DA Bragg’s ‘Key Witness’ In Trump Case Flopped

In a twist of occasions, David Pecker, an important witness for the prosecution, offered testimony in the course of the prison trial of former President Donald Trump in New York, however statements appear to have considerably undermined the case being pursued by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

There was anticipation surrounding Pecker, the ex-CEO of American Media Inc., proprietor of the controversial National Enquirer, to offer essential testimony towards Trump. His testimony was thought to make clear the notorious “catch and kill” scheme, a technique utilized by the tabloid to buy damaging tales about Trump in the course of the 2016 election and subsequently suppress them.

However, throughout cross-examination by Trump’s legal professionals, Pecker’s feedback appeared to tear aside the story that the prosecution had labored exhausting to construct. Pecker stated in courtroom that Trump wasn’t the one who was most nervous about doubtlessly damaging tales due to Trump’s fame and historical past with ladies. It was Pecker himself and former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.

During his testimony, Pecker revealed that in 2015, he had agreed to behave as Trump’s “eyes and ears.” He pledged to tell Cohen about any tales that would doubtlessly trigger hurt as Trump ran for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination. Pecker would purchase the rights to those tales however didn’t publish them, which stored them secret.

Following Pecker’s testimony, political and authorized analysts appeared to largely agree that he was not fairly the star witness that Bragg had hoped for.

Advertisement

“Did the prosecution comprehend that they just looked silly?” “Their main witness just said that Trump didn’t even think of any of this,” a political analyst from Travis Media Group tweeted after the testimony.

“Pecker effectively testified today that he and Cohen drummed up this scheme, without Trump’s instruction. Not a good day for Alvin Bragg and Joe Biden!!!” Raheem Kassam of the National Pulse tweeted.

This ⬇️

Pecker successfully testified in the present day that he and Cohen drummed up this scheme, with out Trump’s instruction.

Not a very good day for Alvin Bragg and Joe Biden!!! https://t.co/gSGjVevzaO

— Raheem. (@RaheemKassam) April 23, 2024

The week’s trial wrapped with testimony from different key figures together with Rhona Graff, a longtime assistant to Trump, and Gary Farro, a former banker related to Cohen.

At the center of the trial lies a $130,000 fee made to grownup movie actress Stormy Daniels, purportedly aimed toward hushing up her alleged affair with Trump in the course of the 2016 presidential marketing campaign.

Farro delved into the specifics of the banking mechanisms employed to execute the fee, as jurors obtained transient testimony from Graff. She affirmed her position in sustaining communications on the Trump Organization for each Daniels and one other particular person implicated in comparable allegations, Karen McDougal.

Georgetown University regulation college professor Jonathan Turley was amongst those that had been unimpressed with Bragg’s witnesses. During a Fox News interview, he identified weaknesses within the prosecution’s technique. “I have to say this is collapsing on its own weight,” Turley acknowledged emphatically. “I mean, you just have to stand back and let it fall.”

Turley criticized the prosecution for not addressing what he deemed important questions. “Just asking simple questions that the jury would want to know has left serious damage for the prosecution,” he famous. “These are the questions that you would have expected the prosecution to ask as just the completion of their line of questioning,” Turley added, suggesting that these omissions might considerably affect the trial’s consequence.

In an earlier Fox interview, Turley called Bragg’s case towards Trump “legally absurd.”

Fox host Maria Bartiromo kicked the section off by asking: “I’m gonna put up this letter, this is from Stormy Daniels that President Trump posted, I know you’ve seen this, it says, ‘Stormy Daniels writes, ‘The fact of the matter is that each party to this alleged affair denied its existence in 2006, 2011, 2016, 2017 and now again 2018. I’m not denying this affair because I was paid hush money. I’m denying the affair because it never happened,’ writes Stormy Daniels. Sir?”

“Yeah, everything about this case is, in my view, legally absurd. You know, this case is basically a state misdemeanor that had run out under the statute of limitations,” Turley started.

“Bragg was forced, after he declined for a long time to bring this charge, to do so. His predecessor rejected it. So they took a dead misdemeanor and bootstrapped it into effectively trying a federal crime. But the federal crime here under election law was rejected under the Department of Justice,” Turley continued.

Advertisement