Donald Trump’s first criminal trial involves his former fixer, Michael Cohen, who the jury may see as a social media troll and vengeful liar with a grudge against his former boss. Despite this negative perception, the jury only needs to believe Cohen’s testimony to find Trump guilty. During cross-examination, defense attorney Todd Blanche attempted to shatter Cohen’s credibility but failed to do so, allowing Cohen to maintain his composure on the stand.
After a day off in the trial, Cohen will have time to reflect while Trump’s team sharpens its approach. Cohen has already directly implicated Trump in making payments to Stormy Daniels and corroborated evidence of election interference. The defense’s goal in cross-examination was to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors, questioning Cohen’s credibility and motives for testifying against Trump.
Blanche focused his cross-examination on tarnishing Cohen’s character and credibility, rather than addressing the core question of whether Trump falsified business records to mislead voters. The defense’s tactics seemed more for Trump’s benefit than to disprove the case against him. The prosecution has concluded its witness testimony with Cohen, leaving attention on the defense’s approach and the possibility of Trump testifying in his own defense.
Legal experts have varying opinions on the success of Blanche’s cross-examination, with some questioning his tone and tactics. While Cohen’s reluctance to answer yes-or-no questions may have appeared confrontational, he did not undermine the prosecution’s case. Cohen’s testimony about breaking from Trump, influenced by his family’s encouragement, was a key moment in the trial and shed light on the pressures of loyalty to the former president.
As the prosecution nears the end of its case, there is a looming decision for the jury on whether to convict Trump of a crime, which would be a historic outcome. Trump’s supporters outside the courthouse, including House Speaker Mike Johnson, have dismissed the trial as politically motivated and a form of election interference. The unpredictability of a jury verdict and the potential implications of Trump’s conviction add further complexity to the trial and its significance.
