On Monday—the first day of content in criminal trial of the former president Donald Trump because of alleged election interference – some important aspects of the case began to gain attention.
Reading the tea leaves, the sentence “You cannot trust Michael Cohen” This approach will probably not be effective and the defense will probably have to try to come up with at least a backup strategy to prevent a conviction. Trump's security team is Currently on a losing streak in an attempt to carry out proceedings designed to hinder prosecution.
Specifically, how has Trump's team been operating in its efforts to throw up any possible roadblocks to try to hinder this affair?
Well, that was their first attempt to completely refute the allegations. That doesn't work.
Their proposal to remove the judge? Failed again.
Attempts to move the case out of Manhattan? No such luck.
Trump's lawyers tried their best to delay the case in general for a variety of other reasons (including the former president's request to attend his son's high school graduation). Judge Juan Mercan, the judge they tried to remove, did not accept that.
Ultimately, their final efforts focused on trying to exclude the testimony of certain witnesses according to the prosecution's plan and narrow the scope of evidence presented? Those tactics also failed.
For now, it appears that the “broken glass” approach ultimately simply undermines the credibility of Trump's former fixer, Michael Cohen, whom they likely believe will be the government's key witness .
And what is their main argument for attacking Cohen's credibility? Cohen was convicted of federal lying about the hush money payments.
We'll leave aside for now the fact that it appears he was simply lying in an effort to protect the former president. Another element of the attack on Cohen's credibility was the fact that he was a neglected employee and confidant who seemed to be bent on revenge against his former employer.
But a funny thing happened on the way to court. The prosecution built a case not only based on Michael Cohen's testimony. David Pecker, former CEO of American Media and its publisher National questionerhas begun his testimony and is expected to provide additional testimony on Tuesday.
Some people might think that the prosecution doesn't pull many punches.
But a common tactic of trial lawyers who know a witness's testimony may last more than a day is to save the most damaging material for the second day of testimony. That way, the opponent won't have time to stay overnight to prepare for cross-examination the most damaging testimony to their client.
We also know that former Playboy model Karen McDougal may testify. And like adult film actress and potential prosecution witness Stephanie Clifford (aka Stormy Daniels)—McDougal's story was also allegedly suppressed by the investigative agency. Questioner.
Former Trump aide Hope Hicks could also take the stand, as could members of the District Attorney Alvin BraggHis trial team announced they would present documentary evidence and audio recordings of Donald Trump that they claimed would corroborate the larger story.
And that bigger story will be bigger than Michael Cohen.
Even portraying Cohen as “damaged goods” might somehow be ineffective. However, as every good trial lawyer knows, it is often former employees who can make great witnesses, not bad ones. Their sense of freedom – as if their livelihood does not depend on testimony that damages their employer – can help them speak their minds freely. And they usually know “where the bodies are buried” (and I'm speaking metaphorically here, to be clear).
Perhaps Team Trump knew the case would be bigger than Cohen for a long time. Maybe that's why they tried so many different angles to stop the trial from happening, or it took place outside of Manhattan, or it was presided over by a different judge, or the corroboration evidence wasn't there. Have.
Whatever they had hoped to achieve through all these efforts to prevent the larger story from coming to light, that strategy failed. Because of that failure, they will probably have to try a different approach if they hope to win an acquittal.
Given the rapidity with which Justice Mercan is handling this case, we may know in just a few short weeks whether that approach is effective.
