US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10215
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Solauren »

He's only saying that because he thinks they might alienate people that would otherwise vote for Trump.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.

It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

Trump calls historic hush money case 'political persecution' as trial gets under way
Former President Donald Trump said he is "proud" to be at a New York court as the trial over the hush money case began on Monday.

It is the first of Trump's four indictments to reach trial and makes him the first former US head of state to stand trial for a serious crime.

"This is an assault on America, nothing like this has ever happened before, there’s never been anything like it. Every legal scholar said this case is nonsense, it should have never been brought, it doesn’t deserve anything like this," Trump told reporters as he walked into court.

"This is political persecution, this is a persecution like never before, nobody has ever seen anything like it and again it’s a case that should have never been brought," he said.

"That’s why I am very proud to be here, this is an assault on our country and it’s a country that’s failing ... This is really an attack on a political opponent, that is all it is, so I’m very honoured to be here, thank you very much.”

This trial is to see whether Trump repeatedly and fraudulently falsified business records to conceal crimes in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 criminal counts of falsifying business records. Prosecutors say he was trying to conceal an alleged effort to keep salacious stories about his sex life from emerging during his 2016 campaign.

On the first day of the trial, the judge selected the jury and lawyers for both sides of the case haggled over what evidence could be permitted.

The prosecution also asked the judge to fine Trump for three social media posts they say broke the judge's gag order that bans him from making public comments about some of the people related to the case.

As Trump is the presumptive nominee for the Republican party, he is expected to split his time between days in court and, as he has said, "campaigning during the night" ahead of the US presidential election set to take place in November.

The jury selection for the case has been extraordinarily difficult, with a jury having to be able to assure judges that they will be able to set aside any personal feelings or biases during the trial and come to a decision that is based entirely on the evidence and the law.

This makes jury selection particularly challenging in the case of Donald Trump, who is very well-known and an extraordinarily divisive figure.

Many of the details of this case have been public since 2018, when federal prosecutors charged Trump’s ex-lawyer Michael Cohen with campaign finance crimes in connection with a scheme to bury claims by porn star Stormy Daniels, as well as other potentially damaging stories from Trump’s past.

There are allegations that Mr Cohen paid Ms Daniels $130,000 (£104,000) to not disclose her claims of an affair and a sexual encounter with Trump.
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18644
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Rogue 9 »

Time Magazine
How Far Trump Would Go
By ERIC CORTELLESSA / PALM BEACH, FLA.

Donald Trump thinks he’s identified a crucial mistake of his first term: He was too nice.

We’ve been talking for more than an hour on April 12 at his fever-dream palace in Palm Beach. Aides lurk around the perimeter of a gilded dining room overlooking the manicured lawn. When one nudges me to wrap up the interview, I bring up the many former Cabinet officials who refuse to endorse Trump this time. Some have publicly warned that he poses a danger to the Republic. Why should voters trust you, I ask, when some of the people who observed you most closely do not?

As always, Trump punches back, denigrating his former top advisers. But beneath the typical torrent of invective, there is a larger lesson he has taken away. “I let them quit because I have a heart. I don’t want to embarrass anybody,” Trump says. “I don’t think I’ll do that again. From now on, I’ll fire.”

Six months from the 2024 presidential election, Trump is better positioned to win the White House than at any point in either of his previous campaigns. He leads Joe Biden by slim margins in most polls, including in several of the seven swing states likely to determine the outcome. But I had not come to ask about the election, the disgrace that followed the last one, or how he has become the first former—and perhaps future—American President to face a criminal trial. I wanted to know what Trump would do if he wins a second term, to hear his vision for the nation, in his own words.

What emerged in two interviews with Trump, and conversations with more than a dozen of his closest advisers and confidants, were the outlines of an imperial presidency that would reshape America and its role in the world. To carry out a deportation operation designed to remove more than 11 million people from the country, Trump told me, he would be willing to build migrant detention camps and deploy the U.S. military, both at the border and inland. He would let red states monitor women’s pregnancies and prosecute those who violate abortion bans. He would, at his personal discretion, withhold funds appropriated by Congress, according to top advisers. He would be willing to fire a U.S. Attorney who doesn’t carry out his order to prosecute someone, breaking with a tradition of independent law enforcement that dates from America’s founding. He is weighing pardons for every one of his supporters accused of attacking the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, more than 800 of whom have pleaded guilty or been convicted by a jury. He might not come to the aid of an attacked ally in Europe or Asia if he felt that country wasn’t paying enough for its own defense. He would gut the U.S. civil service, deploy the National Guard to American cities as he sees fit, close the White House pandemic-preparedness office, and staff his Administration with acolytes who back his false assertion that the 2020 election was stolen.

Trump remains the same guy, with the same goals and grievances. But in person, if anything, he appears more assertive and confident. “When I first got to Washington, I knew very few people,” he says. “I had to rely on people.” Now he is in charge. The arranged marriage with the timorous Republican Party stalwarts is over; the old guard is vanquished, and the people who remain are his people. Trump would enter a second term backed by a slew of policy shops staffed by loyalists who have drawn up detailed plans in service of his agenda, which would concentrate the powers of the state in the hands of a man whose appetite for power appears all but insatiable. “I don’t think it’s a big mystery what his agenda would be,” says his close adviser Kellyanne Conway. “But I think people will be surprised at the alacrity with which he will take action.”

The courts, the Constitution, and a Congress of unknown composition would all have a say in whether Trump’s objectives come to pass. The machinery of Washington has a range of defenses: leaks to a free press, whistle-blower protections, the oversight of inspectors general. The same deficiencies of temperament and judgment that hindered him in the past remain present. If he wins, Trump would be a lame duck—contrary to the suggestions of some supporters, he tells TIME he would not seek to overturn or ignore the Constitution’s prohibition on a third term. Public opinion would also be a powerful check. Amid a popular outcry, Trump was forced to scale back some of his most draconian first-term initiatives, including the policy of separating migrant families. As George Orwell wrote in 1945, the ability of governments to carry out their designs “depends on the general temper in the country.”

Every election is billed as a national turning point. This time that rings true. To supporters, the prospect of Trump 2.0, unconstrained and backed by a disciplined movement of true believers, offers revolutionary promise. To much of the rest of the nation and the world, it represents an alarming risk. A second Trump term could bring “the end of our democracy,” says presidential historian Douglas Brinkley, “and the birth of a new kind of authoritarian presidential order.”
More at the link. It's a super long read and I'm not going to copy it all over, but what he intends to do in his own words is frightening.
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
User avatar
Zwinmar
Jedi Master
Posts: 1091
Joined: 2005-03-24 11:55am
Location: nunyadamnbusiness

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Zwinmar »

He straight up said that he "wanted to be a dictator for a day" so yeah, frightening is only the beginning.
User avatar
LaCroix
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5194
Joined: 2004-12-21 12:14pm
Location: Sopron District, Hungary, Europe, Terra

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by LaCroix »

I would make a joke that sleepy Don would struggle to stay awake long enough to get anything done, but him being only awake to sign the stuff his handlers want to be done is equally frightening.
A minute's thought suggests that the very idea of this is stupid. A more detailed examination raises the possibility that it might be an answer to the question "how could the Germans win the war after the US gets involved?" - Captain Seafort, in a thread proposing a 1942 'D-Day' in Quiberon Bay

I do archery skeet. With a Trebuchet.
User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 16307
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Gandalf »

Democrats make shock move to back Republican speaker Mike Johnson

Hord to copy paste on a phone. The core of it is that the Dems like the way Johnson votes on Ukranian spending bills, so they want to keep him around, despite everything else.

I guess just fuck that progressive vote right off then.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
User avatar
Zaune
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7466
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Zaune »

On the other hand, do you really think whoever the GOP want to replace him with is going to be better?
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

I Have A Blog
User avatar
Gandalf
SD.net White Wizard
Posts: 16307
Joined: 2002-09-16 11:13pm
Location: A video store in Australia

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Gandalf »

That assumes that the Republicans in the House can find a volunteer around whom the whole party can gather, and who can then actually command the party when the dust settles.

If Johnson stays in with Democratic help, one can then tag anything Johnson does as a bipartisan fault because they voted to keep him there.
"Oh no, oh yeah, tell me how can it be so fair
That we dying younger hiding from the police man over there
Just for breathing in the air they wanna leave me in the chair
Electric shocking body rocking beat streeting me to death"

- A.B. Original, Report to the Mist

"I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately."
- George Carlin
bilateralrope
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5971
Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by bilateralrope »

At least they get congress to do things with Johnson remaining as speaker. Anything that's a big enough problem can be stopped in the senate or with a veto.

If he gets removed, I doubt the republicans will be able to appoint a replacement speaker before the next congress is seated. Leaving congress holding up everything.

I don't know which is the better move here.
bilateralrope
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5971
Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by bilateralrope »

RFK Jr is doing well enough in the polls that he might end up as a spoiler candidate, which is why I think it's worth talking about the week he's had.

First he got endorsed by Kevin Spacey.

Then the brain worm
The doctor told him he believed the spot on the brain scan “was caused by a worm that got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died,” Kennedy reportedly said in the deposition.
Now this:

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appears to surprise his running mate with his position on abortion
Kennedy and Nicole Shanahan appeared on separate episodes of Sage Steele's podcast, with Kennedy saying women should be able to make the decision “even if it’s full-term.”

May 10, 2024, 1:45 AM GMT+12
By Katherine Koretski



Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said in an interview released Wednesday that he would allow women to have abortions at full term if that was their choice, the latest answer he has given on abortion policy — and one that provoked a surprised reaction from his running mate.

During an interview with podcaster Sage Steele, the former ESPN host asked Kennedy what the limit should be for women to have an abortion. “Should there be a limit or are you saying all the way up to full term, a woman has a right to have an abortion?” she said.

Kennedy answered that he doesn't think anyone would want to do that at eight months of pregnancy, but abortion should be out of the hands of the government and in the hands of women.

Steele continued to push Kennedy, asking if he agrees with the Roe v. Wade standard or with abortion being left up to the states, and Kennedy reiterated that the decision should not lie with the states but with the mother.

“Even if it’s full-term,” Kennedy said in response to a follow-up question. “I don’t think it’s ever OK,” he added. When Steele said that would allow late-term abortions, Kennedy said, “I think we have to leave it to the women rather than the state.”

The comments appeared to come as a surprise to Nicole Shanahan, Kennedy’s running mate. A week prior to the release of Kennedy’s conversation with Steele, Shanahan was featured in a podcast episode with the host. Steele asked Shanahan if she agreed with Kennedy’s belief that a woman should have the option to have an abortion at full term, to which Shanahan responded with surprise.

“My understanding with Bobby’s position is that, you know, every abortion is a tragedy, is a loss of life,” Shanahan said. “My understanding is that he absolutely believes in limits on abortion, and we’ve talked about this. I do not think, I don’t know where that came from.”

Shanahan went on to say, “That is not my understanding of his position and I think maybe there was a miscommunication there.”

Shanahan, who has not attended an in-person campaign rally since the March announcement that she was joining Kennedy’s ticket, shared her abortion stance in a post on X.

“I will speak personally,” Shanahan wrote. “As a mom, and a person with a womb, I don’t like the feeling of anyone having control over my body. It is coercive. It is wrong. But, I am also a woman that would not feel right terminating a viable life living inside of me, especially if I am both healthy and that baby is healthy. I can hold both beliefs, as someone who believes in the sacredness of life, simultaneously.”

Kennedy has articulated different stances on abortion at times during his campaign for president. During an interview with NBC News in August of last year, Kennedy said if elected, he’d support signing a national abortion ban after the first three months of pregnancy, before his campaign soon walked back the comments.

Kennedy told NBC News, “I believe a decision to abort a child should be up to the women during the first three months of life.” Pressed on whether that meant signing a federal ban at 15 or 21 weeks, he said yes.

Kennedy’s campaign soon put out a statement saying that the candidate “misunderstood” repeated questions on the topic.

“Mr. Kennedy misunderstood a question posed to him by an NBC reporter in a crowded, noisy exhibit hall at the Iowa State Fair,” a spokesperson said, clarifying the candidate’s stance on abortion as “always” being the woman’s right to choose. Kennedy “does not support legislation banning abortion,” the campaign added at the time.
His campaign can't even manage a consistent message on a high profile issue like abortion. Is that because the campaign is badly run or because RFK Jr doesn't have a consistent position ?

Hopefully it falls apart and removes any chance of him being a spoiler. Though him hurting Trump would be acceptable.
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Trump’s use of dodgy accounting on Chicago tower means he could be $100m in red, IRS probe reveals

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

Trump’s use of dodgy accounting on Chicago tower means he could be $100m in red, IRS probe reveals
Former president Donald Trump could end up owing more than $100 million to the Internal Revenue Service after he used a dodgy accounting tactic to claim improper tax breaks on his Chicago building, according to a The New York Times and ProPublica investigation.

The IRS believes Mr Trump violated a law meant to prevent double-dipping on tax-reducing losses, and that he essentially wrote off the same losses twice, the probe revealed.

The building, the Trump International Hotel & Tower in Chicago, which was completed in 2009, has been considered to be a massive money pit over the years.

By writing off his losses twice, Mr Trump was able to double dip on the tax benefits gained from the tower’s financial losses, the report claims.

On his 2008 tax return, Mr Trump claimed that the investment in the 92-story skyscraper met the tax code definition of “worthless,” because his debt on the project meant that he would never see a profit.

According to The Times and ProPublica, this resulted in Mr Trump reporting losses as high as $651m for the year. The probe found there was no indication that the IRS challenged Mr Trump’s claim.

Mr Trump’s tax records have been under scrutiny since the 2016 presidential campaign when refused to release his returns.

In 2010, Mr Trump shifted the company that owned the tower into a new partnership in an effort to further gain benefits from the Chicago project, the report says. This move was then used as justification to declare $168m in additional losses over the next decade.

“Because he controlled both companies, it was like moving coins from one pocket to another,” according to The Times.

A years-long investigation by the IRS into the matter is still ongoing, The Times reported.

As part of their probe, The Times and ProPublica consulted with tax experts, who calculated that a revision by the IRS would result in a new tax bill of more than $100m, plus interest and potential penalties.

The Independent has contacted the Trump Organization for comment.

Mr Trump’s son Eric Trump, executive vice president of the Trump Organization, issued a statement to The Times.

“This matter was settled years ago, only to be brought back to life once my father ran for office. We are confident in our position, which is supported by opinion letters from various tax experts, including the former general counsel of the IRS,” he said.

An IRS spokesman told The Times that the federal law prohibited the agency from discussing private taxpayer information.
User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10215
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Solauren »

I'm pretty sure that's Tax Fraud.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.

It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
bilateralrope
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5971
Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by bilateralrope »

Last I heard, there aren't any trials scheduled for Trump between the end of the current one and election day. Plenty of room for the IRS to slot themselves in if they move quickly.

I doubt they will move quickly.
User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10215
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Solauren »

bilateralrope wrote: 2024-05-12 02:39am Last I heard, there aren't any trials scheduled for Trump between the end of the current one and election day. Plenty of room for the IRS to slot themselves in if they move quickly.

I doubt they will move quickly.
It wouldn't surprise me to learn the IRS has been waiting for a chance like this for a long time, and could have a trial going quickly.

Of course, that would involve a level of competence from a government agency that is fairly rare.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.

It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
User avatar
Zaune
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7466
Joined: 2010-06-21 11:05am
Location: In Transit
Contact:

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Zaune »

As far as RFK Jr goes, I think it's worth noting that he's apparently been suffering from some sort of neurological issue that causes brain fog since at least 2011.

And to the man's credit, up until that point he'd been doing a lot of very worthwhile environmental activist work and might have been a decent candidate one. Even if he had the classic Kennedy enthusiasm for adultery.
There are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do.
-- (Terry Pratchett, Small Gods)


Replace "ginger" with "n*gger," and suddenly it become a lot less funny, doesn't it?
-- fgalkin


Like my writing? Tip me on Patreon

I Have A Blog
User avatar
EnterpriseSovereign
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4100
Joined: 2006-05-12 12:19pm
Location: Spacedock

Michael Cohen testifies Trump saw Stormy Daniels story as 'total disaster' for 2016 campaign

Post by EnterpriseSovereign »

Michael Cohen testifies Trump saw Stormy Daniels story as 'total disaster' for 2016 campaign
Michael Cohen, the attorney and fixer for Donald Trump for a decade, told a Manhattan jury on Monday that his former boss regarded pornographic movie actress Stormy Daniels’ story about Trump having an extramarital fling with her as a “total disaster” for his first White House run in 2016 – and the former president at every juncture approved Cohen’s efforts to pay her hush money.

“Catastrophic - that this is horrible for the campaign,” was Trump’s reaction, according to Cohen after he first informed him that Daniels’ attorney was shopping her story a month before Election Day.

Cohen spent the whole day testifying as a prosecution witness in Trump’s trial for falsifying business records to cover up reimbursements to Cohen for the $130,000 he paid to prevent Daniels from going public about a one-night stand with Trump in 2006 in Nevada, 18 months after Trump had married former First Lady Melania Trump and four months after she had given birth to their son, Barron.

“This is a total disaster,” Trump said, according to Cohen, when they next discussed the story. “Women are going to hate me. Guys may think it’s cool. But this will be a disaster for the campaign.”

The 2016 hush-money deal was the second time Cohen had squelched Daniels' story. Five years earlier, Cohen had worked collaboratively with Daniels’ attorney Keith Davidson to have an online article about the encounter taken down.

Cohen testified he spoke to Trump about Daniels in 2011, saying: “I asked if he knew who she was - he told me that he did."

He also testified that Trump told him he had met Daniels at a celebrity golf tournament, but Cohen said when he asked Trump if he had a sexual encounter with Daniels, Trump did not respond.

When the story reemerged in the fall of 2016, Trump instructed him: “Purchase the life rights. We need to stop this from getting out,” Cohen testified.

According to Cohen’s testimony, Trump told him: "I want you to just push it out as long as you can. Just get past the election, because if I win, it will have no relevance, because I'm president, and if I lose, I don't even care."

When he inquired about the Trump marriage, Cohen said, Trump replied cryptically: “‘Don’t worry. How long do you think I’ll be on the market for?’ He wasn’t thinking about Melania. This was all about the campaign.”

The 34 criminal counts – one each for the 11 checks, 11 invoices, and 12 Trump Organisation ledger entries allegedly used to cover up his reimbursing Cohen for the Daniels hush money -- can be considered felonies if the jury decides the records were intended to conceal another crime, such as a conspiracy to interfere with the 2016 election.

By October 17, 2016, the Daniels hush-money deal almost fell apart, because no one had paid her the agreed upon $130,000.

Due to the delay, Davidson informed Cohen their deal was dead, and Daniels was leaning toward selling the rights to her story to The Daily Mail.

Cohen testified he spoke to Trump over the phone about the snafu and told him: “It’s $130,000. You’re a billionaire - just do it."

Cohen testified he continually discussed the Daniels nondisclosure agreement (NDA) over the phone with Trump and Trump Organisation Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselberg, and Cohen’s phone records showed calls to Trump and Weisselberg on and around the milestone dates of the Daniels deal developments.

Trump told Cohen to discuss payment options with Weisselberg, who told Cohen he could not afford to shell out the hush money himself, Cohen testified.

“I ultimately said, ‘I’ll pay it,’” Cohen said.

“Don’t worry about it. We’ll make sure you get paid back,” Weiselberg said, according to Cohen.

When Cohen and Weisselberg informed Trump that Cohen would “front the money,” Cohen testified: “He was appreciative.”

“Good. Good,” Trump said, according to Cohen.

Cohen opened a First Republic Bank account for a limited liability company (LLC) he created, Essentials Consulting, transferred funds from the home equity line of credit (HELOC) he shared with his wife, and wired the Daniels money to her attorney, Davidson.

Cohen told the jury he never would have paid Daniels without Trump’s assurance of reimbursement.

“I was doing everything and more in order to protect my boss, which is something I’d done for a long time, but I would not lay out $130,000 for an NDA needed by somebody else,” Cohen testified. “Everything required Mr Trump’s signoff, and I wanted the money back.”

The NDA was finalised on October 27, but Trump did not sign the paperwork.

Instead, Cohen wrote the initials “EC” for Essential Consultants on the line where there was a pseudonym, “David Dennison,” for Trump. Daniels was referred to as “Peggy Peterson.”

Cohen testified he called Trump.

“So, he would know the task he gave to me was finished, accomplished, done," Cohen said. “It was also for credit for myself."

In mid-January 2017, Cohen testified, Trump and Weisselberg informed him how he would be reimbursed for the Cohen hush money deal – as income, instead of expenses - by doubling the $130,000 to $260,000 to cover his taxes, plus $50,000 in other expenses owed and a $60,000 bonus, totaling $420,000, to be paid in 12 monthly installments of $35,000 to be invoiced as a retainer for legal services, as Cohen would serve as the president’s personal attorney.

Of Trump, Cohen said: “He approved it.”

Daniels testified over two days for eight hours last week and was preceded on the witness stand by Davidson and former Cohen banker Gary Farro, and the Cohen bank documents were already in evidence.

Cohen, 57, worked until 2017 for the Trump Organisation, as Executive Vice President and Special Counsel to Donald J Trump, answering only to “the boss.”

As Cohen identified Trump in the courtroom, the defendant’s eyes were closed, as they were for much of his testimony.

Cohen said his base salary was $375,000 a year, with bonuses around $525,000, and the job was “fantastic.”

“An amazing experience in many, many ways. There were great times,” Cohen testified. “For the most part, I enjoyed the responsibilities that was given to me.”

In 2007, Cohen took over the office used by Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, on the 26th floor of Trump Tower, and later moved closer into an office about 50 feet from Trump’s.

Cohen said he and Trump spoke “every single day and multiple times a day” in person or cell phone, as he handled real estate and personal matters for him.

“Mr Trump never had an email address,” Cohen testified. Cohen put a premium on keeping Trump, who he described as a “micromanager,” informed.

"It was actually required," Cohen testified. "As soon as you had a result, an answer, you could go straight back and tell him, especially if it was a matter that was troubling to him."

Cohen said: "If you didn't immediately provide him with the information, and he learned it in another manner that wouldn't go over well for you."

As a hard-nosed negotiator, Cohen admitted, sometimes he lied for Trump “to accomplish the task to make him happy.”

When Trump launched his presidential campaign in June 2015, Cohen testified, Trump warned him: “Just be prepared – there’s going to be a lot of women coming forward.”

Cohen recounted a key meeting at Trump Tower two months after Trump launched his first presidential campaign

He attended with Trump and David Pecker, the former CEO of American Media, Inc. (AMI), which published the popular supermarket tabloid The National Enquirer, and other magazines. Pecker was the first trial witness.

Cohen said the trio agreed that “if we can place positive stories that would be beneficial, that if we could place negative stories about some of the other candidates, that would also be beneficial.”

Asked by Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Susan Hoffinger what Pecker vowed to do, Cohen testified: “What he said was he could keep an eye out for anything negative about Mr Trump, and that he would be able to help us know in advance what was coming out and try to stop it from coming out.”

The latter promise was first put to the test when AMI was approached by a Trump Tower doorman shopping a story.

“That there was a love child,” Cohen testified.

The doorman alleged Trump had fathered a girl with a housekeeper, Cohen told Trump.

“I went to him immediately,” Cohen said. “To get his direction on what he wanted me to do.”

Trump told him to make sure the story doesn’t get out, telling him: “You handle it,” according to Cohen.

Cohen said he worked with Pecker and National Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard to buy and bury the story for $30,000.

Cohen said Trump was grateful for the so-called “catch and kill” deal.

“Absolutely,” Cohen said. “I reviewed it to make sure Mr Trump was fully protected.”

He had suggested a $1 million penalty if the doorman violated the nondisclosure agreement - in perpetuity: “They own the story forever, and it can never come out.”

Cohen said he “immediately” informed Trump of a more serious story shopped to AMI in June 2016 about Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model who alleged having a 10-month affair with Trump from 2006 to 2007.

“Boss, I got to talk to you,” Cohen recalled telling Trump. “Told him about what I had just learned. I asked him if he knew who Karen McDougal was.”

Cohen continued: “His response to me was, ‘She’s really beautiful.’”

Asked how Trump told him to act, Cohen testified, the former president said: “Make sure it doesn’t get released.”

Cohen discussed with Pecker and Howard how AMI might acquire the McDougal story in order to bury it – another catch and kill – and about a week later, in Trump’s office, Cohen heard Trump speaking to Pecker over speaker phone.

“We have this under control, and we'll take care of this,” Pecker told Trump, Cohen recalled.

The cost of the McDougal deal was $150,000.

Trump replied: “No problem. I’ll take care of it,” Cohen testified. “He was going to pay him back.”

Cohen said Pecker described the deal - promising McDougal 24 bylined articles and two fitness magazine covers - as “bulletproof.”

Cohen testified he updated Trump: “Effectively the story has now been caught.”

“Fantastic. Great job,” Trump told him, Cohen testified.

After AMI sealed the McDougal deal, Pecker pressed Cohen about payback.

Cohen testified, Trump told him: “Don’t worry, I’ll take care of it.”

To prove to Pecker that he was trying to make AMI whole, Cohen went so far as to surreptitiously record a conversation with Trump.

Using the voice memo function, he held his cell phone in his hand as he walked into Trump’s office and stood on the opposite side of his desk.

When Cohen brought up “financing” the AMI reimbursement through an LLC, Trump advised, “Pay with cash,” according to the recording played for the jury.

“To avoid some kind of paper transaction, but I thought that was not the best way to do it.” Cohen testified. But Trump never reimbursed AMI.

When the first Men’s Fitness issues with McDougal on the cover sold very well, Pecker dropped the matter.

Cohen’s testimony will continue on Tuesday, May 14.
User avatar
Solauren
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10215
Joined: 2003-05-11 09:41pm

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by Solauren »

You know, looking back, how Trump could have handled it, and in line with his actions would have been simple -

"Yeah, I banged her. My wife knew all about it and was okay with it"
Follow that up by 'bribing' his wife to agree with that statement, and now its a non-issue.
I've been asked why I still follow a few of the people I know on Facebook with 'interesting political habits and view points'.

It's so when they comment on or approve of something, I know what pages to block/what not to vote for.
bilateralrope
Sith Acolyte
Posts: 5971
Joined: 2005-06-25 06:50pm
Location: New Zealand

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by bilateralrope »

Zaune wrote: 2024-05-13 04:59pm As far as RFK Jr goes, I think it's worth noting that he's apparently been suffering from some sort of neurological issue that causes brain fog since at least 2011.

And to the man's credit, up until that point he'd been doing a lot of very worthwhile environmental activist work and might have been a decent candidate one. Even if he had the classic Kennedy enthusiasm for adultery.
The remains of the parasite in his brain were detected in 2010.
User avatar
The Sisko
Redshirt
Posts: 47
Joined: 2020-08-10 12:37pm

Re: US Election 2024: Grumpy Old Men

Post by The Sisko »

RFK Jr. also said the brain worms "ate parts of his brain" even though doctors insist that's total bull. To me, that is the funniest part.
CNN wrote:NYT: RFK Jr. says worm ‘got into my brain and ate a portion of it’ full article
...A New York doctor, after reviewing a scan of his brain, told him that his health issues could be “caused by a worm that got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died,” Kennedy said in the 2012 deposition...

...“Yeah, the worms are not feeding the brain. They are living in the brain,” Dr. Hotez said. The worms get nutrients from the body, but they are not eating the brain tissue, he said.
"I have cognitive problems, clearly."
Make this man President, now! :lol:
Anyway, here's Wonderwall
Ralin wrote:Soft Holocaust Denial isn't Holocaust Denial.
Post Reply