Trump makes EPIC miscalculation with jury at NY trial
Summary
TLDRIn this episode of 'The Legal Breakdown,' the hosts discuss the strategic missteps made by Donald Trump during his criminal trial in Manhattan. Trump's insistence on micromanaging his legal team, particularly his lead attorney Todd Blanch, is highlighted as a significant issue. The hosts argue that Trump's directive to aggressively challenge the credibility of witnesses like Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougall, despite their compelling testimonies, may alienate the jury. They also touch upon the potential impact of Trump's refusal to admit any wrongdoing, even when it could be a tactical advantage in court. The summary suggests that Trump's approach may ultimately undermine his case, as the jury may view his denials as dishonesty, and his aggressive tactics as disrespectful to the judicial process.
Takeaways
- 📚 Trump's insistence on controlling his defense strategy may be undermining his attorneys' ability to present the best possible case.
- 🚫 Traditionally, defense attorneys make tactical decisions in a trial, while the client decides on pleas and potential testimony.
- 🔥 Trump is reportedly unhappy with his lead lawyer, Todd Blanche, for not being aggressive enough and not following Trump's instructions.
- 🤔 The New York Times reports suggest that Trump's micromanagement could negatively impact the jury's perception of his case.
- 🚷 Trump's alleged instruction to his lawyers to aggressively challenge the credibility of Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels could backfire in court.
- 💬 The public already has a preconceived notion of Trump's character, which may influence how the jury perceives his honesty and integrity.
- 🧐 Despite the public opinion, jurors are expected to set aside biases and presume Trump's innocence unless proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
- 🚨 Attacking witnesses and jurors, as Trump is said to instruct, could be a significant strategic error and harm his case.
- 🤝 Blanche's reluctance or inability to stand up to Trump and make independent tactical decisions is seen as a failure to fulfill his duty as a defense attorney.
- 📉 Once the jury's trust is lost, it is extremely difficult to regain, which could be detrimental to Trump's case if his lawyers continue their current approach.
- 🔍 The trial coverage by Glenn and Brian will continue on a daily basis, inviting viewers to subscribe for updates on the legal proceedings.
Q & A
What is the main issue with Trump's approach to his criminal prosecution as discussed in the transcript?
-The main issue is that Trump is trying to micromanage his attorneys and is not allowing them to make tactical choices, which is crucial for an effective defense. This includes decisions about which witnesses to call and how to cross-examine prosecution witnesses.
Why is it a problem for Trump to insist on his lawyers being more aggressive, as reported by the New York Times?
-It's a problem because it undermines the lawyers' ability to make strategic decisions that are in the best interest of the defense. Aggressiveness is not always the best strategy and can potentially alienate the jury.
What does the transcript imply about the role of a defense attorney in a criminal case?
-The defense attorney is responsible for making tactical choices about how to defend a case, including which witnesses to call and how to cross-examine prosecution witnesses. The client typically makes decisions on pleading and testifying, but the attorney should have free rein to make tactical choices.
Why is Trump's insistence on attacking Karen McDougall and Stormy Daniels potentially harmful to his case?
-Attacking these women could alienate the jury, as it may seem like Trump is denying obvious relationships and facts. This could make the jury view him as dishonest and untrustworthy, which could negatively impact their perception of his credibility.
What is the significance of the statement 'once you lose the jury, there's no getting them back'?
-It implies that the jury's perception of the defendant and their case is crucial and once it is damaged, it is very difficult to regain their trust and favor. This is particularly important in a criminal trial where the jury's opinion can directly influence the outcome.
What is the transcript's stance on whether Trump should admit to relationships with Karen McDougall and Stormy Daniels?
-The transcript suggests that Trump should admit to these relationships as they are not directly related to the charges of falsifying business records. It argues that such an admission could be a tactical advantage in the trial, as it would not undermine his innocence regarding the charges.
Why does the transcript suggest that Trump is not interested in pleasing the jurors?
-It suggests that Trump is more interested in maintaining his image and narrative for his base, which involves not admitting to any wrongdoing. Pleasing the jurors might require him to admit to certain relationships or actions that he has previously denied, which could risk his credibility with his supporters.
What does the transcript imply about the role of a lawyer representing a difficult client like Trump?
-The transcript implies that a lawyer should stand up to the client if the client's demands undermine the chances of winning the case. The lawyer's role is to represent the client zealously, not to appease them, even if it means going against their wishes for the sake of a stronger defense.
What is the potential downfall of Trump's strategy as outlined in the transcript?
-The downfall is that by refusing to admit to obvious relationships and facts, Trump is damaging his credibility. This strategy could backfire as it may lead the jury to view him as dishonest, which could negatively impact their perception of his case.
What does the transcript suggest about the jurors' perception of Trump before the trial begins?
-The transcript suggests that while some jurors may have preconceived notions about Trump based on his public persona, they are expected to set aside these biases and decide the case based solely on the evidence presented during the trial.
What is the transcript's view on the importance of credibility in a criminal trial?
-The transcript emphasizes the importance of credibility, stating that once lost, it is very difficult to regain the jury's trust. It suggests that Trump's refusal to admit to certain relationships and facts is damaging his credibility and could negatively impact the outcome of the trial.
Outlines
🤔 Trump's Self-Sabotage in Court
The first paragraph discusses how Donald Trump's interference with his attorneys' strategy could negatively impact his criminal prosecution in Manhattan. Trump is attempting to micromanage his legal team, which may prevent them from mounting the best defense. The paragraph highlights that typically, defense attorneys make tactical decisions, not the client, and that Trump's insistence on being aggressive and denying any relationship with Stormy Daniels or Karen McDougall could alienate the jury. It also mentions a New York Times article about Trump's dissatisfaction with his lead lawyer, Todd Blanch, and the potential repercussions of attacking witnesses and judges.
🚫 Trump's Unwavering Denial Strategy
The second paragraph focuses on Trump's continued denial of relationships with certain women and how this could be detrimental to his case. It suggests that Trump's refusal to admit any wrongdoing, even when it might be tactically beneficial, is a strategic mistake. The paragraph also explores the idea that Trump might be priming his base to believe the trial is rigged, thereby maintaining his image as a victim among his supporters. It discusses the difficulty of regaining the jury's trust once lost and the importance of a defense attorney standing up to a client when necessary.
📛 The Impact of Trump's Public Image
The third paragraph examines the potential influence of Trump's public image on the jury's perception. It acknowledges that many people may already have a negative view of Trump but emphasizes the jurors' duty to set aside biases and focus on the evidence presented during the trial. The paragraph also discusses the corroboration of Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougall's claims and the potential harm to Trump's credibility if his attorneys continue to deny the obvious on his behalf. It concludes with a reminder for viewers to subscribe for ongoing coverage of the trial.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Micromanage
💡Defense Attorneys
💡Tactical Choices
💡Jury
💡Scorched Earth
💡Credibility
💡Admit Wrongdoing
💡Base
💡Concede
💡Falsification of Business Records
💡Zealous Representation
Highlights
Donald Trump is reportedly forcing his attorneys to turn the jury against him by micromanaging and undermining their defense strategy.
Trump's insistence on his lawyers being more aggressive with witnesses is causing a rift and potentially damaging his case.
Ordinarily, defense attorneys make tactical choices, but Trump is allegedly interfering with these decisions.
The New York Times reports that Trump is displeased with his lead lawyer, Todd Blanch, for not following his instructions.
Trump's alleged direction to his lawyers to aggressively discredit Karen McDougal could backfire and alienate the jury.
The belief that admitting to relationships with certain women could help Trump's case tactically, but he refuses to concede for fear of losing credibility with his base.
Prosecutors often present the weaker parts of their case upfront to avoid surprises; Trump's denials could make this more challenging.
Todd Blanch's reluctance to defy Trump may be due to the difficulty of managing a powerful client and the potential career implications.
Once the jury is lost, it is nearly impossible to regain their trust, highlighting the importance of early case management.
Jurors are expected to set aside preconceived notions and decide the case based solely on the evidence presented during the trial.
Despite any preconceived opinions about Trump, the jury is instructed to presume his innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
The challenge for Trump's legal team is to manage his desire to fight aggressively while maintaining a strategic and credible defense.
The credibility of witnesses like Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, and the corroboration of their claims, could weigh heavily on the jury's perception.
Attacking the witnesses may not only fail to discredit them but also harm the defense's standing with the jury.
Trump's unwillingness to admit to obvious relationships could be seen as a tactical error that undermines his credibility.
The hosts, Brian Tyler Cohen and Glenn Kersner, provide daily comprehensive coverage of Trump's criminal prosecution.
Viewers are encouraged to subscribe to both hosts' channels for ongoing trial analysis and updates.
Transcripts
you're watching the legal breakdown so
Trump is forcing his attorneys to turn
the jury against him in a major misstep
by the guy but first uh for those
watching right now just a reminder that
Glenn and I are going to be doing daily
comprehensive coverage of the entirety
of Trump's first criminal prosecution in
Manhattan so for those watching if you
want to follow along please make sure to
subscribe to both of our channels okay
Glenn talk about what Trump is doing
that is screwing himself over with the
jury you know Trump is not only trying
to micromanage his own lawyers he is
depriving them of putting on his best
defense Donald Trump in a word is
screwing himself there was a great
headline just uh that popped up in the
New York Times and it reads Trump
venting about his lawyer in his criminal
trial seeks more aggression why is this
important because ordinarily defense
attorneys are the ones who get to make
the Tactical choices about how to defend
a case what witnesses to call more
importantly what Witnesses to decline to
call how to cross-examine the
prosecution witnesses people might not
realize Brian those are not decisions up
to the client those are decisions up to
the lawyer the client gets to make
decisions like whether he wants to plead
guilty or not guilty whether he wants to
accept the plea offer whether he wants
to testify in his own defense or not um
but otherwise the attorneys are supposed
to have free reign to make the Tactical
choices about how to try a case with
input from the the client but Donald
Trump behind the scenes there's some
great reporting by the New York Times
has been sort of endlessly complaining
about how his lead lawyer Todd blanch is
not following his instructions and is
not being aggressive with with the
witnesses and Donald Trump is reportedly
Furious and there is one way in
particular that I can see this is really
gonna come back to haunt Donald Trump um
Donald Trump has never admitted that he
had any relationship or any sexual
encounter with stormmy Daniels or with
Karen McDougall Brian I don't know about
you but when I watched the Anderson
Cooper interview of Karen McDougall she
was pretty darn compelling credible
convincing she you know was pouring her
heart out about how she was in a
10-month relationship with Donald Trump
she talked about where they traveled and
how they exchanged gifts she talked
about how she was in love with him and
he said he was in love with her Donald
Trump it looks like is instructing his
lawyers to go hard after her call her a
liar you know and what that will end up
doing is really alienating Donald Trump
and his legal team in the eyes of the
jury because you know I I think the
prevailing wisdom is he had a
relationship with Karen McDougall he had
an encounter with Stormy Daniels and
given that the def given that Trump is
causing his attorneys to pit him against
those two women and and essentially
instructing his lawyers to go scorched
Earth after them that is going to
backfire that is going to uh make the
jury look at Donald Trump and think you
know you can't even admit to
relationships that are pretty darn
obvious there was a famous lawyer who
used to say in similar circumstances
when he was representing clients who did
wrong and it was in their tactical
interest at trial to admit they did
wrong he would say you know what ladies
and gentlemen my client may have
violated the good book but he didn't
violate the law book but Donald Trump is
refusing to let his attorneys concede
anything that is a tactical blunder
Glenn in in our previous episodes we've
spoken about how prosecutors in their
opening statements will you called it
draw the sting so basically they they
show the weak parts of their case right
up front so that they don't get hit with
it later on why would Donald Trump keep
this as something that's going to be a
burden on him and his case why wouldn't
he just front this thing for himself and
then kind of allow this to just
especially given that we already I mean
this is an obvious point so so why why
undermine his own credibility by denying
what's obvious right off the bat you
know I think for a couple of reasons one
Donald Trump is all bad tactical choices
all day long you know he may be able to
fool his his uh Gull able supporters but
he is not going to be able to fool a
jury he's not going to be able to fool a
judge once you know this case is in a
court of law which is where it now is
and Donald Trump's Mantra is concede
nothing admit nothing where's my Roy con
I need somebody to fight and go hard and
be nasty and go scorched Earth after
everybody regardless of how it might
alienate the jur Donald Trump is not
interested in pleasing the jurors in
fact there's a really telling passage in
this New York Times article where Donald
Trump behind the scenes is telling his
you know his loyalists I it's not only
that Todd blanch is not being aggressive
enough and it's not only that he's not
following my instructions about how to
try this case but he's not attacking the
witnesses he's not attacking the jurors
and he's not attacking the judges you
know what talk about a bad decision if
you attack the jurors who are going to
decide your case if you attack the judge
who is going to sentence you once you're
convicted again Donald Trump is nothing
but bad tactical choices but he will
never admit anything that in part will
end up being his downfall in this trial
well it seems like he's kind of already
conceded defeat as far as the trial's
concern so at this point is he just
trying to Prime his base into believing
that the whole thing was rigged and so
and so he's just trying to color the
entire trial as being you know against
him whether it's judge jury uh defense
whatever it was yeah I think that's a
great point because just as he has never
admitted he had relationships with with
these women um I think he must you know
I don't want to look inside Donald
Trump's mind um but but I think if he
were to now say okay it's in my tactical
interest to admit these relationships
because remember these relationships
have nothing to do with whether business
records were falsified these women have
nothing to do with the falsification of
business records so Donald Trump could
easily say okay I did have a
relationship with them but I'm not
guilty of the of the charged crimes but
I think Donald Trump's calculation is
that even if it was the right tactical
choice to make in his trial he will
never say you know what I told a bunch
of Lies when I said I was never in a
relationship with Karen MC gole and I
never had anything to do with stormmy
Daniels because then he can no longer be
the victim he can no longer convince his
supporters to keep sending him more
money more money more money because now
he's admitting that he's a liar and a
wrongdoer even if all of that would help
him perhaps win a criminal trial right
the only option for him in his eyes
right now is to just keep the con going
and so he he's already told one lie and
so now he just has to keep these lies
going because as soon as he concedes
that he lied at some point then he feels
like his credibility is going to be shot
but what he doesn't realize is that by
virtue of lying about something that
everybody can see is obvious like the
fact that you had an affair with Stormy
Daniels and kman dugall in the first
place you are hurting your own
credibility by digging your heels in on
something that we can all see is false
you're basically saying the sky like you
know the the the sky isn't blue the sky
isn't blue and everybody all you have to
do is look up to see that it is but he's
just you know convincing himself that
it's not and hoping that by virtue of
sheer repetition or power of
manifestation that he's going to
convince these people of something that
they can see is not real all he has left
is his ever dwindling base and the money
they are willing to send him and if he
gives up the con and he loses them he's
got nothing left so maybe this is the
only play that Donald Trump thinks he
still has Glenn is there a world in
which Todd blanch can defy Trump or is
he going to have to basically just try
this case poorly on purpose because he's
at the mercy of his client yeah I think
it exposes the weakness of the lawyers
that Donald Trump chooses and the
lawyers who are willing to represent him
what Todd blanch should do is say uh
yeah Mr former president Mr defendant I
make the Tactical decisions I am going
to defend you so that you have a
Fighting Chance at perhaps winning an
aquid or or a hung jury but Todd blanch
is not up to that task it looks like he
is cow to to you know a um a a really
difficult client a difficult client to
manage and he is not trying a a smart
Savvy tactical case that is I think an
abdication of the responsibility a
defense attorney has to zealously
represent his client it's not to appease
the client if the client wants you to
take a position that you know will
undermine and undercut your clients
chances of winning you stand up to your
client you represent him zealously you
do the right thing and you let the chips
fall Glen once you lose the jury how
hard is it to get them back there's no
getting a jury back once you lose them
you know once the defense attorneys
start attacking Karen McDougall and
Stormy Daniels when I think people will
be able to assess that they're telling
the truth not only because I I think
they're going to come across as credible
Witnesses sort of in and of themselves
but we've already heard some of the
corroboration we've heard about how uh
Stormy Daniels and Karen mcdougall's
phone numbers were virtually in Donald
Trump's Rolodex at work and yet he had
no relationship with those women um so
they're going to be corroborated and
when they are under attack because
they'll see that the defense attorneys
are doing Donald Trump's bidding and
trying to deny the obvious at the
expense of these women and their
credibility um it's not going to sit
well if he's not already lost the jury
he will lose the jury and once you lose
the jury once the jury sees the
defendant for who he is there really is
no turning back yeah but I got to ask do
the same rules apply here because Donald
Trump was just found liable for sexual
assault and defamation everybody knows
that he's gross so isn't that baked into
the cake with him like can you can you
lose a jury for being disgusting if the
Baseline is already that you're
disgusting you know maybe the jurors you
know don't know enough about Donald
Trump to reach the conclusions that most
people who have followed the news and
followed What Donald Trump has said and
done over the years they have already
reached the conclusion that you know if
his lips are moving for example he's
lying um but here's the thing those
jurors took an oath to sort of set aside
their preconceived Notions their biases
their preferences their ideology their
political affiliation and decide the
case based only on the evidence they see
introduced during the course of the
trial and they are to presume Donald
Trump to be innocent of these charged
offenses of course they don't have to
presume Donald Trump is a decent human
being or kind of pretend like he's some
kind of a a saint they just have to
presume that he's innocent of the
charged offenses unless and until the
government's evidence proves guilt
Beyond A Reasonable Doubt so they'll
they'll presume that he's a decent
person because they'll give him the
benefit of the doubt until the moment
where they you know allow like three
days into this trial where we basically
see exactly who he is all a new uh so
yeah I mean it just shows it goes to
show that anytime you have the
opportunity to actually learn who this
guy is even if you do give him the
benefit of the doubt uh it's really
going to ultimately Circle back to
exactly who he is I mean he's not going
to be able to who he is um even even in
the instance where he's actually helping
his attorneys prove to the jury exactly
who he is so any way you cut it it's not
going to help the guy uh again with that
said for anybody watching right now if
you want to follow along with Glenn and
I as we continue to cover this trial on
a daily basis please make sure to
subscribe the links to both of our
channels are right here on the screen
I'm Brian tyer Cohen and I'm Glenn
kersner you're watching the legal
breakdown
[Music]
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)
Trump's lawyers CRASH AND BURN with failure during trial
Trump’s attorneys fail MISERABLY in court on first official trial date
Prosecutor issues CRUCIAL news on Trump jury
Jury hears secret recording of Trump discussing catch-and-kill payment
Michael Cohen told me Stormy payment was 'his idea': ex-adviser
Breaking Trump News [9AM] 3/25/2024 | 🅼🆂🅽🅱🅲 Latest Trump March 25, 2024