This is so good&;#33; Today we got a classic Trump move in a game of 4D chess and it’s looking like the Teflon Don is going to beat ANOTHER one of these sham trials. Allow me to explain…. Actually‚ I’ll let my friend Kevin Paffrath “MeetKevin” explain because he absolutely knocked it out of the park with this video. If you find the so-called “Hush Money” trial hard to follow‚ you’re not alone. It is confusing and not easy to understand. But the video below will make it all clear for you.  Kevin does a great job of giving a quick summary of who the key players are and how we got here before he explains the huge new twist and turn we got today. One thing I wanted to add to Kevin’s video‚ which will make more sense after you watch it‚ is that Michael Avenatti has recently gone on record saying he is ready to testify FOR Trump: Michael Avenatti: ‘Ready To Testify For Trump’ So in terms of this just coming down to credibility between Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels‚ he could be the factor that tips the scales in Trump's favor. But also I have heard rumors that Stormy Daniels herself may claim the entire thing never happened. That would be the death knell to the bogus case. After all‚ don't forget about this letter: BOMBSHELL: Trump Posts Letter From Stormy Daniels on Truth Social And the last thing I want to add is that Kevin thinks the prosecution will bring up Trump's other legal trials as character evidence. Character evidence is not always so easily allowed‚ and the Trump Team could be successful in keeping that out. In criminal trials‚ rules of criminal procedure and evidence typically restrict the admission of character evidence‚ which pertains to the likelihood of a person's conduct based on their disposition or character. The primary rule in the United States is governed by Rule 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence‚ though state rules can vary somewhat while generally following the same principles. Rule Against Character Evidence Rule 404(a) states that evidence of a person’s character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion‚ the person acted in accordance with the character or trait. This rule is based on the principle that such evidence can lead to unfair prejudice‚ confuse the issues‚ or mislead the jury. Exceptions to the Rule However‚ there are significant exceptions to this general prohibition: Defendant's Character in Criminal Cases: Rule 404(a)(2)(A): A defendant may introduce evidence of their own pertinent trait‚ and if the defendant does so‚ the prosecution can rebut with evidence to the contrary. Rule 404(a)(2)(B): If the defendant attacks the character of the alleged victim‚ the prosecution may introduce evidence to prove the victim's character trait and evidence of the defendant's same trait. Character of Victim: Rule 404(a)(2)(C): In homicide cases‚ the prosecution may offer evidence of the victim’s peaceful character to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor. Other Crimes‚ Wrongs‚ or Acts: Rule 404(b): This rule provides that while evidence of a crime‚ wrong‚ or other act is not admissible to prove a person’s character in order to show action in conformity therewith‚ it may be admitted for another purpose‚ such as proving motive‚ opportunity‚ intent‚ preparation‚ plan‚ knowledge‚ identity‚ absence of mistake‚ or lack of accident. This exception is often invoked to show a pattern of behavior that is directly relevant to the crime charged‚ rather than merely to suggest a disposition to commit the crime. Witnesses' Character: Rule 608 and 609: These rules allow for the introduction of evidence concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of a witness as a means to bolster or attack the witness's credibility. Ok‚ enough with all the legal mumbo jumbo.... Let's get on with the video so you can see just how this thing flipped today. It's glorious. Watch here (and for those who always request it‚ I also have the full transcript for you below): Backup here if needed: The Trump Hush Money Trial JUST FLIPPED&;#33; Really great analysis by my friend MeetKevin. Mirror (for backup): https://t.co/MHyBUUaurx See comments for full transcript pic.twitter.com/ywuDDedpFh — DailyNoah.com (@DailyNoahNews) April 22‚ 2024 FULL TRANSCRIPT FOR THOSE WHO PREFER TO READ: wow the Donald Trump strategy to defeat the hush money trial against him just got really interesting let's go through this first let me catch you off to speed my goal is to cover this entire trial I'm just going to give you a quick background so if you're already used to the background I'll put a little time stamp down below you could skip forward to the interesting part but let's just give you a little quick background we'll make it simple just so you know the names of people involved and what's going on so when you hear Alvin Bragg I want you to think district attorney when you hear Matt I want you to think the prosecutor he's the guy actually in the courtroom pound in the pavement for Alvin brag when you hear Leticia James think of a state of New York attorney general these names sometimes blend together so I'll add some reminders so keep in mind that this entire case is designed to paint what Donald Trump did as a criminal conspir iry and a coverup to influence the election now the Trump campaign's response to this is pretty remarkable already in their opening statement so we're going to hit that as far as some other names that are going to be important David pecker CEO of the company that owned the national Inquirer stormmy Daniels who signed a statement in 2018 January 30th 2018 stating she never had an affair with Trump but then she later said that wasn't her signature and then in a different case said that okay was her signature but she had no choice because she was uh forced to sign the statement via a non-disclosure agreement in exchange for accepting the $130‚000 and felt like she had no choice to accept $130‚000 so that'll come up that all relates to of course her allegations that the national Inquirer was thinking about taking public which then she recanted and kind of kept her story uh hushed up if you will because allegedly she made a deal with Trump you'll hear Todd blanch he's the Trump defense attorney now this guy is really interesting because he has a history of being a federal prosecutor in Manhattan which is interesting because now he's playing defense attorney in other words he used to be the guy working for Manhattan now he's the guy working for the defendants against Manhattan so it's kind of a really interesting flip-flop of a role he has limited experience as a defense attorney and he also helped Paul manord avoid avoid State charges of mortgage fraud so somehow hooked up with Donald Trump and here we are so the idea probably is that Trump's got a guy who used to work for the state and knows how they operate right that's the idea then you've got uh judge M I like to call him work judge M I call him judge M he's the justice of uh a Justice of the New York state supreme court in Manhattan he is not only presiding over the hush money trial but he also previously oversaw the 5we trial against the Trump Organization for tax fraud which the Trump organization was convicted icted of 17 counts he also oversaw the trial of Alan velber the former Financial chief of the Trump organization who plad guilty to a 15y yearlong tax fraud scheme judge am sentenced Allen to five months at Riker's Island all right then of course you've got to know Michael Cohen now here's another interesting character everybody's got an interesting kind of story because Michael C actually pled guilty to lying to Congress lying in court and lying to the media he actually went to prison he was sentenced to 3 years in prison and ordered to pay $50‚000 and then got disbarred so he can no longer be an attorney he went to prison in 2019 and got out in 2021 so he spent Co in prison anyway this guy's like 57 years old at one point Donald Trump sued Cohen for breach of legal trust because of that audio recording against uh Donald Trump or that people are trying to use against Donald Trump I'll explain that in a moment uh and then of course he's now being used as a key witness against Donald Trump that's because of I'm not going to play the audio recording because I'll show you why Donald Trump's defense kind of messes all of that audio recording stuff off but basically there's this audio recording where Michael Cohen's like hey so I'm going to set up a shell company I'm going to make the payments to deal with the pecker issue that's the national inquire story referring to Stormy Daniels okay so that's really just just like a catchup of everything and Michael Cohen recorded that why he recorded that who knows but he did and you hear Trump kind of you know going along with it whatever okay none of that is necessarily wrong what's wrong is what the district attorney alleges and that's 34 counts of basically writing uh checks invoices and documenting items in like quick books like a ledger uh saying these are normal necessary and ordinary legal business expenses is that's what the Trump organization claims and the district attorney is claiming no those expenses were used to cover up something that the electing the voting public should have known of therefore not only did you lie about a business expense being a business expense which would be a misdemeanor but you used it to cover something else up and that rises to a classy felony which is the lowest form of a felony uh so the argument is you paid off Stormy Daniels through your family trust via Michael Cohen Cohen has admitted to such okay so what is the Trump defense and this is where things The Shocking Flip. get really interesting so you just had a good little four minute-ish five minute-ish catch up on everything that's being uh alleged those 34 counts by the way come out of uh three different situations the payment to Stormy Daniels the deal with Karen McDougall and the 30k payment to the doorman who alleged that Donald Trump fed a child out of wedlock okay there now we're fully caught up so today we started hearing opening statements and this is where we got a really interesting point of view from the Trump defense and that's what we've got to talk about uh first worth getting out of of the way that Matt the prosecutor suggested that Donald Trump is a penny pincher that he approves every invoice and that Trump never negotiated Cohen's price instead Trump doubled the price Cohen was charging because he wanted this issue to go away now the Trump defense here is is like really really fascinating okay so you ready for this I'm going to set this up let's assume for a moment that Trump did something wrong with Stormy Daniels and then covered it up well then these allegations you know they could have some weight but what if you argue all that stormy Daniel stuff was all a lie and therefore all of the other expenses that happened the invoices the legal expenses the reimbursements the shell company the audio recording all of that doesn't matter because we were just simply paying for a false story to go away so we wouldn't have to publicly defend a false story right before the election now that is a really interesting twist I was not expecting this see I was expecting that the state was going to come in and say Donald Trump knew about these expenses which they did say today Donald Trump knew about these expenses and he had an affair and he used this money to cover up that he had an affair that's what I was expecting the defense or the the prosecution to say and I thought the defense would come in and say Donald Trump knew nothing about these payments which would be problematic because they have that audio recording that the FBI got their hands on right but Trump's defense is going 4D chess move and saying you know what yeah that audio recording we own it you know what we did make payments to Stormy Daniels in fact all those invoices the checks we wrote and The Ledger absolutely right those were a necessary an ordinary business expense because stormmy Daniels came up with a false story and it is not illegal to pay somebody to shut up about a lie instead she's the criminal because she's storting us with a defamatory lie now that is such an interesting argument because it changes everything here it basically lets Donald Trump lean into all of the fraud charges about the general ledger the checks and the invoices and it allows Michael Cohen to say yep we paid her and then he can go up on the stand and say we paid her Donald Trump agrees we paid her Donald Trump will go yep yep we paid her and then when Michael Cohen gets asked well did Donald Trump have an affair with her how am I supposed to know and then Donald Trump's going to go I didn't have an affair with her and then stormmy Daniel is going to go I had an affair with him and so then this whole case doesn't actually come down to the payments what it actually comes down to is do you believe Donald Trump had an affair with her or not which which then all of a sudden this case is like what this is like you know the the case of probably this year right the case of 2024 uh public trial of a former president uh and it kind of reminds me of very much like Bill clintones like you know I did not have sexual relations with like it reminds me a lot of the Monica Lewinsky scandal and so this is like wow we are no longer actually arguing about whether or not these checks were made or invoices were made or the tapes or uh you know whether or not stormmy Daniels uh statement was true or or or false like her written statement right what we're actually now asking the jury to do is do you believe that Donald Trump had an affair if he did not have an affair then all of the stuff that came after that not illegal as Trump's defense says that is a legitimate use of money to defend against a false story and it is not election interference and you know what it is not illegal to influence an election by covering up false lies like you're under no obligation to tell somebody something if it's a lie because you're just reiterating somebody's lie that's very very interesting it's a very interesting defense and it totally contrasts with a what I thought we were going to get going into this but it's also going to then lead jurors to have to decide okay so how credible is stormmy Daniel's story because really you just basically can put Michael Cohen up there and he's going to say yeah we were the checks but now all going to come down to what evidence the Stormy Daniels have that an affair actually occurred and that is going to be used if there's a lack of evidence or a lack of you know uh the stained dress so to speak or text or whatever it's going to be pretty hard to get Trump now again of course the prosecution is going to try to set up a challenge against Donald Trump's credibility so what they're going to do is they're going to come after his is uh assets case this is basically where there's the allegation that Donald Trump inflated assets so they're going to go after him uh for that they'll bring that up uh and they will bring up uh any other potential uh issues or misstatements that have occurred such as Donald Trump's compliance with gag orders and his defaming of Jean Carroll which obviously Jee Carroll won a lot of people like trumped didn't def whatever all of those things are going to come up because what the prosecution is going to try to do is break down Trump's credibility and pump up the credibility of stormmy Daniels and on the other side they're just going to be trying to collapse stormmy Daniel's credibility and boost their own so this is wild because it's really going to come down to an opinion of a jury and the trial actually ended early today because apparently one of the jurors had a toothache you can't make this stuff up anyway if you like my perspective make sure to subscribe I'll be bringing a lot more updates you can also meet me live at the road show click the link down below or going to metkevin.com Road Show to learn about my real estate startup uh and investing in that especially if you're an accredited investor read the solicitation over at house.com 2024 and make sure to click that RSVP button if you want to come in person thanks bye advertise these things that you told us here I feel like nobody else knows about this we'll we'll try a little advertising and see how it goes congratulations man you have done so much people love you people up to you Kevin PA there financial analyst and YouTuber meet Kevin always great to get your take even though I'm a licensed financial advisor licensed real estate broker and becoming a stock broker this video is not personalized advice for you it is not tax legal or otherwise personalized advice tailored to you this video provides generalized perspective information and commentary any third party content I show shall not be deemed endorsed by me this video is not and shall never be deemed reasonably sufficient information for the purposes of evaluating a security or investment decision any links or promoted products are either paid affiliations or products or Services we may benefit from I also personally operate an actively managed ETF I may personally hold or otherwise hold long or short positions in various Securities potentially including those mentioned in this video however I have no relationship to any issuer other than house act nor am I presently acting as a market maker make sure if you're considering investing in house Haack to always read the PPM at house.com SHARE&;#33;