All Episodes
Previous Next
May 30, 2024 - Lionel Nation
01:09:43
Jury Deliberations in the Trump Sham Prosecution That No One Understands Especially the Jury
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Disaster can strike when least expected.
Wildfires, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes.
They can instantly turn your world upside down.
Dirty Man Underground Safes is a safeguard against chaos.
Hidden below, your valuables remain protected no matter what.
Prepare for the unexpected.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off and secure peace of mind for you and your family.
Dirty Man Safe.
When disaster hits, security isn't optional.
When uncertainty strikes, peace of mind is priceless.
Dirty Man Underground Safes protects what matters most.
Discreetly designed, these safes are where innovation meets reliability, keeping your valuables close yet secure.
Be ready for anything.
Use code DIRTY10 for 10% off today and take the first step towards safeguarding your future.
Dirty Man Safe.
Because protecting your family starts with protecting what you treasure.
The storm is coming.
Markets are crashing.
Banks are closing.
When the economy collapses, how will you survive?
You need a plan.
Cash, gold, bitcoin.
Dirty Man Safes keep your assets hidden underground at a secret location ready for any crisis.
Don't wait for disaster to strike.
Get your Dirty Man safe today.
Use promo code DIRTY10 for 10% off your order.
Welcome to this, our Wednesday show, hump day.
Our verdict watch and everything else on this 29th day of May.
Welcome and thank you for joining us here at the Conspiratorium at the Conspiratorium headquarters along with the...
Conspirateers, the clerisy as it were.
Let me remind you as I always do that it is 160 days until the election.
160 days.
Listen to me carefully.
160 days until the election.
Think about that.
Think about that.
160 days.
Incredible.
We're going to be talking about the Trump case.
I'm going to be giving you questions that I think you should know, questions that you should be asking, questions that make the most sense.
And I'm not going to do this like everybody else does.
What does that mean?
They basically want to pretend or tell you that this is a travesty and Trump is right.
That's not legal analysis.
You don't need anybody for that.
I've heard this, yes, we know, and I appreciate it.
Whether it's Don Jr. or Lara Trump or even De Niro and others, that means nothing.
I want to talk about the legal analysis.
I have been now, this is my 42nd year as a lawyer, and I love when people come along and they just figure, well, we can just talk about this and we can just...
Discuss it.
And what they want you to do at Fox and CNN is not talk about the actual clinical aspects of the trial, but talk about it in terms of the fact that this is the end of the world or what have you.
So I'm going to ask you some very serious questions.
And I'm going to talk about the questions that you need to know.
For example, what are the possibilities?
What is the verdict?
What does this mean?
What do I think will happen?
What are the possibilities?
What are we looking at?
What's reasonable doubt?
Will he go to jail?
Will he go to prison?
Where was Ellen Weisselberg?
What effect did Stormy Daniels have on this?
Why was Cohen, a perjurer, allowed to testify?
Should Trump have testified?
What was the actual charge?
What do they hope to prove him guilty of?
Can Trump win an appeal?
If so, how long will it take?
What effect was the delay, the one week off?
What was the big deal about his blanche, his lawyer, saying that, don't send Trump to prison?
The judge went crazy.
Why is that a problem?
What's a mistrial?
What's a hung jury?
What if they find him guilty of some and not the others?
What do the juries think?
What do we view from this?
What do we think?
This is a trial, but this is something which is very interesting.
There is the psychology of human emotion involved in this.
There is this psychology of people who are interjecting, they are part of the calculus of this provision, of this show, of this event.
There's a human panel weighing reasonable doubt.
What does reasonable doubt mean?
What's the best way to go after this?
People will say, oh, it was a fiery closing argument.
I don't want a fiery closing argument.
I want a good one.
Some of the best ones are very calm.
What is it that you're trying to do?
What is it that you're trying to accomplish?
We're going to go through this.
And we're going to take all the time we need.
Let me first thank you for being a part of this.
Thank you for joining us.
Thank you for joining our 7 p.m. and 8 a.m. dual Lionel Nation reviews.
Please make sure you are subscribed.
I'm getting the word from people that sometimes they are unsubscribed.
And before we begin, before we jump in, this critical word from our critical sponsor.
It's no longer a question of if something catastrophic is coming, it's when.
While you still have some control.
What are you going to do about it now to prepare?
Well, your first step is going to my website, preparewithlionel.com.
And for a limited time, take $200 off a three-month emergency food supply.
My Patriot Supply is equipped to help you and your family to prepare.
They've helped over 2 million families already.
These three-month kits with Ready Hour Foods provide over 2,000 calories every day with 22 varieties and a 25-year shelf life.
Breakfast, lunches, dinners, drinks, snacks, everything.
And they're sealed inside six rugged, waterproof buckets, and they're over 120 pounds of food.
So take advantage right now and go to preparewithlionel.com, preparewithlionel.com.
One more time, preparewithlionel.com.
Now, my friends, the jury is now deciding the fate of President Trump.
This falsifying business records.
Before we begin, now remember, what I'm saying to you, the way I speak to you, the level, the volume, the whatever, all of this, all of this, you will never hear on regular TV because you can't.
Nobody on cable news wants to hear this.
They don't have enough time.
They want that viral moment.
Say something funny and move on.
And I'm not trying to be mean, but that's just the way it is.
Now, first and foremost, let us look at what he is charged with.
You have to go to the indictment.
And it says the grand jury of the county of New York, by this indictment, accuses the defendant of the crime of falsifying business records.
Section 175.1.
Okay?
Good.
Now, let's see.
What is that?
Well, it reads as follows.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree.
And when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime, Wait a minute.
What does that mean?
Imagine you're a juror and you're looking at each other and you're saying, did you follow that?
Now, most judges do not allow notes and I'm not sure if there were a lot of copies of the actual jury instructions.
Probably do.
But they're going to sit and say, what does that mean?
Well, first, for our edification, let's go back and see what this means to violate this in the first degree, in the second degree.
Remember this?
Falsifying business records in the second degree is what you have to prove this and then add The additional elements on.
Why are they doing this?
Because this is a misdemeanor.
A Class A misdemeanor.
And the statute of limitations ran.
So in order to breathe life into this, under this theory, I guess that's all they have, they say we have to make this a felony.
And by making it a felony, we take this statute and add on some additional factors to elevate it.
It's almost like a lesser included.
Burglary, in many jurisdictions, is really trespass plus something else.
Battery is sometimes assault plus something else.
You have to enter a building, enter someplace.
It's kind of like trespass.
Sort of.
But then when you intend to commit an offense, you raise it to burglary.
So there's that underlying part of it.
So, 175.05 is falsifying business records in the second degree.
This is what you start off with.
A person is guilty of falsifying business records in the second degree when, with the intent to defraud, he, I think that's sexist, when he, and I'll just give you the first one.
Makes or causes a false entry in the business records of an enterprise.
So stop right there.
With the intent to defraud whom?
Makes or causes a false entry in the business records.
What are the business records?
Intentionally, what if I make a mistake?
What if I want to defraud But not because I'm violating a criminal statute, but for...
I don't even know what that means.
I don't know what that means.
So, take that, which is the basis, the foundation of this, and to make it a felony, you take that, but you add some factors.
175.1, which is what President Trump is charged with.
It says a person is guilty of falsifying business records in the first degree when he commits the crime of falsifying business records in the second degree, which I just read to you, which I don't know what that means, and when his intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof.
So you take the first one and you add to it an intent to defraud.
Again, defraud whom?
And when that intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime.
So you got it?
So you're writing this out.
You're trying to look at the, it's kind of like scaffolding.
You know, you're saying, okay, you've got this.
So I intend to defraud, but that intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime.
Got me so far?
Got me?
Anybody not clear on that?
Does that clear that up?
Good.
Now what you need to do then is you ask yourself, well, what's the best way to handle this?
You don't go in and you say stupid things like, look, you may hate him.
No!
You know, I don't care what you think about Donald Trump.
No!
You're going to be clinical.
You're going to be holding up the x-ray and saying, it's not broken.
It's not broken.
Your leg, it's not broken.
I'm a radiologist.
It's not broken.
I don't know who you are.
I don't care what.
Not broken.
Not guilty.
Here, do you have your...
Here's the line of mercy.
Do you have your...
Do a pregnancy test?
Did you put a sample in here?
Yeah, okay.
Not guilty.
You're not pregnant.
That's it.
It's that simple.
It's very, very clinical.
Oh, okay.
Not clinical.
Not like, you!
You've been trying all these years.
No!
Just tell me the results.
Not guilty.
Not pregnant.
Not broken.
Just tell me.
That's the attitude.
Very simple.
I don't have to tell you why Michael Cohen's a liar.
I don't even want to bring up Stormy Daniels.
I hope nobody did.
This is a very simple thing.
And you have some graphs.
You have something to point to.
You point to this.
This is a very, very complicated thing.
But we're going to make it very simple to you.
Now remember, And you go back and you have the actual indictment.
And take count number one.
This is count number one.
The defendant.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury.
You're going to have to find beyond a reasonable amount.
And we're going to talk about that.
That Donald Trump.
In the county of New York.
And elsewhere.
And elsewhere?
And, by the way, quick stop right there.
Statutory construction.
When you hear words like or and and in a statute, that means two things.
Or is obviously either or.
And means you must have two elements.
May or shall.
Will.
All these words.
So do I have to prove in this that the defendant in New York and elsewhere, where was the elsewhere?
We'll let that go.
But I'm going to read this carefully.
I'm going to let that jury, I'm going to make this jury say, I don't even know what this is.
That's reasonable doubt.
If you can't understand the statute, that's reasonable doubt.
That's simple.
Let me say this again.
Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you are not going to find out what the statute means or the case because no one knows.
So it says that the defendant, this is count one, there's 34 of these, but this is count one, the defendant, Donald Trump, in the county of New York and elsewhere, on or about February the 14th, 2017, with the intent to defraud and the intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof, Let's go through this again.
Count one.
Did they prove beyond a reasonable doubt as to count one?
That President Trump intended to defraud.
Whom?
I don't know.
What do you mean, intended to defraud?
Defraud who?
Stormy?
His office?
His family?
His wife?
His marriage?
His country?
The voters?
Who?
I don't know.
But it says with the intent to defraud.
You know, normally in arson, When you try to collect insurance, you defraud the insurance company.
When you take the life savings of an old person, you defraud the old person.
I mean, it's simple.
This is this case where you're defrauding whom?
That's not guilty.
But you've got to intend to defraud and intend to commit another crime.
What other crime?
I don't know.
And...
Aid and conceal the commission of the other crime.
So he's intending to defraud somebody.
He's intending to commit some other crime and intending to aid and conceal the commission of that crime.
This is not guilty.
Right there.
Did they prove it?
I don't even understand it.
If the indictment read and the president was involved in stuff, Let's assume it's a stuff and did a bunch of stuff with the intent to defraud.
What stuff?
I don't know.
That's not guilty.
Either because of the imprecision of the statute, imprecision of the indictment, imprecision or lack of evidence.
But it goes further.
And what evidence do we have?
An invoice from Michael Cohen.
Michael Cohen.
Yeah.
An invoice from Michael Cohen.
Now, you as a trier of fact, do you believe Michael Cohen?
When Michael Cohen introduces an invoice to you, is that reasonable doubt?
You better believe that's reasonable doubt.
You don't have to believe his credibility in the least.
Michael Cohen?
Michael Cohen, the serial perjurer?
Michael Cohen, who basically has committed more?
We don't even know how many offenses.
He even stole from President Trump.
Always say President Trump.
And what was this invoice?
I don't know.
Marked as a record of the Donald J. Trump revocable trust?
Well, what did the invoice say?
Why is that fraudulent?
Do you see what I'm doing?
Do you see what I'm trying to do?
I'm trying to make them say, I don't understand this.
And I want them to say, when you go back, And you deliberate.
You can say right now, as a matter of fact, as a matter of law, there's 34 of these.
So if you can't answer, and they're all the same, the opening language, the only thing that differs is whether it's an invoice, a check, a voucher, but it's the same thing.
We don't know the indent.
We don't know the underlying defraud home.
So if you can't answer, if your vote...
It is not guilty as to count one.
It's not guilty as to all.
Let me say that again, ladies and gentlemen.
Let me make sure you understand this.
It's very simple here.
Just take one.
Or take any.
Take number 15. Take number 30. They're all the same.
All the counts are the same.
They may have a different date.
They may have a voucher versus a check.
But it involves Michael Cohen.
And as I just went through for you, reasonable doubt, reasonable doubt, reasonable doubt, reasonable doubt.
Reasonable doubt stops the train.
It derails it.
You can do great in that.
Reasonable doubt.
Just think a bridge collapsing or something.
That's all it does.
Now let me read something to you, ladies and gentlemen.
And Laurie Cuck, by the way, says, stop persecuting President Trump et al.
Indeed.
Especially that Al.
Especially Al.
Now, thank you, Lori.
Let's go to this one.
You're going to love this.
You're a juror.
And the judge reads to you from the jury instructions beyond a reasonable doubt.
What does that mean?
This is what a juror hears.
I'm going to read to you.
This is from the New York Criminal Jury Instructions.
This is what the jury hears.
We now turn to the fundamental principles of our law that apply in all criminal trials.
The presumption of innocence, the burden of proof, and the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Throughout these proceedings, the defendant is presumed to be innocent.
As a result, you must find the defendant not guilty.
Unless on the evidence presented at this trial, you conclude that the people have proven the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
In determining whether the people have satisfied their burden of proving the defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, you may consider all the evidence presented.
Whether by the people or by the defendant.
In doing so, however, remember that even though the defendant introduced evidence in the case of his own testimony, the burden of proof remains on the people.
The defendant is not required to prove that he or she is not guilty.
In fact, the defendant is not required to prove or disprove anything to the contrary.
The people have the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
That means, before you can find the defendant guilty of a crime, the people must prove beyond a reasonable doubt every element of the crime, including that the defendant is the person who committed the crime.
The burden of proof never shifts from the people If the people fail to satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant not guilty.
If the people satisfy their burden of proof, you must find the defendant guilty.
What does our law mean when it requires proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?
And this is the money shot.
This is it.
This is where you win your case by saying and focusing on this.
You can blow it up.
This is the jury instructions anybody can read.
The law uses the term proof beyond a reasonable doubt to tell you how convincing the evidence of guilt must be to permit a verdict of guilty.
The law recognizes that in dealing with human affairs, there are very few things in this world that we know with absolute certainty.
Therefore, the law does not require the people to prove a defendant guilty beyond all possible doubt.
On the other hand, it is not sufficient to prove that the defendant is probably guilty.
In a criminal case, the proof of guilt must be stronger than that.
It must be...
Beyond a reasonable doubt.
A reasonable doubt is an honest doubt of the defendant's guilt for which a person exists based on the nature and quality of the evidence.
It is an actual doubt, not an imaginary doubt.
It is a doubt that a reasonable person acting in a matter of this importance would be likely to entertain because of the evidence that was presented or because of the lack of convincing evidence.
And it goes on.
So what you do is you make it very simple.
You say, oh, I get it.
Barry Taylor says, there's actually at least two attorneys sitting on the jury.
Great!
Even better.
I don't care.
I don't care if there are doctors, lawyers, nuns, people.
That would be even better.
Makes no difference.
Makes no difference.
Lori Cuck says, very important, she says, not is he guilty or innocent, guilty or not guilty.
Exactly.
They use this terrible term, Lori, presumption of innocence.
Nobody's innocent.
So that's the first thing you do.
That's the first thing you do.
And you make them, and you have, you just explain that there is no evidence of this.
Now, The question you want to know is, what are the possibilities?
What can the jury do?
What can the jury do?
Well, first of all, the jury can do one of two things.
It can find the President Trump guilty of everything!
That means 34 counts, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt.
They can do that.
Number two, you can find I'm not guilty of everything.
That's not going to happen.
But they could, theoretically.
Number three.
Split verdict.
Count 1, 6, 3, 5, 2. Guilty.
Count 2, 5, 2. Not guilty.
Okay.
Which doesn't make any sense.
And in closing, you've got to tell them.
If you find them guilty, excuse me, not guilty of one, They're not guilty.
He's not guilty of everything.
By the same token, one could argue, well, if you find him guilty of one, is he therefore guilty of all of them?
Let the prosecution decide that.
Very simple.
I want the jury to feel like, well, of course we found him not guilty.
The case was vague, the charges were this, the prosecution.
There was no evidence of it.
The evidence didn't show this.
The evidence didn't show this.
Okay?
Now, some other important news.
Very, very critical questions.
What do I think will happen?
Hung jury.
I believe there is a great chance, a great chance, that at least one juror may say, screw this.
And say, not guilty is everything.
Not guilty.
Just, this is a joke.
I've been here for so long.
I've been away from my family.
This is horrible.
I hate these.
And who knows why?
I could go on and on and explain to you why.
I hate that stormy death.
I hate this.
I can't stand this judge.
I can't stand.
Who knows?
I hate these people.
Put a bunch of Karens.
A bunch of pan-the-ass New Yorkers together.
The likelihood of some saying no.
Uh-uh.
And I'll tell you why in a moment.
Will he go to jail?
Let's assume he's found guilty.
No!
No!
He's not going to jail.
He's not going to Rikers.
He's not going to lockups.
No!
He's a former president, number one.
He has secret service protection.
The Democrats are even not that stupid, and Judge Mershon has got to realize, now listen, I know you're having a lot of fun here, but if you have any interest in any kind of future, any kind of judicial future, tone it down.
Tone it down.
Do you hear what we're saying?
Tone it down.
He's not going to go to prison.
And if this were Joe Blow, On a first offense, no priors, no violence.
Once he files an appeal, he's off.
And ain't gonna happen.
Where was Allen Weisselberg?
This is his accountant.
Couldn't he have helped?
Maybe.
Maybe.
Is it good that he wasn't on there?
Absolutely.
You don't want him on there.
He himself is a convicted felon.
He's not going to say anything to risk another charge.
He's not going to exactly bend over backwards to help the president.
That's okay.
What effect did Stormy Daniels have?
That's a very interesting question.
I think nothing.
The best thing that happened, and we'll talk about this, was the delay, the week's delay.
Absolutely.
Stormy Daniels...
If there was no delay, the first thing the jurors would say is, do you think Trump had sex with Stormy Daniels?
Hmm?
Do you think Trump had, that's not an issue here?
Well, I think he did.
He said he didn't, and she, wait a minute, wait a minute, excuse me.
Stormy Daniels is not on the verdict.
It's nothing to do with the case.
Yeah, yeah, I know, but I think she, I think she, and that's why.
To sully this up, to show him he's a skeeve.
It had nothing to do with anything.
The non-disclosure agreement, the NDA, means nothing.
It doesn't matter why.
It doesn't matter why.
You don't need her to authenticate the NDA.
It couldn't matter.
If I went to you and said, hey, listen, I'm going to give you $100.
Don't tell anybody we had sex.
What?
We didn't have sex.
That's the spirit.
No.
Excuse me.
I don't know who you are.
Okay, I'll give you $100.
Where do I sign?
So you want me not to tell people that we had sex?
Okay, we didn't have sex, but okay, sure, I'll sign that.
Give me the $100.
That's illegal.
It doesn't matter what the NDA is for.
We didn't need Stormy Daniels.
Stormy Daniels meant nothing.
Nothing.
Nothing at all.
What about Michael Cohen?
I guess he established he signed.
I mean, I absolutely don't know.
Maybe they'll tell you this.
Why was Cohen a perjurer allowed to testify?
Same reason Sammy the Bull was allowed to testify.
They put serial killers on.
The government does this all the time.
What are you talking about?
Whistleblower statutes, turncoats, of course.
Should Trump have testified?
No.
No.
Get that out of your head.
No.
What was the charge actually alleged?
That's my point.
We don't know.
Did Trump win an appeal?
Yes.
Three years from now?
Two years?
Maybe.
I don't know.
With this Court of Appeals?
I don't know.
But he's got some good cases.
If so, how long will that take?
Years?
What effect, again, did this delay have?
I think it's very good.
I think the delay, I think the delay was good, unlike most people.
Now, before we go into some other aspects of this, I want you to sit back and, first of all, accept my love and affection for you for being a part of this.
In fact, Raul Rodriguez says, if I was a juror, I would say not guilty.
Oh, I would too, but not because I like Trump, but because I don't think they proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
I don't even understand the charge.
I can't find you guilty of something I don't understand.
Remember, that's the reason.
Now, before we get into this fun part, the man on the street, the Robert De Niro factor, and all this other kind of jazz, I want you to listen, first of all, to make sure, dear friend, that you are absolutely signed.
That you are a part of this.
And let me tell you to stand by for one second from this incredibly important and critical word, from our incredibly important critical sponsor, the greatest guy, Mike Lindell, who has fought everyone for daring to speak the truth.
Remember, MyPillow.com, promo code Lionel.
It's time yet again, my friends, to hail and salute our great friends at MyPillow.com.
And if you use promo code Lionel, You'll get a free gift.
No purchase necessary.
And yes, I know, I know, a free gift.
It's a tautology, so sue me.
But first, listen carefully.
Check out their $25 extravaganza.
Premium MyPillows.
Queen and King.
MyPillow 2.0.
MyPillow bed sheets.
The lowest price ever.
Sandals, slides, slippers, six-piece towel sets, four-pack dish towel sets.
Simply and absolutely unbelievable.
So go to MyPillow.com slash Lionel, MyPillow.com promo code Lionel, or call 800-645-4965 and watch how fast Mike Lindell answers the phone.
MyPillow.com, simply and absolutely the best.
Now my friends, let's talk about the issue everybody's talking about.
And we all despise Robert De Niro was sent out to try to contaminate the jury.
He was sent out in this absolutely just despicable act on the part of the Democratic Party.
And as you notice, he has this fellow named this feller.
His name is...
I think his name is...
What is his name?
Oh, yes.
Jimmy Harkins.
Have you seen him?
He's the big, burly guy with the trimmed mustache following Bankman Freed, Ghislaine Maxwell, O.J. I don't know.
He's like the famed...
Whatever.
And here's the deal which is the most important.
This is the deal which is the most important.
What effect did Robert De Niro have on anything?
Did the jurors know about this?
Did they hear about it?
Were they told about this?
Are they going to find out?
Absolutely.
Do jurors not confer with the news?
Bullshit.
I'm sorry.
I don't believe this for a moment.
I don't believe this.
They're going to sit there in the biggest case ever and they're not going to say, I want to see what's going on.
Wouldn't you?
Of course you would.
Of course you would.
I don't think it affects the jury one way or the other.
I don't think...
I don't think it affects one thing or another.
If you do the right thing in closing arguments.
So don't think for a moment that any juror is going to sit there and say, yeah, I've got my phone.
Oh, my God, I hit the New York Post.
Well, I wanted to see the other news.
I didn't want to see stories about this.
I wanted to check, you know, the weather and the sports, how the Rangers are doing.
Next thing you know, I'm on the front page.
Hey, Robert De Niro showed up.
I didn't know.
I wasn't looking for it, mind you.
I just saw this.
So this is this fellow, this simpleton, who, by the way, is a moron, who had to read from a paper.
Somebody wrote for him.
And he's arguing about voting for Biden, not in the case.
Normally you would show up and you'd say, and the president?
He's making a campaign speech with all of these bodyguards around him where he gets into some of the vilest screaming and yelling, which of course is his thing.
And elections, forget about it.
That's over.
That's done.
If he gets in, I can tell you right now, he will never leave.
He will never leave.
He left the first time, Mr. Forget About It.
He left the first time early.
What are you talking about?
You know that.
He will never leave.
He left.
The first time.
You know that.
What does that mean?
I don't know.
Why are you here?
Why are you such a lousy actor?
Why are you speaking like this?
Because you don't know what you're talking about.
Because you're a gedrool.
Is that the country we want to live in?
Do we want him running this country and saying, I'm not leaving, I'm dictator for life?
Yes.
And he didn't say that.
That was a joke when he was speaking with Mr. Hannity.
You should know that, right?
You do know that was a joke.
Everybody knew that was a joke.
Tell me you understood that Mr. Academy Award.
Isn't that funny?
You don't hear horns honking until he speaks.
Perhaps there is a guy.
I hope this new ad campaign reaches outside the bubble to remind...
This ad campaign?
I hope this is an ad campaign?
Did you hear that?
Is that what this is?
This is an ad campaign?
Supporters of what a danger he is to our lives.
This is not a threat.
This is a reality.
And that's why I've joined the Biden-Harris campaign, because the only way to preserve our freedoms and hold on to our humanity is to vote for Joe Biden for president.
Doesn't...
I mean, this is so tacky.
You...
I think you know.
Really?
Really.
We don't have a choice.
We don't.
On January 6th, while Republican lawmakers despicably tried to keep the loser Trump, the loser Trump.
Oh, please, please.
Isn't that sad?
What?
Don't you?
Isn't he?
These are actors who had to audition.
These are actors who, you know, sometimes they say, you know, we're going to ad-lib, we're going to ad-lib, we're going to ad-lib.
This is a moron.
This is a moron.
This is the worst.
Lisa and I love the car alarm.
Now, how do people in the street, how did they respond?
Now, with all due respect, this is from Fox News and Sarah Carter, so they may have selected certain people to represent As an American, how have you handled this trial?
I'm a Trump fan, 100%.
I think what they're doing to him is outrageous.
Today's a big day.
You gotta watch this one.
This kills me.
I mean, Trump trial is wrapped up.
What do you think is gonna happen?
How do you feel?
You know, my husband, I'm kind of in, like, a different place.
He thinks he's gonna get convicted.
I think it's just a big nothing murder.
Do you feel that this trial...
It's just a target.
He's a target.
Yeah, he is.
Now, does this look like a typical Trumpy?
Does this look like one with the tats and the whole bit?
The age?
I don't think so.
He has a chance to make America great again and they're just using that against him.
That's what it is.
It's just 30 politicians.
Looking for a guilty verdict.
Looking for a guilty verdict.
Does this look like a typical Trump supporter to you?
Does it?
Do you think it could happen?
Could happen.
I think ultimately he'll be able to run even if he is convicted.
I think it's more of like a show.
And I try to stay away from the noise.
Isn't that something?
Doesn't that say everything?
Now, by the way, something else happened which is very interesting.
As you know, Hollywood is a sort of an indicator, a little bit of what people are thinking, which I find fascinating.
And a fellow by the name of Dennis Quaid, an actor who was on Piers Morgan.
And Dennis Quaid, you know Dennis Quaid, I don't think he's necessarily the, he's not the De Niro, thank God, of our generation.
But he had the following to say.
I think I'm going to vote for him.
Really?
Yeah, in the next election.
Yes, I am.
Are you ready for the blowback?
Well, yeah.
Which inevitably comes from Trump.
Well, you know, I think this election, everybody's got to, I think they're going to take a side or whatever, but it's...
It just makes sense.
Now stop right there.
First of all, this guy got the okay from his people, from his agents and his agency, and they said, go ahead and do this.
Believe me, this is a guy who's at the back nine.
He's not exactly in demand.
I'm sorry, he's a good actor, I guess.
And he's not going to do anything unless he gets the okay that...
Things are changing, and from his management team to say, yeah, go ahead and do this.
I was ready not to vote for Trump until what I saw is, more than politics, I see a weaponization of our justice system.
Now this is called lawfare, and this is even more fascinating.
If people are going to vote for him, not because of what he stands for, but because of the fact that he has been unfairly targeted.
I'll take it.
I'll take it.
And a challenge to our Constitution, us as Americans, that I don't think we're going to have.
Yep.
Good.
You know, Trump is the most investigated person probably in the history of the world.
Look at Piers.
He's going crazy.
He's thinking, because Piers secretly is one of us, but he can't say that.
And they haven't been able to.
Really get him.
People might call him an asshole.
Listen to this.
Listen to this.
Now, let me just make sure you get this one, okay?
Listen to this.
This is our line.
Really get him.
People might call him an asshole, but he's my asshole.
Yes.
Remember that one.
This is the famous line from, I think it was LBJ talking about J. Edgar Hoover.
He said, he may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch.
He also said it's better to have him on the inside pissing out than the outside pissing in.
Now, believe it or not, I still think, and I will say to you, that my favorite, I think the best media analyst on this has been Andy McCarthy of National Review.
Without a doubt.
Without a doubt.
Second, Jonathan Turley.
But Andy McCarthy is very, very...
He's the guy I would want second chairing me.
He's the one I want working with me.
He's a lawyer.
He knows the law.
He's not into this, you know, I'm going to say this stuff.
He did a piece on National Review about the jury instructions.
I don't want to say wonky.
I hate that term, but it's a term that you might recognize.
And Fox, in this respect, is very good regarding him.
I'll give you the floor without a specific question, although we have about a thousand.
By the way, Dana Perino, if she keeps getting work, she's going to be completely unrecognizable.
That's all I have to say.
The most extraordinary thing I've ever seen in watching or trying criminal cases for decades is we're on the precipice of having summations here.
This was this week, but the...
But the point is still relevant.
And we still don't have definity about what the crime is.
That's why I keep saying that is the definition of not guilty.
That's it.
Not because you like Trump, but we don't know what the charge is.
We have a situation where the statute doesn't prescribe clearly what the state says Trump did that makes him guilty.
The indictment doesn't put him on notice of the trial.
Now stop right now.
Stop, stop, stop.
This is critical.
This is important.
When you say to put him on notice, both a statute and the indictment is to put you on notice.
You'll hear words like notice pleading.
And the idea is that a statute should be able to be referred to at any time by anybody.
To be able to know what particular behavior they must exhibit in order to comport.
To comport with the law.
How they must abide by the law.
How they must comply with the law.
And the statute, I read it to you.
I don't know what it means.
To conceal, to defraud, whom, what are you talking about?
That's absolutely critically important language there.
Absolutely.
We've had a five-week trial, five weeks of testimony after opening statements.
We're right on the verge of summations, and it's still not clear what they say he did.
That's exactly the point.
That's exactly...
Remember, it's more than just that.
That's not guilty.
That's the...
Let me see.
Hang on a minute.
I'm so sorry about that.
That means not guilty.
Got a little excited there.
All right, here we go.
It's like they're making up a crime as they go along.
They're making a crime.
And, more importantly, they're also asking whether a state, a New York state prosecutor, can charge the violation, the alleged violation of a federal statute that they have no jurisdiction to enforce.
As a basis of the fraud or the other crime.
This is just, I mean, this is law school exam stuff.
You could go crazy on this one.
It's like you did something in the state of Indiana in order to defraud or to violate a Georgia code.
What?
This is something that we, in the biz, Finding this to be absolutely incomprehensible.
And the judge decided to take a week off.
Jonathan Turley, I'm sorry, Professor, but it defies logic for me to understand.
In a case of such vital importance, I take a week off.
Nonetheless, they're back today.
Now, we talked about this.
Listen to Turley.
Turley makes a good point.
But I don't exactly see it his way.
You believe, and you write about this at great length, that you expect a hung jury.
How come?
He's backing off now.
Well, what I've said is that the most likely outcome, in my view, is a hung jury.
That depends a great deal on the instructions.
And some of the instructions that we're hearing hints about are really rough on the defense.
But I still cannot believe that a jury could be unanimous on this evidence.
But you're right.
It's like a different jury.
When you send away 12 people for a week to go into holiday picnics and being in the world, I think it's hard to imagine for the Defense Council.
These people went back and they were reminded how unpopular it would be in New York to acquit or even hang in a trial of Donald Trump.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no.
Brad Rungi, by the way, our dear friend Brad, Brad Rungi says, Rung, Rung, excuse me, says, Is it true that Secret Service is speaking with New York jail officials to prep him for being taken into custody today, according to the news?
No.
They've talked about it.
They've discussed it.
But it's not going to happen.
That's, as we say, caca del toro.
Me entiende?
Caca del toro.
Del Toro.
Now, by the way, thank you, Brett.
What our friend, Mr. Turley, is saying is that, oh, the jury's going to come back and they're a completely different jury.
Good!
Let them come back and say, oh, shit, I've got to come back to this.
I hate this goddamn place.
And I hate this judge and I hate this one.
Let's get to this.
It's stupid.
What are we waiting for?
I've been wasting my whole life with this.
That was nice being away.
I forgot how great it was to be away.
I forgot.
I hate these people.
You know what?
I'm going to show you not guilty.
Here we come.
Do you think that's beyond the possibility?
Absolutely not.
That's the reason I think the defense has to be clear today.
It has to say, look, some of you.
No, no, no, no, no, no, no!
Intimate than anybody even could possibly think about hating.
You're dispassionate.
You're holding up the x-ray.
You're saying, not broken.
Not guilty.
Don't even intimate that.
Don't.
It's not acceptable.
The question for you, is that enough?
Is it enough to hate someone?
Stop with the hate.
To ignore the lack of evidence, the lack of a well-defined crime.
That's a question you will have to answer in that room.
Andrew, what's it like when you are standing up as a defense lawyer and your client is there probably champing at the bit because they want to say something or they want to make sure you say something?
Obviously, they've prepared a lot.
But give me a sense of what that defense team is feeling right now.
What do you think?
Closing arguments are thrilling.
I've done hundreds of them over the years, and it's a moment where it all kind of congeals.
It all comes together, and you've got the guy sitting next to you, and that's a very heavy...
This guy's boring.
I don't even know who he is.
Let me tell you about that.
He's right about one thing.
Oh, my God.
When you're doing closing, closing is the greatest.
You are on...
It's the only time...
Well, technically during voir dire where you get to ask maybe some questions.
Normally, depending on the state, the judge...
This is for jury selection.
Opening statement, you can talk to the jury.
But this is where you make everything come together.
And you make everything come together.
And you give them something very, very simple.
Something to hang their hat on.
Something just to hang their hat.
A little hook.
One of these things is not good.
One, it's like looking at a...
You can give analogies.
If you look, is this diamond pure?
Nope.
It's a flaw.
That's all you're doing.
It's a diamond, but it's a flaw.
This is perfect.
All you're doing is you're not...
You're merely the trier effect.
Then you're saying, did the people of New York, did the government prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, this, this, this, this, and this?
And you have, I would have a big, blown-up kind of document with circled all of the areas, all of the areas where there are reasons to find someone.
Reasons that intent other...
Conspire.
Other crime.
All of these words.
I would make this thing filled.
They would go back into that room and they would see in their mind.
You know, sometimes when you see something, you close your mind, you can still see it in your retina.
They would see all these circles.
This is count one.
Count one is not guilty.
Because if this, this, this, and this.
Intentative fraud.
Other crime.
Conceal.
What other crime?
What?
What happened?
Give it to Cohen.
What does that mean?
What's voucher?
Count one.
Count one is not guilty.
And if one count is not guilty, they're all not guilty.
That's it.
It's a very, very, very simple thing.
Simple.
Now, you could talk about other things.
Of course.
You could talk about this is lawfare.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.
But from, I hope also, that they have Preserved everything on appeal by objecting, objecting, objecting.
Andy McCarthy had written something to the effect which said something which indicated that he was a little concerned that maybe they did not object to everything that they could have as far as the jury instructions.
I don't know.
I don't think that's...
I wouldn't worry about that.
So my friends, based upon what I have told you, what do you think is going to happen?
Not what you want to happen.
Not what you wish would happen.
What do you think is going to happen?
What do you think?
That's the question.
What do you think?
I'm curious as to your review, some of your comments, some of your thoughts.
Ben says guilty.
If Trump is not guilty, New York will be led.
Split verdict?
Okay, interesting.
No idea.
What do you think?
Trump will be found guilty but will win an appeal?
No idea.
I like that.
What do you think is going to happen?
What do you think is going to happen?
A waste of time, yes.
What do you think will be this case right now?
The bottom line is simply this.
This is going to be of no political consequence one way or the other.
Remember, as you know, the reason why they wanted to do this, the reason for this initially, was so that they could say that Trump was a convicted felon.
That's all.
That's what they want.
That's their whole goal.
Impeach twice, convicted felon.
That's it.
Mershon will stay in the annals when he looks for the Democrat, maybe a federal judgeship down the road.
When he looks for something within the state of New York.
I mean, he, oh my god, he is going to be so famous.
If he steps down from the bench, he could be on a variety of, you know, think tanks and who knows.
But he is there to deliver one thing, a conviction.
That's why there's going to be no mistrial other than the jury.
The other day when Mr. Blanche suggested that ladies and gentlemen of the jury, do not Send this man to prison.
He went crazy.
Why?
Two reasons.
Number one, you never should talk about the verdict.
Excuse me, the sentence.
That's up to the judge.
The jury only determines weight of the evidence, guilt versus non-guilt.
Did they prove the case?
That's it.
The jury never should even consider sentencing.
That's number one.
Is it mistrialable?
Not really.
And the reason why, what was interesting is, did Blanche do this on purpose?
Because Blanche, the lawyer could say, look, or Blanche, look, judge, if I screw it up, declare a mistrial.
Oh, no, you don't.
No.
I've got to get my conviction.
This new retrial will be after the election.
Remember, Let me say this again.
Let me remind you.
The election is 160 days away.
Bershon's going to do nothing to interfere.
He's going crazy.
He's like, why are you screwing this up for me?
Why did you do this?
Why is now an appellate court could say, well, you should have granted the mistrial.
Oh, Jesus.
I'm not saying Blanche did this, but if he did intend to do it, it's a great tactic.
To deliberately do something so that the judge would be forced to issue...
We'll see that.
I want to tell you on a personal note.
I have stood there and I have been...
When you're there and you're...
Normally, it depends upon the place.
They have a buzzer system.
If the jury has a question, Press once.
Two questions.
Two buzzers.
Avert it.
And you always got to hang around.
Send the bailiff.
What is it?
They have a question.
Okay.
They bring the jury back.
Everybody's in court.
Okay.
What is your question?
And they can ask anything.
Can we find a defendant guilty of some and not the other?
Whatever the question is.
Can you read back the testimony?
And sometimes the judges will say, no, you must remember your own recollection.
They don't like to read stuff back.
They don't like notes.
Just remember.
And you've got 30. You're looking at the verdict form.
I don't understand any of this.
Keep it complicated, folks.
Keep it complicated.
Keep it complicated, which is good for the defendant.
But then when you get the, or whatever the sign is, verdict, your heart drops.
Call everybody in the courtroom.
We got a verdict.
We got a verdict.
Everybody's got to leave.
The old days, now they got cell phones.
You can walk in.
The old days, you had to stay there.
You had to go into an office.
You had to be ready to go.
And we say, okay, is the jury ready?
Okay, bring in the jury.
And you always tell your clients, stand up.
If you're a trial lawyer or anybody, stand up for that jury.
Now what happens is when the jury comes in, they always do this.
They play this game.
If it's a quick verdict, that's good for the defendant.
If it's a slow verdict, that's good for the defendant.
It's good for the state.
I don't know.
If they go back and they say, if it's a fast verdict, you could say, well, that obviously means it's a conviction.
Really?
Why not?
Why doesn't that mean it's not?
I never believed that.
Never.
Never.
The other one is, when they walk out, see if they look at the defendant.
That means good news.
If they don't look at him, they're like embarrassed, like, oh shit.
Why do they hear this one?
And your heart is coming through your chest.
You've never...
It's so slow, the process.
You think, what is this, a time warp?
What the hell is going on here?
And then the judge will say, Madam or Mr. Foreperson, do you have a verdict?
Yes, Your Honor.
Please hand the verdict to the bailiff or the court officer.
And they give it to the judge.
And the judge gets it, opens it up, looks at it.
And you look at the judge's reaction.
Does the judge look at you?
Is the judge's eyebrows?
Nothing.
You're trying to find something.
You're going to find that very soon.
But you're trying so hard to find some indicator.
The judge looks at you.
Madam Clerk, or whatever it is.
Publish the verdict.
Meaning, announce it.
And this is when it just...
You know, right away.
In the county court, in the superior court, in the supreme court.
Oh, Jesus, we know which court we're in.
People of the state of New York versus Donald Trump.
Case number.
We know what case number.
Jesus, read the verdict.
What are you killing us with this?
We understand it.
The people of the San Antonio.
Yes, yes, yes.
We, the jury, in the above captioned amendment, as to count one, we, the jury, find the defendant, and so help me God, they always pause.
It's like they went to school.
Whatever you do.
Way to the jury.
And that's the one.
Guilty, not guilty, boom.
And it doesn't hit you.
You try to be cool.
You try to not lose your mind.
You don't know what to say.
I think they've got 34 of these things.
The rule also is the loser polls the jury.
When you lose the case, they say, would you like to poll the jury?
Yes, we would.
That means make each individual juror state whether this was their verdict.
Juror number two, is this your verdict?
Yes.
Juror number two, is this?
Yes.
Because it's got to be unanimous.
Every now and then, and it's happened, and it's happened, somebody would say, oh, oh, you mean, oh, I thought it was, oh, so it's unanimous for both acquittal and conviction?
Oh, I thought it was just for, oh, yeah, no, no, it was Hungary.
So you want to eliminate that.
But if you've won, You keep your mouth shut and we say, thank you, can we go, Judge?
No, no, not yet.
Damn it!
And it is this, it's the culmination.
And then, of course, they go there live.
They try to get to the jurors.
Does the juror, can the jury speak?
Sure.
Then if there's some alternates, Every now and then they have an alternate.
And when they excuse the alternate, right before they go into deliberation.
And then you always try to grab the alternate.
What did you think?
What would you have done?
You know, that sort of thing.
And you're just going to, and you're going to second guess it.
And if they're acquitted, you say, well, the jury obviously saw through the holes in the case.
If it's convicted, the jury was Lopsided.
The jury was contaminated.
So it doesn't make any difference at all.
No matter what happens, you're going to see the response to this.
We will stay with you.
Make sure you stay tuned at all times.
If there's a verdict, if there's anything, we'll go live.
Make sure you follow this.
You are subscribed to the channel.
And don't forget on Twitter, at Lionel Media.
I do a lot of tweeting and reviewing.
The response to this is absolutely incredible.
Let me also tell you, my friends, that you have been so wonderful.
Please follow Mrs. L. Her YouTube channel is Splendiferous at Lynn's Warriors.
And I've put exactly the link right there for you.
Just click that link and you will go there immediately.
And to our dear, dear friends, our dear loyal, look at this.
Lori Cuck says, either verdict will have Patriots jacked.
Indeed.
Lori, thank you.
Brad Rung, thank you.
Raul Rodriguez, thank you.
And Barry Taylor, thank you.
Dear, dear friends, dear, dear loyal and wonderful friends for your thoughts and comments.
I hope I have provided you with a new look at this, a more of a sterile look, a more of a clinical look, a more of a lawyerly look, and not the usual.
Reaction that many, many people have.
Not that it's wrong.
I understand why.
But that's not really what this is all about.
Do you see what I'm saying?
Does that make any sense to you?
Good.
I hope it does.
All right, dear friends.
Thank you for this.
Remember, stay tuned.
Stay subscribed.
Make sure you are subscribed to here, to me, Lionel Nation.
Make sure right now you are subscribed.
Check.
Check right now.
Because if anything happens, anything I think we got to go live, I'll be ready to go live.
Do you understand?
Capisce?
Good.
All right, dear friends.
Have a great and glorious day.
Thank you from the bottom of my heart.
We love you.
And until then, don't forget 7 p.m. for sure tonight, but any time in the middle, stay tuned.
But until then, remember, my friends, the monkey's dead.
The show's over.
Sue ya.
▲
Export Selection