davidallengreen, 1 month ago

Such an approach is not unhelpful in pre-trial shenanigans, where it is one party dealing with another party. Pre-trial litigation is often deal-making by another name. But when a dispute gets to court (and most Trump-related litigation does not get to a courtroom) then such bilateral game-playing becomes far less important. A third party - the judge (and sometimes jury) takes power. Trump’s blustering and bargaining is not well suited for this. Bullying will now not be enough.

davidallengreen, 1 month ago

And there will also be another thing he now cannot control: evidence. And this evidence will feed into the media mainstream, with the added credibility of being on oath. For somebody who is a deft manipulator of the media and his public image this los of information control will also be painful for him.

I have no idea if Trump will be convicted. I suspect it will be hard to get a conviction.

But he is now a fish out of water, at least for a while.

gadgetgav, 1 month ago

@davidallengreen I don’t see how his legal team could ever consider putting him on the stand as there seems to be nothing in his history that suggests he could keep to the truth even under oath. It’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.

davidallengreen, 1 month ago

@gadgetgav

I do not know if he will give evidence.

mlmartens, 1 month ago

@davidallengreen @gadgetgav

If he follows previous patterns, he will make a bunch of noise about planning to testify and then will not.

MultiClassGeek, 1 month ago

@mlmartens @davidallengreen @gadgetgav This is correct.

If he waives his 5th Amendment rights, and gives evidence, he'll get absolutely massacred on cross-examination.

And AIUI, because this is a criminal trial, no inferences can be drawn from his refusal.to testify.

So he would gain nothing, and stand to lose everything, by testifying.

gadgetgav, 1 month ago

@MultiClassGeek @mlmartens @davidallengreen It all hinges on whether his lawyers can overcome his ego.

davidallengreen, 1 month ago

@gadgetgav @MultiClassGeek @mlmartens

Or whether the law can.

MultiClassGeek, 1 month ago

@davidallengreen By all accounts, the evidence is comprehensive.

Cohen has recordings of Trump, Pecker has already laid out the roadmap of the conspiracy, and there are records.

There is no affirmative defence, the only play Trump's team has is to try and discredit the witnesses.

But ultimately, it'll be down to the jury. And then we find out just how good the US Voir Dire process really is.