Ben Meiselas: 'Donald Trump Lawyer Makes a FOOL OF HERSELF At Interview ON TRIAL'

Source:Meidas Touch with a look at MAGA lawyer Alina Habba.

"MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump’s lawyer Alina Habba’s disastrous interview during the criminal trial." 

From the Meidas Touch

"Alina Habba has said that she doubts the New York court system and the jury in Donald Trump's hush money case will do the "right thing."

Speaking to Newsmax's Greg Kelly on April 24, Habba, a Trump lawyer and legal spokesperson, said she didn't think the jury would "do the right thing." 

She said: "I don't have hopes really that high at this moment that the New York courts will do the right thing, that the jury will do the right thing, we're in a blue state as you know."

Habba later posted to X (formerly Twitter) to say that she believes Trump will "prevail" in his trial." 

From Newsweek

Alina Habba: "Let me be very clear: the truth firmly stands with the President. He did nothing wrong and a fair hearing will expose this sham case for what it is—a partisan hoax designed to interfere in the election. President Trump will prevail." 

From Alina Habba

In case I haven't been clear about what I know and what I think about Alina Habba in the past: this is what I wrote about her back in November, before she became a MAGA media celebrity: 

"Alina Habba is not really a trial lawyer. She can barely afford to do whatever she does as a lawyer right now. She's more of a public relations lawyer, if anything at all, who makes her living trying her client's cases on TV and on social media. But she's officially Donald Trump's civil lawyer right now because she's about the best of what's left to try to defend him, because of his own financial situation and all the evidence that's against him right now, in multiple cases. 

Perhaps one of the reasons right now that Alina Habba owes millions of dollars, is because her own client is not paying her. But she's trying to work for him anyway, perhaps banking on the fact that defending a former President of the United States, would lead to clients who can and would pay her very well for her legal advice and actions in the future. But that career strategy is obviously not working out for her right now." 

From The New Democrat

In case anyone thinks that I'm obsessed with Alina Habba or I have a crush on her: I haven't written anything about her in about a month on The New Democrat. And that was about her leaving the country. But unfortunately only for a short vacation. 

No offense to Ben Meiselas, (who I think has been spot on about Alina Habba the last 6 months or so) Newsweek has a better story about her. 

When the evidence and facts are on your side, you argue the facts and evidence in this case. But when they're not, as Carl Sandberg brilliantly said: “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell”

From Goodreads

With David Pecker's testimony, plus all the text messages, the emails, the conversations that they have on tape, the Manhattan District Attorney has already proven that Donald Trump not only knew about the payoff and the coverup, but he was in on it. So Trump and company have already lost that round. 

So what Alina Habba and company want to do now, is have the jury and public believe and see everything that has nothing to do with the facts and evidence of the case: 

This is a Manhattan court 

Manhattan jury

Overwhelmingly Democratic

Donald J. Trump is overwhelmingly unpopular in Manhattan

Judge Juan Merchan's daughter is a Democratic Party activist

Donald Trump is not the only adulterous and cheating politician whose slept with porn chicks and covered up those affairs 

And then they throw new garbage onto the case that it's really Joe Biden and the U.S. Department of Justice whose behind this Manhattan prosecution. 

Alina Habba has essentially already admitted that Donald Trump has lost the case and can't win in Manhattan. But not because of the facts and evidence of the case. Because that would require her to be honest and tell the truth on national TV. Something she's obviously not comfortable doing. What she does instead, is try to make the case about anything other than the actual facts and evidence in the case. But if you look at her track record of using the exact same media tactics, she has a bad habit losing "bigly" for Donald Trump. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Michael Smerconish: College Unrest

Source:Michael Smerconish talking about the college Israel-Palestine protests.

"Sorry Grads college politics" 

From Michael Smerconish

I've been looking for an opportunity to get into this discussion for at least the 2nd half of this week. But David Pecker really exposed my interest (pun intended) in Donald Trump's porn star hush money case in New York. 

I think Michael Smerconish hit the nail on the head when he posed the question: "Are these protests at Columbia and Southern California genuine, or is someone astroturfing them?" Meaning do these protestors really hate Israel and what Israel is doing in Gaza right now, or is someone ginning them up and getting to do these protests, to bring attention to their political movement? 

Considering that Columbia University is not a school that's known for producing professional athletes. I mean the Lions football program is known for winless seasons and they compete in the Ivy League. You are talking about a lot of wealthy, overprivileged students, who are the sons and daughters of politicians, doctors, lawyers, journalists, some of the most successful and wealthy people in America. 

And young people, especially overprivileged young people are very impressionable to begin with. Especially with leftists who are cool and are hipsters and know how to get young people's attention. So you have all these young overprivileged students, seeing all these people, especially children and women, suffering in Gaza, mostly because of the Hamas regime there, but also because of the Israeli military as well and the students are reacting to that. 

But then the other part is, when you are young, taking a stand against the establishment and even risking your own future, is considered cool. Even if you don't know what you are doing and what you are supposed to taking a stand against. 

Just being there is a social political statement for these folks and they can say: "Yeah, I'm down with Palestine. Fuck the Jews. From the river to the see, Palestine will be free." Not having any idea what that actually means. And apparently having no idea that a statement like that puts you in the same political company as Neo-Nazis. 

"But hey, when you are in your early 20s, it's being cool and popular which is what counts. Not intelligent and successful."  

You can also see this post on WordPress.

MSNBC: 'Direct Evidence': David Pecker Testimony Links Donald Trump To Hush Money Payment

Source:MSNBC with a look at Defendant Don in court.

"Ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker spells out details of a "catch-and-kill" scheme in former President Trump's hush money trial. Former FBI General Counsel Andrew Weissman and former Assistant Manhattan District Attorney Catherine Christian provide their expertise." 

From MSNBC

As someone who is looking at this case as a non-lawyer, I think the Manhattan District Attorney has a very specific mission to accomplish here. Not just get a conviction of Donald J. Trump, but convict him of a felony, multiple felonies. 

Even if the Manhattan DA wins on all 34 misdemeanors, Defendant Don wins, at least politically. But, if they prove that he committed real felonies under New York law by: 

They show that he had an affair with Stormy Daniels and perhaps Karen McDougal as well, but that he not just tried to cover up those affairs with hush money. 

And not just try to prevent his wife Melania and his son Barron from finding out about these affairs, but to prevent the voters, especially Independents, as well as Republican college educated, urban and suburban women from finding out about these affairs, before they voted in 2016

As well as covered up these affairs and did that with illegal political contributions to his his own 2016 presidential campaign, that he didn't even report, which is another crime in New York 

They can convict Defendant Don of election interference as well, which is a felony in New York. 

And this David Pecker-Michael Cohen link with the hush money payments is a direct way to move the ball down that road. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Don Lemon: SCOTUS: CAN PRESIDENTS KILL OPPONENTS? - With Tim Miller & Sarah Longwell

Source:Don Lemon talking to Tim Miller & Sarah Longwell from The Bulwark.

"Don Lemon is joined by Tim Miller and Sarah Longwell of @BulwarkMedia to discuss the latest case before the Supreme Court and the political influences on Trump's voters." 

From Don Lemon 

"The Supreme Court on Thursday appeared likely to reject former President Donald Trump’s claim of absolute immunity from prosecution over election interference, but it seemed possible Trump could still benefit from a lengthy trial delay, possibly beyond November’s election.

Chief Justice John Roberts was among at least five members of the court who did not appear to embrace the claim of absolute immunity that would stop special counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump on charges he conspired to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.

But in arguments lasting more than 2 1/2 hours in the court’s first consideration of criminal charges against a former president, Roberts also was among several justices who suggested that the case might have to be sent back to lower courts before any trial could begin. Roberts indicated he was unhappy with the reasoning adopted by the federal appeals court that ruled against Trump. 

The timing of the Supreme Court’s decision could be as important as the outcome. Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, has been pushing to delay the trial until after the election, and the later the justices issue their decision, the more likely he is to succeed." 

From the Associated Press

If Donald Trump's lawyers were honest (and the sky was green and humans could walk on water and hold their breath for days) they would just argue at the Supreme Court that Donald J. Trump is immune to all criminal prosecutions, simply because he's Donald J. Trump. And they should just say: 

"Our client is running for President of the United States. We need him back in The White House to save America and save it from Joe Biden and the Socialist Democrats. And if we lose here, he's going to prison. So you have to give him absolute immunity here, because he's Donald Trump and he can't save America, while he's in prison, or just being prosecuted."

If the John Sauer's of the world (whose one of Donald Trump's defense attorney's) were honest, that is what their argument would be. And you would probably have Justice Clarence Thomas and perhaps Justice Samuel Alito cheering them on. But perhaps just in private. 

But of course the sky isn't green, (except for perhaps on St. Patrick's Day or when the Celtics win the NBA Finals) humans can't walk on water, (but Donald J. Trump gets damn close to being able to do that everyday) and no human being, perhaps especially Donald J. Trump, who probably has long, unintelligible conversations, out loud, with himself, in his asleep, (assuming he ever sleeps) can hold their breath for days. 

So what you get from the Trump lawyers are all these ridiculous arguments about the President of the United States, well, probably just Donald Trump, has absolute immunity to do whatever the hell he wants to do, whenever the hell he wants to do it, because they're not honest. And has Sarah Longwell pointed out to Don Lemon, they have no shame. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.

The Bulwark: Tim Miller & Olivia Nuzzi: 'Donald Trump is POWERLESS At His Trial'

Source:The Bulwark with Tim Miller & Olivia Nuzzi.

"The one-time most powerful man in the world is now being told when to sit, when to stand, and what he's permitted to say. Scenes from the New York courthouse, with Olivia Nuzzi. Stay tuned for Part 2 of today's episode!" 

From The Bulwark

I just have a couple observations here first and then I'll get into what I really want to talk about here. 

Tim Miller and Olivia Nuzzi were talking about how cold it is in Judge Juan Merchan's courtroom and how Donald Trump has been uncomfortable with that. Defendant Don's lawyer Todd Blanche (according to Olivia Nuzzi) asked the Judge could they just turn the temperature up 1 degree. And Judge Merchan said this is a very old building and if they just raised the temperature 1 degree, it would be like 20 degrees warmer and they would all be roasting in the courtroom. 

Imagine if it was too hot in the courtroom: 

The Judge shows up to court wearing a tank top and shades. 

Maybe the male male lawyers are shirtless all together. 

The female lawyers are all there in bathing suits. 

Maybe DJT is sitting in his own outdoor, I mean courtroom kiddy pool trying to stay cool. 

Instead of the lawyers arguing with each other about the facts and evidence of the case, they're arguing over water: 

"Judge, they''re hogging all the water over there. You should hold them in contempt. We're roasting and dying of first over here." Of course the Judge doesn't care, because he has his own pitcher of ice tea and perhaps margarita. I think it might make a good skit for Saturday Night Live, especially if it were real. 

And then Defendant Don's lawyer Todd Blanche (who unless he was kidnapped and forced at gunpoint to represent Donald Trump: I don't feel sorry for him at all) in his own damn opening statement, I guess not turning over a smoking gun and flat out saying that his client had an affair with Stormy Daniels, but instead saying that: "Nondisclosure agreements are not illegal." coming pretty close to acknowledging that the affair happened. I mean it's like the defense attorney saying: "My client is not guilty of anything here. But even if he did it, it's not illegal." 

But Senator Mitt Romney who ever since he stopped running for President after he lost in 2012, has been living with a strong case of candor and honesty had the best line about Donald Trump and his porn chicks: 

“I think everybody has made their own assessment of President Trump’s character,” he told CNN’s Manu Raju outside the Capitol. “And so far as I know, you don’t pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you.”

From The Hill

As far as Donald Trump in the courtroom; before some MAGA maniac who finally broke out of the state hospital to defend his cult hero Donald Trump, accuses me of calling Mr. Trump a mobster and I'm not saying that DJT has ever ordered the murders of anyone, but only because I don't know that he has, but I think the mobster reference is app here. 

Think about it, Donald Trump has been in complete control of his own life, at least since his father Fred died in 1999. But now he's like a mobster whose essentially at the complete mercy of the Judge in this case and is now getting ordered around in an old, freezing courtroom. And forced to sit in place for several hours at a time and be quiet like a 7 year old boy in a classroom. Maybe falling asleep in court helps this man get though these long days for him.

You can also see this post on WordPress.

Michael Smerconish: David Pecker Exposes The National Enquirer

Source:Michael Smerconish with a look at Donald Trump's tabloid political world.

Source:The New Democrat

"Enquiring Minds.... 

From Michael Smerconish

"David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, testified at Donald Trump's trial Tuesday that the tabloid completely manufactured a negative story in 2016 about the father of Sen. Ted Cruz, of Texas, who was then Trump's rival for the GOP presidential nomination.

The paper had published a photo allegedly showing Cruz's father, Rafael Cruz, with Lee Harvey Oswald handing out pro-Fidel Castro pamphlets in New Orleans in 1963, not long before Oswald assassinated President John F. Kennedy.

Trump repeatedly referred to the story on the campaign trail and in interviews.

“I mean, what was he doing — what was he doing with Lee Harvey Oswald shortly before the death? Before the shooting?” Trump said in an interview with Fox News in May 2016. “It’s horrible.”

Manhattan prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked Pecker about the story's origins during the trial Tuesday in Manhattan. Pecker said that then-National Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard and the tabloid's research department got involved, and Pecker indicated that they faked the photo that was the foundation for the story.

“We mashed the photos and the different picture with Lee Harvey Oswald. And mashed the two together. And that’s how that story was prepared — created I would say," Pecker said on the witness stand.

Asked by Steinglass whether Cruz had gained popularity in the presidential race at the time, Pecker said, “I believe so.”

The revelation came up as the prosecution focused on negative articles that were published by the tabloid about Trump's Republican opponents at the time. Pecker explained that it was Michael Cohen, Trump's personal lawyer, who would orchestrate the planting of these stories.

Pecker said Cohen would call and say they'd like his publication to run an article on a certain candidate, adding that Cohen would then send him a piece about Cruz, for example, and the National Enquirer "would embellish it from there."

Pecker suggested that Trump was directly involved in the process, too. He said that the negative stories about Trump's opponents were published as part of an arrangement that was struck in 2015 at a Trump Tower meeting that also included a directive to write positive stories about the real estate mogul." 

From NBC News

Sorry for the tabloid title of this post. Actually, that's a lie. I'm definitely not sorry for the title. But what's a little lie anyway when you are talking about a tabloid publication anyway? Lies for tabloids are what food are for restaurants, gas is for cars, lawyers, politicians, fundamentalist preachers even for prostitutes, it's how they stay in business. 

I think the David Pecker revelations (I'm still having a hard time writing his last name without laughing and I'm 47 years old) is a perfect example of why American voters are stereotyped as stupid. At least gullible because here you had this well-known, national tabloid magazine, that promoted stories about Donald J. Trump back in 2015-16, to get him into The White House and you had 10s of millions of American voters, who simply bought all of those garbage stories. 

10s of millions of American voters. probably mostly Independents, as well as some blue-collar Democrats, who perhaps weren't ready for a female President of the United States, bought those garbage stories, as if they were buying an 1985 Ford Escort, thinking that car was as good as a Mercedes SEL, or a Jaguar sedan, etc. Without doing any of their homework: "Hey, if The National Enquirer says that Ted Cruz's father was involved in the JFK assassination, it must be true." 

And so yesterday, you have the Manhattan prosecutors laying out exactly what The National Enquirer was doing in partnership with Donald J. Trump, with the man who was in charge of this entire scheme, their publisher at the time David Pecker, exposing (pun in intended) this whole operation. And they have all the texts, the emails, the phone calls even, to back up all of Mr. Pecker's claims here on what they were doing for Mr. Trump.

Michael Popok: 'Donald Trump Co-Conspirator SCREWS HIM To HIS FACE At Trial'

Source:Meidas Touch- left to right- David (don't call me Richard) Pecker & Defendant Don.

"David Pecker the lead road map witness for the Manhattan DA is absolutely killing Trump with his testimony today, as he “cashes all the checks” that the prosecution wrote to the jury in their opening statement yesterday. Michael Popok explains the impact of Pecker’s testimony on the jury of him confessing that he entered into a criminal conspiracy with Trump and Michael Cohen to help the 2016 Trump campaign by buying negative  “women stories” against Trump." 

From the Meidas Touch

I think Michael Popok laid this out very well. The thing that I would add to this is to remind people exactly why Donald J. Trump is being prosecuted here. 

Donald Trump is not being prosecuted for adultery in Manhattan. I mean think about it, this is Manhattan, if anything adultery is encouraged here. If you are not rich and divorce by the time you are 40, if you are a man who doesn't have kids with multiple women, by the time you are 40, you are considered to be some outsider, who should go move to Cleveland or some place. You are not considered a real Manhattanite, certainly not a real New Yorker. 

Donald Trump is not being prosecuted for paying off a porn chick, who he was having an affair with, when his wife Melania was pregnant with his son Barron. Hell, Defendant Don is not even being charged with cheating on his wife, while she was pregnant with their son. Again, this is Manhattan, they're not looking for saints and for people who are playing to make it to Heaven. I'm having a little fun with this, but you get the idea. 

What Donald J. Trump is being prosecuted here for, is for falsifying his business records and his campaign contributions that he made to himself, that he didn't report during the 2016 election campaign season. Specifically the payment that he made to Stormy Daniels on behalf of his campaign. 

As well as the catch and kill scheme, this "checkbook journalism" (as David Pecker called it) that Pecker and Trump were involved with together, to get DJT into The White House. And Pecker has all the goods on Defendant Don. I guess you could say that David is exposing Defendant Don with his Pecker and screwing him over "bigly". But only to stay out of prison himself. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.