George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley said that the New York sham trial against former president Donald Trump is crumbling, as he pointed out that the defense is benefiting from the prosecution’s key witness.
The former president was charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records for an alleged $130,000 hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 election.
Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker stood as the first witness of the prosecution, whom Turley noted has been helpful to Trump as the prosecution committed mistakes that the defense capitalized on during cross-examination.
“It’s a breakdown in the courtroom. They have a witness that is disassembling in front of them.”
“The prosecution never revealed to the jury in the direct that Pecker had actually killed stories for other celebrities, that he had been working on stories two decades before the election with Trump that he was suppressing. And now it’s only getting worse. Yesterday was really bad in terms of the cross-examination for the prosecution,” the law professor added.
During the cross-examination, Pecker testified that Michael Cohen, a former Trump attorney, and the Republican presumptive nominee purchased a story regarding an alleged affair between former Playboy model Karen McDougal and Trump. According to prosecutors, this move was not merely an attempt to cover up Trump’s reputation but an attempt to influence the 2016 election.
However, defense attorney Emil Bove, upon questioning Pecker, exposed that this was the tabloid’s business practice, or what they call “checkbook journalism.”
Bove also enumerated stories where Pecker’s magazine suppressed damaging stories, such as those of politicians such as former Democratic mayor Rahm Emanuel and former Republican California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Moreover, Pecker and Trump’s relationship goes way back before the 2016 election, according to Bove. In truth, the publisher has been tipping Trump on possible negative publicity for more than a decade.
Pecker confirmed that the first time he did this was in 1998.
Turley was impressed with how the defense panel was handling the case. He added, “I think the defense is doing a very good job, but I have to say that this is collapsing on its own weight.”
“You just have to stand back and let it fall. Just asking simple questions that the jury would want to know has left serious damage for the prosecution. These are not strange tangential questions, these are questions you would’ve expected the prosecution to ask as just the completion of their line of questioning. Like, was Donald Trump the only one you did this for? When did you start to do this?”
