Take our user survey and make your voice heard.
Former U.S. President Trump's criminal trial on charges of falsifying business records continues in New York
Former US President Donald Trump, with lawyer Todd Blanche, speaks to the press as he arrives at his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments linked to extramarital affairs, at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City, U.S., April 23, 2024. TIMOTHY A. CLARY/Pool via REUTERS Image: Reuters/TIMOTHY A. CLARY
world

Judge tells Trump lawyer in hush money trial he is 'losing all credibility'

62 Comments
By Luc Cohen, Jack Queen and Andy Sullivan

The judge overseeing Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial on Tuesday warned that Trump's lawyer was "losing all credibility" in his arguments that the former president should not be punished for violating a gag order in the case.

Justice Juan Merchan said he would not immediately rule on prosecutors' request to fine Trump $10,000 for violating the order, which prevents him from criticizing witnesses and others involved in the case.

At a hearing, Merchan told Trump defense lawyer Todd Blanche that he had neither case law nor evidence to support his argument that Trump was not intimidating witnesses but responding to political attacks.

"You've presented nothing," Merchan said. "I've asked you eight or nine times, show me the exact post he was responding to. You've not even been able to do that once."

"I have to tell you right now, you're losing all credibility with the court," the judge added.

After the session, Trump repeated his claim that the gag order violated his constitutional free speech rights.

"This is a kangaroo court and the judge should recuse himself!" Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform.

The judge's gag order prevents Trump from publicly criticizing witnesses, court officials and their relatives.

New York prosecutor Christopher Conroy said Trump has run afoul of the order, pointing to an April 10 Truth Social post that called porn star Stormy Daniels and Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen "sleazebags." Both are expected to testify in the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president.

Conroy said other posts led to media coverage that prompted a juror last week to withdraw over privacy concerns.

"He knows what he's not allowed to do and he does it anyway," Conroy said of Trump. "His disobedience of the order is willful. It's intentional."

The $10,000 fine sought by Conroy would be a relatively small penalty for Trump, who has posted $266.6 million in bonds as he appeals civil judgments in two other cases.

Conroy said he was not at this point asking Merchan to send Trump to jail for up to 30 days, as New York law allows.

"The defendant seems to be angling for that," Conroy said.

Blanche said his posts were responses to political attacks by Cohen and not related to his former lawyer's expected testimony.

"He's allowed to respond to political attacks," Blanche said.

PECKER TAKES THE STAND

Trump is charged by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg with falsifying business records to cover up a $130,000 payment shortly before the 2016 U.S. election to buy the silence of Daniels about a sexual encounter she has said they had 10 years earlier.

Trump has pleaded not guilty and denies such an encounter took place. His lawyers argue that Trump did not commit any crimes and only acted to protect his reputation.

On Tuesday, jurors heard testimony from former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, who prosecutors say participated in a "catch and kill" scheme to suppress unflattering stories about Trump and help him get elected.

Pecker, 72, said he has known Trump since the 1980s and worked with him at one point on a magazine called "Trump Style." He said Trump was a fixture on the National Enquirer's front pages, and a survey found 80% of the magazine's readers said they would back him if he ran for president.

Prosecutors displayed an email from Cohen inviting Pecker to Trump's 2015 campaign launch. "No one deserves to be there more than you," Cohen wrote.

He said he worked with Cohen to track rumors or negative stories about Trump.

American Media, which published the National Enquirer, admitted in 2018 that it paid $150,000 to former Playboy magazine model Karen McDougal for her story about a months-long affair with Trump in 2006 and 2007. American Media said it worked "in concert" with Trump's campaign, and it never published a story.

The tabloid reached a similar deal to pay $30,000 to a doorman who was seeking to sell a story about Trump allegedly fathering a child out of wedlock, which turned out to be false, according to prosecutors.

Trump has said the payments were personal and did not violate election law. He has also denied an affair with McDougal.

The case may be the only one of the Republican Trump's four criminal prosecutions to go to trial before his Nov. 5 election rematch with Democratic President Joe Biden.

A guilty verdict would not bar Trump from taking office but it could hurt his candidacy. Reuters/Ipsos polling shows that half of independent voters and one in four Republicans say they would not vote for Trump if he is convicted of a crime.

© Thomson Reuters 2024.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.


62 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Oh, his credibility is long gone.

Hope he got paid up front and that it was worth it because the stain will never wash away.

At least he hasn’t lost his law license (yet) or been criminally charged like multiple other lawyers for this narcotics sociopath have.

21 ( +21 / -0 )

"You've presented nothing," Merchan said. "I've asked you eight or nine times, show me the exact post he was responding to. You've not even been able to do that once."

Blanche sounds like one heckuva lawyer.

16 ( +16 / -0 )

“Narcissistic sociopath”

Trump is a criminal, evil and stupid, but there’s no evidence that he is using narcotics, although it would jibe.

15 ( +15 / -0 )

The judge overseeing Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial on Tuesday warned that Trump's lawyer was "losing all credibility" in his arguments that the former president should not be punished for violating a gag order in the case.

To be expected when you take on Trump as a client.

On Tuesday, jurors heard testimony from former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, who prosecutors say participated in a "catch and kill" scheme to suppress unflattering stories about Trump and help him get elected.

This includes publishing articles falsely claiming Ted Cruz's father was connected to the Lee Harvey Oswald, and Hillary Clinton was on various narcotics. In other words, the same kind of media collusion rightists are always whining about. Clearly we can see it's all projection.

17 ( +17 / -0 )

Trump was a fixture on the National Enquirer's front pages, and a survey found 80% of the magazine's readers said they would back him if he ran for president.

Shows you the caliber of the average Trump voter.

15 ( +16 / -1 )

Donny only has credibility with MAGA gang..

LOL

6 ( +9 / -3 )

American Media said it worked "in concert" with Trump's campaign, and it never published a story.

MAGAs and other far right extremists constantly whine that something they call 'the media' is out to get their babbling Bible hawker, but he's still got wack US media, including outlets owned by RM, the modern day Hearst, and some from foreign countries pushing his lies. Speaking of disinformation, he started his own blog, and so far he might be making money but most of his MAGAs that invested in him have lost. It looks like he's made a mess of his latest business, infighting seems to be part of all his dealings., yet recall some of his most faithful claiming their cult leader a business and economic genius. It turns out he's just a fraudster, a pampered class brat who was able to use daddy's money, employ thugs and his incompetent family members to manage it while using criminal-level activities to stay afloat. He tried that same approach while president but the majority of US Americans saw what a failure he was and voted him out. Democracy can work, his brand of gangster authoritarianism not so well according to the majority of voters.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

Blanche said his posts were responses to political attacks by Cohen and not related to his former lawyer's expected testimony.

"He's allowed to respond to political attacks," Blanche said.

Sure. So what political attacks are you referring to:

"You've presented nothing," Merchan said. "I've asked you eight or nine times, show me the exact post he was responding to. You've not even been able to do that once."

Oooops. So you say he is just reacting to attacks, but you have no evidence of these attacks? Talk about being unprepared. And that's why:

"I have to tell you right now, you're losing all credibility with the court," the judge added.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

The back and forth may have gone something like this:

Blanche: He's allowed to respond to political attacks.

Merchan: You've presented nothing. Show me the exact post he was responding to.

Blanche: Take your pick.

Merchan: Which specifically?

Blanche: All of them.

Merchan: I have to tell you right now, you're losing all credibility with the court.

Blanche: Biden?

Merchan: Biden has nothing to do with this trial.

Blanche: Why? Because the left say so?

14 ( +14 / -0 )

Blanche: Why? Because the left say so?

Why does this sound so familiar? hmmm lol

12 ( +12 / -0 )

plasticmonkey

The back and forth may have gone something like this:

Blanche: He's allowed to respond to political attacks.

Merchan: You've presented nothing. Show me the exact post he was responding to.

Blanche: Take your pick.

Merchan: Which specifically?

Blanche: All of them.

Merchan: I have to tell you right now, you're losing all credibility with the court.

Blanche: Biden?

Merchan: Biden has nothing to do with this trial.

Blanche: Why? Because the left say so?

ROFL!!

9 ( +10 / -1 )

"You've presented nothing," Merchan said. "I've asked you eight or nine times, show me the exact post he was responding to. You've not even been able to do that once."

As expected. Claiming he’s not allowed to speak out or tell the truth then when given the opportunity all he has is “waaaaaaaah”

What a baby.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

He said Trump was a fixture on the National Enquirer's front pages, and a survey found 80% of the magazine's readers said they would back him if he ran for president.

Colour me not surprised.

Especially given the sources of the citations, links and evidence the MAGA mob always uses to back up their "claims."

If Trump lawyers rely on the same insight and logic...

I imagine if he had a legal ace up his sleeve he could get away with a slap on the wrist in this case of a hush money payment; it is not like it is unheard of in a case of a politician's infidelity.

Election tampering and insurrection on the other hand...

8 ( +8 / -0 )

projection. That judge has no credibility.

-13 ( +2 / -15 )

With this level of clumsiness and stupidity, I'm guessing two things;

This lawyer has figured out Trump is going to stiff him just like he did Giuliani and is throwing the case on purpose...

Trump and he determined his only way to avoid a guilty sentence is to appeal by saying his lawyer was incompetent...

Still can't wait until Trump takes the stand - he'll either doze off or will treat us to a series of unhinged "Bings!, Bangs!, and Dings!"....

9 ( +9 / -0 )

projection. That judge has no credibility.

Only to Trump fans. Pretty pathetic that this is the most the Trump fans could muster.

Telling they've got nothing to say about Trump colluding with the National Enquirer to make up stories about political oppents.

11 ( +12 / -1 )

projection. That judge has no credibility.

Stupidest comment this week. He's a judge - the vetting process required to get to that point, combined with their ethics oversight provides all the credibility needed to anyone who hasn't been brainwashed by MAGA.

12 ( +12 / -0 )

projection. That judge has no credibility.

Perhaps that could be the basis of an appeal. Sounds like a winner for sure!

10 ( +11 / -1 )

nobody pays attention to anything the National Enquirer says and not a crime to make up stories about political rivals.

Dems do it to Trump all the time, in actual newspapers.

-15 ( +1 / -16 )

nobody pays attention to anything the National Enquirer

Irrelevant.

says and not a crime to make up stories about political rivals.

That's actually not true.

Dems do it to Trump all the time, in actual newspapers.

Really? You have evidence of the Democrats engaging in catch and kill schemes with "actual newspapers"? Link please.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Dems do it to Trump all the time, in actual newspapers.

It’s been a while since you used the “somebody else did it before” legal defense.

Do you think it will finally work this time?

10 ( +11 / -1 )

Do you think it will finally work this time?

Hmm. Well, what do you think? (Not what does headline liberal news shout). Any thoughts? (As opposed to just saying No, when someone else says Yes).

Dig deep!

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

projection. That judge has no credibility.

Says the one with negative credibility. I previously thought that wasn’t mathematically possible, but it seems I was mistaken.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Blacklabel

nobody pays attention to anything the National Enquirer says and not a crime to make up stories about political rivals.

Dems do it to Trump all the time, in actual newspapers.

Really? You've presented nothing. You're losing all credibility.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

nobody pays attention to anything the National Enquirer says

The jury will.

and not a crime to make up stories about political rivals.

Weird MAGA fantasy not based in the reality of what is happening.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Hmm. Well, what do you think? (Not what does headline liberal news shout). Any thoughts? (As opposed to just saying No, when someone else says Yes).

Dig deep!

I thought I heard your clown shows honking.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

I always thought this trial was the weakest in terms of evidence...not any more...

"Pecker back on the witness stand: In what amounted to incredibly damning testimony, Pecker laid out the 2015 deal he reached with Trump “to help the campaign.” Pecker called the arrangement to publish stories to make Trump look good — and to smear his political rivals — “highly, highly confidential.” Trump’s then lawyer Michael Cohen fed the tabloid negative stories about rivals like Sen. Ted Cruz when they sensed him gaining momentum on Trump in the GOP primary, Pecker testified. Steve Bannon also pitched negative stories about Hillary Clinton to Pecker that the Enquirer published.

“Catch and kill”: Pecker also testified about the Enquirer’s efforts regarding “catch and kill,” the practice of buying the exclusive rights to a story only to make sure it would never be published. The Enquirer paid $30,000 to a Trump Tower doorman named Dino Sajudin for a story about Trump fathering an out-of-wedlock child. Though the story turned out not to be true, Pecker said, “I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it would have to the campaign and Mr. Trump.” A second catch-and-kill example involved former Playboy model Karen McDougal, who was shopping a story about a sexual relationship she said she had with Trump. “I think you should buy it,” Pecker said he told Trump, who was married at the time, during the 2016 campaign."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-trial-updates-former-national-enquirer-publisher-david-pecker-details-efforts-to-help-trumps-2016-campaign-183916839.html

And this is just the first witness....

No wonder Trump is freaking out and wetting his pants...he better hide his golf clubs so Melania can't find them...

11 ( +11 / -0 )

Trump is always having trouble keeping his personal business in his pants.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

"Pecker back on the witness stand: In what amounted to incredibly damning testimony, Pecker laid out the 2015 deal he reached with Trump “to help the campaign.” Pecker called the arrangement to publish stories to make Trump look good — and to smear his political rivals — “highly, highly confidential.” Trump’s then lawyer Michael Cohen fed the tabloid negative stories about rivals like Sen. Ted Cruz when they sensed him gaining momentum on Trump in the GOP primary, Pecker testified. Steve Bannon also pitched negative stories about Hillary Clinton to Pecker that the Enquirer published.

“Catch and kill”: Pecker also testified about the Enquirer’s efforts regarding “catch and kill,” the practice of buying the exclusive rights to a story only to make sure it would never be published. The Enquirer paid $30,000 to a Trump Tower doorman named Dino Sajudin for a story about Trump fathering an out-of-wedlock child. Though the story turned out not to be true, Pecker said, “I made the decision to buy the story because of the potential embarrassment it would have to the campaign and Mr. Trump.” A second catch-and-kill example involved former Playboy model Karen McDougal, who was shopping a story about a sexual relationship she said she had with Trump. “I think you should buy it,” Pecker said he told Trump, who was married at the time, during the 2016 campaign."

Election interference must be stopped!!! Scream the right. Or at least they did until they realized that the only election interference here in the real world was on the part of their own team. He interfered in the 2016 election, stealing the election, and then he tried to overthrow democracy in 2020.

Trump has redefined a lot of things, and the term 'loser' is high among them.

11 ( +11 / -0 )

not a crime to make up stories about political rivals.

Here's what the law actually says if anyone is interested:

Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

https://casetext.com/statute/consolidated-laws-of-new-york/chapter-election/article-17-protecting-the-elective-franchise/title-1-violations-of-the-elective-franchise/section-17-152-conspiracy-to-promote-or-prevent-election

11 ( +11 / -0 )

not a crime to make up stories about political rivals.

Here's what the law actually says if anyone is interested:

Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

tldr; It's a crime sometimes, and Bragg is showing that this is one of those times.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

Shows you the caliber of the average Trump voter.

the left reads the Yahoo News, get real! ROFL!

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

"You've presented nothing," Merchan said. "I've asked you eight or nine times, show me the exact post he was responding to. You've not even been able to do that once."

As expected. Claiming he’s not allowed to speak out or tell the truth then when given the opportunity all he has is “waaaaaaaah”

He can't. Funny, Cohen can spout out lies all day and on his Podcast (ROFL) but Trump has to sit there and just take it, the beauty of this trial is, the circus for what it is, this just continues to help Trump.

What a baby.

Democrats certainly are.

-14 ( +0 / -14 )

the left reads the Yahoo News, get real! ROFL!

Good morning, Bass. Hope you're well.

7 ( +9 / -2 )

"Judge tells Trump lawyer in hush money trial he is 'losing all credibility".

Like the entire case has any credibility? This case is no different like Joe claiming his uncle was eaten without seasoning by African cannibals!

-14 ( +1 / -15 )

Good morning, Bass. Hope you're well.

Always ;)

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Like the entire case has any credibility? This case is no different like Joe claiming his uncle was eaten without seasoning by African cannibals!

How to say your a MAGA far-right extremist, without saying you're a MAGA far-right extremist.

Or maybe a Russian - they like to pretend they're MAGA, because the MAGA believe what the Russians tell them.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Trump has to sit there and just take it

It's beautiful.

It will be even more beautiful if he ends up in jail for contempt of court.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

As John Stewart said last night, it sure seems strange that a guy already judged to have committed a "sexual assault", is on trial for fraudulently paying off a "porn star", with the first witness being a "Mr Pecker"...

Welcome to sleaze is as sleaze does MAGA-world...

7 ( +7 / -0 )

“Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor," New York Law 17-152 reads.”

so a misdemeanor is made a felony by….another misdemeanor? Clown world.

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

And why do they keep saying conspiracy when conspiracy isn’t in the indictments?

and how is repaying someone in 2017 for legal services influence on the 2016 election?

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Cohen can spout out lies all day and on his Podcast (ROFL) but Trump has to sit there and just take it

Let's see. One is a podcast, the other is a court. How good we're you in kindergarten playing one is not like the other?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

“Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means and which conspiracy is acted upon by one or more of the parties thereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor," New York Law 17-152 reads.”

so a misdemeanor is made a felony by….another misdemeanor? Clown world."

People outside MAGA have read how this translates to a felony. If you want to continue to remain willfully ignorant, and then be all angry about it, that's on you. The rest of us see your comment as devoid of value when you aren't ignorant of the facts.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

projection. That judge has no credibility.

It's good that you started labelling your projections. Makes it easier to read.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Or in other words, maybe educate yourself and you won't need to beg us to educate you to allay your anger.

And why do they keep saying conspiracy when conspiracy isn’t in the indictments?

and how is repaying someone in 2017 for legal services influence on the 2016 election?

10 ( +10 / -0 )

and how is repaying someone in 2017 for legal services influence on the 2016 election?

Because they weren't legal services. That's what the fraudulant documents were for.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

and how is repaying someone in 2017 for legal services influence on the 2016 election?

Because they weren't legal services. That's what the fraudulant documents were for.

Information widely known outside of far-right extremist MAGA media.

MAGA love willful ignorance.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

so a misdemeanor is made a felony by….another misdemeanor? Clown world.

Yes. Being held responsible for the crimes you commit makes this a clown world.

In your world, you think it should be okay to just make up literal fake news to damage opponents.

Now that is what I call a "clown world."

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Misdemeanor + misdemeanor doesn’t equal 34 felonies.

documents created in 2017 can’t impact a 2016 election.

if there was a conspiracy why are all the indictments about business records and none mention conspiracy?

NDA: legal

catch and kill: legal

payments to your lawyer: legal

Tabloids making up stories: legal

-10 ( +1 / -11 )

Information widely known outside of far-right extremist MAGA media.

Yes, here you are, from WAPO:

President Trump’s real estate company authorized paying $420,000 to lawyer Michael Cohen in his effort to silence women during the presidential campaign and then relied on “sham” invoices from Cohen that concealed the nature of the payments, according to legal filings released Tuesday.

...

..

Trump executives decided Cohen should be paid more than he sought — an additional $360,000 for expenses and other fees and taxes, plus a $60,000 bonus, prosecutors said.

Now why would notoriously frugal Trump go pay more than Cohen even requested?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-company-approved-420000-in-payments-to-cohen-relying-on-sham-invoices-prosecutors-say/2018/08/21/b6b327fc-a596-11e8-97ce-cc9042272f07_story.html

“In truth and fact, there was no such retainer agreement, and the monthly invoices COHEN submitted were not in connection with any legal services he had provided in 2017,” prosecutors wrote.

Well looky there, it sounds a whole lot like the fraud prosecutors alleged.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Misdemeanor + misdemeanor doesn’t equal 34 felonies.

documents created in 2017 can’t impact a 2016 election.

Again, if you want to remain willfully ignorant to information that is widely available, your anger is on your.

if there was a conspiracy why are all the indictments about business records and none mention conspiracy?

Open ended questions prove nothing other than that the questioner is too lazy to answer a question they know they won't like the actual answer to.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

It's beautiful.

Why? Not being fair and impartial is good? hmm...

It will be even more beautiful if he ends up in jail for contempt of court.

I see, so for our non-American followers, the rule of law is not good enough?

Ok...

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

Misdemeanor + misdemeanor doesn’t equal 34 felonies.

lol Clearly they do. That's what the grand jury decided.

documents created in 2017 can’t impact a 2016 election

They can when they're repayments for burying stories from before the election.

NDA: legal

Irrelevant.

catch and kill: legal

Irrelevant.

payments to your lawyer: legal

Irrelevant.

Tabloids making up stories: legal

A tabloid alone? Possibly legal, but you're opening yourself to defamation claims.

A tabloid in concert with a political candidate? That's probably illegal, that feels illegal.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

Why? Not being fair and impartial is good? hmm...

Heh, says the guy from the so-called party of law and order.

I guess you guys have given up on that one.

I see, so for our non-American followers, the rule of law is not good enough?

Heh, says the guy who thinks Jan 6th was ok, and that Trump shouldn't be prosecuted even after grand juries found probable cause...

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Prosecutors doing a great job so far of telling us about things that happened that….aren’t crimes.

Isn’t this a criminal trial?

-12 ( +1 / -13 )

Prosecutors doing a great job so far of telling us about things that happened that….aren’t crimes.

lol Actually he's done a pretty good job at proving what a crook Trump is. He's done a very good job showing that Trump's motivation for the hush money payment was nothing to do with the his wife and everything to do with the election, and he's shown Trump was aware of the fraudulent documents. If you think today was a good day for Trump or his defense, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

"constitutional free speech rights."

That's funny how he is the ONLY former president to say that. Not to mention "free speech" is more so for civilians not government officials. People who run the country and or work for the US government or military don't have the same rights as the citizens. They are supposed to be held to higher standards because of the weight the words they speak.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Prosecutors doing a great job so far of telling us about things that happened that….aren’t crimes.

Meanwhile, back in the real world, they already proved all the points of the crime with Pecker's testimony alone.

Also publicly available information I will add.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

I feel overwhelmed by the abundance of tears shed by people supporting the 'Make America Great Again' movement.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Prosecutors doing a great job so far of telling us about things that happened that….aren’t crimes.

More daily MAGA-delusion...you show them they're wrong each day and they come back with the same old tired tropes...

It really just shows how desperate and dejected they are...

Isn’t this a criminal trial?

Ask that question when he's sentenced to jail...

7 ( +7 / -0 )

I feel overwhelmed by the abundance of tears shed by people supporting the 'Make America Great Again' movement.

At least the MAGA have Obamacare, so they can get care for their wounded feelings.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

It sounds like the prosecution is intending to use Pecker's testimony to confirm testimony they intend from Michael Cohen, due to Cohen's lack of credibility. They'll use documents and other people's testimony to cross-reference the rest of Cohen's trial, thereby removing any points for the defense to call into question his credibility, since everything he says will already have been supported through testimony and facts.

The irony is that Cohen's lack of credibility literally comes from the very exact crime and instance of said crime that Trump is on trial.

7 ( +8 / -1 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites