Last week, MSNBC’s coverage of the New York v.
Trump trial featured an unexpected moment of triumph for former President Donald Trump’s defense team, with network legal correspondent Lisa Rubin highlighting a crucial point in the cross-examination of Michael Cohen.
As a key witness for the prosecution, Michael Cohen was confronted by defense attorney Todd Blanche regarding a contentious phone call made to Trump’s former bodyguard, Keith Schiller.
The crux of this exchange involved Michael Cohen’s honesty regarding his communications with Trump about a hush money payment.
However, his credibility was challenged when Blanche introduced a text message between Cohen and Schiller, which Cohen had not seen in the eight years since it was sent.
This disclosure contradicted Cohen’s earlier testimony, where he maintained that the call was exclusively about Trump.
Under cross-examination, Cohen responded with uncertainty, saying, “Part of it was the 14-year-old… but I know Keith was with Mr.
Trump.
Blanche seized on this discrepancy, stating emphatically, “That was a lie.
You did not talk to President Trump.” Cohen’s reply was weak, however: “I’m not certain that’s accurate.
Rubin portrayed this moment as a significant win for Trump’s legal team, highlighting the difficulties the prosecution faces in constructing a credible case against the former president.
Rubin’s analysis emphasized that the cross-examination extended beyond just a phone call, focusing on Cohen’s integrity and reliability as a witness.
It sort of cast lots of his testimony in doubt given the passage of time and makes the District Attorney’s Office look terrible all in one breath,” Rubin explained.
This is a moment of real triumph for Todd Blanche.
You could even hear it in his voice.
He is not a person to get excitable very easily.
The incident not only casts doubt on the strength of the prosecution’s case but also raises questions about the diligence of the District Attorney’s Office.
Rubin noted that the office seemed “sloppy” for not having previously shown Cohen the crucial text message, which could have clarified the facts before the trial.
It was evident that MSNBC, often critical of Trump, recognized a pivotal moment where the defense not only challenged but potentially upended the prosecution’s narrative.
In addition to this, Trump attorney and spokeswoman Alina Habba criticized the hypocritical nature of the prosecution against her boss that is evident in his Manhattan hush money trial, even to the point where attorney-client privilege doesn’t appear to matter.
Habba was discussing Cohen’s testimony after he admitted last week to secretly recording a conversation with his then-boss about an alleged hush money payment.
These discussions between attorneys and their clients are supposed to be privileged and private, but Cohen’s testimony in court has not yet been challenged.
Habba, in an interview with Fox News host Sean Hannity, noted the discrepancy.
Last time I checked, there’s something called attorney-client privilege.
Obviously, you know, that doesn’t stand if you’re going against Donald Trump because none of the rules stand if you’re going against Donald Trump in a political campaign where he is winning and they have no other way to win but to take him down with illegal and politically motivated lawfare,” Habba said.
You said it best, Sean.
Hillary Clinton did something far worse, and the [Federal Election Commission] looked at it, they examined it, and what did they do?
They gave her a slap on the wrist, she paid, I think, eight grand for hiding the dirty dossier, the Russian hoax against Donald Trump, and nobody cared about anything,” Habba continued.
She wasn’t dragged into court.
Neither was Bill Clinton in the sock drawer case, and the list goes on and on and on.
But if you are Donald Trump, you’re going to be gagged unconstitutionally so that you can’t even discuss testimony of people that are calling you a liar, and you can’t defend yourself.
Can I tell you, Sean, I have never seen anything worse than what I saw today.
I’m not going to get into the testimony of somebody under oath on a witness stand, but I think if you read the news, it speaks for itself,” she added.