Didn’t he have a deposition though? I thought they played that at the trial. If he HAD testified, that would have opened him up to questioning about other women who’ve accused him of sexual misconduct over the years, like many wealthy men have experienced.
And I imagine they will come forward...there are books to be wrote!!!!
He and his lawyer did everything possible to get him to lose.
The fact that the law was changed by gov hochul in order to facilitate the charge against PDJT should invalidate the entire thing. How tf is this even constitutional to make a temporary law...that expires in a year...to attack a presidential candidate?? I just dont get it.
His deposition was horrible! The man is his own worse enemy. He said things that his attorney would have strongly advised him not to say. But Trump in his egomania thinks he can never be wrong.
And he is delusional. Witness his obvious lie that the court employees were crying and apologizing to him during his arraignment on his other charges.
I like the policies he represents but he has a self destructive narcissistic personality disorder which is ruining him.
Such a shame! If he gets the nomination the Dims will win in a landslide. They wont even have to cheat this time!
I have great respect for Turley. However, to what was he going to testify that wasn’t already in his deposition? (And he did himself no favors in that deposition.)
He had no defense other than, “I did not do what she is accusing me of doing,” because by her failure to even know the YEAR in which the alleged incident occurred, how else could Trump refute it? SHE produced no independent witnesses to the alleged incident, and Trump — not even being able to identify witnesses who could show that he wasn’t even in the country on the day she claims because she doesn’t even know WHEN it allegedly happened! Trump was put in an impossible position; and I think, intentionally.
If I were Trump, I wouldn’t have testified, either. Unless I was asked only one question on direct, and that would be:
“Did you touch her in a sexual manner without her consent?” And a simple response: “No.” In which case my attorney would say, “No further questions.” Absent a cross-examination on credibility, it reduces the entire case to he said/she said.
But, a NYC jury was going to nail him no matter what.
if the jury found him not guilty of rape, doesn’t mean they thought she perjured herself?
I tend to agree with Turley.
You can’t prove a negative. You certainly cannot prove a negative on an unspecified date and year. This trial was a travesty. How could Trump prove he was elsewhere on the date when there is no actual date of the assault specified?
Trump had no chance to get justice in this trial and was justified in skipping the lynching party.
But the case shouldn’t have been brought.
Maybe true.
But having a case in New York city means the jury could not be anything other than a cesspool.
Trump has so few folks there who don’t hate him that the plaintiff’s preemptory challenges and a little research on the jurors were easily sufficient to pick a hangin’ jury. Defendant’s counsel did not have the same power. They would have had to have so many preemptory challenges to challenge everyone but the five MAGA Republicans in NYC.