Below is my column in the New York Post on the meltdown of Michael Cohen on the stand in the Manhattan trial of former President Donald Trump. In a trial careening out of control, Judge Juan Merchan seemed to be furiously working to just get the matter to the jury as fast as possible. Judge Merchan seems in open denial of the legal farce playing out in his courtroom. He is only the latest person pulled into the vortex of the swirling corruption around Michael Cohen.
Here is the column:
The completion of the testimony of Michael Cohen left the prosecution of Donald Trump, like its star witness, in tatters.
In the final day of cross-examination, Cohen admitted to committing larceny in stealing tens of thousands of dollars from his client.
Even more notably, he admitted to the larceny on the stand — after the statute of limitations had passed. There will be no dead felony zapped back into life against Cohen, as it was for Trump.
Cohen clearly has found a home for his unique skill as a convicted, disbarred serial perjurer.
It was not the first time that prosecutors looked the other way as Cohen admitted to major criminal conduct: In a prior hearing, Cohen admitted under oath that he lied in a previous case where he pleaded guilty to lying.
If that is a bit confusing, it was just another day in the life of Michael Cohen, who appears only willing to tell the truth if he has no other alternative.
The result is truly otherworldly. You have a disbarred lawyer not only casually discussing lies and uncharged crimes, but prosecutors who proceeded to get him to remind the jury that he is not facing any further criminal charges.
If any one of those jurors had stolen tens of thousands of dollars, they would be given a fast trip to the hoosegow.
Yet Cohen then matter-of-factly said he plans to run for Congress due to his “name recognition” — the ultimate proof that it does not matter whether you are famous or infamous, so long as they spell your name right.
As a legislator, Cohen would have the unique ability to say he will not be corrupted by Congress — because he came to Congress corrupted.
While most members wait to take office to commit felonies, Rep. Cohen would show up with a self-affirming criminal record.
He could then take one of the few oaths that he has not previously violated as the Honorable Rep. Michael Cohen.
At the end of the day, Cohen is the ultimate shining object for prosecutors to use as a distraction from the glaring omissions in their case.
Prior witnesses testified that Trump’s payments to Cohen were designated as “legal expenses” not by Trump but by his accounting staff.
Moreover, Cohen admitted that he worked for Trump for years in his murky capacity as a fixer. References to payments as a retainer were approved by Allen Weisselberg, a retired executive with the Trump Organization.
The “legal expense” label was a natural characterization for a lawyer who was paid monthly and was on-call as Trump’s personal counsel.
In any other district, this case would never have been allowed in trial. It certainly now should be facing a directed verdict by the court.
Indeed, with any other defendant, a New York jury would be giving a Bronx cheer in derision.
Even CNN hosts and experts have admitted that this case would never have been brought against another defendant or in another district.
That is what Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is counting on.
The biggest problem facing the defense is not the evidence, but the judge: Judge Juan Merchan seems to be channeling George Patton’s warning, “May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won’t.”
Merchan has not given any indication that he is seriously considering a directed verdict, which he should clearly grant before this goes to the jury.
Merchan’s rulings have largely favored the prosecution, including some rulings that left some of us mystified.
Judge Merchan continues to allow the jury to hear references to campaign-finance violations that do not exist.
After gutting any use of a legal expert to testify on the absence of any such violations, the judge allowed the jury to hear Michael Cohen state that the payments to Stormy Daniels were clearly campaign violations.
All that Merchan would offer is a weak instruction telling jurors not to take such statements as proof of a violation.
The alleged campaign-finance violations allowed Cohen to try to implicate Trump. However, it is doubtful that Trump could have been convicted on such a charge in any other venue.
It is precisely what the Justice Department tried and failed to do with John Edwards, a Democratic candidate.
After that unmitigated failure, the Justice Department dropped this theory of hush money as a campaign contribution.
Indeed, after reviewing the Trump payments, not only did the Justice Department decline any charges but the Federal Election Commission did not even seek a civil fine.
On Monday, Judge Merchan’s orders became even more inexplicable when Cohen’s former attorney Robert Costello took the stand.
Merchan immediately started to sustain a flurry of prosecutors’ objections as Costello basically accused Cohen of multiple acts of perjury.
At one point, Costello — one of the most experienced lawyers in New York and a former prosecutor — exclaimed that one of the judge’s rulings was “ridiculous.”
The judge chastised Costello and even challenged him: “Are you staring me down?”
In fact, it was hard not to stare. What is happening in the courtroom of Judge Juan Merchan is anything but ordinary.
Jonathan Turley is an attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.
September 2023 – “I look forward to testifying. At trial, I’ll testify,” Trump insisted to radio host Hugh Hewitt on Wednesday.
So?
I wouldn’t be surprised if the jury voted to convict the judge.
Nothing seems off the table in this bizarre performance. Are we sure it isn’t a revived Stooges or Marx Brothers play on Broadway?
Maybe Biden will show up as Charley McCarthy in the next act. But the curtain is down on the American judicial system in New York and DC.
Professor Dershowitz attended the trial for a day and later remarked:
“This judge has committed more reversible errors in the one day I was in the courtroom than I’ve seen in years and years of practicing law.”
I imagine a lot of lawyers are thinking that.
Some may also be wondering what glittering rewards may have been tendered that would induce these judges and prosecutors to destroy their reputations forever on the national stage.
Instead of renting their clown suits for future public events they should just buy them. They will need them for a long while.
Ask his daughter…
Federal judgeship if Biden wins is my guess.
Might have trouble with that one even if the Democrats control the Senate. It doesn’t happen often with Democrats but some goods are too damaged even for them.
Of course Dershowitz is going to say something negative about the judge. He’s a former defense lawyer for Trump and current paid Fox News pundit like Turley. They are expected to be defend Trump by attacking the judge because arguing on the merits is harder.
Dershowits as well as Turley know all too well you don’t break court decorum and act contemptuous toward the judge. They know how much power judges have over their court rooms and they have every bit the right to ensure proceedings go according to their rules. It’s the only place Trump has no real control.
Challenge what Dershowitz said. Debat reversable errors.
ad hominem attack. Tool for the wholly ignorant.
Iowan2,
Well said.
Dershowitz and the good professor are just calling out the obvious that we all see, a corrupt, biased judge, a sham trial, no crime committed.
They are calling out the lawfare the Democrat party is committing. They are calling out how far the Democrat party has fallen. He, nor the good professor needs Fox to point it out. They both have written for other news outlets like The Hill, USA Today, Just The News. They would of stated there legal opinions and have, even if they were not getting paid for it.
Only a true moron would believe either of them need a paycheck and are thereby obligated to say what that news outlet wants them to say.
You must be the anti-George.
Mortimer Snerd, not Charley McCarthy.
Edward,
I would choose Denny Dimwit except he had a good soul and Biden surely does not.
Young said: “Maybe Biden will show up as Charley McCarthy in the next act.”
You mean in a performance reprising his entire Presidency, correct? The real question is “Who is playing the part of Edgar Bergen?”
Number 6: “The real question is “Who is playing the part of Edgar Bergen?”
+++
THAT is the question, who or what? Whoever is behind it seems to have no objection to having what essentially is a ventriloquist’s dummy in the White House. Might even be better for them because a stooge who remembered he is President might interfere once in awhile.
Well Jonathan, you get the respect that you earn. Judge Marchan’s pathetic barking at defense witnesses won’t garner any points or respect. His legal “decisions” during this case leave no doubt that he has been bribed by Team Biden. No wonder he felt comfortable letting Stormy Daniels testify. They’re teammates !!!
Professor Turley’s remarks after defense rested:
https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1792917568295952754
Truly also encouraged the Biden impeachment fiasco in the House. How’s that going?
That’s a lie
Listening to Turley, Trump’s lawyers instructed him NOT to testify as the scope of the prosecution was so unlimited and undefined.
It will not matter if they find Trump guilty, this will be thrown out on appeal on a hundred different motions. It will continue to bolster Trump’s numbers and base.
@Traveler,
If found guilty. The judge could put him in jail while Trump goes to appeal.
At the same time… its fodder for the Dims.
As it is… Bragg faces the potential for prosecutorial misconduct and a civil lawsuit from Trump.
The judge seems to be heading down that path, except that the worst that could happen is he gets his wrists slapped.
Unless he’s charged w Election Interference. 18 USC Ch 29: 595 as a start.
Same for Bragg.
At this point… based on what the judge did yesterday… that charge would stick.
If the judge does anything but a directed verdict at this juncture… he could face some hot water. Especially if Trump wins.
A new USAG would have the freedom to go after the judge.
-G
Ian Michael Gumby said: “A new USAG would have the freedom to go after the judge.”
Especially an attack dog type like Ken Paxton, whom Trump may be considering for that role. I’d pay to watch Paxton rip this judge a new one.
If Merchan wanted to put him in jail he could have for contempt with the gag order. Not going to happen.
For months trump told us he would testify and straighten this all up.
TRUMP DID NOT TAKE THE STAND!
Think back to all that trump has said about accused criminals. Here he sits, had his chance to set it all straight and he did not. His witness made an ass of himself and really proved that the trump organization is nothing short of a criminal enterprise.
trump is a coward and deserves the guilty verdict coming next week.
A guilty verdict for not taking the stand. Your world no thanks.
Yea, I know, trumps words are as cheap as dirt but a lot more sickening. So he chose not to testify.
Go watch his third reich post on (un)truthsocial.
“A guilty verdict for not taking the stand.”
Nope, a guilty verdict because of the facts of the case as presented in trial.
Just pointing out that trump said numerous times he would take the stand. Yet here we are, the defense rests with trump not taking the stand. But what do you expect from the man whose words mean nothing.
He would but then he won’t because his lawyers won’t let him.
He gets on the stand, he ends up in a perjury trap.
He stays off, he wins.
Only Cohen or Hunter Biden would take the stand.
-G
Just pointing out that trump said numerous times he would take the stand.
Merchan allowed Daniels, a witness that had nothing to do with the charges. Allowed her to spout off about EVERyTHING.
Merchan allowed Costello to testified, but kept him in an extremely small box.
With President Trump, Merchan stated he would allow the prosecution unlimited range to ask him question, that had zero probative value.
Merchan, ignored his job is to keep the prosecutors on a very short constitutional leash, and honor the defendant as an innocent victim, and protect with all the vigor he can muster the rights of the innocent
Iowan2,
With how much the judge has allowed the persecution to allow testimony that relates to nothing, did everything to hinder Costello’s testimony in favor of the prosecution, the corrupt and biased judge would of allowed the persecution to ask anything not related to the trial if Trump would of took the stand.
Trump and the defense were smart enough not to step in that trap.
^ troll ^
You are pretty dense. Democrat?
I’m not concerned about Donald Trump. If it’s true that his name is the reason he’s being subjected to this sham trial, it’s also true that his name is drawing attention to the flaws within the legal system. The fact that a defendant who has reason to believe that a judge is conflicted or downright prejudiced at the outset has to appeal to that same judge for redress is a flaw in the system. Same thing happened to Derek Chauvin but everybody, including Turley, is still too afraid to state the obvious facts that Derek Chauvin is innocent, was known at the time to be innocent, and was railroaded because everybody was so terrified of mob violence. Chauvin’s requests for a change of venue, mistrial, etc were rejected by his cowardly judge because of cowardice and he still sits in jail awaiting the next shank in his kidneys because of that same cowardice.
It may very well be that the best thing for the American legal system, as well as its many innocent victims starting with the j6ers, would be a sham conviction. It should be noted that Jake Lang is still sitting in jail, over 3 years after his incarceration, with no trial. He’s routinely tortured, thrown in solitary, and retaliated against for his efforts at legal redress, but everybody has something better to talk about, think about, write about, than the nazi-esque abuses happening within our legal system TODAY.
When we break down the machine breaks down and well, I’m just not going to let that happen. America sees through this farce, people understand that if they can do this to Trump, they can do it to them.
Merchan will be arrested and prosecuted.
Hear hear! Lick the spoon! It’s coming unglued for them, Klaus Schwab just stepped aside putting his wife and kids in charge. Shades of Soros, fall of the cabal.
Doubtful.
Its possible that he could be charged under Federal Election Interference and tossed into Jail awaiting trial like the J6ers.
You know in ‘protective custody’ (solitary confinement) since he’s a judge and all…
But realistically, it would be a stretch to go after him… although they might and Trump could sue him for violating his civil rights under the color of the law.
(That would be an interesting case that could end up in front of SCOTUS….)
-G
You mean like Epstein?!
The People’s Court. Dem style.
Merchan has a picture of Roland Freisler on his desk.
quite clear the rule of law in America is DEAD
so why are the Republicans continuing to fund criminal Democrat government?
As it’s being reported live,
“That was a masterclass in effective cross. Not only did Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger use Costello’s own emails against him brilliantly, but she kept calling back to his statement yesterday that an email spoke for itself —making his responses this morning seem less credible.“
Why did the defense choose Costello as a witness? It seems to have backfired spectacularly. The prosecution used his own emails against him and undermined his own statements from yesterday. The defense just rested. It’s very likely judge Merchan will not dismiss the case after Costello’s poor performance as a witness.
so what is the crime?
It’s one of life’s great mysteries…
so can Judges commit crimes?
Trump needs to jail Democrats from across government by the 10,000’s
Correct, that is where this is headed.
ALL leftists within DOJ and the federal judiciary MUST BE fired immediately and ALL prosecuted.
The prosecution is already impeaching Costello with evidence. Coupled with the attitude and contemptuous behavior the jury is not going to look at the defense witness as credible. It’s obvious Costello is not the “highly esteemed and professional” attorney Turley claims he is. Cohen comported himself way, way better than Costello and that is important when you have a jury trial.
“This is the HERO witness BOB COSTELLO at the Trump Trial today. He is Openly and Gloriously showing CONTEMPT for this Lidicrous trial. He said Out loud how RIDICULOUS This whole thing is —Judge Merchan was HUMILIATED and asked to be Alone for a while.” @gregkellyusa
Trump’s incompetent lawyers have made a colossal and fatal error.
The defense position is that the payments made to Cohen were actually legitimate legal fees and not a reimbursement for the payments made by Cohen on behalf of Trump. This is an important distinction. If the payments were reimbursement then Trump would be aware of the details.
Cohen presented monthly invoices for $35k “pursuant to a retainer agreement”. No further detail in the invoices.
Prosecution alleges that the invoices were false, and in reality were an attempt to hide REIMBURSEMENT payments that Trump was aware of. Cohen testifies that this is true. This is the basis for the charges of falsification of business records.
Reminder: Defense position is that invoices were valid and paid in good faith for unspecified legal services pursuant to a retainer agreement. The payments were therefore not reimbursements for payments made on Trump’s behalf to third parties. Therefore no crime committed.
However in his cross examination of Cohen, Blanche made a huge deal of the fact that Cohen pocketed $30,000 of the REIMBURSEMENT that was supposed to go to Red Finch.
Therefore, according to Blanche, Cohen “stole” $30,000 from Trump.
Cohen readily admits that he stole the $30k. No hesitation. No obfuscation. No hemming and hawing.
Here is the problem for the defense. If the payments to Cohen were payments for legal fees, paid in good faith by Trump, then it is not possible to “steal” anything. In his cross-examination Blanche characterized the payments made by Trump to compensate Cohen for his payments to Red Finch as a REIMBURSEMENT. Therefore Blanche has proven the prosecution’s allegations that the payments really were REIMBURSEMENTS and not legitimate legal fees.
Blanche hammered Cohen on this point, thinking he had scored a major hit. Accused Cohen of theft of a REIMBURSEMENT intended for Red Finch. Blanche even used the term REIMBURSEMENT. Cohen freely admitted that he had stolen the REIMBURSEMENT intended for Red Finch.
Blanche did not realize that he had just proven the prosecution case that the payments were intended as REIMBURSEMENTS, and not legal fees. Clearly the prosecution set this as a trap. When confronted, Cohen immediately confessed that he had in fact stolen the money without a moments hesitation. There was no attempt at obfuscation or prevarication. No long pauses or hemming and hawing. Immediate confession. Yes I stole the money.
It was a trap and Blanche walked right into it.
You can’t have it both ways. The payments were either a monthly flat rate fee for legal services, or reimbursements for payments to a third party. You can’t “steal” a flat rate fee, but you can “steal” a reimbursement.
Completely wrong, assumes facts not in evidence.
Which facts are assumed ???
Please point them out to me with specificity
Too many to itemize. Trump knowledge of underlying legal expenses is primary.
FALSE
*** Trump knowledge of underlying legal expenses is primary.***
I have absolutely no idea what that means.
Please clarify.
Now tie it to a federal campaign charge. Otherwise, it doesn’t matter what it was called. It could have been called “New curtains”.
@Anonynous,
Great catch! It crystalizes the rationale for Cohen’s admissions without hesitation. The contrast between Cohen’s behavior and Costello is so large that no jury could miss it.
While Cohen has freely admitted he’s a liar and the prosecution emphasized this early and often it undercut the defense expected arguments about Cohen’s credibility. Cohen never raised his voice or got provoked into an outburst. He remained cool and collected. Costello did the opposite. He almost immediately disrespected the judge and the proceedings. Acted with contempt for the judge and prosecution and was impeached by his own emails by the prosecution. This is not looking good for Trump or for the prospect of a directed verdict.
Glad you agree!!!
We can expect the prosecution closing arguments to hammer this point relentlessly. Their trap was perfectly set and Blanche walked into it.
Poor Judge Merchan!!! He had his feelings hurt by a witness. He is letting one side rule in the courtroom and is giving them all of the favor. He could have halted Ms. Cliffords’ “testimony”, but he was intent on embarrassing Mr. Trump. Same with Cohen’s “testimony”. I am hoping for an acquittal, however, I am bracing for a guilty verdict. And if the verdict come back “guilty”, there will be hell to pay.
Brings courtroom farce to a whole new level. Justice: the PC Woke version.
Who thinks Judge Merchan should be disbarred and convicted of election interference? 🙋♀️