Live Breaking News & Updates on Colloquy Downeast|Page 5
Stay updated with breaking news from Colloquy downeast. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
Under oath. Cohen is the last prosecution witness and the question that remains this morning, what, if anything defense will trumps legal team mount . Nbcs Yasmin Vossoughian is outside that courthouse. I also want to bring in our legal panel, former u. S. Attorney and former senior fbi official Chuck Rosenberg, new York Law School professor and director of the schools criminal defense clinic. Ana coe min ski and criminal Defense Attorney and former federal prosecutor duncan levins. There was a little bit of uncertainty this morning in court, a long Bench Meeting before the Cross Examination got underway. Bring us up to speed on all of it. Report ....
Right . You would have a pretty good sense of what he was going to be asked and a pretty good sense of how he was going to answer it. None of this goes perfectly from a prosecutors perspective. Danny will tell you, none of this goes perfectly from the Defense Attorneys perspective. This is why you have redirect. This is why you have final arguments, this is why as danny said earlier, you keep a list of defenses and some fall out along the way and some get better. As much as you plan, you have to be flexible. Is the prosecution happy with the cross . If i were the prosecutor here and they wanted to spent 3 1 2 days saying the same thing, my view would be let him have it. Keep doing it. I think at some point, jose, youre losing your jury. I take anas point, sometimes you lose your jury, but you never try to. My goal is to never lose my jury. And if youre saying the same thing over and over for days on end, i think youre losing yo ....
Admitting that these facts were so inextricably intertwined in a colloquy with justice barrett, that it would be very difficult to separate them out on remand. Thats how i interpreted his statements. Please to translate that for people watching, that means that basically, if it wasnt official act, they would not be able to use that potentially at trial. He was arguing they should be able to use it to paint a bigger picture. But trump has argued, total immunity. He has not said, well, some of these are private x. This would mean the case could at least in part go forward and go to trial, we believe that without the official acts charged in the indictment, there is no case. Weve been very consistent in our position from the start, starting with the District Court proceeding through the circuit. Now at the us Supreme Court, that what were talking about is absolute immunity. Yes. ....
Im period in question. I thought in many what we did a concession at all was Michael Dreeben essentially admitting the attorney for the special counsels office, essentially admitting that these facts were so inextricably intertwined in a colloquy with justice barrett, that it would be very difficult to separate them out on remand. Thats how i interpret for his statements at least. Well, and to translate that for people watching, that means that basically, if it wasnt official act, they would not be able to use that potentially at trial. He was arguing they should be able to use it to paint a bigger picture. But trump has argued, total immunity. He has not said, well, some of these are private x this would mean the case could at least in part go forward and go to trial. We believe that without the official acts charged in the indictment, there is no case. Weve been very consistent in our position from the start, starting with the ....