Japan Today
world

Trump doesn't testify as defense rests case

52 Comments
By Maggy DONALDSON

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2024 AFP

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


52 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

without the former president following through on a vow to testify

Trump was never going to testify. Despite his repeated claims that he was going to, all those who have studied his behaviour said that there was no way he would.

Of course he has a right not to incriminate himself on the stand, and the jury should not take any conscious inference from it.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

Trump doesn't testify as defense rests case

What happened to all the MAGA criers that Trump was being gagged, not going to be allowed his day in court, the judge was afraid if Trump testified he would blow the lib dem radical left judge's case wide open with his truth bombs?

Let's see how many times the sentiment of sour grapes can be conjugated.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

"I think a great case was put on... It should be dismissed before you even have any verdict," the Republican said outside court Tuesday. "It's very sad. But the good news is they've not proven the case. There is no crime."

Apart from attacking Michael Cohen, this has been his de facto defense, at least in public, one that I have seen parroted on Fox News. There is no crime, he hasn't been told of the charges blah blah blah - essentially that it is a Kafkaesque trial. In fact, you will see precise this argument trotted out below in the next few hours.

Unfortunately it doesn't work in the court where the charges are clear. But it will help spin the narrative among the MAGA faithful of a deep state Democrat conspiracy to prevent Trump from running for President.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

What happened to all the MAGA criers that Trump was being gagged

It turns out that he doesn't want to speak when he actually has the chance. He's a funny one, that Mr Trump.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Donald Trump's defense lawyers rested their case Tuesday -- without the former president following through on a vow to testify -- as the judge scheduled jury deliberations

Of course he didn’t. He. Was. Lying.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Lawyer Robert Costello was grilled further on Tuesday on emails he sent to prosecution star witness Michael Cohen after the FBI raided Cohen in 2018.

Apparently a disaster - a witness who only boosted the prosecution's case, both his behaviour and the actual evidence he gave.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Robert Costello was a terrible witness for Trump: he was antagonistic to the judge to the extent that he was reprimanded by the judge.

Then on cross, he was forced to confront his own damning words about "opening this back channel of communication" to Trump about what was happening with Cohen.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

What happened to all the MAGA criers that Trump was being gagged,

Around.

not going to be allowed his day in court, the judge was afraid if Trump testified he would blow the lib dem radical left judge's case wide open with his truth bombs?

Well, not really allowed to give a testimony if you can’t talk about the people accusing you of a crime, what’s the purpose when your constitutional rights are being blocked? You want to address the elephant in the room, but you’re not allowed to talk about it. Just pure liberal political insanity.

Let's see how many times the sentiment of sour grapes can be conjugated.

With this so-called judge, let’s see.

-19 ( +1 / -20 )

"So-called judge"

Typical response of the global anti-democracy herds supporting Russia/China before the US.

14 ( +14 / -0 )

bass4funk

Well, not really allowed to give a testimony if you can’t talk about the people accusing you of a crime, what’s the purpose when your constitutional rights are being blocked? You want to address the elephant in the room, but you’re not allowed to talk about it. Just pure liberal political insanity.

There is nothing political about it. Trump didn't take the stand because he would perjure himself in 5 seconds...

With this so-called judge, let’s see.

The judge hasn't acted in any way that could be perceived as biased.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

Typical response of the global anti-democracy herds supporting Russia/China before the US.

None here. I’m more concerned about the one-sided anti-American Marxists that want to involve themselves deeper into this war.

There is nothing political about it.

And the moon landing was a farce.

Trump didn't take the stand because he would perjure himself in 5 seconds...

By calling out Cohen and Daniel’s?? .

The judge hasn't acted in any way that could be perceived as biased.

Maybe Europeans see it that way from abroad, ok….

-17 ( +0 / -17 )

Case was so poor that his testimony became unnecessary.

he doesn’t have to prove innocence- They have to prove guilt and they didn’t.

of course there will be a conviction anyway, that has always been predetermined.

overturn on appeal.

-20 ( +0 / -20 )

What happened to Trump's demand to speak and not being allowed to do so?

16 ( +16 / -0 )

Case was so poor that his testimony became unnecessary.

lol Yea. With all the evidence and the testimony of nearly a dozen state witnesses, Trump's defense only needed the help of a paralegal, and a contemptuous Trump acolyte attorney to neutralize the case. What crimes? Reeeee

he doesn’t have to prove innocence- They have to prove guilt and they didn’t.

Oh yes they did.

overturn on appeal.

lol What are you going to say when that doesn't happen?

15 ( +15 / -0 )

BlacklabelToday  08:02 am JST

he doesn’t have to prove innocence- They have to prove guilt and they didn’t.

of course there will be a conviction anyway, that has always been predetermined.

I thought the jury decided things like that.

bass4funkToday  07:59 am JST

"Trump didn't take the stand because he would perjure himself in 5 seconds..."

By calling out Cohen and Daniel’s?? 

Um. He's the defendant. I think he'd be expected to answer questions about what he did or didn't do, not go off on unhinged rants about prosecution witnesses. It's up to his lawyers to undermine their credibility.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Blacklabel

he doesn’t have to prove innocence- They have to prove guilt and they didn’t.

of course there will be a conviction anyway, that has always been predetermined.

What? How do you arrive at that conclusion?

13 ( +13 / -0 )

not going to be allowed his day in court, the judge was afraid if Trump testified he would blow the lib dem radical left judge's case wide open with his truth bombs?

Well, not really allowed to give a testimony if you can’t talk about the people accusing you of a crime, what’s the purpose when your constitutional rights are being blocked? You want to address the elephant in the room, but you’re not allowed to talk about it. Just pure liberal political insanity.

The gag order is for specific extrajudicial comments. The honorable judge made it very, very clear that TFG would be allowed to testify about anything while on the stand. The gag order doesn’t apply there.

So, Trump is a whining chicken.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Um. He's the defendant. I think he'd be expected to answer questions about what he did or didn't do, not go off on unhinged rants about prosecution witnesses.

No, in the U.S. he is absolutely allowed to address his accusers of the charges hurled against him since he is the “defendant” he is not allowed to do that regardless iIf if is a rant or not, they’re ranting all kinds of lies, biases and slanders against the man and he just has to listen and take it. Just never, ever seen anything like this in the U.S., not one single mafia that’s living today has gone through this. Quite a few famous mobsters spoke out on this injustice.

It's up to his lawyers to undermine their credibility.

Well, they’re only allowed to go so far, so a lot of evidence that they do have to prove Trump’s innocence is not allowed to be brought in, this entire court is a ruse and a sham.

-17 ( +0 / -17 )

I thought the jury decided things like that.

Little thing called “jury instruction” determines what they can and can’t consider or do.

who instructs the jury of this?

-19 ( +0 / -19 )

The judge can identify Cohen as unreliable witness and instruct the jury to discount his testimony. Will he? No

judge can instruct if only a misdemeanor is found the final verdict must be not guilty because of statute of limitations. Will he? No.

this judge will get the mandatory verdict demanded. Then appeal will overturn it.

-20 ( +0 / -20 )

who instructs the jury of this?

Someone with good moral character, and an actual understanding of the law, and it's application.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Blacklabel

I thought the jury decided things like that.

Little thing called “jury instruction” determines what they can and can’t consider or do.

who instructs the jury of this?

An impartial judge.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

The judge can identify Cohen as unreliable witness and instruct the jury to discount his testimony. Will he? No

Why would he do that? That point was made very clear in both direct and cross.

Odd you don't have the same expectation with that Costello character who couldn't stop back talking the judge.

judge can instruct if only a misdemeanor is found the final verdict must be not guilty because of statute of limitations. Will he? No.

lol This is not correct.

this judge will get the mandatory verdict demanded. Then appeal will overturn it.

lol This isn't going to happen. What will the excuse be then?

13 ( +13 / -0 )

bass4funk

Um. He's the defendant. I think he'd be expected to answer questions about what he did or didn't do, not go off on unhinged rants about prosecution witnesses.

No, in the U.S. he is absolutely allowed to address his accusers of the charges hurled against him since he is the “defendant” he is not allowed to do that regardless iIf if is a rant or not, they’re ranting all kinds of lies, biases and slanders against the man and he just has to listen and take it.

That hasn't happened in the courtroom. Anything Cohen has accused Trump of has been handled by Trump's lawyer.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Blacklabel

The judge can identify Cohen as unreliable witness and instruct the jury to discount his testimony. Will he? No

Sure. Because the jury can decide if Cohen is credible or not. That's what they are there for.

judge can instruct if only a misdemeanor is found the final verdict must be not guilty because of statute of limitations. Will he? No.

That's because it is more than a misdemeanor.

this judge will get the mandatory verdict demanded.

The judge will let the jury decide.

Then appeal will overturn it.

You hope.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

“without the former president following through on a vow to testify”

He gagged himself. What a shocker.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

Quite a few famous mobsters spoke out on this injustice.

Name one. Giuliani doesn’t count.

13 ( +13 / -0 )

That's because it is more than a misdemeanor.

without the “other federal election crime” being proven, it’s 34 expired misdemeanors.

-18 ( +0 / -18 )

without the “other federal election crime” being proven, it’s 34 expired misdemeanors.

It was proven, though. Good grief. You think Trump paid Stormy Daniels to keep quiet about the affair a decade after it happened to avoid embarassing Melania at just the same time he happens to be running for president? Who is buying that?

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Nice conspiracy theory you got there.

night be what you think or suspect or even hope.

But wasn’t proven.

-18 ( +0 / -18 )

More like Stormy and her lawyer knew right before the election was the perfect time to extort money to avoid a false story coming out.

-16 ( +0 / -16 )

I don't like ex-presidents who refuse to testify in their own defense. To spell it out: G-U-I-L-T-Y (as sin). And especially a loony-tunes wannabe "Fuehrer" who wants to "unify the Reich".

10 ( +10 / -0 )

without the “other federal election crime” being proven, it’s 34 expired misdemeanors.

Bingo!

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/editorials/2996508/the-trump-trial-farce/

Normally, that is a misdemeanor and charges must be brought within two years. That deadline was missed almost five years ago.

Bragg sidestepped this problem **by alleging that the falsification was done “with intent to defraud that includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.” By adding this intent to commit or conceal another crime, the bookkeeping misdemeanor is raised to a felony, **which carries a five-year statute of limitations.

-16 ( +0 / -16 )

More like Stormy and her lawyer knew right before the election was the perfect time to extort money to avoid a false story coming out

lol That isn't what happened. Trump wasn't "extorted." He paid her after the fallout from the Billy Bush tape. Can you imagine what would have happened if the affair news leaked immediately after the Access Hollywood tape? Trump would have been toast. Instead the news was covering the FBI relaunching it's investigation in Clinton.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

I have always had the upmost respect, confidence, admiration for the US justice system, constitution.

That "Qui Pro Domina Justitia Sequitur" was a guiding light for a judiciary that has integrity, tools to repel political interference.

Well how foolish, naïve, misplaced my belief.

My blindness, is that Alvin Bragg, Manhattan District Attorney, so easily is able to corrupt, contaminate, taper, and manipulate for the means to politically interfere with the US 2024 US election, remove a candidate from the democratic process, with the aid of openly bias unscrupulous partisan judge, Juan Merchan.

So sinking to such depths of soiling a once honourable respected 150 old Judiciary.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

The sooner this sordid corrupt spectacle is over, the better.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

So the constant daily whining and crying about how he was being "denied his right to speak" was all BS....not surprising...

The coward didn't even have the courage to get on the stand and argue his innocence....maybe because he isn't...

Maybe just like in his other NY trial, he'd be forced to "take the 5th" 450 times when asked those hard questions...just like "the mob does"...

Or maybe after freezing up for 35 seconds the other day, he doesn't want to chance doing that again on the stand....that would certainly make news...and tank his already floundering campaign...

11 ( +11 / -0 )

You know what sets the US Justice system apart from tyrant dictatorships China, Russia?

Solid checks and balances that maintain legitimise legislative protocols procedures statutes that limit curtail political interference.

To even momentarily suggest that this "trial" is not a gross abuse of the US justice system is beyond delusional.

This media circus of sordid contempt of the law, the constitution, democracy, the electoral system, has truly terrifying future foolishly unseen ramifications.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Trump always says he’d love to testify, but then he chickens out.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Blacklabel

Nice conspiracy theory you got there.

night be what you think or suspect or even hope.

But wasn’t proven.

Not required.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Coward.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

this judge will get the mandatory verdict demanded. Then appeal will overturn it.

Keep barking that bunk.

Just like you did on the “stolen election” and all the appeals that were going to overturn the election and verify Trump’s victory, lol.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Lawyer Robert Costello was grilled further on Tuesday on emails he sent to prosecution star witness Michael Cohen after the FBI raided Cohen in 2018.

Apparently a disaster - a witness who only boosted the prosecution's case, both his behaviour and the actual evidence he gave.

An absolute disaster.

He single-handedly reconstituted the credibility of the prosecution’s final witness.

And as bad as (Abbot and) Costello were, the lying idiot in Chief AKA the defendant would have been worse.

Even worse, he would have been mocked in open court.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Narcissus J. Trumpnocchio continues to play the victim to his brainwashed audience of tens of millions … enough already.

We tge People of the United States of America deserve better.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

And the other bombshell we learned today - in addition to violating a subpoena to turn in all his classified - a subpoena his lawyers told him it was illegal to violate, then keeping 184 classified documents and directing his aides to re-hide it and destroy the security tapes showing that, we find out today he had 4 MORE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS in his bedroom at Mar-A-Lago he tried to hide....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-classified-documents-found-mar-220956886.html

As his own AG Bill Barr said, he's toast...burnt to a crisp...

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Trump always says he’d love to testify, but then he chickens out.

Why would his advisors allow him to testify when they know he pretty much can't say anything about the people accusing him of a crime? That is just beyond insane.

An absolute disaster. 

Cohen and Stormy were.

He single-handedly reconstituted the credibility of the prosecution’s final witness.

Hardly.

And as bad as (Abbot and) Costello were, the lying idiot in Chief AKA the defendant would have been worse. 

Even worse, he would have been mocked in open court

Ok, so you are admitting finally that this is a political witch hunt, knew it!

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

thats 3 times now hes stated hell testify, the judge in the civil trail even gave him a couple extra days to get from Ireland to the US where he said he had to leave to go and testify in the US. He didnt show up.

3 trials, 3 failed to show, such chickenshite LOL

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Well, not really allowed to give a testimony if you can’t talk about the people accusing you of a crime, what’s the purpose when your constitutional rights are being blocked? You want to address the elephant in the room, but you’re not allowed to talk about it. Just pure liberal political insanity.

What are you talking about? Trump, like any other criminal defendant in an American Court, has both a right to testify and a right to confront witnesses against him. If he wanted to say "Cohen is lying about me" or whatever then he would have had every right to do that if he had taken the stand.

Of course if he did that, he'd be subject to cross examination by the prosecutors on the stand, which is the real reason he didn't take it. This isn't some political witch hunt by liberals against him, its how all criminal trials work for Christ's sake.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

No, in the U.S. he is absolutely allowed to address his accusers of the charges hurled against him since he is the “defendant” he is not allowed to do that regardless iIf if is a rant or not, 

wrong youre not allowed to threaten the judge jury or their families, a gag order is to stop that, its legal and constitutional, the NY court or appeals even backed Judge Merchan and rejected Trumps appeal.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

wrong youre not allowed to threaten the judge jury or their families,

He didn't, but he is allowed under the first amendment to address the charges that were hurled at him.

a gag order is to stop that,

Misused in that sense. In other words, let Cohen and Stormy talk smack, make up smack and you just sit there and take it? That is what they do in Latin America and African nations, not in the US.

its legal and constitutional, the NY court or appeals even backed Judge Merchan and rejected Trumps appeal.

Well, it's NYC, ever notice how many people are leaving that state? That is what and how people feel about this nuttiness, the city like my old state of California was destroyed by radical liberal leftist policies, and many of them are running from the crap they created. Just so infuriating.

-13 ( +0 / -13 )

trump’s bodyguard could have testified that Stormy was lying.

He didn’t.

He could have testified that Cohen lied when he said that He also talked to Trump in the phone call.

He didn’t.

One wonders why???

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Misused in that sense. In other words, let Cohen and Stormy talk smack, make up smack and you just sit there and take it? That is what they do in Latin America and African nations, not in the US.

There was nothing preventing Trump from taking the stand and telling the Court and everyone in it that Cohen and Stormy and anyone else who testified against him was lying or whatever else he wanted to say in response to their testimony. Not one damn thing. Your argument is pure nonsense.

The only thing that prevented Trump taking the stand was his own fear of being cross examined.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites