Path: ...!news.nobody.at!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Ubiquitous <weberm@polaris.net>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: CNN Analyst Reveals The Question That Would Have Completely Blown Cohen Testimony
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 04:30:45 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 40
Message-ID: <v2i0o0$ij4u$6@dont-email.me>
Injection-Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 13:32:17 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="e7979cbdbb67d88bb29470742292998c";
	logging-data="609438"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18iKJVfzI11MZugkqYdoAjhZ+ZypdFsgCU="
Summary: https://www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-analyst-reveals-the-four-word-question-that-would-have-completely-blown-cohen-testimony
Keywords: https://www.dailywire.com/news/cnn-analyst-reveals-the-four-word-question-that-would-have-completely-blown-cohen-testimony
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Hq/R7zev0IvxV9kCHTchFFPosfI=
X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.99.12N (x86 32bit)
Bytes: 3173

CNN analyst Elie Honig revealed the approach he would have used to discredit 
the testimony of former President Donald Trump’s ex-attorney Michael Cohen, 
saying that Trump’s attorney had missed an opportunity.

Honig spoke with anchor Jake Tapper about the former president’s ongoing 
Manhattan hush-money trial, explaining that the best way to convince the jury 
that Cohen was unreliable was to point out the number of times in the past 
that he had been caught shading the truth.

Tapper began the conversation by noting that Trump attorney Todd Blanche had 
chosen an interesting line of attack, opening his cross-examination by 
reading off a series of insulting things Cohen had said or posted on social 
media about both Trump and Blanche.

“Do you have an idea why Blanche would start with that?” Tapper asked. 
“Because, I mean, it does kind of make it seem as though Michael Cohen is 
kind of just like a shoot-from-the-hip jerk and not necessarily focused 
entirely on Trump as a motive.”

“Well, I think it was a mistake to open the way that Todd Blanche opened. I 
absolutely never would have done it,” Honig replied. “It was properly 
sustained. First of all, it’s not the point. It’s not the point, does Michael 
Cohen hate Todd Blanche?”

“The point is, Michael Cohen hates and desperately wants the defendant, 
Donald Trump, in prison,” Honig continued. “Let me give you what I would have 
started with. We like to play like armchair prosecutor now that we’re no 
longer actual prosecutors. First question would have been, ‘Mr. Cohen, are 
you a perjurer?’ Okay? If he says ‘Yes,’ great! Folks, he’s a perjurer. He 
says ‘No,’ then you just hit him with the dozens of lies that he’s … He is a 
perjurer. I mean, that’s a fact. So it leaves him — it’s a win-win.”

Honig went on to say that he was “not impressed” with the rest of Blanche’s 
cross-examination either — but the key point was that he should have started 
with a question where any answer would have been a win for him and for Trump.

--
Let's go Brandon!