This is so good!
Today we got a classic Trump move in a game of 4D chess and it’s looking like the Teflon Don is going to beat ANOTHER one of these sham trials.
Allow me to explain….
Actually, I’ll let my friend Kevin Paffrath “MeetKevin” explain because he absolutely knocked it out of the park with this video.
If you find the so-called “Hush Money” trial hard to follow, you’re not alone.
It is confusing and not easy to understand.
But the video below will make it all clear for you. Kevin does a great job of giving a quick summary of who the key players are and how we got here before he explains the huge new twist and turn we got today.
One thing I wanted to add to Kevin’s video, which will make more sense after you watch it, is that Michael Avenatti has recently gone on record saying he is ready to testify FOR Trump:
So in terms of this just coming down to credibility between Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels, he could be the factor that tips the scales in Trump's favor.
But also I have heard rumors that Stormy Daniels herself may claim the entire thing never happened.
That would be the death knell to the bogus case.
After all, don't forget about this letter:
BOMBSHELL: Trump Posts Letter From Stormy Daniels on Truth Social
And the last thing I want to add is that Kevin thinks the prosecution will bring up Trump's other legal trials as character evidence.
Character evidence is not always so easily allowed, and the Trump Team could be successful in keeping that out.
In criminal trials, rules of criminal procedure and evidence typically restrict the admission of character evidence, which pertains to the likelihood of a person's conduct based on their disposition or character. The primary rule in the United States is governed by Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, though state rules can vary somewhat while generally following the same principles.
Rule Against Character Evidence
Rule 404(a) states that evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion, the person acted in accordance with the character or trait. This rule is based on the principle that such evidence can lead to unfair prejudice, confuse the issues, or mislead the jury.
Exceptions to the Rule
However, there are significant exceptions to this general prohibition:
- Defendant's Character in Criminal Cases:
- Rule 404(a)(2)(A): A defendant may introduce evidence of their own pertinent trait, and if the defendant does so, the prosecution can rebut with evidence to the contrary.
- Rule 404(a)(2)(B): If the defendant attacks the character of the alleged victim, the prosecution may introduce evidence to prove the victim's character trait and evidence of the defendant's same trait.
- Character of Victim:
- Rule 404(a)(2)(C): In homicide cases, the prosecution may offer evidence of the victim’s peaceful character to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor.
- Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts:
- Rule 404(b): This rule provides that while evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show action in conformity therewith, it may be admitted for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. This exception is often invoked to show a pattern of behavior that is directly relevant to the crime charged, rather than merely to suggest a disposition to commit the crime.
- Witnesses' Character:
- Rule 608 and 609: These rules allow for the introduction of evidence concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of a witness as a means to bolster or attack the witness's credibility.
Ok, enough with all the legal mumbo jumbo....
Let's get on with the video so you can see just how this thing flipped today.
It's glorious.
Watch here (and for those who always request it, I also have the full transcript for you below):
Backup here if needed:
The Trump Hush Money Trial JUST FLIPPED!
Really great analysis by my friend MeetKevin.
Mirror (for backup): https://t.co/MHyBUUaurx
See comments for full transcript pic.twitter.com/ywuDDedpFh
— DailyNoah.com (@DailyNoahNews) April 22, 2024
FULL TRANSCRIPT FOR THOSE WHO PREFER TO READ:
wow the Donald Trump strategy to defeat the hush money trial against him just got really interesting let's go through this first let me catch you off to speed
my goal is to cover this entire trial I'm just going to give you a quick background so if you're already used to the background I'll put a little time
stamp down below you could skip forward to the interesting part but let's just give you a little quick background we'll make it simple just so you know the
names of people involved and what's going on so when you hear Alvin Bragg I want you to think district attorney when you hear Matt I want you to think the
prosecutor he's the guy actually in the courtroom pound in the pavement for Alvin brag when you hear Leticia James think of a state of New York attorney
general these names sometimes blend together so I'll add some reminders so keep in mind that this entire case is designed to paint what Donald Trump did
as a criminal conspiracy and a coverup to influence the election now the Trump campaign's response to this is pretty remarkable already in their opening
statement so we're going to hit that as far as some other names that are going to be important David pecker CEO of the company that owned the national Inquirer
Stormy Daniels who signed a statement in 2018 January 30th 2018 stating she never had an affair with Trump but then she later said that wasn't her signature
and then in a different case said that okay was her signature but she had no choice because she was uh forced to sign the statement via a non-disclosure
agreement in exchange for accepting the $130,000 and felt like she had no choice to accept $130,000 so that'll come up that all relates to of course her
allegations that the national Inquirer was thinking about taking public which then she recanted and kind of kept her story uh hushed up if you will because
allegedly she made a deal with Trump you'll hear Todd blanch he's the Trump defense attorney now this guy is really interesting because he has a history of
being a federal prosecutor in Manhattan which is interesting because now he's playing defense attorney in other words he used to be the guy working for
Manhattan now he's the guy working for the defendants against Manhattan so it's kind of a really interesting flip-flop of a role he has limited experience as a
defense attorney and he also helped Paul manord avoid avoid State charges of mortgage fraud so somehow hooked up with Donald Trump and here we are so the idea
probably is that Trump's got a guy who used to work for the state and knows how they operate right that's the idea then you've got uh judge M I like to call him
work judge M I call him judge M he's the justice of uh a Justice of the New York state supreme court in Manhattan he is not only presiding over the hush money
trial but he also previously oversaw the 5we trial against the Trump Organization for tax fraud which the Trump organization was convicted icted of 17
counts he also oversaw the trial of Alan velber the former Financial chief of the Trump organization who pled guilty to a 15y yearlong tax fraud
scheme judge am sentenced Allen to five months at Riker's Island all right then of course you've got to know Michael Cohen now here's another interesting
character everybody's got an interesting kind of story because Michael C actually pled guilty to lying to Congress lying in court and lying to the media he
actually went to prison he was sentenced to 3 years in prison and ordered to pay $50,000 and then got disbarred so he can no longer be an attorney he went to
prison in 2019 and got out in 2021 so he spent Co in prison anyway this guy's like 57 years old at one point Donald Trump sued Cohen for breach of legal
trust because of that audio recording against uh Donald Trump or that people are trying to use against Donald Trump I'll explain that in a moment uh and
then of course he's now being used as a key witness against Donald Trump that's because of I'm not going to play the audio recording because I'll show you
why Donald Trump's defense kind of messes all of that audio recording stuff off but basically there's this audio recording where Michael Cohen's like hey
so I'm going to set up a shell company I'm going to make the payments to deal with the pecker issue that's the national inquire story referring to
Stormy Daniels okay so that's really just just like a catchup of everything and Michael Cohen recorded that why he recorded that who knows but he did and
you hear Trump kind of you know going along with it whatever okay none of that is necessarily wrong what's wrong is what the district attorney alleges and
that's 34 counts of basically writing uh checks invoices and documenting items in like quick books like a ledger uh saying these are normal necessary and ordinary
legal business expenses is that's what the Trump organization claims and the district attorney is claiming no those expenses were used to cover up something
that the electing the voting public should have known of therefore not only did you lie about a business expense being a business expense which would be
a misdemeanor but you used it to cover something else up and that rises to a classy felony which is the lowest form of a felony uh so the argument is you
paid off Stormy Daniels through your family trust via Michael Cohen Cohen has admitted to such okay so what is the Trump defense and this is where things
Join the conversation!
Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!