Legal scholar Professor Jonathan Turley has warned the Democrats that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s “hush money” case against President Donald Trump now looks doomed.
Turley wrote in a New York Post op-ed that “this may be the week Alvin Bragg’s case against Trump falls apart.”
The George Washington University Law School professor said the prosecution’s evidence has been without substance so far.
Turley notes that that Bragg appears to be basing his whole case on the testimony of Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen, an admitted liar and convicted perjurer.
According to Turley, Bragg’s only hope of convicting Trump now rests on convincing the jury in deep-blue New York City.
“The calculus of Alvin Bragg is now obvious,” Turley wrote.
“He is counting on the jury convicting Trump regardless of the evidence.”
Turley pointed out that most people are still confused about what the crime in the case is.
“After three weeks of testimony, there is still confusion on what crime Trump allegedly committed,” he said.
He faulted the judge in the case for failing to protect Trump’s rights during the trial:
“Judge Juan Merchan, in my view, has failed repeatedly to protect the rights of the accused in this case.”
In Turley’s estimation, the prosecution’s witnesses have helped Trump more than hurt him in many cases.
Prosecutors decided to put three females who worked for Trump on the stand.
However, as Slay News reported, all three praised him and said he was good to work for.
Another witness, former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, also testified for the prosecution.
Yet, Pecker testified that Trump told him he didn’t even know about the payments by Cohen to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal.
Turley thinks Merchan is trying to stack the deck against Trump by creating conditions that would keep him from testifying on his own behalf.
He has said he will allow broad latitude for Trump to be cross-examined if he does testify.
Turley said it would be foolish for Trump to testify under these conditions.
“No competent lawyer would advise him to do so after Merchan’s rulings,” Turley said.
“That is exactly where Bragg wants to be: with a ‘he said,’ not a ‘he said, he said’ case.
“With Trump effectively silenced, Bragg will argue that Cohen’s testimony is enough to get to the jury.”
Despite the flaws in the case, Turley still thinks a jury might convict Trump.
However, Turley notes that Merchan’s unfairness would be to blame if that happened.
“Given the blind rage of many New Yorkers at Trump, the testimony of a convicted, disbarred, serial perjurer may be enough,” he said.
