Folks involved in funding this lied about it, and with sanctimony, for a year.”
It was not just reporters who asked the Clinton campaign about its role in the Steele dossier. John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, was questioned by Congress and denied categorically any contractual agreement with Fusion GPS. Sitting beside him was Elias, who reportedly said nothing to correct the misleading information given to Congress.
The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee were ultimately sanctioned by the FEC over the handling of the funding of the dossier through his prior firm.
The Democratic National Committee reportedly later cut ties with Elias.
Elias has been sanctioned in past litigation. Yet, other democrats have continued to hire Elias despite his checkered past. Elias unsuccessfully led efforts to challenge Democratic losses. Elias also was the subject of intense criticism after a tweet that some have called inherently racist.
Elias was back in the news in another major defeat in Maryland. He filed in support of an abusive gerrymandering of the election districts that a court found violated not only violated Maryland law but the state constitution’s equal protection, free speech and free elections clauses. The court found that the map pushed by Elias “subverts the will of those governed.”
Elias has been accused of making millions from gerrymandering and challenging election victories by Republicans (while condemning such actions by Republicans as “anti-Democratic”). His work for New York redistricting that was ridiculed as not only ignoring the express will of the voters to end such gerrymandering while effectively negating the votes of Republican voters.
Recently, Elias’ name popped up again in the scandal involving David Hogg and accounting irregularities. Hogg is accused of raising millions to support liberal candidates but allegedly spending only $263,000 on such candidates while paying $83,000 to the Elias law firm.
Previously, when allegations of self-dealing and accounting improprieties were raised with regard to Black Lives Matter, the group’s attorney, Elias, immediately stood out for many. Elias resigned from his “key role” with BLM as the scandal exploded.
It is not known if the Elias Law Group will appeal this stinging rebuke or cut its losses.
Mark Elias’ law license should have been revoked and removed from the bar long ago!!!!!
Living in Wisconsin as I do, there has been scant reporting on this with the online news feeds.
As with all people of the ilk of Mr. Elias, I often wonder just when they will be exposed for the evil people that they are.
It doesn’t take long as they are usually brought down by their own.
What kind of person would do the things that Elias does. He obviously considers himself superior in his knowledge of the law but he continuously is defeated in court. You would think that maybe he would at least have a single moment of self reflection but it never comes. My theory is that it happens to lawyers who lose their ability to know right from wrong because of their associations. Then again, one must consider that just plain old greed is probably at play. Greed and the physiological need to be accepted to a maniacal degree is most likely what we are dealing with. I guess that’s a nice way of saying he’s bat guano crazy along with his best pal Hillary.
@TiT,
Elias knows what he is doing.
He’s hoping that he’ll find a sympathetic judge and count that the appeals process will be too late.
He firmly believes in winning at all costs. And yes, he’s a Dem gun for hire.
The reason he’s challenging this law is that it makes it harder to cheat.
You now have an extra data point because your ‘witness’ can now be tracked.
Imagine if you have 2000 ballots w Mark Elias as the witness.
Kinda suspect, no?
-G
The hijacking of the vote in Wisconsin by Perkins-Coie / FBI / DNC is plain for everyone to see. They even went so far as to install one of their corrupt lawyers as the AG in Wisconsin. Josh Kaul
Russia-Ukraine War: NATO warns of ‘enormous danger’ if Russia keeps troops in Ukraine | WION
I believe most readers of Professor Turley’s writings have been well-aware of Marc Elias and what a cancer he has and still does represent to ‘truth, justice, and the American way.’
I will not be surprised to find that Elias is on President Trump’s ‘enemies of America’ list, to be dealt with harshly when, as and if Trump’s presidency resumes in January of 2025.
What about his “enemas of America” list?
yeah, flush E liars ass
How many Trump attorneys were disbarred. Nothing happens to Dem lawyers
The members of Karl Marx’s communist proletariat have nothing to vote for.
The members of the proletariat would have nothing to vote for if the Supreme Court did its charge and duty and struck down the unconstitutional communist American welfare state.
The American Founders never intended for the members of the proletariat to vote in the first place.
Grifters grift and so long as there is profit to be made we will find Elias at the center of many a disreputable election scheme. There are always rich lefties willing to win at any cost and Elias is their man and stands ready to sell himself for the right price.
All attorneys and anyone else associated with Elias should be pursued for fraud and other crimes on the court by red state AGs.
New law should require that attorneys be disbarred when caught lying in the court or to Congress, etc. The only way to stop this madness is make the act of too lying too painful. The disbarment should be permanent since a change of character is unlikely Elias is in a class by himself and should be held accountable for treason for his part in the attempted coup by Clinton and her vast array of toadies both in and out of government. They are STILL in it up to their collective eyeballs with all the lawfare attacks.
Elias is one of the many Democrats who should have been tried and hanged for treason over the Dossier/Trump-Russia Collusion/Spygate Affair, the worst act of treason in American history.
It’s sedition and/or seditious conspiracy, not treason. Ask an adult to explain the difference to you. And calling for Elias to be hanged makes your comment a vengefully-ignorant joke. The maximum penalty is 20 years.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384
If your point is to cite someone’s violation of law, you defeat your own point by recklessly misrepresenting the law, purposefully exaggerating the offense, AND exceeding the maximum penalty due to your own thirst for vengeance.
Vengeance and justice are not synonymous. Try not to behave too much like a democrat.
100%
Another just-say-anything MORON that doesn’t know the definition of treason but uses the word anyway because it sounds good.
Treason is defined in the constitution – specifically to make exactly what you are seeking impossible.
Absolutely there should have been more consequences than their were for representing to the FBI that the Steele Dossier was an allegation of actual crimes.
And that is the limit to the criminal prosecution that should result from the Steele Dossier.
A Delaware Jury rejected the two such prosecutions that Durham tried to bring based on the fact that the FBI KNEW the Steele Dossier was a fraud from the start.
That is actually the correct verdict.
But that verdict REQUIRES prosecuting those in the FBI/DOJ who violated numerous peoples civil rigfhts by procededing with a criminal investigation based on a known fraud.
If Marc Elias has lied to the courts – he should be sanctioned by the courts for lying.
As disreputable as Elias is there should NEVER be a consequence for a lawyer zealously representing a client – within the law, beyond losing the case when the arguments are garbage. Elias has lost a lot of cases, The problem is he has won to many that he should not have – and the fault for that is with the courts.
I want judges jailed for rulings that a clearly political. Example denied bond for Jan 6 peoples
When corruption is rampant throughout the courts and justice is no longer served, well John that is exactly the time for vigilante justice. Use to be tar and feathers, often a sound azz whopping. A little Roy Bean justice would go a long way to righting the ills of today.
Trumpsters believe the wants and needs of people who don’t think like them should be dishonored and those people should be discarded.
As if your comment wasn’t dumb enough, the “Trumpster” name-calling adds that juvenile touch that makes it extra stupid.
Have somebody read the article to you, Gilligan
Gibberish.
We’ll start with you, mr. naive.
Nope, ‘Trumpsters’ as you call us, just want those that are dishonest, corrupt, liars, and cheats held accountable, and to pay the price. Those that disgrace the Constitution and all it represents, and their pervasive contempt for the USA, and the American people, are not worthy of honor nor respect. THAT goes far beyond a mere difference of opinion
Whatever does this mean ?
Regardless, you are free to have whatever wants and needs you wish.
But your wants and needs create no obligation in others.
We do not live in Nazi germany – where some people were property and actually destroyed and then discarded.
We do not “discard” people. Many of us do ignore their whining. Not at all the same thing.
You are owed the protection of your actual rights by government.
Rights do not cost other people anything.
My free speech costs you nothing.
My right to do as I please with what is mine – my home, my property, my business, so long as I do not actually harm you, costs you nothing.
Anything that imposes a positive duty on others is not a right.
I think you need to look in the mirror.
Trumpsters, as you say, only wish for justice and the coming years will show that democracy is alive and well in the USA
No surprises here.
KNOW THE ENEMY
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
– Sun Tzu, The Art of War
_____________________________
Comrade Marc Elias is a direct and mortal enemy of the American Thesis of Freedom and Self-Reliance, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, actual Americans, and America.
Marc Elias’s entire communistic American welfare state is unconstitutional including, but not limited to, admissions affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Agriculture, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
Article 1, Section 8, provides Congress the power to tax for ONLY debt, defense, and general Welfare (i.e. all well proceed or basic infrastructure) omitting and, thereby, excluding any power to tax for individual Welfare, specific Welfare, particular Welfare, favor or charity. The same article enumerates and provides Congress the power to regulate ONLY the Value of money, Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian Tribes, and land and naval Forces. Additionally, the 5th Amendment right to private property was initially qualified by the Framers and is, therefore, absolute, allowing no further qualification, and allowing ONLY the owner the power to “claim and exercise” dominion over private property.
Government exists, under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, to provide maximal freedom to individuals while government is severely limited and restricted to merely facilitating that maximal freedom of individuals through the provision of security and infrastructure only.
You continually PREACH to two sets of people, those that have already read The Art of War and don’t need to be told what it says, and those who’ve never read The Art of War because they are lazy, ignorant, or disinterested in the subject matter.
In both cases, you’re wasting everyone’s time, including your own. Maybe you should double you library by finding a second book to read.
Thanks for reading…again!
That’s the whole idea; to educate.
I consider you educated.
Congratulations.
I fhink a squirrel would be considered educated compared wih anyone that finds your comments educational.
You “fhink” so well, Einstein, you should create your own blog-of-brilliance.
You could “fhink” to your heart’s content on your own site without bothering anyone.
Meanwhile (and off this bickering topic), there’s this:
Biden Regime Hit Man DC US Attorney Matthew Graves Indicts Former GOP Congressman “Set Up” by FBI After California Conviction Overturned
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/05/biden-regime-hit-man-dc-us-attorney-matthew/
Long story short: The Congressman had already both resigned from office AND served his sentence after being convicted by the corrupt DOJ in the WRONG jurisdiction, but they’re gonna re-try him anyway after his conviction was reversed by the court of appeals. Naturally, now they want to bring the prosecution in Washington DC before a rubber-stamp democrat jury.
This is a DOJ that’s completely out of control. There’s no legitimate reason I can imagine for retrying someone who’s already resigned from Congress AND served his unjust sentence. What are they gonna do, make him serve his sentence again?
More fool you for relying on the Hoft brothers’ lie sheet.
Fortenberry did not serve his full sentence, because his conviction was overturned in November. He hasn’t done the full two years of probation, let alone the community service.
Further, even if he had served the full sentence, there’s always the chance that after a new conviction in the correct district the judge there might impose a more severe sentence. He might even get some prison time. Of course if he gets probation again, he’ll get credit for the time he did serve.
His successful appeal had nothing at all to do with the merits of the charge, but was entirely because the trial had been held in the wrong state and district. So it makes perfect sense that the retrial will be in the correct district — that’s exactly what the 9th circuit said should happen. His claim to have been set up was not made in the appeals court, it was made at trial, and the jury rejected it, so it’s irrelevant. The appeals court did not cast any doubt on his guilt.
“The appeals court said the FBI interviews took place in Nebraska at Fortenberry’s home and in DC. Meanwhile, a Los Angeles jury convicted Fortenberry of the alleged crimes that took place in another state.”
Where did the “crime” occur, and subsequently where should the trial have occurred?
Either in DC or in Nebraska. So the prosecutor has now opted for DC.
The reason they originally tried him in LA was that some of the bribes were allegedly delivered there. But the 9th circuit said that wasn’t enough of a connection.
Let’s not forget Elias’ prior hits –
Fifth Circuit Sanctions Democratic Election Lawyer Marc Elias in Texas Voting Case
https://www.law.com/americanlawyer/2021/03/15/fifth-circuit-sanctions-democratic-election-lawyer-marc-elias-in-texas-voting-case/?slreturn=20240411144323
Jonathan: Well, Stormy Daniels completed her testimony this week and it was a doozy! Although Daniels wasn’t allowed to describe all the details of her sexual encounter with DJT she did describe the setting in DJT’s suite that Daniels described as bigger than any of her apartments, what DJT was wearing and a tidbit about her spanking DJT with a magazine with his head on the cover. Daniels was not allowed to describe DJT’s genitalia but we know from Daniels’ documentary that DJT has “a small penis with a head shaped like a mushroom”.
Why was Daniels testimony important? Because DJT and his attorneys have claimed the sexual encounter never happened. That defense is now out the window because of Daniels vivid description of what took place in 2006 in DJT’s suite. Daniels credibility has now been established and it will be hard to disprove. Unless, of course, DJT agrees to testify. On the stand DJT could drop his pants to try to disprove Daniels description of his genitalia. That’s probably why DJT will never testify! Daniels had fun with DJT after her testimony. She posted this on “X”: “Real men respond to testimony by being sworn in and taking the stand in court. Oh…wait. Never mind”.
On Thursday DJT’s attorneys tried to have a mistrial declared, claiming Daniels testimony revealed far too much about their client’s sexual encounter with Daniels. Justice Merchan denied the motion pointing out that they never objected once to Daniels’s testimony on direct. I think I heard Justice Merchan also say: “It simply does not make any sense” to declare a mistrial.
Well I’m back to disagreeing with Dennis the Menace, not that there is anything to disagree with because his entire comment consists of ill-natured invective and p-nis envy. It’s like disagreeing with Rosemary’s baby. I always feel like I need a shower when I accidentally read one of his comments. Enjoy the show while it lasts, Dennis.
Why u mad brah?
Trump will never testify. Innocent people take the stand.
Not in corrupt trials they don’t, idiot.
Innocent defendants usually don’t take the stand. You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.
“If you’re innocent, why are you taking the Fifth Amendment?” — Donald Trump
Presumes good faith court and proceedings.
Are you saying you believe Bragg’s (and the other cases) actions are in good faith, assclown?
https://dailycaller.com/2024/05/08/opinion-trumps-trial-is-a-stupendous-legal-catastrophe-for-the-history-books-alan-dershowitz/
Not impressed by a guy who helped OJ get away with murder and still insists OJ was innocent.
Don’t care if you’re impressed or not, he understands how the US legal system is constructed and operates.
You’ve failed to refute any of his substantive points, because you are a leftist criminal.
If you don’t care if I’m impressed, why even engage with me? It’s only going to get under your skin more. You can’t win. I don’t need you to agree with me. But you need me to agree with you. Why give me all the power and make yourself miserable? Stop while you can. But I bet you can’t.
Why do you falsely believe you are under anyone’s skin, assclown?
Have you considered that everyone is laughing at you as you continue to vomit your stupidity on this board without any sense of self-awareness?
Have you ever considered how stupid you have made yourself look?
Ha ha ha ha. This is better than libtard whining. Trumptard’s are already angry about everything.
What other questions do you answer with “Ha ha ha ha” ?
Dershowitz declines to state whether he thinks OJ is guilty. As usual, you speak before your brain is out of its stupor.
Dershowitz doesn’t deal with guilt or innocence. He deals with the law and its parts, which he feels are unconstitutional. In that fashion, he also protects your rights.
That is why when you lie drunk in the street, you don’t automatically lose your rights.
Too bad this gets under your skin so much. Makes my day.
Trump is not a lawyer. And if he said that it was before he was a defendant and was advised by his lawyer.
Because he’s guilty.
LMAO
Anonymous blog commenter renders summary judgment against Trump.
TDS patients don’t need evidence or a criminal prosecution to walk around saying “he’s guilty.” They’re like little wind-up toys. You just turn the knob and they mindlessly repeat the phrase all day long.
Trump’s guilty.
Judge Freisler has joined the discussion
Guilty of what?
Fix your moniker
He already IS innocent, the burden is to prove GUILT which they have not and never will.
I love how angry and miserable Trump supporters are over this trial. Love it.
It’s hilarious you leftist criminals seem to believe that there will be no consequences for you from your destructive sedition.
You’re making my day! Get angrier.
You’re making mine! Your reaction to your arrest and/or elimination will be hysterical!
That you want to have somebody executed who said something you don’t like on a comment board says it all.
Oh no, you’ll be eliminated for far more than simple comments, imbecile.
This is only the bulletin board for you to announce your crimes, criminal. Continue, please, with your self-incrimination.
LOL. 🙂
Indeed. 🙂
Dennis,
YOUR PANIC IS SHOWING!
You should probably pull your panic up or your skirt down.
Dennis: thanks. Dr. Mary Trump was on Alex Witt’s program this afternoon and she offered an interesting insight into Stormy Daniels’s testimony. Stormey said DJT called her “Honeybunch”. She said that “Honeybunch” is DJT’s favorite term of endearment, and that other members of the Trump family also used it frequently. She said she was called “Honeybunch” so many times as a kid that she wondered whether they knew her real name. The only other time I personally ever heard anyone consistently use the term “Honeybunch” was the Fred Mertz character on “I Love Lucy”–whenever his wife Ethel was peeved at him about something–he’d call her “Honeybunch”. Dr. Mary said that’s why she KNOWS Stomry is telling the truth–how else would she come up with DJT calling her ‘Honeybunch”, which is not a common term of endearment? As an aside–in Dr. Mary’s book, she states that when Trump’s father, Fred was in the process of coming down with dementia, he couldn’t remember people’s names, even though they looked familiar to him, so he called everyone “Toots”, including his wife, Mary.
At the end of the day, the jury will be instructed that it is not necessary for them to decide whether there was a sexual episode between Stormy and DJT because that’s irrelevant. The issue is whether he paid her to keep quiet to benefit his campaign. He’s already admitted that in the California litigation between them, written proof of which is before the jury. In terms of proof of whether Stormy’s anatomical description of DJT is accurate, I’d bet Melania could shed some light on that subject (even though it was not presented to the jury and is really irrelevant). Maybe that’s the reason for her absence–to preserve some shred of her dignity? Melania also put the kabosh on Barron participating the the FL nomination process–good for her! As I have previously indicated many observers believe he’s on the autism spectrum and it would be terribly stressful for him to be forced to speak in public with cameras in his face. She’s protecting him and she had to stand up to DJT and especially Lara Trump, who was crowing on MAGA media about his public debut, so I give her considerable credit for that. Dr. Mary also sadi that DJT doesn’t care whether Melania’s feelings are hurt or not because everything about him is transactional.
Gigi (or is that you, Dennis? The writing style, use of DJT, and the off-topic comments seem pretty similar):
You’ve sunk pretty far, twisting yourself into knots in your ‘job’ to ‘poke holes’ in Mr. Turley’s articles,
but bringing speculation about someone’s kid, who may or may not have autism or anything else, is a real low.
Fishwings
Robert Browning
Chris Weber
GiGi
Anonymous (nut job)
and a few more seem to be same
Uh, oh!
It’s not working, NUTCHACHACHA!
IU have no idea whether Trump uses the term Honeybunch – nor do you and Mary Trump is not a trustworthy reporter.
But more importantly her argument is incorrect.
Unlike the Carrol Case Trump has NEVER claimed to not Know Daniels.
There is zero doubt they met at this golf club and that they talked in public.
There is also no doubt that she aggressively sought to get on The apprentice.
Put simply it is near certain that she had enough interaction with Trump, that if “honeybunch” was a term Trump used – he would have used it.
That does NOT means that they had sex.
Daniels credibility took a serious hit on cross.
Not just for $chilling services to talk to the dead.
Daniels claims she got a ride to Trump’s hotel was dropped off two blocks away, and then walked to it.
Yet, Daniels hotel room was just across the street – Her room and Trump’s room were less than a football field away from each other.
Daniels is full of details about Trump’s room, but did not remember anything about her own room.
The room that Trump was staying at and the layout of the room are easily discoverable – as was the information about the room Daniels stayed in. Daniels forgot to study her own room in prep for testifying.
Daniels story has changed in significant ways many times.
Finally according to her own testimony there are witnesses to her going to Trump’s room – these people have publicly denied that happened. Daniels also purportedly told people contemporaenously – these people deny publicly that Daniles told them.
Following this brief splash of notoriety, Daniels will out of the biz. She was a B-list Actor at best, her films were always 5 or 6th place (at best) to other porn actresses, her age has now placed her in the Mature and Granny category of porn, no one will want to work with her, and she’s destine to working strip club tours should she decide to stay in the Biz. Women get old, Time always wins.
She knew well that her career in porn was in the retirement stage. Now if we could only wake up Brittney Spears to the same facts (it’s Over).
“There’s no Business like Show Business” and ‘That’s All Folks’
“The issue is whether he paid her to keep quiet to benefit his campaign.”
Nice deception. You snuck in: “to benefit his campaign.”
She has no first-hand knowledge about that issue, and admitted so on the stand.
Hope Hicks put the payoff into context—the disclosure of a porn actress claiming a sexual dalliance while Melania was at home with his newborn son—coming on the heels of the Access Hollywood tape — would have been devastating.
Weisselberg’s handwritten notes make clear that the money paid to Cohen was reimbursement—and enough to cover Cohen’s tax liability . There was also testimony that Trump tried to delay the payment until after the election—he wouldn’t have paid the money if he lost. THAT’S the smoking gun. Stormy wouldn’t go for it. So, he didn’t care about Melania.
Cohen testified that Trump directed him to make the payment from a home equity line of credit to prevent the payment from being traced back to him, which is why the payment was misrepresented as attorney fees. Why would Stormy have information about the details of how the money was misrepresented as attorney fees?
James Carville is frustrated that Trump is ‘more ahead than he’s ever been’, and that Democrat tactics are ‘not working’:
“It’s going the wrong way. It’s not working.Everything we’re that throwing is spaghetti at a wall, and none of it is sticking, me included.
We gotta try to… pic.twitter.com/OAMsDA37Ng
— Eric Abbenante (@EricAbbenante) May 10, 2024
Whether they had a consensual sex or not is irrelevant. It is a case about the bookkeeping of a legal expense. Federal Elections refused the case as did others. She was paid $130k for a NDA, and broke the contract, she should be sued for damages. She’s an extortionist. She saw an opportunity
She can’t be sued for testimony under oath. Her duty to testify overrides the NDA.
You say: “Why was Daniels testimony important? Because DJT and his attorneys have claimed the sexual encounter never happened. That defense is now out the window because of Daniels vivid description of what took place in 2006 in DJT’s suite.” I don’t think you understand this case. Trump is being accused of falsifying business records to hide payment of money to a blackmailer. There is no dispute that his attorney, Michael Cohen, paid this money. It is irrelevant whether the incident in the hotel suite happened or not.
Daniels testimony is entirely unimportant – it is irrelevant whether Daniels and Trump had sex 20 years ago.
The prosecutions claim has absolutely nothing to do with whether this event actually occured.
Frankly it is really ahrd to tell what the prosecutions case is – because almost none of the testimony so far has had anything to do with the crime that has been charged.
Trump has not been charged with having Sex With Daniels – whether that happened or not – it is legal.
Trump has not been charged with Paying for Daniels silence – which is legal. Though Daniels seeking payment for her silence SOMETIMES is extortion. Again it does not matter if Daniels story is true. Buying silence regarding a false story is as legal as bying a true story, and one of the things that came from other witnesses is that paying to kill false stories is extremely common.
Trump has not been charged with violating any election laws – because he has not violated any election laws.
Trump has been charged with 34 counts of Fraudulent records – which is a farce, because payments to Lawyers for NDA are legal expenses.
But there are several other problems.
These are private business records – this is NOT records submitted to clients or the govenrment. There were no tax requirements involved.
And Micheal Cohen was 1099’d for all the money he received. Presumably he also 1099’d daniels.
Fraud has many requirements.
It REQUIRES an intentional falsehood – it is impossible to intentionally lie to yourself and that is the claim here.
Trump is a private person. His businesses – those involved in this are privately held.
It REQUIRES a Duty to be truthful – people lie all the time – our current president lies both knowingly and unwittingly constantly.
He is telling these idiotic tales about his canabalized uncle and then falsely claiming that inflation was 9% when he took office.
None of us know for sure whether he is making these and many other stupid claims because he is demented, or because he is deliberately lying. Voters can decide for themselves what the consequence of those lies should be. Regardless, these are not crimes.
It requires actual harm to result from the false statement.
Bragg has yet to prove a signle requirement of the 34 charges of documents fraud he has alleged.
He has wasted everyone’s time prosecuting crimes which he has not charged – and that is illegal, but worse, he has failed to provide credible evidence of the uncharged crimes.
“On the stand DJT could drop his pants to try to disprove Daniels description of his genitalia”
Seriously ?
You are sick.
If you beleive that, then you are REQUIRED to acquit Trump. Daniels is making the accusation – not Trump. The burden of proof is on her.
The Daniels testimony was a side show.
If you are Daniels – her testimony was incredibly successful. She will likely make a fortune off of it – especially if Trump wins.
I strongly suspect Daniels is lying when she claims she wants Trump jailed. If Trump loses the election – Daniels value declines greatly.
Regardless, Daniels will get to make lots of money telling her story.
It does not matter whether the story is true. It does not matter if she has been incredibly self contrdictory.
Those who beleive her would do so no matter what. And many will pay to here her over and over.
I would note that Stormy is playing both sides. Those on the left buy her story. But many Trump fans pay for Signed photos of Daniels.
After all the testimony we have heard – I think Daniels is lying. It true her story would have been worth alot more. If True Stormy probably could have gotten Clinton to pay millions for it.
The person who will pay the most for a false story is the person who is harmed if even some people beleive it is true – Trump.
And that is who she sold her story to.
But you are free to beleive the latest version of her ever changing story is true.
Regardless, Stormy was a winner in her testimony – because she will make money off it.
Trump is also the winner from Her testimony. It does nto appear she went over well with the jury.
Until they got their marching orders and started to toe the line – the MSM pundits seem to think she bombed.
Trump is also a winner – because he has another huge appeals issue – a winner, and Jeophardy has applied. So this case is effectively over.
I would note that even if you believe Daniels – Trump is still a winner – Those Trump fans seeking Daniels autograph are happy that their hero bedded a porn star.
Bragg and Merchan are big losers from Daniels testimony. They could not control their own witness and Merchan could not control his own court. They made a mockery of the court. They made themselves and the court look bad.
And finally – Daniels said nothing about any crimes or provided any evidence of them.
No You and Merchan is not right that Trump’s asserting this never happened allows the prosecution to leap into the bedroom.
It is entirtely irrelevant to this case or the law whether Trump or Daniels is telling the truth.
Just as it is irrelevant to this trial whether the moon is made of green cheese.
I agree with you that Trump will not testify. There is too much danger to him if he does.
Like Kaplan and EnMoron before – he will be severely restricted in what he is allowed to say.
And if every word he says is the clear truth – Bragg will still seek to prosecute him for perjury.
There is no need to refute Daniels. Testifying will not change who beleives her and who does not.
Merchan never should have allowed this case to proceed.
Separately Merchan is lying.
There has been a standing objection to Daniels testimony from Trump’s lawyers from the start.
Merchan improperly overruled that.
There has been a tanding othe scope of Daniels testimony from the start.
Merchan overruled that.
There is no requirement for the defense to object over and over to each and every utterance that never should have been allowed in the first place.
This is just another appelate nail int he coffin of this case.
Necheles objected to the scope Daniels was being given.
Merchan explicitly refused to narrow the scope.
As a result he got LOTS of testimony that never should have been admitted – and the Judge knows that – that is why he is trying to figure out how to write a jury instruction to cure the mess he has made.
But you can not unring the bell.
You have massive problems with this case – Brag is prosecuting Trump for crimes he has not been charged with. He is doing WORSE than was done in the weinstein case – the crimes Trump has not been charged with are the core to Braggs case – without them everything else falls apart t- that is why Merchan was required to dismiss at the start.
The statute of limitation has expired on the crimes Trump has been charged with. Braggs theory is that he can extend the statute of limitations and increase those crimes to a fellony if they are for the purpose of covering up another crime.
But no other crime has been charged or is being prosecuted.
You keep trying to pretend that Merchan speaks with the authority of the law – he does not. He is wrong.
Not only is he wrong – but he is so clearly wrong that people who are not legal scholars know that he is wrong.
They may not understand the nuances of the law, but they know a biased judge and an unfair trial.
The very things you are gloating over are all wins for Trump.
Trump remains ahead of Biden by almost 3pts nationwide.
And leading in all swing states – many by near double digitis.
Further Trump is doing well in NJ, NY, and WA. It is not likely he will win any of those – but Biden will have to spend money defending them.
Two polls now have Trump leading in Washington. I still think those are outliars. At the same time they are indicatiosn that Biden’s strength in blue states is weak.
I have noticed another theme to nearly all the witnesses.
A substantial portion of them are Trump employees, or people who have dealt with Trump such as Pecker.
There has been a pattern:
You are testifying for the prosecution ? Yes, I have been subpeonad.
You like Trump ? Yes! He was a great boss, Wonderful to work for and with.
Outside of those prosecution witnesses that have never met Trump – Petty much every witness – including Daniels and Cohen has said wonderful things about Trump.
Daniels and Cohen were effusive about Trump in the past.
They ALONE are critical of him as witnesses in this trial.
Is the fact that everyone who has worked for Trump thinks he is a great boss or great guy relevant to this trial ?
Maybe not – but then all of Daniels testimony was irrelevant, that does not stop it.
But it does undermine this nonsense that Trump is a $hitty person to work for.
Or put differently – one more lie of yours exposed.
Next, Many of these witnesses were Women who worked for Trump – not one of them is reporting inappropriate conduct by Trump.
Trump attorneys did object before after enduring her testimony, but you do not continuously object every five minutes this judge needs to be disbarred because he is blatantly political. His daughter is profiting off of this case. The bar for a judge is an appearance of impropriety. That bar is long past met multiple times This judge should recuse himself, but does not what a slimy scumbucket
No, the daughter is NOT profiting from the case. I don’t know where people have got the idea that she is, but they need to cite at least some evidence. Instead they’re just claiming it with no basis in fact.
“Why was Daniels testimony important?”
Because it allows bottom-dwellers (like you) to publicize lurid garbage.