CNN —
The forced direct examination of former Trump fixer-turned-star prosecution witness Michael Cohen in former President Donald Trump's Manhattan criminal trial concluded Tuesday. Mr. Cohen's compelling testimony, in my view, deepened the case beyond a reasonable doubt that the prosecution secured Monday's evidence.
Late Tuesday, lead defense attorney Todd Blanche spent hours on cross-examination trying to uncover that evidence. However, the cross was uneven and Cohen, like Stormy Daniels before him, defended himself. At least for today, the prosecution case remains intact. Whether that changes in the coming days remains to be seen, but either way, Cohen's cross was an unfortunate start.
The day began with testimony about Mr. Cohen's meetings with Mr. Trump in January and February 2017. These were the third and fourth of four significant meetings between Mr. Cohen and Mr. Trump that I wrote about in my previous trial diary. As on Monday, prosecutors meticulously corroborated these two meetings using emails, invoices, and photos, in which Cohen was accused of illegally falsifying documents at the center of 34 counts of felony document forgery in the case. President Trump was an active participant in the repayment plan.
They included one in which President Trump allegedly told Cohen to “deal with Mr. Allen” during a White House meeting in February. [Weisselberg, the Trump Organization CFO],” Whose handwritten notes Part of the hush money cover-up involves telling jurors the story of $130,000 in hush money paid to adult film actress Daniels before the 2016 presidential election to keep her quiet about her alleged affair with President Trump. Used to devastating effect. Sexual contact (which President Trump denies).
Provided by Norm Eisen
Norm Eisen
About an hour into Mr. Cohen's testimony Tuesday, prosecutors turned to what we trial lawyers call “pulling the sting.” In other words, the idea is to predict how a witness might be attacked by the cross, and to pre-emptively recognize it directly, thereby mitigating the impact on the witness. jury.
In my estimation, Assistant District Attorney Susan Hoffinger spent over an hour intermittently questioning Cohen about his many lies. Deny About Trump's role in the Daniel family payoff, getting others to do the same, and Cohen's own past convictions, including perjury.Cohen explained that he had committed this fraud. “Out of loyalty” to playing cards “And to protect him.”
One of the most effective moments of this bait-and-switch tactic came just a few months ago, when Hoffinger admitted in Trump's civil fraud trial that he had lied in pleading guilty to tax and banking charges in 2018. when I asked Mr. Cohen. scam. Mr. Cohen explained that he never disputed the underlying conduct of failing to pay certain taxes or failing to include important information on bank forms. A first-time offender, he said he felt the crimes were not worth prosecuting, but was forced to plead guilty by federal prosecutors' short-sighted threats to also charge his wife. If the defense returns to that point later this week, Cohen will be able to say to a federal judge, “I have already explained what I was forced to do,” instead of having to tell a federal judge inexplicable lies.
Direct examination ended before lunch, when Mr. Cohen's testimony about Mr. Trump reached a fever pitch: “I regret doing things for him that I shouldn't have done, like lying and bullying people, but I did it to stay loyal and do what he asked me to do.” By doing so, I broke a moral code and was punished as well as my family. ”
At that moment, and at multiple points throughout the day, I saw something I had never witnessed before in this trial. That means Cohen was speaking directly to the jury, and all the jurors could see him and hear him. It seemed to me that he had developed a real human bond with the jurors through a long direct examination.
Anticipation was building at every moment of the entire case as we waited for Blanche to begin her cross-examination. In fact, courtroom and overflow room spectators typically trickle back from lunch, but by the time I returned to the courthouse entrance, dozens of people had already lined up early to get their reserved seats and head back inside. It was.
With the defense behind her, Blanche had to swing right out of the box, and Blanche swung. But when he asked Cohen his first question, it was a swing and a miss. –I agree? '' Cohen replies, with a deadpan manner that suggests he's hiding a glint in his eyes, that the words “sound like something I would say,” and that Blanche's own co-counsel, Susan,・Even Necheres brought out a smile.
But that had nothing to do with the underlying facts of the case, nor did subsequent questions about Cohen, who criticized Necheres. Both sides drew dissenting opinions, which were upheld and the court's conference with Judge Juan Mercian began. We won't know what was said until we receive the transcript, but the judge appears to have reprimanded Blanche and ordered the questioning to be discontinued.
This was not a good look for the jury and Blanche was only able to get up from there, as she continued to struggle a bit and was unable to provoke Cohen with questions about topics such as her frequent media appearances. , elicited some opposing views. Despite the district attorney's reservations (it was a prank, but so what?), he was selling an anti-Trump podcast (which shows bias, but Cohen owned it) and even anti-Trump merchandise. (Although it had indicated a financial motive, it again failed to gain support from Cohen).
Blanche eventually perked up a bit when Cohen contrasted how little he remembers about his conversation with the prosecutor's office a year ago and how he remembers details of his conversation with Trump in 2016. began to recover. Mr. Blanche also criticized Mr. Cohen's bias as follows. They have extracted various confessions about wanting Trump to be convicted and sold T-shirts depicting Trump in prison. But even when Blanche confronted him on social media with the most inflammatory comments, including calling Trump a “dictator idiot” and a “cheat-filled cartoon villain,” Cohen remained unfazed. Ta.
Get our free weekly newsletter
In my estimation, these questions did little to break Cohen's bond with the jury, undermine his credibility, or push the prosecution's proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Perhaps the defense strategy could have improved a little after the afternoon break, when Branch delved into Cohen's motivations for getting his federal sentence reduced when he began cooperating with the federal prison system, but not much. There was no improvement. By the time the judge mercifully offered Blanche an afternoon break, it was clear that she was not producing the strong performance needed. In fact, it wasn't even close.
Of course, we are relatively early in the cross and still have many miles to go. The initial gains could be better for Blanche or worse for Cohen. On the other hand, as my late mother used to say, you only get one chance to make a first impression, and Blanche's impression was decidedly uninteresting. Cohen, like Daniels before him, is a good shot on crosses, at least for now. Blanche is taking a long break to recalibrate off the court on Wednesday, so he should try to do that. Let's see what Thursday brings.
