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.
So it all comes down to 12 jurors each believing there might have been intent to commit an unspecified crime.
That’s really insane.
Turkey. So sad you’ve become such a sell-out. Neither you nor Drershowitz will be well-regarded in the pantheon of history for it. #sad
” 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.”
You can be sure that Democrat operatives are, at this very moment, digging through the personal lives of these jurors and will be contacting and threatening any jurors suspected of wavering in their support of the prosecution. The fix is in.
Most of you who comment on this site are not practicing attorneys.
if joe biden can get away with making the statement that donald trump is a threat to democracy, then anything short of a failure to get a conviction on the Bragg case against DJT will be an actual, not theoretical, threat to our democracy.
Why can’t you be a decent enough person to give yourself a pseudonym rather than “anonymous”? I intend to skip any posts from that name in the future, without even knowing whether it is you. What a stupid, jerky thing to do. Make up a name for Heaven’s sake!
Special Counsel Jack Smith seeks a gag order to prevent Trump from commenting about the armed raid on Mar-a-Lago and the authorization to shoot, claiming that it’s standard procedure:
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67490070/581/united-states-v-trump/
Of course, if it’s standard procedure, the DOJ or FBI would have issued the same authorization to shoot when they raided Hillary Clinton’s home to retrieve unlawfully-retained classified documents back in early 2015.
Oh, that’s right — the DOJ and FBI never raided Hillary’s home to retrieve stolen classified documents, and just let her destroy more than 30,000 documents that were under subpoena, taking Hillary’s word that the destroyed documents were just about “wedding planning” and other such total BS — even though they found out much later that Hillary had lied and destroyed a large number of highly-classified documents instead of returning them to the government.
“Of course, if it’s standard procedure, the DOJ or FBI would have issued the same authorization to shoot when they raided Hillary Clinton’s home to retrieve unlawfully-retained classified documents back in early 2015.”
ATS – No it is NOT SOP. It is NOT SOP to conduct a raid.
It si NOT SOP to conduct a SWAT Raid, it is NOT SOP to authorize deadly fdorce.
If you were slightly clueful you would know, this. This issue LITTERALLY came up with regard to Ruby Ridge and with Regard to the Bundies and David Koresch. At Ruby ridge the State courts came very near to indicting an FBI Agent for manslaughter.
Regardless a less politically in the tank media at that time discussed the FACT that FBI Director Free had authorized Deadly Force and that was highly unusual.
Government agents are ALWAYS permitted to engage in self defense – no authorization is necescary for that – even ordinary people have that right.
A deadly force authorization means there is a lower standard that self defense that can be met to use deadly force.
As to Hilary Clinton – just as with Joe Biden THERE WAS NO RAID.
Clinton was caught destroying evidence.
Clinton was permitted by Comey to have HER OWN attonery’s – who did not have security clearances review her emails and decide what got turned over to FBI and what did not.
There was no warrant, no swat team no raid. And Clintons “cooperation” was far less than Trump’s.
There was also no raid of Biden’s homes or the Biden center or UDel.
I have addressed this all – you are parroting left wing nut talking points that have no basis in reality.
The DOJ/FBI in numerous different investigation have been attempting to provoke violence.
Ther eis not a single J6 defendant that took a gun into the capitol – yet pretty much ALL J6 defendants were SWATTED – Including a Journalist for a major new outleft in Miamia that was contracted to cover the protests followed the story into the Capital with his Bulky Professional Gear, Did not chant, or wear a MAGA hat or cloths, carried a press pass, and he was hit with a SWAT raid with 20Armed FBI agents at 6 in the morning with lasers signts on himself and his entire family including his children.
This is being done in the HOPE of provoking a violent response. So far the only one of these “raids” that has turned violant was a very recent ATF raid. That resulted in the death of the target and there appears to be strong evidence that ATF was not following their own rules.
Regardless, the FBI has been HOPING for violence.
The only actual violence we have seen is from Antifa and pro-hamas protestors.
Regardless, those on the Left are NOT subject to SWAT raids or deadly force authorizations.
HUunter Biden actually has guin charges – and the FBI did not SWAT or even Raid him.
Previously I recomended reading Radley Blako’s “The rise of the Warrior Cop”
book. The Militarization of the police was initiated by the right, but both republicans and democrats have fallen all over themsleves to continue that – atleast through the last decades of the 20th century.
Regardless, it has been disastrously bad public policy and has dramatically increased violent encounters with the police.
The LEFT has more recently taken to using the same bad tactics in Political cases.
This NONSENSE must end.
Do you really want a Trump DOJ raiding Rep. Thomspon or Schiff or myriads of leftist politicians who have engaged in dubious political acts that can be painted as sufficiently criminal to justify and investigation and then send in a SWAT Team. ?
Sorry, while my reply is accurate with respect to facts, I missed the fact that you were writing satirically.
I apologize.
I wonder what garbage Turley will phone in today from his Memorial Day Weekend roadtrip.
Go away.
This website has never been compelled to endure so many panicked, incoherent, and slavering communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO, AINO) trolls who are mistaken in their delusional belief that they have a valid argument or rationale for attempting to impeach the unassailable and Good Professor Jonathan Turley, or even a scintilla of the necessary capacity to stave off the impending election of Real President Donald J. Trump.
George, just yesterday you lamented that Live Nation (Ticketmaster) was being sued by the DOJ for anti-trust action. You then said, “It would be like Taylor Swift being sued for selling too many records” (or something to that effect.
The truth is that Ticketmaster first caught the DOJ’s attention during Swift’s tour last year. Fans were outraged that tickets were seemingly not available almost as soon as they were supposed to go on sale. And Taylor Swift herself was upset.
So George no serious commenter is really looking to you for insightful, intelligent comments.
Ikn about george – I am just confused. Anyone please correct me – the fed elections commission with jurisdiction over election campaigns didn’t think the “hush money” met fec fed violations. So there is no underlying fed crime afoot regarding campaign money. Moreover the irs isn’t squaking. So there is no tax or accounting crimes afoot. So Bragg basically has his state misters beyond their sol? As the foundation? Where does he get jurisdiction? To even act? If the scouts told Paxton to shut up and color – when the constitution does speak to original jurisdiction between states – what makes Bragg so special? He has prosecutor standing how? To vindicate my rights ? I don’t vote in NY. I’m sorry I just can’t see his jurisdiction at all.
He may have had record keeping jurisdiction – but sol have passed- how can he invoke some fed rules breached as the underlying- when ag Paxton couldn’t? Its absurd really. And when the feds have clearly pre emptied in the tax and election arenas. I don’t understand how the judge given pre emotion and precedent after Paxton can tell the jury they can use fed laws as foundation….bc who is Bragg to enforce fed law ? This case turns shit on its head – yet the same Sotomayor question remains – but this time it isn’t why does Colorado get to decide….it’s why and how does ny get to decide?
I may sign off I’m not afraid – cuz I’m terrified – my man taking bids again – 5 June they think they’ll tee bone us out his way so he can move. Anything happens to me/us I’m counting any you all to follow the money and the baby xc hey coach dba. Js
Dna of the 10 new oven – belly
Not only does’nt he have jurisdiction, but he can not present evidence to the jury of crimes not charged (or previously convicted).
This case is violating pretty much every single principle of law that has arrisen regarding the rights of defendants going back to the Magna Carte.
If Swift is upset – she can bypass ticket master for her concerts.
LOL — It’s a well-known FACT that Turley hires trolls from BOTH ends of the idiot spectrum to argue with each other and generate controversy in his lame comment section.
Idiots that hang out here EVERY DAY, ALL DAY, with recognizable screen names are HIRED by Turley to generate interest which would not exist if everyone agreed with everyone else about everything. This has been confessed in the comment section by some of them on more than one occasion over the years.
It only takes a half-dozen functioning brain cells to figure out which trolls commenting here are on Turley’s payroll.
I wonder if this trump supporter will show up on a Trump ad.
https://flip.it/NyBIyv
I couldn’t find any mention in that NBC trash article about why it took more than 3 years to sentence the guy.
And now it’s time for another thrilling episode of Bickering Morons That Will Argue About ANYTHING — starring Turley’s halfwit hired trolls, each of whom almost graduated from elementary school and has several fake screen names so that, whenever there is a lull in the bickering, they can argue with themselves just to keep the nonsense flowing.
Now is the time for the endless ad hominem attacks. Necessitated by the utter lack of intellectual acumen, needed to stay on topic and engage on the facts
Jonathan, stop trying to 2nd guess the Jury…they haven’t even been handed the case to decide.
My hunch, and it’s just a hunch, is that the Jury will be highly influenced by the Defense’s Closing Argument, and specifically whether that summation insults the Jury’s intelligence by trying to manipulate them emotionally (as Trump will do if allowed to dictate the Summation).
Trump’s vulnerability is that he is prone to insulting anyone who he fears.
that Dennis McIntyre and PBinCA write almost identical verbiage is not a coincidence. In the above comment he makes mistake of addressing Professor Turley by his first name just like Dennis.
frauds, liars, DNC paid trolls all manipulators
Trump’s vulnerability is that he is prone to insulting anyone who he fears.
how rich!!!
Is there anybody Trump has not insulted with verbal garbage?
He’s very good at afflicting the comfortable.
It’s noteworthy that that the DNC trolls started using the word “garbage” about 2 weeks ago. Maybe it is the person in different guises.
Add ‘Gigi’ to the list, there are often many similarities there, as well.
PBINCA – not only shouldn’t this case have gone to the jury – it should not have gone to trial.
Even when there is no political factors to a case Juries are notoriously unreliable.
In my county the more serious the charges the less evidence a jury needs to convict.
We have litterally had a man convicted of murder based ton the Dream testimony of a witness.
Stuff that should not get in gets in.
Trump’s Keeps Gaslighting
But Turley Never Notices
The former president’s Truth Social account posted a video posing the question “What happens after Donald Trump wins?” and providing a possible answer: In the background was the phrase “unified Reich.”
That maneuver — floating an outrageous policy and then pretending he had done no such thing — is another tool that Trump routinely uses. After Trump’s Truth Social account shared the video with the slightly-blurred “unified Reich” message, his spokeswoman claimed the video had been “created by a random account online and reposted by a staffer who clearly did not see the word, while the president was in court.” The campaign removed the post.
The disavowal is part of the game, says Jason Stanley, a Yale philosophy professor who specializes in the rhetoric of fascism. “You do it and then you deny it and it’s just systematic, over and over and over again,” he told me in a phone call. “The people who want to hear it hear it, and it signals the direction you want to go in.” And for those uncomfortable with the extremism, the denial provides “a way of lying to themselves and telling themselves this is not what’s really going on.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2024/05/24/trump-fascist-rhetoric-reich-policy/
……………………………….
This piece cites numerous instances where Trump used fascist rhetoric, or said something completely outrageous, then denied it shortly thereafter. We’ve seen it too many times to believe these are just innocent gaffes.
Yet Professor Turley never seems to notice. Instead he keeps painting Trump as a ‘victim’ worthy a sympathy. Which is another fascist stratagem: ‘Portraying the leader, and his followers, as victims of unjust plots’.
Is Johnathan Turley a closet fascist?? If not, why does he never notice Trump’s constant game of, “I’m really a fascist but not really”..?
Another Fascist Trope: ‘The Rigged Election Threat’
The Times has documented more than 500 campaign events, social media posts and interviews during the 2024 cycle in which Mr. Trump falsely accused Democrats or others of trying to “rig,” “cheat,” “steal” or otherwise “influence” the next election — or of having done so in 2020.
Mr. Trump has adapted the specifics of his accusations with each of the three election cycles. But in each case, his pattern of discourse has followed the same contours. He sows doubt about the legitimacy of the election, and then begins to capitalize on that doubt by alluding to not necessarily accepting the election results — unless, of course, he wins.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/05/24/us/politics/trump-election-results-doubt.html
Is it unlawful to question an election?
No, if you go to court with evidence showing specific irregularity.
Yes, if after you’ve had that chance, and come up with nothing (according to Rudy), and then try to manipulate people into thinking there was something, and that you deserve to remain in office….going as far as filing false slates of Electors (fraud), yep, what started out as legal before going to court is now totally illegal when taken as far as Trump took it. Thank you for the question.
so who are you now? Dennis? PBinCA? Svelaz? Wally? turdrunner more likely
bwahahahahaahahahaha
You can have plenty of evidence (like 2020), but if the court scuppers it’s duty and refuses to look at it (like 2020) there is no recourse/justice.
Like when Al Gore presented evidence that the hanging chads in Florida cost him the election?
Like when John Kerry presented evidence when questioning the legitimacy of the voting machines in Ohio?
Like Hilary presented evidence of Russian interference? (Has she ever actually conceded that she lost? Has Stacy Adams?)
They all “claimed, without evidence” as the media likes to say, that their losses were the result of someone or something stealing their rightful victories from them.
It is not illegal to have an alternate slate of electors. It’s been done before.
Anonymous, talk is cheap. Courts need PROOF.
Not to hold hearings they do not – They need credibly claims – affidavits are sufficient.
Proof is something that is establishe or not, at hearings – efter discovery, and where witnesses are cross examined and evidence is tested.
Not a single 2020 Election case was actually dismissed over lack of proof.
Not a single court allowed discovery or witnesses, or examination and cross examination.
That is where in the US we determine whether there is proof
The 2020 election cases were all dismissed using a variety of legal games and truicks.
For mootness, before the election for lack of ripeness after the election using laches, or standing.
In many cases the very same court that refused to allow Trump to challenge corrupt election changed before the elections because it was too early ruled AFTER the election that it was now too late.
Many of these are important legal doctrines. But the purpose of them is NOT to prevent actual cases and controvercies from being adjudicated or to prevent Judges from making tough calls.
It cannot be unlawful to question an election otherwise Hillary would’ve been indicted years ago.
In communist countries, yes.
You mean by trying to bury the NY POst hunter Biden story in 2020 ? Or by counting hundreds of thousands of mail in ballots that never had signatures verified in GA ?
Or do you mean the weaponization for law enforcement and the courts as a political campaign strategy ?
Regardless, the reason that the left is so terrified right now is that Trump is 7pts ahead of where he was in Nov. 2020.
For Democrats to tip this election they MUST win the popular vote – and by atleast a full percent.
If the do not – the courts WILL take seriously allegations of Fraud.
Currently trump will win the popular vote by about 7M votes – if the polls are correct.
Democrats can not push through 7M fraudulent votes without getting caught.
The left likes to Rant that Fraud is rare in elections – that is FALSE. It is Rare in elections where one candidate wins significantly.
The Fascist Left hopes you overlook all their totalitarian action and focus on their imaginary claims about opponents.
They are a clear and present danger to America with this Stalinist Show Trial just another among the many examples.
^^ DNC paid troll. Ignore. ^^
Yes, Trump constantly uses “fascist rhetoric” as defined by idiot left wing nuts who think being told that they are actually going to have to pay off their college loans is Fascist.
Do you idiots understand that most of us are away that the Jusse Smollet nonsense was a HOAX ?
Fewer are aware that all or nearly all of the Swastika’s and other Nazi or racist graffetti that shows up on our campuses COMES FROM THE LEFT.
Most of it is HOAXES – like the supposed nooses at NASCAR, but some of it is actual LEft wing nut anti-semitism.
Are there actually a few moron’s on the right capable of this nonsense ? Sure, but for every one on the Right dumb enough to do something like this, there are a dozen Left wing nuts who think they can get away with a HOAX.
Do you actually think that you can produce studies and papers and spin and tell us all What Trump says – when all we need to do is go to our listen to a Trump rally or follow Trump on Truth Social ?
Why exactly should we trust you or your sources – when we can far more easily hear Trump right from his own mouth ?
People listen to Trump and follow him and learn quickly – that you are lying.
We listen to Biden and learn quickly that he is rarely decipherable, and never truthful – though at this point in his life he is likely demented enough to Beleive what he is saying.
This Blexit activist is exceptional. Listen to her message:
https://x.com/CitizenFreePres/status/1793861660094177342
Just a lil help OFK:
Video Link:
https://video.twimg.com/amplify_video/1793762201993367552/vid/avc1/1280×720/5YAsuGlFK0MTqi9S.mp4?tag=14
“bring back into life a dead misdemeanor and convert it into 34 felony counts”
That’s a hydra on steroids. One dead head turned into 34. Hercules, step forth with your torch!
Samuel Alito: waive whatever flags you wish proudly. Democrats can go F*** themselves
“In July 2016, Ginsburg told the New York Times: “I can’t imagine what this place would be—I can’t imagine what the country would be—with Donald Trump as our president. … For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be—I don’t even want to contemplate that.” She said that if her late husband were around to see a Trump presidency, he would have said: “Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.” A few days later, Ginsburg doubled down in an interview with CNN, calling Trump a “faker” and saying: “He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. … How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns?” Ginsburg then apologized for her comments, but she never recused herself from cases involving Trump, including one about the disclosure of Trump’s tax returns.
Why didn’t Senate Democrats call for Ginsburg’s recusal following her public comments opposing Trump during the 2016 campaign? “Because I don’t remember her doing that. I don’t remember her doing that. And, like, who said that she did that?” Kaine told The Dispatch. When The Dispatch pointed out those Ginsburg comments were made in on-the-record media interviews, Kaine replied: “I don’t know. I would have to see that to believe that to be true.”
Asked the same question about why she didn’t call for Ginsburg to recuse, Hirono replied: “Why don’t we deal with the issues that are before us now?” Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island told The Dispatch: “I don’t know what cases she was ruling on at that point. They [Republicans] weren’t asking for [recusal].”
https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/dispatch-politics/a-double-standard-in-alito-flag-flap/
Anonymous said: “Samuel Alito: waive whatever flags you wish proudly. Democrats can go F*** themselves”
EXACTLY. First.,Alito and his wife are not co-joined identical twins. His opinions and hers do not necessarly match, and he is not, and should not be held, accountable for her political sentiments. Second, from what I understand, SCOTUS Justices have an affirmative duty to serve unless formally disqualified, which obviously has not happened to Alito. I now see that Demoncraps Tick Turbin and Shill-Don Whor3Hou$3 are requesting a meeting with John Roberts on this “issue”. Hopefully, Roberts does the right thing, which is to not give those buzzards so much as the time of day, but, frankly, I don’t trust him on that.
Senate Judiciary Democrats request meeting with Chief Justice Roberts over Alito flag controversy:
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/senate-judiciary-democrats-request-meeting-chief-justice-roberts-over-alito
Thw Alito upside down flag nonsense is tailor made for Turley’s idiot gallery to stew over all Memorial Day weekend while Turley is off somewhere vacationing and phoning in his troll-triggering diatribes.
This flag-upside-down is a violation of norms. Altho it’s a mistake to try to read someone’s mind by a flag displayed at home residence, or displayed by his wife. Why? because of the sinister ways it can be interpreted.
you are a violation of norms. oh, and of basic biology too
YTou can interpret someone else’s flag anyway that you wish.
The odds of your being correct when you try to engage in mind reading of other people is near zero.
But lets presume that the upside down american flag is Alito’s personal expression of concern that this country is in danger.
he is both free to beleive that, and correct.
Further that is a view that is shared by nearly the entire country – fight and left. heeeeeeeeee LBiden is the end of the rule of law, and monumental incompetence.
It would not surprise me to have Judge Chutkan flying an upside down american flag as a signal of distress – except that she probably does not KNOW that is what an upside down S flag means.
Regardless she is free to do so.
What I find incredibly interesting is that symbols and flags that sprung up accross the country starting 9/12/2001 that were popular right and left for a long time are now all purportedly sympbols of white supremecists.
ALL the flags of the revolution mean the same thing – “Do Not F$%K with us”.
That was the message to the british in 1776, that was the message to Al Queda in 2001.
That is the message of those flying the same flags today.
If your the one “F#$King with us” you might want to think seriously – that did not go so well for Britian in 1776, nor Al Queda in 2001.
It is unlikely to go that well for you today.