Trump Lawyer Argues That Case Has Not Been Proven

0:00

Former President Trump’s legal spokeswoman Alina Habba provides an update in the NY v. Trump trial after Michael Cohen cross-examination on ‘Hannity.’

Fox News
Fox News
A 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news.

Latest stories

Ad

Related Articles

41 Comments

  1. Absolutely shocking that Fox would lie! The fact that they decided not to call the last two witnesses mean they feel pretty strong. They backed up Cohen’s testimony with documentation and collaborated it with other witnesses. If the case is a sham, why did the former president delay exposing it until now? Why has he sought to delay (apparently successfully) the other three cases? Notice that he doesn’t claim innocence, but rather that he’s ALLOWED to do whatever he wants. Seems an innocent person would want to clear their name so they could get on with campaigning…

  2. Trump cult logic is flawless. Supposedly, there could only ever be ONE way to prove Trump commanded Cohen to pay Stormy. Proof would need to be in a notarized letter from Trump to Cohen. According to dumpster fire worshipers, it would read as follows:

    Dear Michael Dean Cohen,

    I (Donald John Trump) do hereby swear that I am commanding you to pay Stephanie Gregory Clifford to hide from the public any knowledge of how little I can control my Pecker.

    I give you this command in full knowledge that I will pay you back later, and I will call the repayments "legal expenses." That should trick my idiot fans into making me a candidate in the 2016 presidential election. Without this brute stupid deception, it would be impossible for me to be a candidate. So nice you are willing to do this for me. Signed in blood on a hot day in August of 2015, by a man called "me."

    In the really real world? The jurors are not blind. Cohen would never have paid Stormy unless he was directed to do so by Trump BEFORE the 2016 election. Evidence and testimonies which corroborate this are also available, but the simple fact remains. People can see that Cohen would not have acted without being directed. Pretending otherwise is a lame attempt to evade truth.

  3. Hannity will eventually go the same way as tucker. How hard is it to actually report the facts. Trumps attorneys selected the jury. If they have a problem with the jury they can only blame themselves. Typical propaganda tactics, spread doubt and accusations and maybe something will stick.

  4. Ivanka used to get mad at her daddy for cheating on her when she was 12.
    She would wake up to find daddy had left her bed and was in bed with her friends.❀❀❀

  5. The prosecution just rested their case in NY. They had other witnesses planned but felt Cohen's testimony was stronger than they expected. That means Tr*mp is toast. Sorry MAGAs. Sorry Alina. Sorry Sean.

  6. Hannity is right about this trial not being fair. Trump broke his gag order 9 times and has gotten away with it. If I or you violated a gag order we would have been warned the 1st time. Fined the second time and incarcerated the third time. This is not fair at all.

  7. Instead of giving his employees a raise, Elon Musk is spending 100s of million on advertising to promote his "good" image to his investors!! Is he the worst boos or not??

  8. Trump is guilty of secure borders, low inflation, robust economy, peace abroad and had all these Terrorists on the globe by the Balls! 4 more years. Trump 2024 MAGAπŸ‡ΊπŸ‡²

  9. If there was no case, why did trump need to hide the reimbursed payments to Cohen? Why did he sign the checks (from the WH even). He talks about why they didn't pursue the case almost eight years ago. Well, that is clear as mud. He was President for 4 of those years and as of Jan 21 he was already on the campaign trail for the next election even though he didn't announce his candidacy until later so using election interference as an excuse is just beyond belief. Foxnews spreading propaganda again. And more importantly why was habba blabberer relegated to spokesperson instead of trial attorney?

  10. If you are going to indict a president, you need to have a serious and clear crime with solid evidence. Bragg and Colangelo should be facing serious legal repercussions for this.

Leave a reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here
Captcha verification failed!
CAPTCHA user score failed. Please contact us!

Ad
Continue on app