Democratic Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s case against former President Donald Trump may be heading for the rocks, according to a panel of legal commentators on CNN.
The former president’s ongoing criminal trial has been front, back and center of the national discussion in recent weeks. Several witnesses, including former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker, have testified in the ongoing case. However, testimonies of those witnesses have failed to establish any direct link of wrongdoing against Trump, according to the CNN panel.
Since Donald Trump entered into NDAs in the past, according to David Pecker, there is no way to assume that the money used was a campaign contribution. Just the opposite! NDAs are entered into for family, business, and reputation preservation. pic.twitter.com/PDkJpSBUay
— Jeanine Pirro (@JudgeJeanine) April 24, 2024
“I’ve seen precious little evidence presented yet that Trump wasn’t floating above,” CNN political director David Chalian said. “I mean, I’ve seen very little evidence of Trump’s direct involvement in getting this accomplished. Correct me if I’m wrong.”
CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig agreed with Chalian’s assessment. However, Honig insisted Michael Cohen—Trump’s former lawyer and the prosecution’s star witness— would provide evidence against the former president.
“No, you’re right. A lot of that’s going to come from Michael Cohen,” Honig said. “But also there was a few tidbits in David Pecker’s testimony, right, that there were direct communications, but it’s a great point, David. There hasn’t not been much evidence yet directly of Donald Trump’s involvement and knowledge.”
CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams echoed both men’s sentiments, adding that prosecutors have not proven their case against the former president.
“Prosecutors certainly haven’t proven their entire case, you know, their burden now by any stretch of the imagination,” Williams said. “And in all likelihood, if they’re doing their jobs, future witnesses will help tease a lot of this information out. But something that certainly has not been established thus far, eight or nine days in is, ‘well, what can we say about the involvement of the actual defendant?’”
In April, criminal defense attorney Arthur Aidala told CNN that while there is paperwork in evidence that could hurt Trump’s case, no document links the president directly to the case. Aidala insisted that the lack of those documents would pose a “reasonable doubt in the mind of readers.”
JUST IN: President Trump's lack of signatures on key documents could present a major challenge for DA Alvin Bragg’s "Hush Money" case, says criminal defense attorney Arthur Aidala.
According to Aidala, the absence of Trump’s direct signatures "except for a check" could lead to… pic.twitter.com/duk6HfsYI7
— Hank (@HANKonX) April 22, 2024
“Look, there is paperwork that corroborates the people’s evidence, and that’s obviously hurtful for the president,” Aidala said. “But my understanding is it’s not paperwork with Donald Trump’s handwriting on it or his signature on it, except for a check. So the defense could merely be, hey, Michael Cohen did all of this. He never told his client. He just said, look, I need money for this, I need money for that. And you know, one of the witnesses who is going to testify at this trial testified for the feds and he said that the money that was given to Michael Cohen was for Stormy Daniels and for legal fees. That’s a reasonable doubt.”
