is illustrated to me a most interesting the devon archer testimony is that this by an incident is read over these 20 calls. they are in dubai, at the four seasons. this is hunter and the helber i mark and they re having drinks together. then all of a sudden you have the head of burisma saying get on the phone with dc. hunter puts his data speakerphone. devon archer wasn t privy to that conversation took about five days later after much pressure have been put on to ge victor chauvin out the door, th prosecutor looking into burisma joe biden shows up in ukraine and says it s not enough to set up a new anticorruption bureau and establish so prosecutors. the office of the general prosecutor, victor chauvin, desperately needs reform. coincidence? no, absolutely not. i mean, what we learned from th testimony is that the proof of concept is the idea that joe biden, filla hunter biden and
the idea that carole was going to hide her whole case by th testimony of others who ve bee wronged by trump, and so she got up on the stand, today and spent four hours there answering the juries secre question, but they always want to know. is, why am i here? why are we spending all this time, talking about a thre minute incident, it happened some 30 years ago. and boy did they get their answer she said, after that three minute encounter with trump, her life was never the same. she never had an intimat relationship again, a part o her was dead and the jurors went home tonight, without one singl question on cross-examine, a direct exam is not over with yet. and that, story the graphi details we just heard about, will be going around in roun in their heads, not only tonight, but the rest of their lives. and they ll either believe, it where they won t in my view, the case was resolved one way or the other,
these kinds of trials, normall you don t hear from th principal witness in these things right at the beginning, and in fact we don t think we re gonna hear from donald trump, we ve got a depositio from him so this was the big one. you thought it was wise to d this right out of the gate absolutely, trump opened on the idea that carole was going to hide her whole case by th testimony of others who ve bee wronged by trump, and so she got up on the stand, today and spent four hours there answering the juries secre question, but they always want to know. is, why am i here? why are we spending all this time, talking about a thre minute incident, it happened some 30 years ago. and boy did they get their answer she said, after that three minute encounter with trump, her life was never the same. she never had an intimat relationship again, a part o her was dead and the jurors went home tonight, without one singl question on cross-examine, a direct exam is not over with yet. and that, story th
i suppose politically, he ca say this isn t worth my time this is frivolous, this is a insignificant matter and i m focused on more importan things as a campaign for the presidency i suppose that s part of it. he asked for this instructio that the jury be told that h is doing the set of th goodness of it s hard for th good people of new york at the courthouse personnel i don t know what the last tim donald trump did a paper for somebody else but it s laughable that he would be doing that now and the judge wisely said i not giving that instruction. it s your choice be there are not i m a target jury that you v done some favor by not being here another potential pitfall for trump showing up for thi trial is the fact that judge kaplan has ruled that th testimony of two other women who have alleged that trum sexually assaulted them mayb entered into evidence at thi upcoming trial the judges also allowing aging carroll to use that infamous october 2016 access hollywoo tape as evidence ho
thought when i saw the new about epstein is that ther doesn t seem to have been an privilege assertion issue here at least in terms of the court we seen in other places where they ve had to go to court t compel testimony for peopl from trump who are lawyers i found it interesting as well, my assumption is tha trump and his cronies have tried that one too many times, and have had the case rejected quickly. i think at this point, there i very solid precedent that th testimony will be compelled in any event. i think that thinking was, it interesting that this was more informal interview rather than a grand jury testimony. i think the thinking was, let go in and try to be friendly say what the questioning is. and not waste time and money