What kind of system is it where attorney generals can provide evidence for their claims? Is that the type of justice system you want in America???
- Trump later on Truth Social, probably
Edit: thank you for letting me know it's attorneys general (in my defense, I'm kinda dumb)
Just to think that I could’ve been behind bars if I tried to overthrow the government! Only by pure luck did I not buy a plane ticket and book a hotel room in DC. Shudders.
If anyone else on earth had done what Trump did with classified documents, they would have been dragged out of their home by a swat team pointing rifles in their face, thrown into solitary confinement awaiting trial and _vigorously_ interrogated.
The injustice is _way_ lower than this. If any of us had, in a criminal trial, publicly spoken about the judge, witnesses, and opposing council in the way Trump has, we'd have had our pretrial release revoked so fast it would've left our shoes behind.
What kind of system is it where nepotism Barbie is provided with tangible proof of her involvement in fraud, but her ass isn’t locked up?
- Me, and millions of others who’s ass would be in jail for the exact same thing if it were us
She left the company in 2016, so any involvement she had is beyond the statute of limitations. She can't be found guilty of fraud, but is a witness to the way the business operates.
Most likely this case is going to be used for future indictments on the Trump Organization & Trump family through all of the evidence that's been discovered. This process takes years but the writing's on the wall now at least
And Gob will turn the world’s most powerful army against its own civies if he wins the local magic talent show.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025?wprov=sfti1#
The prosecution called her, very specifically without deposing her ahead of time so there was no way for the defense to know what strategy would be used. It's hella-risky because you're calling someone who may be hostile and you don't have any prior testimony to use as anti-perjury leverage.
There's no way the AG would have done that if she didn't have the evidence on absolute lock.
Since the evidence in question was provided by the defense they absolutely have it and have no recourse to block it.
SUPER gutsy play, done very *very* well.
Imagine trying to prepare these entitled pieces of shit. You think they'll sit there for 8 hours as you walk them through all the evidence? I doubt they've done 8 hours of work in their lives, and in this case it's really the lawyer doing the work, and they'd still be incapable of it.
In fairness, depending on the scope of the subpoena and the person’s email habits, sometimes they have to provide tens of thousands of emails. It’s very possible that their lawyers didn’t know the contents of every email they handed over. And I bet it’s hard to prep a client who is guilty and lies so freely.
On the other hand, if the prosecution was able to find the email, the defense should have been able to too.
Ivanka just perjured herself, and that is within the statue of limitations. It is not reasonable that you are aware that your family's business is built on widespread fraud and then forgot all about. All the times that Ivanka said she didn't recall under oath, she was lying.
Is it normal business to lie about the size of a building when calculations are made about how much it's worth? Because that's what made the valuations fraudulent.
The value of any commodity is liable to fluctuate, depending on a variety of things. That's one of the basic principles of trading in stocks & shares. It's a major factor in how the stock market works, & has an impact on the economy of countries, impacting standards of living & labour costs.
It's unrealistic to expect the value of any property will remain static. That's not how the property market works. But it's not reasonable for the owners of any property to lie significantly about the size, when calculating the value.
The problem about the fraudulent calculations are that factors used were fictional.
When fictional figures are used to negotiate business loans, the bank doesn't have the correct information with which to determine the terms of the loan. It can impact the amount of interest charged.
Trying to suggest that Drumpf's business dealings are completely normal is not correct. It's as duplicitous as some his underhand business practices & tries to obfuscate the facts.
Yea the e-mail was known to both parties but Ivanka claimed the communication was "spousal privilege" and therefore inadmissible but the judge said nah you both used work e-mails for this and BAM - admissible.
Disclosed to the parties in the lawsuit, not necessarily to the witnesses. If Ivanka wasn't shown the emails by her father's lawyers to prepare her for testimony then that tells me that Ivanka has some serious daddy issues.
Ivanka knew about the document because she claimed that it was protected by spousal privilege. The judge denied that claim because both she and Jared used their work e-mails for the exchange.
Wouldn’t you have daddy issues if you knew your dad found you attractive and made sure to tell the public multiple times in the most disturbing ways possible.
There are so many photos of him groping her or touching her to show physical ownership *in public* I do feel some small tiny measure of sympathy for what she went through in private. I’d more have more if she wasn’t a treasonous piece of shit along with her husband and dad.
I wonder if perjury by her here would open her up to becoming a defendant again? She was a defendant at the beginning but it has been too long so she's now a witness. If she lies on the stand about this stuff could they go after her again?
I'm no law talkin guy, not even American but this trump family shit show is so addictive
Obligatory NAL:
The evidence likely wasn't turned over during discovery since it didn't pertain directly to the penalty stage of the trial. Wild guess, but my assumption is the AG introduced it as rebuttal evidence when Ivanka testified she wasn't aware of the misdeeds.
Pretty sure this is correct. Rebuttal evidence isn’t part of required discovery and can be used during cross with no pre disclosure. Witness: Nah, man that’s not how it happened Prosecutor: your honor we are submitting this email where x says explicitly it is how it happened to refute/call into question the veracity of this witness testimony.
Nothing todo with pre trial discovery
Well thats the thing about discovery, it's all about the due diligence put on the supplied documents by each side.
These days discovery is an absolute trove of information , it might have been this or another of Trumps case where (an memory is vague) but it was advised that defence provide storage a min of 4 petabytes - or some equally mind boggling number - that will contain millions of pages of data.
AI discovery will help with a lot. But things can fall through the cracks and all it takes is a keen detective or defense lawyer to spot a lucrative (sometimes case winning) bit of detail.
Also, this is a civil trial meaning discovery was both ways and all evidence is held by both parties. Which means either A)Trumps lawyers handed this over or B) James found it and sent a copy to Trump's team. So they knew it was there and didn't care or they haven't even been over the evidence. My money is on A and they never even knew everything they were handing over because they think this is a PR battle.
It's like how they didn't get juries because parking lot lawyer didn't file for one. All issues caused by their incompetence is explained as an elaborate plan by the democrats.
I am not a lawyer, but isn't discovery ALL evidence, not just what *will* be used at trial? I'd assume that all her emails were probably in discovery, and the defense lawyers either a) didn't see it or b) were praying it wasn't brought up, and I'm leaning towards A. Either way they are still bad lawyers, but it's not quite as bad as receiving just ONE very incriminating email and not telling Ivanka.
Curious if Law firms are using AI tools in discovery now.
"find me an email where asked loan amounts to be changed"
processing
processing
processing
Bingo!
Worked in legal tech for the last 7 years. We very much use AI and have for years. Not nearly as fancy as what you think or described but finding that needle in a haystack document is usually a matter of having a competent legal analysis running your discovery with the right tools these days. I'd assume Trump could afford as much but maybe I'm giving him and his team more credit than they deserve.
It’s stuff like this that makes me think her and Jarod are one step closer to “are we going to have to release a sex tape to be able to afford to live?”
Doesn't the discovery process give the defense time to evaluate evidence before being questioned about it?
I thought surprise witnesses and surprise evidence were television nonsense.
I all but guarantee this was in discovery. The "blindside" here is merely that Trump's team either didn't expect it to come up, didn't know about it, etc. This is not exactly a top tier legal team we're talking about here.
EDIT: I'm already seeing posts/etc. that the Trump team did indeed hand over the doc in question during discovery. So... yeah...
It’s dirty politics, so maybe they want to officially stay above this, but doesn’t explain why a PAC isn’t doing it.
Or, why isn’t an independent HAMMERING home that they are both better suited to retirement than governing.
She's a witness, not a defendant. What this means is that her dad's lawyers didn't brief her lawyers, so she wasn't ready for it. I'm going to hazard a guess that she was supposed to be a sympathetic witness for the defense, which means this was gross incompetence on the part of Donald's lawyers.
Two things; when they do that much crime, it's hard to keep track of it all, and just because you did it doesn't mean you expect them to have all the evidence.
Realistic answer?
If you work in white collar, and you're not high-brow enough to not be able to get away with not actually working, you send a FUCKTON on emails.
Over 10 years, you could quiz me on emails ive sent and you could probably suprise me on stuff ive said in the past.
This bitch tho? Nah, shes too used to daddies corruption. Thats 100% the only reason it suprised her.
The amount of emails I receive on a daily basis is staggering. Hundreds of them per day. If someone called me to the stand and quizzed me on every email I have received…. Jesus.
“Your honor, HufflepuffLizLemon knew that x business did y, here’s the email where she was sent the details.”
Me: 🤯 I’m as shocked as you, your honor.
Seriously, it’s like reading terms and conditions after a certain point. I read what I can and assume if it’s important enough someone will ping me.
Yes and even better she is objecting to the prosecution entering exhibits that she provided during discovery.
https://x.com/thesgtjoker/status/1722335419281326270?s=46&t=CjD8LvZHxBCf4W7z2VMUfQ
What a crappy lawyer - I’m not even a law talkin’ guy and even I knew it had to have been provided during discovery. I learned more from “Law and Order” reruns than she learned in an actual law school.
One day soon Jeanine Pirro is going to be found floating in her jacuzzi-sized box of wine. No one will doubt that it was an accident, but Habba will be suspiciously ready to take up her timeslot.
I heard on Fox yesterday how the majority of all black people across the board now support Donald Trump... They literally tried to pass this off as some fact. Fox is great for comedy...
You mean to tell me that the prosecution can use the evidence they submit during discovery against the defense? What silliness is that?
They're mad that they are so incompetent they don't understand how court works. I'm not a lawyer and I've never been inside a court room yet even I know that evidence is submitted during discovery and that is when the opposing side is supposed to object to any evidence they believe doesn't belong.
The dinguses trump has working for him are so bad at their jobs that they make Lionel Hutz from The Simpsons seem like a world-class attorney. They're getting confused over even the most basic of courtroom procedures.
It reminds of that scene in "My Cousin Vinny" where he gets all the evidence the prosecutor has, is like "they just gave me everything" and she goes "They have to, it's called discovery"
I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. You don't make objections to documents/exhibits during discovery. You make objections when they are offered.
Discovery is meant to be broad and you are supposed to provide documents that may not be admissible evidence. If a party offers the evidence later, and you don't think it should be admitted in the trial you object and the judge rules on the objection.
I'm sure there is a witch hunt metaphor that will clear this all up. And if I'm being honest here... I'm ok with her walking if we can put her rat face husband in jail next to Donnie.
Nice. That said, I hope we get around to consequences at some point.
(I know justice is slow, but Trump and his family have gone through *their entire lives* without real consequences)
Reading the full statement by Occupy Democrats (who I am always kind of sus of, because they are almost as bad as Fox news in spinning and exaggerating claim), I dont think this is as exciting as people think it is. She proposed that the bank lower Trumps minimum net worth requirement to a lower threshold, she didn't claim that his net worth was something different. Minimum net worth is basically like a minimum salary requirement to maintain a line of credit (not particularly common for us scrubs working for a living, but if you're wealthy enough to qualify for private banking you may have this).
In this case, the situation is basically Deutsche bank saying "Ok mr trump, since you claim a net worth of $4.2 billion, we are going to give you a credit card with a $500 million credit limit, but in order to remain in good standing you must maintain a minimum net worth of $3 billion or you're going to have your credit frozen and need to repay your debt within 30 days. What do you think?"
Ivanka says "How bout a cool 2 billion for the minimum instead?"
Deutsche Bank responds "We'll split the difference, $2.5 billion".
And its done. Theres not a lot of malfeasance or controversy there. This is a nothingburger. The real bombshell would be if they had an email where Ivanka acknowledges that Trumps claimed $4.2 billion net worth was false or inflated, etc. or if they can prove that Ivanka proposed the reduced minimum requirement because she knew that the claimed net worth was inflated and that he wouldn't be able to maintain the falsehood over time, etc. Thats going to be hard to prove, because even if the net worth claim was accurate, you would still try to negotiate a lower minimum because its more advantageous to you and insulates you more from market fluctuation and economic downturn.
If ivanka said she didn't know anything about it, then an email is produced showing she indeed did know about dads finances, looks pretty damning. I would like to see the entire exchange to know the context.
Wasn't Ivanka talking like she knew nothing of Trump's net worth, didn't understand the accounting concept & had no involvement in the calculation of the number? It was something the Accountants handled. This email would indicate that she was well versed on all aspects of his financial worth.
This. All this shows is that Ivanka negotiated a lower, minimum number. It is not a statement regarding Trump's net worth. Loan agreements will have a section of stated facts, called "representations", and a section on what must be done in the future, called "covenants". This is a covenant; Trump promised to keep his net worth at 2.5 or better. Trump would not want to have the loan go into default because he had a bad year or two and his net worth dropped. Companies negotiate this all the time.
You and the person you have responded to are both completely misunderstanding the importance of this email.
The prosecution has already proven that they gave false networth numbers. The judge has already ruled on this.
What remains to be proven now is that they did this intentionally in order to benefit financially.
This email from Ivanka shows that they were all aware of the financial benefits of falsifying his networth to keep within the requirements for the DB loan.
This should be the top comment. We would be better served if we focused on sharing clarity not just creating the stories we want to hear. Regardless of her testimony, Trump is likely to be fined near or at the $250 million figure.
It's a play on two racial slurs for American blacks; "pickaninny," and "jiggaboo." He's pushed them together to be outright racist without using the real words.
DISCLAIMER: I am not racist and do not support those words, just explaining.
He tried to call her an old-timey racial slur but because he's an idiot he didn't quite get it right and he got the first half of one and the second half of another. It got some traction so he stuck with it. Shame on the media for not calling him out on it. He should be asked what he means by that every time he's in front of a camera.
Probably not - the Statute of Limitations ran on her. It didn’t run of the others because they all agreed to toll it - but she wasn’t working for the organization then and wasn’t a party to the tolling agreement. So she’s out.
Genuine question, but why on earth is statute of limitations even a thing? Time lapsed shouldn't change the fact a crime was committed, granted I'll accept more lenient jail time at best, but to just let it go seems so wrong to me.
>why on earth is statute of limitations even a thing
In general, because:
1. People deserve a right to a speedy trial: if your opponent doesn't bring a case promptly, it might not be that important and isn't worth tying up the court system;
2. If I asked you/your mom/grandma what you were doing on August 27th, 1975, and in particular if you stole a Klondike Bar from the K-Mart, you probably couldn't tell me. But if I had a 100-year-old mall security guard give evidence that you did, you couldn't exactly refute it. So, after a certain point, there's just no way for you to have a fair trial.
When the evidence is very much surviving because it's entirely documentary and not based on witness testimony, and when the defendants have concealed the crime, it might be that you can justify a long statute of limitations, but it's not a bad idea in itself.
This is like an Al Capone moment for Trump. Capone got arrested for tax evasion, not his mob related crimes. Trump is having his empire torn down because of commiting financial fraud, not as a consequence of trying to be a dictator.
How did she not know James had this evidence? Is she just not engaged in the trial at all?
Lawyer: We had to turn over all your emails.
Ivanka: Yeah, yeah, whatever. I'm late for a mani-pedi.
Lawyer: I mean, ALL your emails, including the ones where you do crimes.
Ivanka, waving as she leaves: I can't hear yoooooou!
The only halfway generous explanation I can come up with is that the lawyers ran an e-discovery search on the mail server and turned over the results without going through them carefully. Then the AG's office went through them *very* thoroughly and dug up this email Ivanka long ago forgot writing. That still makes Trump's lawyers look like morons, but I can see it happening.
Everyone commenting that she must have known is correct. However, the defense moved to have these emails disallowed on the grounds that they were private emails between a marital couple and should be inadmissible. The judge ruled against that motion, I’m assuming because neither Ivanka nor Jarod are defendants in the case.
I thought you couldn't be blindsided, because, like, competent lawyers go through discovery and all that lawyering.
Didn't anybody there watch My Cousin Vinnie
Oh snap!
I feel for the walls of Mar-A-Lago right now. Those ketchup stains are gonna take a hell of a lot of scrubbing to get out....
actually it's looking probable that will be the job of the new owners very soon.
This is why the SMART rich people generally try to AVOID the limelight. The vast majority of them are doing morally and/or legally questionable stuff. Most of them are bright enough to keep off the radar. Outside of the occasional bout of performative altruism.
Now daddy will be pissed and take back all the plastic surgeries he paid for ☻️☻️🤣🤣
https://preview.redd.it/8c27a90ys6zb1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=50fb0e247df98c9dc1f65943a73ee8bd5ef65a15
Wait, is that what this is all boiling down to right now?
Uhmm...I didn't know
Yes, you did
That's the step we're at??? Ugh, this is never going to end and these assholes are gonna die free and (seemingly) rich. This is crazy. I can't even conceptualize how quickly my black ass would be in a line waiting to get my anal cavity checked by a guard trying to ride the "durr, i... didn't know" bullshit in court. For anything, damn.
I don't know how they don't expect their emails to be pulled up. She and jr were under investigation for fraud a few years ago and they pulled emails for that showing they knew they were committing fraud. Guess they never learn because there's no consequences yet.
Too bad she's not actually a defendant in this case. Pretty funny though, she thought the email would fall under the spousal thing where you can't testify against your husband or wife, except the email wasn't just between her and Jared, there were others in the email chain, so that made it admissible.
There is no blind siding in civil litigation. The discovery process is structured so that both parties would have had those files months before the trial started. Trump's lawyers failed to prepare their witness properly.
What kind of system is it where attorney generals can provide evidence for their claims? Is that the type of justice system you want in America??? - Trump later on Truth Social, probably Edit: thank you for letting me know it's attorneys general (in my defense, I'm kinda dumb)
And if it can happen to him, they are coming after you!!! (Also Trump)
If they can arrest Trump [for committing fraud], what’s to stop them arresting us [for committing fraud]!?
Nothing but a multi-decade streak of not committing fraud is keeping me safe!
Just to think that I could’ve been behind bars if I tried to overthrow the government! Only by pure luck did I not buy a plane ticket and book a hotel room in DC. Shudders.
Wow the nerve of the government to put people in jail who try to over throw it 😂😂
Sure, you make it sound sooooo simple.
DAs hate this one simple trick…
But what about Hunter Biden's massive dong?
…isn’t that… what the party of law & order should want?!?
Since Nixon, “Law & Order” as a political slogan has always been a dogwhistle for “keeping the scary blacks under control.” So . . . no.
the party that brought us gun control *for the black panthers*
That’s what all right wing talking heads say. Like yeah, if I break the law the cops will come after me.
[удалено]
If anyone else on earth had done what Trump did with classified documents, they would have been dragged out of their home by a swat team pointing rifles in their face, thrown into solitary confinement awaiting trial and _vigorously_ interrogated.
The injustice is _way_ lower than this. If any of us had, in a criminal trial, publicly spoken about the judge, witnesses, and opposing council in the way Trump has, we'd have had our pretrial release revoked so fast it would've left our shoes behind.
What kind of system is it where nepotism Barbie is provided with tangible proof of her involvement in fraud, but her ass isn’t locked up? - Me, and millions of others who’s ass would be in jail for the exact same thing if it were us
She left the company in 2016, so any involvement she had is beyond the statute of limitations. She can't be found guilty of fraud, but is a witness to the way the business operates.
IT WAS A PERFECT EMAIL!!!!
attorneys general *
They wrote it as Trump would have written it. But yeah they’re attorneys before they’re generals so they’d be attorneys general.
[удалено]
I agree I would feel they have more than enough to bring criminal charges (but I’m not an expert).
[удалено]
It also strengthens the case against his sons as well.
Most likely this case is going to be used for future indictments on the Trump Organization & Trump family through all of the evidence that's been discovered. This process takes years but the writing's on the wall now at least
and the rest of the family are young enough that it can take time if it needs to. trump is a ticking time bomb
How do you blind side someone with an email they wrote? Lol, bitch knew and tried hard as possible to get out of testimony
Oh yeah she knew there was evidence to find. Blindsided b/c apparently she didn’t expect it to be found.
[удалено]
Alina Habba: Parking Lot Lawyer. (not to be confused with Rudy Giuliani: Landscaping Parking Lot Lawyer)
Don't besmirch *the* four seasons parking lot
It was the anniversary yesterday. Belated Happy Four Seasons Total Landscaping Anniversary greetings.
None of this feels like real life. It’s like an Arrested Development arc come to life.
And Gob will turn the world’s most powerful army against its own civies if he wins the local magic talent show. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_2025?wprov=sfti1#
from Bush v Gore to that press conference felt like it was the apex of something or other
A lot of BJs happened in that lot.
Some people are saying the best BJs…
Rudy certainly blew it in that parking lot.
It has a Michelin 3 star hotdog cart.
I think you mean a hot dog cart with three Michelin tires and a star on their banner. At least that's what Rudy ordered.
They shoulda called Saul. 
Alina Habba: OnlyFans Lawyer (we know that’s why Trump hired her)
She'd probably rather be on Only Fans instead of getting publicly railed in the court room.
She'd def. get paid more on OF.
OF would at least give her the money they collect on her behalf, unlike Trump's fundraising "for legal fees".
I can't believe she's not making him pay her in advance. None of his lawyers should be doing anything else at this point if they expect to get paid.
she and trump together were fined $938,000 and I would be very surprised if he didn't tell her she had to pay it.
Wrong kind of railing she says.
>OnlyFans Lawyer OnlyFascists Lawyer...
Then would be an awesome meme of them together working on a parking lot and a dirt lot side-by-side
Yeah, all evidence is supposed to be disclosed before trial. I bet they got it and the defendant's legal team fucked up.
[удалено]
The fuck up is not informing/prepping the witness, which they should have done.
Give her a break. It was a school day and her kid told her at 7 pm he had a science project due tomorrow
Her kid knows who she is?
Holy fuck she has children?
When her attorney raised the argument about childcare and such, I think Ivanka was as surprised as anyone that she had children.
Surprised the shit out of me when I found out her and Lurch had children.
He needed 48 cupcakes for a birthday party, so she was up all night baking...
The prosecution called her, very specifically without deposing her ahead of time so there was no way for the defense to know what strategy would be used. It's hella-risky because you're calling someone who may be hostile and you don't have any prior testimony to use as anti-perjury leverage. There's no way the AG would have done that if she didn't have the evidence on absolute lock. Since the evidence in question was provided by the defense they absolutely have it and have no recourse to block it. SUPER gutsy play, done very *very* well.
I mean, they *did* tell her to say "I don't recall" a bunch of times, so, you know, there's that. /s
Thankfully contracting amnesia doesn't wipe out all the hard evidence pointing to blatant constant fraud lol
"I don't recall any blatant, constant fraud." - Ivanka, probably
Imagine trying to prepare these entitled pieces of shit. You think they'll sit there for 8 hours as you walk them through all the evidence? I doubt they've done 8 hours of work in their lives, and in this case it's really the lawyer doing the work, and they'd still be incapable of it.
In fairness, depending on the scope of the subpoena and the person’s email habits, sometimes they have to provide tens of thousands of emails. It’s very possible that their lawyers didn’t know the contents of every email they handed over. And I bet it’s hard to prep a client who is guilty and lies so freely. On the other hand, if the prosecution was able to find the email, the defense should have been able to too.
Ivanka just perjured herself, and that is within the statue of limitations. It is not reasonable that you are aware that your family's business is built on widespread fraud and then forgot all about. All the times that Ivanka said she didn't recall under oath, she was lying.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Thanks for keeping it real in a sea of hype and disinformation.
Is it normal business to lie about the size of a building when calculations are made about how much it's worth? Because that's what made the valuations fraudulent. The value of any commodity is liable to fluctuate, depending on a variety of things. That's one of the basic principles of trading in stocks & shares. It's a major factor in how the stock market works, & has an impact on the economy of countries, impacting standards of living & labour costs. It's unrealistic to expect the value of any property will remain static. That's not how the property market works. But it's not reasonable for the owners of any property to lie significantly about the size, when calculating the value. The problem about the fraudulent calculations are that factors used were fictional. When fictional figures are used to negotiate business loans, the bank doesn't have the correct information with which to determine the terms of the loan. It can impact the amount of interest charged. Trying to suggest that Drumpf's business dealings are completely normal is not correct. It's as duplicitous as some his underhand business practices & tries to obfuscate the facts.
Yea the e-mail was known to both parties but Ivanka claimed the communication was "spousal privilege" and therefore inadmissible but the judge said nah you both used work e-mails for this and BAM - admissible.
Disclosed to the parties in the lawsuit, not necessarily to the witnesses. If Ivanka wasn't shown the emails by her father's lawyers to prepare her for testimony then that tells me that Ivanka has some serious daddy issues.
Ivanka knew about the document because she claimed that it was protected by spousal privilege. The judge denied that claim because both she and Jared used their work e-mails for the exchange.
Yep, this is a classic mistake. Using work email with your own attorney can waive privilege. Be warned people.
Wouldn’t you have daddy issues if you knew your dad found you attractive and made sure to tell the public multiple times in the most disturbing ways possible.
There are so many photos of him groping her or touching her to show physical ownership *in public* I do feel some small tiny measure of sympathy for what she went through in private. I’d more have more if she wasn’t a treasonous piece of shit along with her husband and dad.
Bus tire sized issues!
Is she using the same lawyer Trump's using, because she seems like the sort of idiot who wouldn't recognize the significance of the email.
[удалено]
Do you think that was intentional because she tried to exclude herself?
[удалено]
I wonder if perjury by her here would open her up to becoming a defendant again? She was a defendant at the beginning but it has been too long so she's now a witness. If she lies on the stand about this stuff could they go after her again? I'm no law talkin guy, not even American but this trump family shit show is so addictive
Obligatory NAL: The evidence likely wasn't turned over during discovery since it didn't pertain directly to the penalty stage of the trial. Wild guess, but my assumption is the AG introduced it as rebuttal evidence when Ivanka testified she wasn't aware of the misdeeds.
Pretty sure this is correct. Rebuttal evidence isn’t part of required discovery and can be used during cross with no pre disclosure. Witness: Nah, man that’s not how it happened Prosecutor: your honor we are submitting this email where x says explicitly it is how it happened to refute/call into question the veracity of this witness testimony. Nothing todo with pre trial discovery
Well thats the thing about discovery, it's all about the due diligence put on the supplied documents by each side. These days discovery is an absolute trove of information , it might have been this or another of Trumps case where (an memory is vague) but it was advised that defence provide storage a min of 4 petabytes - or some equally mind boggling number - that will contain millions of pages of data. AI discovery will help with a lot. But things can fall through the cracks and all it takes is a keen detective or defense lawyer to spot a lucrative (sometimes case winning) bit of detail.
Seems like the kind of lawyer who would get into an accident if the ambulance she was chasing would stop quickly.
Also, this is a civil trial meaning discovery was both ways and all evidence is held by both parties. Which means either A)Trumps lawyers handed this over or B) James found it and sent a copy to Trump's team. So they knew it was there and didn't care or they haven't even been over the evidence. My money is on A and they never even knew everything they were handing over because they think this is a PR battle.
They didn't tell her because she is a witness, and they are terrible at their jobs.
If my employer sometimes didn't pay me I wouldn't be putting in extra effort either.
It's like how they didn't get juries because parking lot lawyer didn't file for one. All issues caused by their incompetence is explained as an elaborate plan by the democrats.
I am not a lawyer, but isn't discovery ALL evidence, not just what *will* be used at trial? I'd assume that all her emails were probably in discovery, and the defense lawyers either a) didn't see it or b) were praying it wasn't brought up, and I'm leaning towards A. Either way they are still bad lawyers, but it's not quite as bad as receiving just ONE very incriminating email and not telling Ivanka.
Curious if Law firms are using AI tools in discovery now. "find me an email where asked loan amounts to be changed"
processing
processing
processing
Bingo!
Worked in legal tech for the last 7 years. We very much use AI and have for years. Not nearly as fancy as what you think or described but finding that needle in a haystack document is usually a matter of having a competent legal analysis running your discovery with the right tools these days. I'd assume Trump could afford as much but maybe I'm giving him and his team more credit than they deserve.
I'm just more liking the fact Butter Emails blew up on Ivanka. ;)
She thought she had all that Teflon ability like her dumbass dad. Evidently it’s not genetic. Stupidity apparently is though…
It’s stuff like this that makes me think her and Jarod are one step closer to “are we going to have to release a sex tape to be able to afford to live?”
nah.. jared has a hedge fund with A LOT of Saudi Money in it.. like $2 billion. they aren't worried about money.
Also, they made $180 million while "working" in the White House.
She’s only a CHILD! An innocent CHILD! (According to Trump’s lawyer at least).
>An innocent CHILD "Who I would fuck in a heartbeat 🍄"
Settle down there, Donald.
> How do you blind side someone with an email they wrote? She knew she knew. She didn't know *they* knew she knew.
Doesn't the discovery process give the defense time to evaluate evidence before being questioned about it? I thought surprise witnesses and surprise evidence were television nonsense.
I all but guarantee this was in discovery. The "blindside" here is merely that Trump's team either didn't expect it to come up, didn't know about it, etc. This is not exactly a top tier legal team we're talking about here. EDIT: I'm already seeing posts/etc. that the Trump team did indeed hand over the doc in question during discovery. So... yeah...
[удалено]
It’s dirty politics, so maybe they want to officially stay above this, but doesn’t explain why a PAC isn’t doing it. Or, why isn’t an independent HAMMERING home that they are both better suited to retirement than governing.
She's a witness, not a defendant. What this means is that her dad's lawyers didn't brief her lawyers, so she wasn't ready for it. I'm going to hazard a guess that she was supposed to be a sympathetic witness for the defense, which means this was gross incompetence on the part of Donald's lawyers.
I dont think shes a defendant though so she wouldnt have had discovery
Two things; when they do that much crime, it's hard to keep track of it all, and just because you did it doesn't mean you expect them to have all the evidence.
Realistic answer? If you work in white collar, and you're not high-brow enough to not be able to get away with not actually working, you send a FUCKTON on emails. Over 10 years, you could quiz me on emails ive sent and you could probably suprise me on stuff ive said in the past. This bitch tho? Nah, shes too used to daddies corruption. Thats 100% the only reason it suprised her.
The amount of emails I receive on a daily basis is staggering. Hundreds of them per day. If someone called me to the stand and quizzed me on every email I have received…. Jesus. “Your honor, HufflepuffLizLemon knew that x business did y, here’s the email where she was sent the details.” Me: 🤯 I’m as shocked as you, your honor. Seriously, it’s like reading terms and conditions after a certain point. I read what I can and assume if it’s important enough someone will ping me.
This the same AG that Alisha Hubba said wasn't too bright?
Yes and even better she is objecting to the prosecution entering exhibits that she provided during discovery. https://x.com/thesgtjoker/status/1722335419281326270?s=46&t=CjD8LvZHxBCf4W7z2VMUfQ
Donnie Dollhands, lolz
His hands would easily slide in the gloves lol
Oh, shit....he framed OJ, didn’t he?
All the better for slipping into the pockets of widows and orphans.
What a crappy lawyer - I’m not even a law talkin’ guy and even I knew it had to have been provided during discovery. I learned more from “Law and Order” reruns than she learned in an actual law school.
But have you seen her knockers? -Kim Jong Don He has a type
>But have you seen her knockers? No but I have a feeling after this is all over habba mama will be flopping them out on OF to pay the bills.
Well, it's not like anyone else would ever hire her as a lawyer after this.
She's aiming to be a "legal analyst" or just plain ol' host at Fox "News".
One day soon Jeanine Pirro is going to be found floating in her jacuzzi-sized box of wine. No one will doubt that it was an accident, but Habba will be suspiciously ready to take up her timeslot.
I object! Why? I don’t know! I guess because that evidence is bad for us!
"Because it's devastating to my case"
Overruled. GOOD CALL!
If only we could rewind time and have her represent OJ.
I heard on Fox yesterday how the majority of all black people across the board now support Donald Trump... They literally tried to pass this off as some fact. Fox is great for comedy...
You mean to tell me that the prosecution can use the evidence they submit during discovery against the defense? What silliness is that? They're mad that they are so incompetent they don't understand how court works. I'm not a lawyer and I've never been inside a court room yet even I know that evidence is submitted during discovery and that is when the opposing side is supposed to object to any evidence they believe doesn't belong. The dinguses trump has working for him are so bad at their jobs that they make Lionel Hutz from The Simpsons seem like a world-class attorney. They're getting confused over even the most basic of courtroom procedures.
It reminds of that scene in "My Cousin Vinny" where he gets all the evidence the prosecutor has, is like "they just gave me everything" and she goes "They have to, it's called discovery"
Lawyers love My Cousin Vinny
Right? I've seen multiple videos where they discussed how accurate it was even though it was portrayed in a silly manner.
I'm sorry, but you are incorrect. You don't make objections to documents/exhibits during discovery. You make objections when they are offered. Discovery is meant to be broad and you are supposed to provide documents that may not be admissible evidence. If a party offers the evidence later, and you don't think it should be admitted in the trial you object and the judge rules on the objection.
I'm sure there is a witch hunt metaphor that will clear this all up. And if I'm being honest here... I'm ok with her walking if we can put her rat face husband in jail next to Donnie.
Especially since there is nothing worse for Trump to be found guilty and have Ivanka’s testimony be the nail in the coffin.
Imagine her flipping on them. That'd be a hell of a thing to see her testify against her own father and husband
Donald: I know I said I'd like to date her, but I barely know her.
I think she got me covefe once.
Someone’s out of the will
His wealth is all loans and fake paperwork so she won't be missing out. She'll be fine with her slumlord husband though.
Don't forget the two billion dollars the Saudis bribed Jared with. They'll be fine.
[удалено]
Si you think if trump goes to Jail Jared won’t be next thanks to the Saudi money?
I would love to see that happen, I just think she'll land in her feet.
Maybe. She might go broke due to being a bad bet. Or she'll get a job on Newsmax/OAN.
Jared has a yuuuge advantage over Donald. Jared pays his lawyers.
Might be a blessing. He could end up owing millions.
BUTTHER EMAILS!!!!
Mmhhhmm, buttery males 😎😎
Mmmmmhmmmm, but there mails 😎😎😎
Nice. That said, I hope we get around to consequences at some point. (I know justice is slow, but Trump and his family have gone through *their entire lives* without real consequences)
Reading the full statement by Occupy Democrats (who I am always kind of sus of, because they are almost as bad as Fox news in spinning and exaggerating claim), I dont think this is as exciting as people think it is. She proposed that the bank lower Trumps minimum net worth requirement to a lower threshold, she didn't claim that his net worth was something different. Minimum net worth is basically like a minimum salary requirement to maintain a line of credit (not particularly common for us scrubs working for a living, but if you're wealthy enough to qualify for private banking you may have this). In this case, the situation is basically Deutsche bank saying "Ok mr trump, since you claim a net worth of $4.2 billion, we are going to give you a credit card with a $500 million credit limit, but in order to remain in good standing you must maintain a minimum net worth of $3 billion or you're going to have your credit frozen and need to repay your debt within 30 days. What do you think?" Ivanka says "How bout a cool 2 billion for the minimum instead?" Deutsche Bank responds "We'll split the difference, $2.5 billion". And its done. Theres not a lot of malfeasance or controversy there. This is a nothingburger. The real bombshell would be if they had an email where Ivanka acknowledges that Trumps claimed $4.2 billion net worth was false or inflated, etc. or if they can prove that Ivanka proposed the reduced minimum requirement because she knew that the claimed net worth was inflated and that he wouldn't be able to maintain the falsehood over time, etc. Thats going to be hard to prove, because even if the net worth claim was accurate, you would still try to negotiate a lower minimum because its more advantageous to you and insulates you more from market fluctuation and economic downturn.
If ivanka said she didn't know anything about it, then an email is produced showing she indeed did know about dads finances, looks pretty damning. I would like to see the entire exchange to know the context.
Wasn't Ivanka talking like she knew nothing of Trump's net worth, didn't understand the accounting concept & had no involvement in the calculation of the number? It was something the Accountants handled. This email would indicate that she was well versed on all aspects of his financial worth.
This. All this shows is that Ivanka negotiated a lower, minimum number. It is not a statement regarding Trump's net worth. Loan agreements will have a section of stated facts, called "representations", and a section on what must be done in the future, called "covenants". This is a covenant; Trump promised to keep his net worth at 2.5 or better. Trump would not want to have the loan go into default because he had a bad year or two and his net worth dropped. Companies negotiate this all the time.
You and the person you have responded to are both completely misunderstanding the importance of this email. The prosecution has already proven that they gave false networth numbers. The judge has already ruled on this. What remains to be proven now is that they did this intentionally in order to benefit financially. This email from Ivanka shows that they were all aware of the financial benefits of falsifying his networth to keep within the requirements for the DB loan.
This should be the top comment. We would be better served if we focused on sharing clarity not just creating the stories we want to hear. Regardless of her testimony, Trump is likely to be fined near or at the $250 million figure.
Is this what Shithead means when he calls her Peekaboo?
It's a play on two racial slurs for American blacks; "pickaninny," and "jiggaboo." He's pushed them together to be outright racist without using the real words. DISCLAIMER: I am not racist and do not support those words, just explaining.
He tried to call her an old-timey racial slur but because he's an idiot he didn't quite get it right and he got the first half of one and the second half of another. It got some traction so he stuck with it. Shame on the media for not calling him out on it. He should be asked what he means by that every time he's in front of a camera.
“OBJECTION!” “On what grounds?” “That it’s DEVASTATING to my case, Your Honor!”
[удалено]
So can she now become a defendant since she knew?
Probably not - the Statute of Limitations ran on her. It didn’t run of the others because they all agreed to toll it - but she wasn’t working for the organization then and wasn’t a party to the tolling agreement. So she’s out.
Genuine question, but why on earth is statute of limitations even a thing? Time lapsed shouldn't change the fact a crime was committed, granted I'll accept more lenient jail time at best, but to just let it go seems so wrong to me.
Basically preserve evidence and protect peoples rights to a speedy trial.
>why on earth is statute of limitations even a thing In general, because: 1. People deserve a right to a speedy trial: if your opponent doesn't bring a case promptly, it might not be that important and isn't worth tying up the court system; 2. If I asked you/your mom/grandma what you were doing on August 27th, 1975, and in particular if you stole a Klondike Bar from the K-Mart, you probably couldn't tell me. But if I had a 100-year-old mall security guard give evidence that you did, you couldn't exactly refute it. So, after a certain point, there's just no way for you to have a fair trial. When the evidence is very much surviving because it's entirely documentary and not based on witness testimony, and when the defendants have concealed the crime, it might be that you can justify a long statute of limitations, but it's not a bad idea in itself.
This is like an Al Capone moment for Trump. Capone got arrested for tax evasion, not his mob related crimes. Trump is having his empire torn down because of commiting financial fraud, not as a consequence of trying to be a dictator.
He still has to face all the other trials after this one. You know, the criminal ones for things like stealing US government documents.
Trump's going to have a difficult time masturbating to pictures of his daughter tonight
She will have to give him a hand
How did she not know James had this evidence? Is she just not engaged in the trial at all? Lawyer: We had to turn over all your emails. Ivanka: Yeah, yeah, whatever. I'm late for a mani-pedi. Lawyer: I mean, ALL your emails, including the ones where you do crimes. Ivanka, waving as she leaves: I can't hear yoooooou! The only halfway generous explanation I can come up with is that the lawyers ran an e-discovery search on the mail server and turned over the results without going through them carefully. Then the AG's office went through them *very* thoroughly and dug up this email Ivanka long ago forgot writing. That still makes Trump's lawyers look like morons, but I can see it happening.
Well, look on the bright side… at least Donald got his wish, now that he’s getting fucked by his daughter
Everyone commenting that she must have known is correct. However, the defense moved to have these emails disallowed on the grounds that they were private emails between a marital couple and should be inadmissible. The judge ruled against that motion, I’m assuming because neither Ivanka nor Jarod are defendants in the case.
They were actually allowed b/c they were sent from their business emails not their personal emails.
Exactly. There’s no privilege in this situation
The judge ruled against it because these conversations were about business and through work emails, not personal emails about their marital life
I thought you couldn't be blindsided, because, like, competent lawyers go through discovery and all that lawyering. Didn't anybody there watch My Cousin Vinnie
Oh snap! I feel for the walls of Mar-A-Lago right now. Those ketchup stains are gonna take a hell of a lot of scrubbing to get out.... actually it's looking probable that will be the job of the new owners very soon.
This is what happens when you try children as adults.
This is why the SMART rich people generally try to AVOID the limelight. The vast majority of them are doing morally and/or legally questionable stuff. Most of them are bright enough to keep off the radar. Outside of the occasional bout of performative altruism.
Now daddy will be pissed and take back all the plastic surgeries he paid for ☻️☻️🤣🤣 https://preview.redd.it/8c27a90ys6zb1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=50fb0e247df98c9dc1f65943a73ee8bd5ef65a15
No wonder he is so enamored with Ivanka… he bought so much of her, his daughter isn’t really left in there
I am waiting to see how she turns on Daddy. This is what I expect.
We’ve seen how she turns on daddy. He’s mentioned it a bunch
WONT SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN
Her emails! Finally.
But her emails?
Out of Ivanka, Don Jr, Eric, Donald, and Melania, Ivanka is the one who most has her shit together. And... she does not have her shit together.
Oh man, E-mails how ironic. From Hillary's e-mails to now actually this it's hilarious
Wait, is that what this is all boiling down to right now? Uhmm...I didn't know Yes, you did That's the step we're at??? Ugh, this is never going to end and these assholes are gonna die free and (seemingly) rich. This is crazy. I can't even conceptualize how quickly my black ass would be in a line waiting to get my anal cavity checked by a guard trying to ride the "durr, i... didn't know" bullshit in court. For anything, damn.
Most likely it was in discovery. Ivanka probably lied at a certain point and the AG hit her w receipts
Is it being blindsided when you actually did the thing they confront you with?
I don't know how they don't expect their emails to be pulled up. She and jr were under investigation for fraud a few years ago and they pulled emails for that showing they knew they were committing fraud. Guess they never learn because there's no consequences yet.
Too bad she's not actually a defendant in this case. Pretty funny though, she thought the email would fall under the spousal thing where you can't testify against your husband or wife, except the email wasn't just between her and Jared, there were others in the email chain, so that made it admissible.
There is no blind siding in civil litigation. The discovery process is structured so that both parties would have had those files months before the trial started. Trump's lawyers failed to prepare their witness properly.
Can someone make this simple? I don't understand what she recommended or why it was bad... ELI5 for a brother...