newYou can now listen to Fox News articles.
In a spectacular miscalculation that backfired, prosecutors in Donald Trump’s Manhattan hush money trial called Hope Hicks to the stand. The moment cross-examination began, their false case against the former president began to fall apart.
Hicks, who served as press secretary during the 2016 presidential campaign, said Trump’s motivation for suppressing salacious reporting was to protect his wife, Melania. “Of course…I don’t think he wanted anyone in his family to be hurt or embarrassed during the campaign. He wanted his family to be proud of him. ”
FILE — Hope Hicks attends a Cabinet meeting with President Trump in the East Room of the White House on May 19, 2020 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images) (Getty Images)
Hicks’ statement alleges that District Attorney Alvin Bragg paid porn actress Stormy Daniels for her silence in order to benefit his campaign, thereby influencing the election through “illegal means.” This discards the main allegation against Trump that he is. On the contrary, it clearly supports the federal investigation’s findings that Daniels did not commit a crime or violate campaign finance laws because her non-disclosure agreement, which she signed, had a different purpose.
Hope Hicks: Cohen calls himself “Mr.” “Fix it” only because he “broke it”
Hicks, like previous prosecution witnesses, disparaged Bragg’s planned star witness, Michael Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer. “He liked to call himself ‘Mr. Fix-It,’ but only because he was the first to break it.” Oh! But that snide remark is tame compared to other derisive comments directed at the insufferable Cohen, a jailed and convicted liar.
It was reckless for Mr. Bragg’s lawyers to call Mr. Hicks. An amateur level mistake. Her testimony was redundant and unnecessary. But on the theory that she is no loser, prosecutors appear determined to have her tell her jury what they already know.
If the polling data is correct, Americans are angry about this spectacle. They are outraged to see leading presidential candidates removed from the campaign trail by partisan opponents and held up in court.
Mr. Hicks acknowledged that Mr. Trump was aware that Mr. Cohen paid Mr. Daniels to end what he described as coercive and threatening demands. As the election approached, Ms. Daniels accelerated her greedy scheme to profit from Mr. Trump, threatening to go public with allegations of an affair, which Mr. Trump denied. Not coincidentally, she abandoned what she called a secret meeting. And then, in a maneuver that made her dizzy, she retracted her denial.
As the election approached, Stormy Daniels accelerated her greedy scheme to benefit from President Trump by threatening to go public with allegations of extramarital affairs, which Trump denies. (Philip Farawan/Getty Images)
NY VS. Trump: Da Bragg’s web of deception begins to unravel
The payment to Daniels, regardless of its intent, turned out to be a waste of money. Although the National Enquirer did not publish her article, Ms. Hicks testified that other news outlets did so before her election. In the end, it didn’t seem to matter much to voters who were more interested in policy ideas than personal issues. Hillary Clinton’s unimpressive performance was also a factor.
It’s worth repeating that the jury has already I know All about the Daniels trade. Since the trial began, the matter has been the subject of endless debate by other witnesses. This makes Hicks’ testimony unnecessary and proves nothing. Of course, Trump knew about the payments. He doesn’t dispute it. He said he was following the advice of the lawyer who handled everything. so what?
The payments made were not illegal. Non-disclosure agreements in exchange for silence are not illegal. Deleting negative articles is not against the law. What’s more, it’s not a crime for Trump to know that it’s not a crime. That would be a meaningless syllogism.
So, what exactly is the crime? To quote a memorable line from Shakespeare in Love: “I don’t understand…it’s a mystery!”
NY vs. Trump: A trial exploring fictitious crimes
But there is no mystery behind Alvin Bragg’s politically-driven prosecution of Trump. Prosecutors came up with an overdue misdemeanor out of thin air, threw it into a Cuisinart, threw in some garbage state law that doesn’t apply to federal elections, hit the “puree” button, and poured out absurd fabrications. felony.
The only crime here is Bragg’s grotesque abuse of the law.
Legal arguments between two lawyers who have entered into a legal contract on behalf of their respective clients are a daily occurrence for lawyers. That’s why it was recorded as a “legal expense” in President Trump’s personal business records. Nothing was tampered with, as Mr. Bragg alleges in his indictment. But the DA’s office wants to put Trump behind bars for following his lawyers’ legal advice.
Bragg must have skipped a law school class when “The Theory of Impossibility” was being taught. He cannot choose empty pockets.Also, elections cannot be illegally influenced. rear election. In his complaint, Mr. Bragg alleges that Mr. Trump falsified his business records in 2017. However, the presidential election that occurred in 2016 made it impossible for him to even complete the intended crime he was accused of.
For more FOX News opinions, click here
This is just one of the many fallacies embedded in Bragg’s frivolous case. The facts and evidence alleged do not constitute a crime. On this basis, an objective or neutral judge would have long ago granted the defense’s motion to dismiss the case. Unfortunately, Juan Melchan is on the bench. It’s as if he has shed his black robe and taken on the role of willing accomplice to Bragg’s false accusations.
With Hicks on the stand, prosecutors mulled over the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape. Just to be clear, it has nothing to do with the incident except to smear Trump with irrelevant and biased information. Marchan’s decision to admit this as admissible evidence is an irreversible error, just as it was proven in Harvey Weinstein’s recently dismissed sex crime conviction.
Mr. Bragg should turn himself in to the authorities for impersonating an honest lawyer. To fulfill its campaign promise to nail President Trump, the prosecutor’s office manipulated the law, fabricated evidence, and fabricated wrongful convictions. He targeted Trump in a textbook case of selective prosecution. This is an affront to the principles of fairness and equal justice.
If the polling data is correct, Americans are angry about this spectacle. They are outraged to see leading presidential candidates removed from the campaign trail by partisan opponents and held up in court. Mr. Bragg’s anemic legal case only emphasizes the injustice.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
There is definitely a boomerang effect here. Voters see this exactly as it is. It is a pathetically weak lawsuit designed to damage President Trump politically in order to improve President Joe Biden’s re-election chances.
Let’s hope the jury understands that too.
Click here to read more about Greg Jarrett
