Donald Trump's criminal
trial could be wrapping up
as soon as next week.
The former president
leaving court Thursday on a confident
note as his defense attorneys
cross-examine Trump's
former fixer, Michael Cohen.
Under questioning,
Cohen appeared to contradict himself
on the topic of a phone
call with his former boss
potentially raising doubts
over his testimony altogether.
Former Trump attorney
Tim Parlato is joining us now.
He's also a CNN legal commentator.
Tim, nice to see you.
I'm curious what you think.
Would the outcome
of this trial hinge on Cohen
and that phone call,
or is that kind of
blowing it out of proportion?
No, I think it really does
come down to that.
You know,
when you look at the evidence
in this case,
they have a lot of corroboration
for a lot of the story.
But the problem is that all the things
that they have corroboration for
are not the actual elements of the crime.
It's all the background,
all the hush money
and, you know, catch
and kill things like that.
The evidence that they need
to actually tie Donald Trump
personally to the false business records
is Michael Cohen and him
coming in to testify
about conversations like this one.
And so to the extent
that you have text messages that you can
then use to cross-examine them
and show
that phone calls
he claimed were about
this were actually about something else
that does undercut
really the only connection
that they can make between him
and the false business record entries.
So I think it can
certainly have a big impact,
particularly, don't forget,
there are two lawyers on this jury.
And so I think that the two of them
can have
significant sway in kind of cutting
through all the noise
and getting down to that element.
And the prosecutors
are likely going
to try and firm up
Cohen's credibility next week
before this all comes to a close.
How do you foresee them going about that?
You know,
a lot of it is going to depend
on, you know, what what they can do.
You know, as
far as the actual facts
of their phone call,
you know,
they'll try and,
you know, go to him and say, you know,
do you think that you actually talked
about this as well?
You know, they'll try and make it,
you know, where he packs
both conversations into that 90 seconds.
I think that they'll probably try
to focus on all of the other things
that they do have corroboration for
and try and shore up some of that thing.
You know, that part of it to,
you know,
see if they can make the jury believe
that, you know,
this phone call really
was what he said it was.
And given that it's a difficult.
Yeah, it's a difficult process, no doubt.
Mm hmm.
And given that we could hear
closing arguments next week,
if you're Trump's attorneys,
what is that last message
you want the jury walking away with?
What do you want to emphasize?
Really, it is that credibility piece,
you know,
that they have not been able
to corroborate
his connection to the business records
and you know, what
I always try to think about on
closing arguments
is you have a complex case
with a lot of different moving parts
to the extent
that you can kind of figure out,
you know, separate, you know,
what is in dispute
from what's not in dispute
and, you know, set all this stuff aside
and basically focus
on the one key element
that really the case rises and falls on.
I think that that
if they keep laser
focused on that and use this phone call
to really
focus the jury,
I think that that's
where they're going
to have the most success.
And the former president had complained
he wasn't getting he felt enough
support in the courtroom.
So this week,
we did see several
Republican members of Congress
showing up and others.
But the speaker of the House was there.
There are obviously
politics involved here.
But what do you think
their appearance in that courtroom,
what kind of impact, if any,
do you think it has on the jury?
You know,
I always tell
clients that when it comes
to a criminal trial,
there are only 12 opinions that matter
and yours is not one of them.
And so
what impact
is that going to have
on the 12 people in the box?
And I do.
I am concerned that by parading these,
you know, figures in and out,
that they would have
a negative impact on the jury.
I know that there was an incident
where a couple of members of Congress
came in,
know not during a break
and they were somewhat disruptive
and the judge was,
you know, looking angrily down.
That's the kind of thing
that jurors notice.
So, you know,
it's not something
that I would be encouraging.
But you know, whether the jury
actually takes something from that
or if they just kind of set it aside.
Jurors are friendly things.
They get to decide.
That's the bottom line. Right?
Former Trump attorney Tim Predatory,
thanks so much. We appreciate it.
Thank you.