Trump's Attorney Fails To Impeach Witness So Badly He's Forced To Apologize
Added 2024-05-06 06:55:04 +0000 UTCOA1030: It's more Trump Trial Transcripts! Go easy on Mr. Bove, it's his first day...
This episode centers around David Pecker's testimony and it's basically rock solid. Trump's attorneys are desperate, so Mr. Bove goes for the juggler! And then everyone has to explain it's actually "jugular" why in the world would you go for the "juggler?" Why would that be the idiom? In what world are jugglers like, crucial components of anything, at which you would want to go in order to really hurt someone or something? Maybe at circuses? They're arguably not even that important to circuses though, don't they just mess around in between way better acts to try to distract the audience a little?
I just want to assure people that Matt had nothing to do with these show notes. He hasn't had a stroke or anything, don't worry. It's just that I, Thomas, now answer to NO ONE when it comes to Opening Arguments because.... SURPRISE SHOW NOTES ANNOUNCEMENT Andrew is completely out of OA! The legal bull shit is over! More details inside!
If you would like to audition to read transcripts on the show in the future, go to https://openargs.com/audition and follow the directions there!
Comments
23:00 "I don't think you're responding to what I'm saying." Me arguing with any conservative ever.
Jason Valasek
2024-05-13 14:16:57 +0000 UTCpity dylan howard isn't testifying... 🤣
lauren
2024-05-07 18:47:13 +0000 UTCIt’ll be awesome!
KeepingThePlatesSpinning
2024-05-07 17:19:18 +0000 UTCWe should reserve it for the attorneys and witnesses we like
Steno Pun'd it
2024-05-07 16:56:27 +0000 UTCThanks for the clarification about patreon money! I upped my pledge so I can get Lawd Awful Movies again, so excited!
Elven Engineer
2024-05-07 12:44:18 +0000 UTCI wondered that too, if the prosecution at least gets to explain that it's the defense's fault they had to bore the shit out of everyone. Also the dumbness hurts my brain. Either the dumbness, or I'm missing something. "Wow, that took for fucking ever, didn't it. They sure had a lot of evidence, didn't they. Booo accountants, fuckin' nerds"
Bald Weasels Scrotal Manscaping
2024-05-07 09:55:03 +0000 UTCAny chance that D might be assigned community service?
subpoenaspoenaspoenaspoenaspoenaspoenaspoenas
2024-05-07 07:04:16 +0000 UTCYay! Congratulations Thomas and Lydia...and Matt, thanks for being an awesome human, and so amazing in your new role. I love OA and I'm thrilled to have it back in my earholes. In a darker spirit...I'm so fucking sick of people who stay "neutral". It's not fairness, it's complacency. There was enough information to pick a fucking side. And I sided with the humans. Rest in Distress, Andrew the Asshat.
SlightlyAskewSince1982
2024-05-07 01:32:05 +0000 UTCI mean obviously yes but will it be too weird for transcript reading?
Bald Weasels Scrotal Manscaping
2024-05-07 00:24:57 +0000 UTCI have an Australian accent, will that be weird?
Bald Weasels Scrotal Manscaping
2024-05-07 00:24:13 +0000 UTCUnfortunately I grew up in the age of answering machines. My voice is way too squeaky to participate but I LOVE what you’re doing with the show! ❤️ you all, Thomas, Lydia and Matt!
KeepingThePlatesSpinning
2024-05-06 23:52:16 +0000 UTCI laughed for A WHILE about the real meaning behind a judge saying, “You’re doing a good job.” Oh, here I go again… 😂
Anne
2024-05-06 23:47:49 +0000 UTCSame. It’s very helpful to have Thomas break in with questions and to have Matt’s explainers as we go along.
Anne
2024-05-06 23:46:34 +0000 UTCWell Actually, when you go for the juggler, you destroy your opponent's morale. Or improve it if they've had enough juggling
Bald Weasels Scrotal Manscaping
2024-05-06 23:07:28 +0000 UTCI mean… for you it might be worth a try
Opening Arguments
2024-05-06 21:49:27 +0000 UTCIs professional-grade In-car audio sufficient for recording transcript readings? Asking for a friend....
Vehicular Man's Laughter ... Oh I just realized it's 'car' from WTW ... he's so good at Codenames he can play it blind
2024-05-06 21:49:08 +0000 UTCooh, I have a further question about the stipulation and what the jury can know about it. in today's testimony, the defense made a show on cross examination of the trump org accounts payable witness, about it taking an hour and a half for the people to confirm the validity of the signed cheques (checks). can prosecutors come back on redirect and mention the lack of stipulation in that instance? or do they just have to suck it up?
lauren
2024-05-06 20:49:04 +0000 UTCI'm inclined to believe AG's theory that Bove's involvement in the hush money trial is mostly to help give Cannon an excuse to delay the documents case, as Bove is on that case for the CIPA proceedings. His poor performance here seems to reinforce that theory.
Why do podcasters say moron that later
2024-05-06 17:50:47 +0000 UTCJust want to point out: Pilot here, it is not against the law to go to the bathroom with the seatbelt sign on if the plane is in cruise, but we're not allowed to tell you that. (Much like a defense attorney can't say the jury is allowed to disregard the law and just vote not guilty). It is against the law to disobey a safety instruction from the staff on the airplane. You'll notice that even in the clip the Attendant is saying and keeps repeating 'The seatbelt sign is on' not 'Sit down' or 'go back to your seat' That's all they're permitted to say.
Michael Rops
2024-05-06 16:00:59 +0000 UTCI think the stipulation thing is at least a plausible strategy for trying to hang the jury. As much as there might be 2 lawyers on the jury, there's also (is it 1 or 2?) Truth Social muppets on there too. And if they're trumpians, they might not listen to the 'elite' lawyers. If they're trumpians, they might well be thinking that it's the prosecution wasting their time with the authenticity testimony. They might even hold it against the prosecution for (idiotsplaining?) at them... "See how hard they're trying to prove these are legitimate? I think there's something fishy going on here!"... I guess this sort of thing could also contribute to that ineffective counsel strategy?
I am a philosophical hole
2024-05-06 15:26:14 +0000 UTCThomas asked if the jurors would know about the refusal to stipulate and how it's because of the defense being obstinate. Aren't two of the jurors lawyers? Wouldn't they notice how unusual this is, and possibly make a negative inference on the defense's conduct?
Despairing Radical
2024-05-06 12:38:50 +0000 UTCI just want to say that I am absolutely loving these transcript readings you’re doing! What a fantastic idea and really well executed. ❤️
Kelley
2024-05-06 12:38:29 +0000 UTCWell, I love your show notes. Stroke or no, at least you’re happy, that’s what matters to me 🎊
Totally A Real Human Person
2024-05-06 10:18:25 +0000 UTC
