by Jeff Childers
Alvin Bragg’s sneakiest strategy slithered out yesterday, in the form of his star witness’s worst day, a scheme missed by most media. Late last night, CNN Politics ran its Trump Trial story headlined, “Analysis: Michael Cohen gives Donald Trump his best day in hush money trial so far.”
President Trump, CNN reluctantly explained, “got to savor his former fixer-turned-enemy Michael Cohen wobbling on the stand under a fearsome cross-examination.” The problem was, convicted felon and disbarred lawyer Michael Cohen is an inveterate fibber and an incurable fabulist. Michael has lied under oath so many times he’s lost count. NYU Law professor Ryan Goodman told CNN, “I think what happened today is so devastating they have to do something.”
Trump also seemed happy how the day turned out. “I think it was a very interesting day, it was a fascinating day. And it shows what a scam this whole thing is,” he assured reporters. CNN couldn’t help adding that Trump’s confidence “rang less hollow than usual given several positive moments for the defense.”
The mind reels contemplating how CNN can with a straight face continue reporting this revolting spectacle as some kind of legitimate judicial exercise. Cortez’s men would have looked upon Trump’s trial with even wilder surmise than they viewed the Pacific Ocean from a peak in Darien. I don’t know whether Michael Cohen is the biggest liar who ever took the stand, but he’s got to be up there. And he’s the state’s key witness.
Anyway, to give you the smallest taste, here’s how CNN described one legally significant exchange:
Trump attorney Blanche asked Cohen about a time when he’d lied under oath to a judge in a different case because “the stakes affected you personally.” Cohen agreed he had.
Then Blanche asked Cohen: “Does the outcome of this trial affect you personally?” Cohen answered, “Yes.” The unspoken implication was that if Cohen lied in a previous trial that affected him personally, why would he not do the same in a trial involving his now sworn foe, the former president?
A fair question. On Monday, Bragg will get a chance, if he wants, to “rehabilitate” Cohen.
Maybe the biggest actual news was that Trump’s team doesn’t plan to put on much of a defense. The judge concluded Court yesterday advising counsel to prepare for closing arguments starting as early as Tuesday. It might not be as unusual as it sounds, since in criminal cases, it’s the state’s burden to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. So if the defense already has good arguments for reasonable doubt when the state rests, then it could be better to stand down and not risk over selling.
Some of CNN’s ‘legal experts’ seemed to think Trump may have already established reasonable doubt:
Experienced trial lawyers immediately spotted a potential turning point. “I think it has to have raised some doubt,” criminal defense attorney Nikki Lotze said on CNN’s “The Situation Room,” of Blanche’s clash with Cohen. “There was testimony previously that this phone call was about X and now there are texts that suggest it is about Y … and not a lot of time for there to be a conversation about both X and Y.“
Jim Trusty, a former Trump attorney, also believed the exchange was significant and was cause for the ex-president to feel upbeat. “The defense set the whole trial up to be a referendum on Cohen’s honesty. That is exactly where you want this fight to be, so it is a good moment,” he said.
Notwithstanding undeniable proof that Michael Cohen wouldn’t know the truth if it gave him a colonoscopy, the jury is permitted to believe him anyway. After reading the transcripts of various exchanges, it seems Alvin Bragg’s strategy was to play to politically biased jurors dying to find some reason to believe Cohen. Otherwise it was a terrible idea to call Cohen last and leave on a low note.
Clearly, they prepared Cohen to testify better than he has ever been prepared in his entire sneaky, scurrilous life. Biden’s finest federal prosecutors taught Cohen exactly what to say about all his previous lies.
In short, Michael never argued. He didn’t even try to deny it. In other words, he was honest about lying.
Cohen quietly and confidently admitted all his previous lies when asked. Those admissions were the main reason the legal analysts called what happened “devastating.” But they missed the point. Alvin Bragg deployed a high-risk strategy I’ll call, “the prodigal son.” Cohen sounded and acted like a recovering alcoholic.
Bragg’s closing argument will be something like, he used to be a liar but now he’s been rehabilitated, or he recognizes how important this trial is and he would never lie about THIS.
It could work. Running the ‘prodigal son’ would be unreasonably chancy absent a jury dying to find some way to convict Trump. With that kind of jury in your pocket, Bragg’s strategy makes more sense. But it would be the thinnest possible way to make history convicting a United States President for … what?
