Tipsheet

'Like a Bomb:' CNN Analyst Again Shocked by Michael Cohen's Latest Courtroom Meltdown

Late last week, we highlighted several memorable exchanges on CNN, following "devastating" testimony from the anti-Trump prosecution's star witness, Michael Cohen.  The devastation was not done to Trump, but rather to the case against him.  Host Anderson Cooper, who had been inside the courtroom, recounted how a key memory Cohen had testified to just days prior got eviscerated when the defense team used Cohen's own text messages as evidence against him.  Cooper said the moment showed Cohen being "cornered in what appeared to be a lie, I think, to many in the room."  Cohen is a convicted felon and known perjurer, so impeaching his credibility isn't necessarily that difficult of a task, but in this circumstance, Cohen seems to have lied under oath yet again -- this time about a recollection that is central to the prosecution's case.  This was a disaster for Alvin Bragg, with mounds of reasonable doubt being poured onto the charges.  

Yesterday was arguably worse for the state, as their prime witness admitted to yet another crime he'd committed: Stealing tens of thousands of dollars from Trump's company.  So in just a handful of days of cross-examination, Michael Cohen looks to have freshly perjured himself, then confessed to another felony.  CNN legal analyst Elie Honig -- who last week had said he'd never seen "a star cooperating witness get his knees chopped out quite as clearly and dramatically" in his career -- reacted to the new, dramatic revelation like this:

"[Cohen's admission] came out like a bomb earlier today. I don't know how much [prosecutors] can do to fix that...He committed larceny.  It's a higher degree of felony than what Donald Trump is charged with. Yet they gave Michael Cohen a free pass even though he's now admitted that he stole what amounts to $60,000. It goes to his credibility, it goes to his relationship with the D.A."

It's surreal. Here we have a convicted criminal and established perjurer admitting to a felony -- for which he will face no consequences -- that is more serious than the alleged 'crimes' with which the man he's testifying against is charged. Trump faces more than 100 years in prison over this jerry-rigged bookkeeping dispute.  It does not take a Trump fan to see this appalling spectacle and travesty of justice for what it is: A partisan witch hunt in an election year, undertaken by sharp-elbowed partisans and presided over by a Biden donor, for the purposes of branding Donald Trump a "convicted felon" prior to Election Day.  I discussed this on Special Report last evening:


Even if one disagrees with the notion that this case should never have been brought in the first place (I agree with the previous Manhattan DA, and the FEC, and the DOJ that it should not have), the "evidence" against Trump is so flimsy, and so reliant on the fabricated musings of Michael Cohen, that heaps of reasonable doubt should result in an easy acquittal. If it's asking too much for 12 New Yorkers to acquit Trump, maybe a conviction on lesser included offenses (which would be misdemeanors with lapsed statues of limitation) would do the trick.  Alternatively, it just takes one or more jurors refusing to convict at all to result in a mistrial.  We shall see, perhaps as soon as next week.  Incidentally, the term "Trump Derangement Syndrome" gets thrown around a bit too much, I think, but sometimes that phenomenon is undeniably real.  For example, when a host at MSNBC finds himself literally defending and excusing stealing in order to try to justify the confession of an anti-Trump criminal, the brain worms have truly taken over:

Taking money that isn't yours in order to "rebalance" a bonus you think you deserve, but didn't receive, is called...stealing.  It's against the law.  And as noted above, it's a heavier felony than anything they've indicted Trump for in this case.  I'll leave you with a few more chestnuts from Bragg's most important, and hopelessly discredited and compromised, witness:

Cohen would likely run for Congress as a Democrat, but if he's looking to bring on a political consultant who might genuinely 'get' him, I can think of someone who may be available -- depending on a few factors and the timing of it all.