21 posts from Saturday, November 11, 2023

was that like? Tell us what happened. I think let's start from before she came in to testify. I think there was some frustration there because she's been dismissed from this action and many people don't realize that because the judge proceeds as if she hasn't, as if there is no statute of limitations, as if a lot of things that were decided by the appellate division and he just disregards it. So she came in though, she was great. She really was epic on the stand, just stoic, answered the questions directly, was very factual. The facts are good for us. So there it was an uneventful day. I think that's why it was pretty quiet in the press. There was, there were no fireworks. Interesting, interesting. Look, the AG rested their case. You're now moving for something called a directed verdict. That's lawyers speak for throw this thing out because the AG did not prove her case. What are your arguments? That's right. Well, I have to save them for a couple hours and I would tell you to pay attention. But most importantly, every case has certain elements that you have to prove. One of the biggest elements is intent to defraud. In this one, you have to show intent. You have to show reliance. We're talking about sophisticated banks. We're talking about Deutsche Bank, who if I give you a number and say I believe Mar-a-Lago is worth a number, they're gonna take that number and they're gonna say let me have my people do their vetting. This is DB. They've got some big lawyers, some big firms, smart people working for them. They do their own vetting and they say okay, we want a personal guarantee because you have a lot of cash and the Trumps have a lot of cash. Let's take that and then we're good with it. Here's the deal. They're putting their nose into private businesses contracts. Imagine a world where now okay, you guys have a contract. I'm going to put my nose into it and use a consumer fraud statute to do so. Right. That's what we're dealing with. So they failed to meet their case primarily because the only person that had any testimony, not surprisingly, about the president was Michael Cohen and he folded on the stand when I cross-examined him. He lied under oath and as I said yesterday he really should be prosecuted for what happened in that courtroom with me. Yeah and after the former president testified Latisha James came out of the courtroom and said justice will be served and the question does still remain justice against who I believe even the judge said that there is really no victim in this crime. There is no crime. Right and it's not a crime. It's a civil suit for damages. She's using this. Now don't forget they tried to bring a criminal action and the DA backed off and said no there's not enough there there. So Latisha look she's in my opinion she's a very desperate human being who sits in the courtroom. I've watched her. She does not participate. She doesn't sit at counsel table. She doesn't practice. She just sits there taking notes on what she's gonna say outside but she says the same thing and their blanket statements because she doesn't have real facts. He lied and no one is above the law. Well guess what Michael Cohen you're not above the law. Latisha James you're not above the law. You wasted taxpayer dollars and the world is not being fooled. One thing that I don't think is being talked about enough especially when you listen to the other people on the other networks your team and the president looks to me like they're baiting both the AG and this judge to say really stupid stupid things that on appeal if you end up losing are going to get this case reversed. Is that the strategy? I can't answer. I don't think you have to beat these people. I just don't think they're making intellectually wise decisions and there's a record and the record already speaks for itself. All right really quickly before we move on because we want to talk to you about something else but what's gonna happen in court today and when does this all wrap up? Today is a really important day. We're going to move for a directed verdict saying that they have rested yesterday. You didn't prove the elements of the case. Certain this case should be dismissed. It should never have been brought. Now with this judge do I think he's gonna give us an ear? No but we have to make a record again. So we're going to do so and

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

-Has the president ever testified like this in court? -No. -Never. -It's a disgrace. -So they won't give him the grace to do that. -It's really -- they're cutting him off, and I objected, and there was a fiery exchange with the judge. -Yeah. -Frankly, I can't even say it was with the judge and I. I'm very polite. I'm very professional when I'm in the courtroom. But the judge did not like him finishing or explaining because it wasn't good for their case, and he's interfering. He's made his decision. Let's not forget that, Larry. He made his decision on summary judgment. He found liability already. So now we're wasting taxpayer dollars for months and months and months, $450,000 for an expert the AG paid. Taxpayer dollars, those New York taxpayer dollars. We're wasting all this time, and he won't even let the president, who's the person they're trying to get to, explain why he's certified to certain values. Why? Because the minute he starts to explain it, it ruins their case. He was worth more than his statement of financial condition. And Ms. James, her politics, are not allowing her now to backtrack. She needs a P.R. team, I'm telling you. Well, she looks like Dan Phul.

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.

♪ But you ain't no doubt, I got this hand ♪ ♪ I guess I'm the U.S. ♪ ♪ Yeah ♪ (audience cheering) - Thank you very much. - Thank you. (audience cheering) (audience cheering)

Transcribed automatically. Expect errors in names and numbers.