In a recent court session, Michael Cohen, Trump's former lawyer and fixer turned bitter adversary, faced a grueling cross-examination. The outcome? Cohen's claims faltered under scrutiny, revealing inconsistencies and contradictions. His attempt to implicate former President Trump in supposedly improperly trying to influence the 2016 fell apart as he struggled to provide concrete evidence or coherent explanations. In short, the testimony shattered Cohen's credibility, prompting even anti-Trump journalists to admit that Cohen only helped Trump.
This wasn’t the first time a witness boosted Trump in court. Stormy Daniels's lawyer, Keith Davidson, testified that the $130,000 payment to Daniels shouldn't be labeled as "hush money" but rather as a legitimate "consideration" payment.
Hope Hicks's testimony further undermined Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's case when she testified that Trump's nondisclosure agreement with Daniels stemmed from a desire to protect his family from embarrassing media coverage and not to influence the election.
Related: Even CNN Thinks That Michael Cohen’s Testimony Was a Gift for Trump
And then there was Daniels’ testimony, the most pivotal witness save Cohen. She not only admitted to essentially extorting Trump, but the defense team also effectively called her out for repeatedly changing her story depending on what was the most useful and profitable narrative for her at any given time.
In a legal system built on fairness and justice, the indictment of Trump for a non-crime would be inconceivable. It has been clear from the very beginning that Bragg, who campaigned on getting Trump, put together a weak case. Heck, it was so weak that his predecessor and the Biden Justice Department refused to prosecute it.
Experts have repeatedly pointed out that Bragg bootstrapped misdemeanor charges, which typically result in a fine at worst, into a felony. Making matters worse, this blatantly partisan case has relied upon the most unreliable of witnesses.
Some might suggest that despite the weakness of the case and the disastrous witnesses the prosecution has relied on, between the partisan judge and the partisan jury, a conviction could still happen. However, even CNN seems to be doubting that a conviction will happen now.
For Our VIPs: Swing State Voters Are So Over the Trump Trial
When you consider everything that has happened so far, from the weak case to the blatantly unreliable witnesses, it calls into question whether a conviction was even the actual point of the case. But, if they’re not trying to convict Trump, why bother? Well, think about it. The trial has not only kept Trump away from the campaign trail, but the ridiculous gag orders have kept him from being about to talk much about it either. The closer we get to the election, the smaller the pool of swayable voters gets.
So while this trial may not succeed in convicting Trump (and it shouldn’t) it is nevertheless keeping him from the campaign trail at a critical time of the election while simultaneously burdening him with massive legal bills.
The left is most certainly afraid that Trump will win the election, and it has tried everything possible to stop him. But its lawfare strategy has been incredibly weak in every single case, not just the New York City one, that it seems unlikely that nobody ever believed that a conviction was possible.
