And, by the time this, ah, trial is over, the election may have already been lost.

It's a criminal trial... not an "ah, trial" and will most likely be over before the end of the month. As for the election, it actually doesn't occur until November 2024, and there's no winning it or losing it until that time.

Wake up!

Not sure who you are blaming for being asleep, but your laughable and unwarranted drama is (again) duly noted. :)

Wake up!

You meant it won't be Karen McDougal. Prosecutors likely decided not to call her because:

(a) they were likely satisfied with the testimony of Stormy Daniels (on top of the other evidence to date),

and

(b) the 34 falsified records in question have nothing to do with McDougal because she was admittedly paid $150,000 by Pecker/AMI (the second "catch-and-kill") but never reimbursed by Trump, along with the doorman Dino Sajudin that AMI had already admittedly paid $30,000 (the first "catch-and-kill") that was also never reimbursed by Trump, which is what lead Pecker (among other things he testified) to refuse to buy Daniels' story despite the fact Cohen had already negotiated the deal, telling Cohen that he was "not a bank" and that he didn't want the National Enquirer to be associated with a porn star... so apparently a Playboy centerfold/playmate of the year is where Pecker drew the line. *shakes head*

So Trump was left to his own devices to quiet Daniels, and this is what they came up with, and now Trump wants everyone to buy the utter nonsensical claim that he knew nothing about this and it's all on Cohen. I mean, really!

Trump's lawyers will (of course) rip into Cohen like a pack of wild dogs, since the key to their strategy is to completely destroy his credibility as a witness.

So Trump and his lawyers want the jury (and the public) to believe that Cohen is a skeezy lying cur but also that Michael "the Pit Bull" Cohen had decided to pay Daniels out of the goodness of his heart and he and Weisselberg "went rogue" when Pecker had refused to pay Daniels (as previously conspired among Trump, Cohen, Hicks, Pecker) but also without any knowledge whatsoever of the co-conspirator/beneficiary of the entire arrangement who would thereafter be liable for reimbursement... the lying, welching, tight-fisted, penny-pinching prick Cohen worked for who micromanaged everything. *duh*

Opening and closing statements are arguments but not evidence, and the jury will be asked to decide the case "beyond a reasonable doubt" based on the mountains of evidence presented at trial. Anything his lawyers claim on his behalf in opening and closing statements isn't evidence, and therefore Trump himself would have to take the stand in order to refute documents and testimony and will commit perjury and be eviscerated to hell and back by the prosecution if he tries.

Based on the evidence, I see no path to an acquittal; be that as it may and still, all Trump needs is one holdout to get a hung jury.