Trump chickens out

[Stewy]

(12-14-2023, 03:35 PM)pally Wrote: Actually listen to Trump’s disjointed stump speeches and tell me why the future he is describing is the one you want for this country? Really, I truly want to understand the appeal.

In my view, MAGA devotion is rooted in the biggest lie of all.  What is the biggest lie of all you ask?  It's "Let's make America great again!"  The lie isn't that Trump thinks he can make America great again, the lie is that it ever stopped being great.

This is still the land of opportunity.  It's the place that immigrants want to flock to.  It's still a place where hard work pays off.  Trump came up with a slogan that was a lie.  He makes promises he will not and cannot keep.  He cannot make America great again, because it is still great.

[*pally*]

Like client like the lawyer

Rudy Guliani, who was scheduled to testify today in the defamation case brought against him by Georgia poll workers, chickened out just like Trump. all these guys are blow-hards. They talk a big game but when it comes to taking an oath they run like the cowards they are.

[GMDino]

https://apnews.com/article/trump-fraud-trial-closing-arguments-420997f889922423dbce8a0945f0c348

Quote:Judge says Donald Trump won’t give own closing argument at civil fraud trial after disputing rules


[color=var(--color-byline-authors)]BY JENNIFER PELTZ AND JAKE OFFENHARTZ
Updated 9:12 PM EST, January 10, 2024
Share
NEW YORK (AP) — Donald Trump won’t make his own closing argument after all in his New York civil business fraud trial after his lawyers objected to the judge’s insistence that the former president stick to “relevant” matters and “not deliver a campaign speech.”
Judge Arthur Engoron nixed Trump’s unusual plan on Wednesday, a day ahead of closing arguments.[/color]

The judge had initially indicated he was open to the idea, saying he’d let Trump speak if he agreed to abide by rules that apply to attorneys’ closing arguments. Among other things, Engoron wanted the former president and current Republican front-runner to promise he wouldn’t assail his adversaries in the case, the judge or others in the court system.

Trump’s legal team said those limitations unfairly muzzled him. When Engoron didn’t hear from them by a Wednesday deadline, the judge told them he assumed Trump was not agreeing to the restrictions and therefore would not be speaking.


“MEAN & NASTY,” Trump wrote of the judge’s decision on his Truth Social platform. Trump indicated he will still attend Thursday’s court proceeding and reiterated his desire to “personally do the closing argument.”

The trial could cost Trump hundreds of millions of dollars in penalties and strip him of his ability to do business in New York. He’s fighting allegations that his net worth was inflated by billions of dollars on financial statements that helped him secure business loans and insurance.

The former president denies any wrongdoing, and he has lambasted the case as a “hoax” and a political attack on him. The judge is a Democrat, as is New York Attorney General Letitia James, who brought the lawsuit.

The trial came after Engoron decided, in a pretrial ruling, that Trump had engaged in fraud for years. The judge ordered at that point that a receiver take control of some of the ex-president’s properties, but an appeals court has put that order on hold.

The trial concerns remaining claims of conspiracy, insurance fraud and falsifying business records. Engoron will decide the verdict.
It’s extremely uncommon for people who have lawyers to give their own closing arguments. But Trump’s lawyers had signaled privately to the judge last week that the ex-president planned to deliver a summation personally, in addition to arguments from his legal team. James’ office objected, saying that the proposal would effectively amount to testimony without cross-examination.


In an email exchange filed in court Wednesday, Engoron initially approved the request, saying he was “inclined to let everyone have his or her say.”

But he said Trump’s remarks would have to stay within the bounds of “commentary on the relevant, material facts that are in evidence, and application of the relevant law to those facts.”


Trump would not be allowed to introduce new evidence, “comment on irrelevant matters” or “deliver a campaign speech” — or impugn the judge, his staff, the attorney general, her lawyers or the court system, the judge wrote.

Trump attorney Christopher Kise responded that those limitations were “fraught with ambiguities, creating the substantial likelihood for misinterpretation or unintended violation.” Engoron said that they were ”reasonable, normal limits” and would allow for comments on the attorney general’s arguments but not personal attacks.


Kise termed the restrictions “very unfair.”


“You are not allowing President Trump, who has been wrongfully demeaned and belittled by an out of control, politically motivated attorney general, to speak about the things that must be spoken about,” the attorney wrote.

“I won’t debate this yet again. Take it or leave it,” the judge shot back, with an all-caps addition saying he wouldn’t push back an already extended and imminent deadline to resolve the matter. The deadline passed without a response from Trump’s lawyers.


Earlier in the exchange, the judge also denied Kise’s request to postpone closing arguments until Jan. 29 because of the death Tuesday of Trump’s mother-in-law, Amalija Knavs. The judge expressed condolences but said he was sticking to the scheduled date, citing the security and logistics required for Trump’s planned visit to court.

Taking on a role usually performed by an attorney is dicey for any defendant, and summations are a last chance to try to show how the evidence from the trial has or hasn’t met legal requirements for proving the case.


A closing argument isn’t constrained to the question-and-answer format of testimony. But “it’s absolutely not a free-for-all,” said Christine Bartholomew, a University at Buffalo School of Law professor who specializes in civil procedure.


“Unless you’re legally trained … the chance of a misstep is really, really high,” she said, adding that it’s “extra-risky” when a judge has already taken issue with a defendant’s conduct during the case.


Trump ran afoul of Engoron after making a disparaging social media post about the judge’s law clerk on the trial’s second day. The post included a false insinuation about the clerk’s personal life.


Engoron then imposed a limited gag order, barring all participants in the trial from commenting publicly about court staffers. The judge later fined Trump a total of $15,000, saying he’d repeatedly violated the order. Trump’s defense team is appealing it.

During the recent email exchange about Trump’s potential summation, Engoron warned Trump’s lawyers that if the former president violated the gag order, he’d be removed from the courtroom and fined at least $50,000.


Trump testified in November, sparring verbally with the judge and state lawyers as he defended himself and his real estate empire. He later considered but ultimately decided against a second round of testimony, explaining that he had “nothing more to say.”
___
Associated Press writer Michael R. Sisak contributed.

1) You can just hear P01135809 saying he would give a better closing argument than his handpicked lawyers.

2) I wouldn't delay anything until I saw an actual body ready to buried on the practice putting green.

[*pally*]

The Judge gave him 5 minutes last Thursday and then told him to sit down and shut up. It was a statement that hit his usual high points.

Trump's attornies petitioned for a postponement of the closing statements due to the recent death of Melania's mother. He wanted to "comfort" his grieving wife. The judge said no. He is in Iowa all 3 days of the long weekend. Melania isn't

The E Jean Carroll punishment trial starts next week. He used the excuse of the death and funeral of his MIL with this case also. He said he wanted to be present at both the trial and funeral. Keep in mind that Trump also claimed he would attend and testify during the first phase of this case and wimped out. His lawyer said a single day postponement was "too much a burden" for the court so they magnanimously suggested a 2 or 3-week postponement. The judge in that case also said no.

These New York judges aren't putting up with his BS.

In Florida, in the case of the document, Jack Smith filed a brief complaint that the Trump defense has not provided information concerning using the 'advice of counsel defense" which would trigger certain discovery requirements. Trump appointee Judge Cannon said it was a premature motion considering other pre-trial motions haven't been resolved yet including which classified information may be disclosed during their defense. This far, the Trump team has turned over zero information in discovery. Judge Cannon has ruled that she will not decide anything until after a Mar 1st scheduling conference. Most attoenies who practice in the federal court system says these rulings are very unusual. This is the case most experts believe is the most likely to convict Trump. Judge Cannon's rulings are very likely to mean no trial before the November election.

[basballguy]

lets pretend I said something snarky here.