The Bulwark: 'George Conway Explains: Why Donald Trump WILL Be CONVICTED In The NY Case!'

Source:The Bulwark with Sarah Conwell & George Conway on Donald Trump's Manhattan trial.

"Sarah Longwell and George Conway take on Trump's New York criminal trial: Hope Hicks' testimony and a story about Trump glaring at George across the courtroom. Don't worry -- George explains it all." 

From The Bulwark

Just to talk about Donald Trump's latest gag order violations and what could happen in the future: George Conway gets to that in this video around the 15 minute mark (give or take) in this video. He was talking about there''s essentially a bridge that Judge Juan Merchan could take before he throws Defendant Don (as The New Democrat as politely as we can call Donald J. Trump) in Rikers. And just doesn't settle for $1,000 fine after $1,000 fine. 

If this courthouse has a holding tank (for lack of a better name) where the Judge can send unruly defendants, who are like 12 year old boys who are being told that they can't go to the ballgame or their friend's party, because they're failing English or got caught shoplifting, or something. 

I sort of got into this 2 weeks ago:

"But I'm wondering if Defendant Don keeps violating the gag order, could the Judge take that out on his lawyer and do that first, before he holds the defendant in contempt and throws him in a holding tank." 

From The New Democrat

As far as this case, I don't know if Donald Trump is "screwed" yet, as George Conway seems to be implying. But you can see him being screwed (by someone he doesn't want to get screwed by) from where he's right now. 

The jurors have Donald Trump's bank records. Thanks to Hope Hicks and David Pecker, they know that Donald Trump not only knew about the payments, knew why they were made, and Donald Trump was concern about the Stormy affairs (pun intended) coming out before the 2016 presidential election, instead of being concern about how these stories would affect his wife Melania and son Barron. 

But, as a non-lawyer, I would like to see another credible witness, pre-Michael Cohen, who was close to DJT, or who still is close to DJT, take the stand and back up what David Pecker has exposed (pun intended) and what Hope Hicks said on Friday about DJT's knowledge about what was going on here and what he intended to do about it. Which was to burry the story, at least before the 2016 presidential election, by paying these women off with his money. Which was the money he paid back to his then lawyer Michael Cohen, for paying off Stephanie Clifford (also known as Stormy Daniels) and Karen McDougal, back in late 2016 before the election. 

And then again as a non-lawyer, I would like the alleged affairs with Stephanie Clifford and Karen McDougal actually get established in court, so the defense can't argue that these women with their lawyer Keith Davidson, we're extorting Donald Trump. 

You can also see this post on WordPress.