Music
Former Trump lawyer fears legal tactic poses ‘huge danger’ to hush money defense
Former President Donald Trump's biggest risk in the Manhattan hush money trial could be what he himself says if he takes the witness stand, former Trump administration White House lawyer Jim Schultz argued on CNN Monday.
This came as the trial's first day opened with the jury selection process, with Trump sitting at the defense table and some experts remarking that he appeared diminished.
"Does today matter?" asked anchor Phil Mattingly. "Does what they see from these potential jurors matter in that kind of strategy process?"
"Look, I think all of it's going to matter, right?" said Schultz, a longtime defender of the former president who has nevertheless admitted the recent string of civil and criminal trials has been rough for him.
"How he interacts, how they interact with him, how they feel — how the lawyers feel that the jurors are, how much appeal there is from the jurors as to whether they're going to put him on the stand. But I think at this — at this stage in the game, I think they're probably leaning towards putting him on the stand."
Anchor Erin Burnett then chimed in. "And what would you do?" she asked. "You know him. You've worked with him. You think that's a gamble you'd take, to put him on the stand?"
ALSO READ: A neuroscientist explains how Trump is using existential fear to win the election
Schultz replied, "I think again ... in this particular case, hearing from him is likely going to matter. I think he'd want to testify in this case. I think he's going to push his lawyers to testify in this case. And quite frankly, the problem with putting Donald Trump on the stand is that you never know what Donald Trump's gonna say, whether he could say something that's completely irrelevant to the case, he could say something that damages the case just by making a flippant remark.
"So there is a huge danger of putting him on the stand, but I think he's going to be pressing to do it."
Watch the video below or at the link here.
Jim Schultz says Trump is a "huge danger" to himself on the stand www.youtube.com
Jack Smith’s ‘flashy’ charge to blame for Trump election interference trial delay: Op-ed
Special counsel Jack Smith is to blame for the ongoing delay in former President Donald Trump's federal election interference case, according to Washington Post columnist Jack Willick.
Willick laid into Smith for bringing a "flashier" charge he believes allowed Trump to cry presidential immunity and take that claim all the way to the Supreme Court.
"Smith — apparently fearful that the Supreme Court might recognize some presidential immunity for official acts — says that allegations of Trump’s 'private misconduct are more than sufficient to support the indictment,'" writes Willick.
"Then why insist in the first place on charging Trump for official conduct, inviting a Supreme Court showdown over the scope of immunity?"
ALSO READ: A neuroscientist reveals how Trump and Biden's cognitive impairments are different
The Supreme Court is expected to hear arguments on April 25.
Their ruling effectively puts on hold the Washington D.C. federal case, in which Trump has pleaded not guilty to charges linked to his actions between the November 2020 election and the U.S. Capitol riots on Jan. 6, 2021.
Trump's argument — that commanders in chief must enjoy absolute immunity to effectively lead the nation — stands in stark opposition to Smith's contention that presidents must be bound by the law they have sworn to uphold.
But Willick argues Smith blundered, first in delaying to bring charges against Trump then opting to connect those charges to official acts.
"This holdup is on the Justice Department," Willick writes. "Biden’s Justice Department bet instead on a flashier but less strategic approach," he writes. "The resulting appellate delays were predictable."
Willick notes time is of the essence in Smith's case as Trump could conceivably kill it should he regain the White House in 2025.
"If Trump makes it to November without a Jan. 6 conviction," Willick concludes, "he’ll have Jack Smith to thank."
