Below is my column on Fox.com on the closure of the government and defense cases in the Trump trial. It is clear that the government is going to achieve its objective in avoiding a direct verdict and giving this matter to the jury, which it hopes that the paucity of direct evidence of a crime will be overcome with an abundance of hostility to Donald Trump. As I previously have written, I am still hopeful that these jurors will vindicate the New York legal system with at least a hung jury. In the end, we will see if a Manhattan jury will exercise blind justice or willful blindness.
Here is the column:
With closing arguments scheduled for Tuesday, May 28, the prosecution of former President Donald Trump will finally head to a jury. Judge Juan Merchan has refused every opportunity to bring an end to this politically manufactured prosecution. Now it will be up to 12 New Yorkers to do what neither the court nor the prosecutors were willing to do: adhere to the rule of law regardless of the identity of the defendant.
Merchan has allowed the government to bring back into life a dead misdemeanor and convert it into 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. To accomplish this legal regeneration, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has vaguely referenced a variety of crimes that Trump allegedly was trying to conceal through the business record violations.
The problem is that he has left the secondary crime mired in uncertainty to the point that experts on various networks are still debating what the underlying theory is in the case.
Indeed, Bragg is expected to finally state with clarity what he is alleging … at the closing arguments of the case.
In the meantime, the prosecution is pushing to make it easier for the jury to convict. First, they have vaguely referenced a variety of possible offenses from tax to election violations. Bragg initially laid out four possible predicate crimes. It is down to three – a tax crime and violations of state or federal election law.
Merchan has ruled that the jury does not have to agree on what crimes were being covered up so the jury could literally have three different views of what happened in the case and still convict Trump.
Prosecutors are also seeking to effectively shorten the playing field by allowing the jurors to convict on a lower standard of proof for the key term in using “unlawful means.” The defense wants the jury instructed that it must find that such use of “unlawful means” was done with willful intent.
The prosecutors do not want to use that higher standard. For the defense, it is effectively reducing the field to the end zone to make it easier for the prosecution to score.
In the last few days, the Bragg strategy has come into sharper focus in one respect. Bragg is not counting on the evidence or the law. He is counting on the jury. Call it the Lawrence O’Donnell factor.
After Michael Cohen imploded on the stand in the trial, even experts and hosts on MSNBC and CNN stated that his admissions and contradictions were devastating. Cohen is not only accused of committing perjury in his testimony, but he matter-of-factly detailed how he stole tens of thousands of dollars from the Trump organization.
After being disbarred and convicted as a serial perjurer, Cohen waited for the statute of limitations to run on larceny to admit that he stole as much as $50,000 by pocketing money intended for a contractor.
Liberal commentators acknowledged the fact that Cohen had committed a far more serious offense than the converted misdemeanor against Trump (but was never charged). Yet, one figure stepped forward to assure the public that all was well.
MSNBC host O’Donnell said that he watched the testimony and that Cohen did wonderfully. Keep in mind that Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche asked Cohen point blank: “So you stole from the Trump organization, right?” Cohen answered unequivocably: “Yes, sir.”
O’Donnell, however, rushed outside to declare that Cohen was merely acquiring a bonus that he thought that he deserved as a type of “self-help”:
“Cohen [was trying] to rebalance the bonus he thought he deserved. And it still came out as less than the bonus he thought he deserved and the bonus he had gotten the year before.”
In other words, he first determined that his employer should pay him more and then elected to lie to his employer and steal the money. It is akin to New Jersey Democrat Sen. Bob Menendez claiming, in his nearby trial, that the gold bars and cash found in his home were just his effort to secure a well-deserved bonus for his public service.
O’Donnell was widely mocked for his galactic spin. However, he reflects the greatest danger for the Trump team. O’Donnell was showing a type of willful blindness; a refusal to acknowledge even the most shocking disclosures in the trial.
Some of the jurors admitted that MSNBC is one on their news sources and they exhibit the same all-consuming O’Donnell obsession with Trump. If so, they could listen to contradiction to contradiction and simply not recognize them like the MSNBC host. For some, Cohen could burst into flames on the stand but their eyes will not move from the person behind the defense table.
Many viewers have been raised in an echo chamber of news coverage where they avoid opposing facts on both the left and the right. They actively tailor their news to fulfill a narrative or viewpoint. A jury of O’Donnell’s peers would convict Trump even if the Angel Gabriel appeared at trial as a defense character witness.
It is the ultimate jury instruction not from the court but from the community. With jurors “back in the world” for six days and going to holiday cookouts and events, they will likely hear much of that social judgment and the need to “rebalance” the political ledger through this case.
If the jury is comprised of indoctrinated prog tools, no facts will matter – only if there is one rational person, then justice may prevail.
Jonathan: Everyone has an opinion om whether DJT will be convicted in his Manhattan criminal trial. There is what you call the “O’Donnell Factor”. Then there is the “Turley Factor”. You were on Fox from the Manhattan courthouse on Tuesday as their “legal analyst”–opining variously that “I think Trump will win this case” and “Costello is a kill shot witness” for the defense.
As it turns out Robert Costello got “killed” on cross by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger. In a series of emails she got Costello to admit his role in the conspiracy by DJT/Giuliani to silence Cohen–to keep him from cooperating with the federal investigation that would reveal the business fraud/ election interference scheme. Todd Blanche and his co-counsels didn’t want Costello to testify because they knew the series of emails would be damaging for the defense. But they got overruled by DJT who thought Costello could put Cohen on trial as a serial liar. In fact, Costello ended up being on trial. His credibility was trashed by Hoffinger in front of the jury–that laughed many times at Costello’s testimony and his lack of court decorum. Not a good sign. So much for your predictions on Fox. Ultimately, the jury will not be swayed by your opinions or that of O’Donnell. They will only consider the facts and evidence in their deliberations.
Everyone is speculating about what Justice Merchan will do about DJT’s 10 contempt violations and his continued attacks on prosecutors, witnesses and the judge. Ordinarily, a criminal defendant who violates a gag order just once will find himself in jail. But so far Justice Merchan has show unusual deference to DJT. Proof positive that Justice Merchan is not “conflicted” and doesn’t “hate” DJT.
After Tuesday’s proceedings DJT stood outside the courtroom and continued to attack Merchan: “The judge hates Donald Trump, just take a look. Take a look at him. Take a look at where he comes from…” Merchan was born in Bogota, Columbia but he and his parents moved to NY when he was six. It’s not the first time DJT has attacked his judges because of their ancestry. Racist tropes are DJT’s last resort.
So what will happen if DJT is convicted? No doubt, prosecutors will argue DJT should be incarcerated for a period of time that accounts for his previous 10 contempt violations and his continuing attacks on Merchan. If convicted don’t expect DJT will just see home detention at Mar-a-Lago. He will definitely face some prison time! Again, attacking the judge, his daughter and witnesses and violating gag orders over and over again is not a good trial strategy.
Trump’s disdain toward the Jury is shown in his strategy to play on their emotions by making Cohen the defendant — a highly manipulative tactic common with narcissists. Trump’s unwillingness to defend his actions with sincerity and candor could leave the Jury cold and unsympathetic. Nobody likes to be conned, even if the attempt is lame and doesn’t work. It shows disrespect. But that is how Trump deals with conflict and accusation.
If Trump dictates the defense’s closing argument to his lawyers based on his ego protection, I think he’s headed for big trouble. If he allows his lawyers to craft the summation in their client’s best interest, I think he’ll get off. So, we’ll see how he plays it.
What actions is Trump supposed to “defend?” No crime has been identified.
“Nobody likes to be conned” really? just explain how democrats get elected? that’s all they know how to do.
neither is using our constitution in a political game of lawfare.
May we put you down as “prison time” on May 24, 2024 at 11:20 AM, Dennis?
Merchan is on the Woke Left’s JV Team and is anxiously trying out for the Varsity Team. With a Trump conviction, it might just work Jonathan.
The jury’s decision will depend greatly on who has influence and two attorneys are on the jury.
O’Donnell is a useful idiot who serves as nothing more than entertainment value on a declining network. That others of his ilk might indeed be populating the jury is, regrettably, not so far fetched in that, depending upon the circumstances of the case, voir dire often seeks these out for inclusion.
Respectfully, professor…..Gabriel is an Archangel!
Indeed, Bragg is expected to finally state with clarity what he is alleging … at the closing arguments of the case.
I thought closing arguments were strictly limited to the evidence presented during the Trial?
But if Coangelo is going to push Election Interference, in Closing, that would open the door for Trump to lay out exactly why NDA’s are legal, and since generated by a lawyer, are in fact a legal expense.
(But we all KNOW Merchan will allow the out of bounds election interference claim, while shutting down the Defense when it responds in kind.)
I didn’t write this myself, I actually pieced it together from 2:different articles. I 100% agree with what it says though.
The modern political left is a cult. They have a definite derangement of the mind, and a hole -something missing- in their hearts. They envy the peace and joy they see in others. They are highly unsettled and unfulfilled. Many of them are manifestly evil. Leftists lack any sort of depth, meaning, courage and/or self-control. When challenged, they lose their shit when the weak nature of who they are is exposed.
REMEMBER: The need for control is a reaction to fear. Often people write the professional political leftists within the IC, Deep State and DOJ/FBI apparatus do not look fearful, act with fear, nor do they operate from an appearance of fearfulness. However, that counterpoint is wrong. It is exactly fear that creates the severe need for control. The more fearful they are, the more vitriolic and dangerous their triggered need for control becomes.
The way to destroy the professional political left is to laugh at them. Laugh and ignore the communists. Ridicule evil. Belittle them. Force them to exhibit their insufferable need for control. This natural ability to be their toxic kryptonite is the gift that Donald J Trump represents, and the best part is he doesn’t create it
O’Donnell has revealed his ethical core. Take whatever you feel you are entitled to (depending on who you are)?? Unbelievable. And, keep him away from any access to assets.
O’Donnell has revealed his ethical core.
I feel obligated to point out, O’Donnell is far too stupid to have core values, he might corrupt
MSNBC reached its zenith when Chris Matthews asked Erin Burnett to get a little closer to the camera. He also introduced Nora O’Donnell (no relation, I’m sure) to a national stage when she was a doe-eyed twenty-something toiling away at Roll Call. That guy was a bit of a bluff, blunt, blustering, buffoon, but he had good taste in women.
Then it became unwatchable with Al Sharpton and Rachel Maddow. Radio was invented for people who look like that. It’s like Bill Gates is their casting director. They’d be a better fit for NPR.
Turley is writing about his mirror-image on the left. O’Donnell gets carrried away with his partisanship as did the late Ed Schultz that I often found unwatchable. O’Donnell will spin with the best of them and if he is one’s only source of information, you won’t have a clear picture.
Professor Turley performs the same function for Fox News and sometimes works on behals of Republicans in Congress. He may find minor faults in the way Republicans word things while absolving them for major misdeeds. He uses the cover of his legal background and has the luxury of only having to talk about subjects of his choice. In Turley World, anything other than a directed verdict in the current Trump trial is a sham and if the verdict is guilty, it will be a miscarriage of justice. If/when there is another Trump uprising, Turley will be partially to blame
LOL… another Trump uprising to be blamed on Turley
By the way, there are no mirror images here. There are only sane and insane. The insane have taken over the asylum. Turley’s shortcoming is that you cannot be too rational with the insane.
News flash. You’re not an enigma. Comparing O’Donnell to Turkey is like comparing you, the enigma, to an actual enigma. Please come back and join us in reality.
Enigma writes like a typical white liberal. I wonder if he/she/it is commenting in virtual blackface?
With a dash of hot blood red for color, as in Malcolm X the Marxist.
https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/malcolm-x/index.htm
Here is some humor at the expense of Malcolm X and Black Panthers.
If only they had been committed to their chest thumping, red flag waving pledge. If only!!!
Black Child’s Pledge
I pledge allegiance to my Black People.
I pledge to develop my mind and body to the greatest extent possible.
I will learn all that I can in order to give my best to my People in their struggle for liberation.
I will keep myself physically fit, building a strong body free from drugs and other substances which weaken me and make me less capable of protecting myself, my family and my Black brothers and sisters.
I will unselfishly share my knowledge and understanding with them in order to bring about change more quickly.
I will discipline myself to direct my energies thoughtfully and constructively rather than wasting them in idle hatred.
I will train myself never to hurt or allow others to harm my Black brothers and sisters for I recognize that we need every Black Man, Woman, and Child to be physically, mentally and psychologically strong.
These principles I pledge to practice daily and to teach them to others in order to unite my People.
The Black Panther, October 26, 1968
by Shirley Williams
https://www.marxists.org/history/usa/workers/black-panthers/
What a hoot! I think it must have been Opposite Day when they wrote that. Give the Democrats credit, they brought them uppity colored-folks down, and in a hurry! Now they got them on the DNC Plantation, voting for Democrats, and working for peanuts.
Richmond is 50% black, and I have yet to hear one black person in my city tell me anything good about our current culture. Today an elderly black, next door neighbor knocked on my door for help. I immediately attended to her. We spoke about her health, her fears, the increase in violent crime, the trajectory of the nation, etc. None of it was good.
Same for yesterday when I visited a business in my neighborhood, black owned, by a retired, former police officer, gracious, lovely lady. We shot the breeze for a good while – once again, nothing good to say about our national pulse. I never discuss politics with people nor political parties / politicians / candidates, as I see them all the same. However, when it comes to those issues that impact health, I’m all over it. And the black folks I see daily tell me they do not like what is taking place in the public forum. Both individuals agreed it wasn’t this way 20 years ago. So much for “racism” and “get whitey”. Malcolm X, Black Panthers, anti-racism/woke, all frauds
@Floyd
I’ve often had the same thought, I suspect you are correct.
Without Joe Biden’s ilk there would be no need for a ‘Trump uprising.’ Cause and effect.
Among other disabilities, in the past Trump has demonstrated incredibly poor judgement about personal ‘fixer’ lawyers and loose women. His government appointments were much worse, imo. But that’s not, necessarily, a crime.
Turley’s/Fox commentary is the least of Trump worries.
Otoh, I must insist upon mandatory drug testing and, preferably, a full psych work-up for ‘genocide’ Joe before the 2024 Presidential Debates. Can’t be too careful these days.
*don’t believe a word you read in the media, including ‘Fox News’ .. . unless it’s true.
The cause of Trump’s rise wasn’t Biden, it was Obama. Trump was the response to a Black President, his polar opposite.
No, Trump is the response to a decrepit political elite which takes care of itself and ignores its constituents, from Bill’s open commercial borders to the endless wars of the Bush family. Obama did more to divide the nation than any president in my lifetime, and I go back to the 1940s; he was a complete failure as a leader, and his signal achievement, health care, was a fraud on the poor and the middle class.
Time to abandon the race-baiting and actually take a hard look at the the political, social, economic, and cultural rot that has permeated this country.
Obama didn’t divide Americans, he exposed them.
@enigma
That’s a good one. 🙄😂 I do not know what it will take to get hardcore progressives to join the rest of us in reality, I really don’t.
No, Obama played the Race Card, and further divided the country. Remember the savage black thug, Trayvon Martin – and how he violently assaulted George Z??? Obama could have been honest and called Trayvon what he was, a mugger. Nope, instead we got the silly, “If I had a son, he would have looked like Trayvon” blather.
As a result, millions of stupid white people put on hoodies in support of a dead, black thug, and streets got named after him. What a disaster!
And he said, on a purely racial basis, that the police in Cambridge, MA acted “stupidly” – when they didn’t, and he didn’t even know the facts of the case. The only person “exposed” was Obama – he showed that his basic instinct is to divide along racial lines and pander to racial grievances.
No, Obama played the Race Card
I would have voted for Geraldine Ferraro had she been my US Representative. She called Obama what he was: an opportunist
“if Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position.” “And if he was a woman he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept,” Ferraro said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-ferraro/geraldine-ferraro-defends-remarks-about-obama-idUSN1216129120080312/
I was thinking about Obama, in particular, when I mentioned ‘Joe Biden’s ilk’.
Obama, of course, was not elected because he was ‘a clean-cut articulate black man’. .. although it probably didn’t hurt.
Obama was elected with an overwhelming mandate to repudiate and repair the monumental abuses of the G.W. Bush/Cheney cabal. .. and in that Obama failed completely.
*BLM
Enigma: thank you–you are absolutely correct about questioning the role of a so-called “law professor” who feeds into the lie machine of MAGA media, knowing that some of those who watch have proven their propensity for violence when they believe that an injustice has occurred. Turley KNOWS that most MAGA followers still believe the Big Lie, but doesn’t speak out against it. Now, he’s feeding into the Trump trial “injustice rage”. Why Turley would lend his voice to feeding into this “injustice rage” is beyond me–other than wanting the money. Turley DOES understand the basis for the charges, but keeps on feeding into the trope that DA Bragg doesn’t know what Trump was charged with, hasn’t explained what Trump is charged with, it’s just a “bookkeeping error”, all the witnesses against Trump are liars, “any honest judge would grant a directed verdict”. it goes on and on, and Fox viewers fall for it.. Turley KNOWS better, Judge Merchan has already denied a directed verdict. He, his family and staff have been the objects of death threats. Heaven forbid something bad happens, Turley would have a share in the blame.
enigma,
A little mental exercise.
Name the action Trump took, that generated the crime Trump is charged with
Given the 87 counts in his four indictments, you probably should have been more specific. Assuming you mean the current trial. To reach a felony level. There had to be an underlying crime in furtherance of an additional crime. Of three choices of underlying crimes, I’ll oick the 34 counts of falsifying records, normally that would be 34 misdemeanors. The secondary crime which which I understand will be fully detailed in the closing statements is a violation of a New York State election conspiracy law. Check with me after Tuesday and I’ll be more specific.
What Trump did is to direct his CFO and two others to falsify records and make the payments to individuals who could have made him look bad just before the election. One of several election conspiracies was his agreement with David Pecker to buy and conceal negative stories and make up false stories about his rivals. Some of the stories Trump personally suggested. That’s what I’m going with for now but I haven’t done the amount of research I’d normally do if I was writing about it.
A little mental exercise for you. Do you believe Trump is innocent of obstruction of justice charges in Mar-a-Lago? How would you explain the classified documents found in his bedroom, four months after the search warrant was executed?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3gglgwe49zo
What your answer wasn’t, was an explanation.
Having grown up in the South, I can remember Juries and Police Depts and Sheriffs Depts that stacked the deck against black Americans for virtually any crime that they committed or did not commit. I thought we had moved past that. We, in the south, were certainly lectured by the enlightened masses from Harvard and Yale and the rest of the Ivy League crowd about our shortcomings and Racism and yet slowly the South has moved away, more and more, from that Dark Chapter in our history.
I thought that type of thinking had gradually started to leave American shores but it looks like it only moved up to the Northeast and West Coast, and some other city bastions, and has kept it’s racist thoughts but has also morphed more and more into rank antisemitism and total intolerance of what were once nationwide American ideals.
Used to be the greatest racists and antisemites in the South were poorer and lower class whites with a mingling of some middle class and upper class. Now it seems so many of the racists, antisemites, fascists and rabidly intolerant carry an Ivy League degree with them, in their upper class bastions and mansion studded suburbs. These people think they are so smart but they simply cannot understand that the veneer that they think is their armor is melting and showing the rot that lies beneath.
You said, “Now it seems so many of the racists, antisemites, fascists and rabidly intolerant carry an Ivy League degree with them, in their upper class bastions and mansion studded suburbs. These people think they are so smart but they simply cannot understand that the veneer that they think is their armor is melting and showing the rot that lies beneath.”
Great words! I am 70 years old, and I think this was so even back in the 1960s. They never cared about black people, and in fact, they despised them. That is why they cynically launched the Great Society Programs – to put an end to those uppity blacks who were making great strides toward equality. Nothing like paying for illegitimate children to destroy black family life.
@GEB
Yup. But really – there was a brief period maybe in the 60s this wasn’t the case; otherwise these people have always been these people, and a great many of those Berkeley beatniks were basically trust fund babies. 🤷🏻♂️
It is generational, and I have seen it over the years; anyone that thinks the dem party was ever anything but a continuation of the aristocracy of old does not know enough history. This is not remotely new. And it isn’t a pass for Republicans, either; both parties have been subsumed to various degrees, but the dems have consistently been what we shot in the a** to found this country in the first place. There is quite literally nothing redeeming about being a modern dem.
Maybe the hippies should have been more judicious in their drug use. And again, I am a lifelong independent voter.
Translation of Turley-speak: trump will be convicted and it’s time for magats to start attacking the jurors personally and publicly for it.
On a more realistic note, this case has whittled itself to the jury resonating with Cohen’s plight and thereby trusting his version of what went down in trump pay off world. Especially when juxtaposed against trump and Costello. Add to that much corroboration from Pecker, Hicks and Clifford.
Trump conviction by a week from today. Turley is letting you know.
Turley keeps to the MAGA media model—keep repeating the same lies over and over again and the message might stick—especially among the more devoted disciples. So, today’s little assignments are: 1. Keep up the messaging that Trump didn’t commit any crimes; 2. That the Manhattan DA has yet to articulate any crime; 3. That “we’ll” find out what the crime is when summation happens; 4. That Merchan wrongfully failed to grant a directed verdict; 5. That Laurence O’Donnell is stupid and wrong.
In reply: Turley knows that not only has O’Donnell done a marvelous job of explaining the case against Trump, but he is widely respected. Turley sold his credibility for cash. Turley will never get either his own program or a judgeship. I predict that his book is not likely to be a best seller either.
Turley knows that the Manhattan DA has a solid case against Trump. Turley also knows that the charges have been laid out over and over again and that regardless of how many lies Cohen may have told, his testimony is backed up by extensive documentary evidence. So, the jury may buy all the attacks against Cohen being a liar, etc but they can’t ignore the paper trail. Turley can’t really come up with any case or statutory law requiring a judge to take the case away from the jury when there is a credibility issue, especially when there is other evidence supporting the disputed testimony.
Turley also knows that Judge Merchan would be committing judicial misconduct if he granted a directed verdict when there is such an extensive amount of documentary evidence. BUT Turley also knows that most of the people he pitches his spin to DO NOT know any better—that’s where Turley has crossed the line, IMHO. Turley sells himself as a lofty “law professor “ but in a previous post falsely accused Judge Merchan of dishonesty, knowing that the audience of Fox is unsophisticated and unfamiliar with the Rules of Professional Conduct that prohibit attorneys from accusing a judicial official of dishonesty. This is intellectual dishonesty—call it the “Turley Effect “.
+100
This site needs a down vote button.
Im fond of using this one instead
🖕🏾
Gigi keeps to the CRAZY media model—keep repeating the same lies over and over again and the message DOESN’T stick.
Make that the “Turley Factor”.
the point isn’t “justice”. It is lawfare…draining a person of money, time and FREEDOM!
Reading the column, it seems a guilty verdict results in reversal on appeal.
But it take Weinstein’s case FOUR years to be overturned, and even that offers a chance at a retrial. A conviction, any conviction, is a dangerous thing.
Yes, a conviction will be overturned. There was never a crime, and Merchan allowed the case to go forward, with no crime.
But all the Trump casses are planned, coordinated lawfare. Justice is the enemy of lawfare. The process is punishment, with a stupid and corrupt judge, a Jury gets a case like this. The Jury thinks, “well, we sat through a trial, even if I dont see it, all the lawerys see a crime” A conviction is like winning the lottery. Huge longshot odds, but when it hits, it is delicous for the left. ANY of these case that goes against Trump will be overturned. This is the first criminal trial, so a conviction means the media can now use “convicted felon running for President Donald J Trump. . . .
That is the ultimate goal.
Getting overturned is 100% sure thing.
It felt like Merchan’s hostile bias, apparent from the outset, reached a crescendo with the defense case, slamming Costello and refusing any expert testimony. It’s like Merchan is competing with Engoron for number of reversible errors, but this trial has a more ominous due process and sixth amendment overhang as a criminal matter. As you note, the fix is in, so much will turn on jury instructions, and assuming Merchan’s greasy thumb will remain on the scale, whether there are a few members of the jury that will resent the process, feel that they along with Trump are getting played and see this trial as a script written by Orwell, directed by Kafka, produced by Stalin and acted by the Keystone Cops.
Soon the fulness of time will be come.
The Trump jury should do some jumping jacks. It would be good for their cardiovascular system.
Who is Lawrence O’Donnell and why is it important that I don’t know him?
HE is a self described Socialist and writer for the West Wing. Undergraduate degree in economics from Harvard. No Legal training at all that I can find.