(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Trump lawyer rips prosecutors for not helping the defense - "because we live in America" [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2024-05-31 Yesterday, during an interview with CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Todd Blanche , Trump’s lead attorney in the ‘hush-money’ trial, said he did not call several witnesses who would have helped his client’s defense because “We happen to live in America.” It made sense to him. Collins laid the groundwork for Blanche’s odd statement by asking him about the absence of potentially helpful witnesses: “When he [Trump] was leaving, one thing he brought up were the witnesses who were not called. And he said they could've been witnesses they would've helped make the case. We never saw Keith Schiller, Alan Weisselberg, or some key figures here who got brought up a lot. Why didn't the defense call any of these witnesses?” Blanche answered: “Because we happen to live in America and we [the defense] don't have the burden of proof. And so that's not the point. That's a question that is a loaded question that should not be asked of a defense attorney or a defendant. The question we asked the jury and they ultimately obviously got passed is why? Why the prosecution didn't call those witnesses? Right?” I think living in MAGA America has damaged Todd’s brain. In a trial, the defense puts on the defense. Not the prosecutors. Even bad law schools teach that — no? I also have no idea why Blanche thinks Collins asked a “loaded question.” She is merely requesting clarification of something his client said publicly. If Blanche is worried about uncomfortable questions, why is he on CNN? Surely Fox would have been a safe haven? More importantly, judges instruct jurors to weigh only the evidence presented. The prosecution calculated that their evidence met the burden of proof ‘beyond a reasonable doubt.’ According to the jury, they were right. And theirs is the only opinion that counts. Blanche did not see it that way. He added, “You, as a defense, right, you don't go into a case saying, I'm going to fill the holes for the prosecution. Right? And Keith Schiller and some of the other witnesses that were not ultimately called, in our view should've been called by the prosecution. And we asked the jury to take a hard look at that. I don't know whether they did or not, but they convicted.” If I am a juror who has decided that the prosecution has done its job, I do not care who the prosecution did not call. Instead, I would wonder — if the defense implied some uncalled witnesses would have shot holes in the prosecution's case — why the defense did not call them. I would not assume — and by law, as a juror, I cannot assume — anything about facts not in evidence. If the defense thinks there is something exculpatory, it is their job to put it into evidence. Blanche's strange take on evidentiary procedure raises a question with no good answer. What happens to lawyers who choose to work for Trump? Some of them, Alina Habba for example, were never good at their job and continued to perform atrociously. But others were well-regarded before they stepped on the rake. Blanche, for instance, was a partner of Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft — New York’s oldest law firm. The company employs 400 layers in five offices in three countries. In 2021, Cadwalader generated profits of $4.38 million per partner. But in 2023, Blanche left the company to set up a one-man shop to represent one man, Donald Trump. Why? As the world knows now, it has not gone well. He is now on the losing end of a 34-0 drubbing in the ‘hush-money’ case. Blanche further tried to distract from his incompetence — or perhaps his inability to resist the bad judgment of his client — by whining about the unfairness of it all. He complained that Trump could not get a fair jury in Manhattan. To prove his point, he said that when selecting the panel, the Judge had groups of 100 prospective jurors at a time for voir dire. And when Merchan asked them if they could be fair and impartial, Blanche said that half of them declared they could not — and were therefore dismissed. Blanche’s logic is that because many admitted they could not be impartial, the resulting jury was biased. But is not the opposite true? If the anti-Trumpers disqualified themselves, does not that mean the remaining candidates were more likely to be unbiased? Besides, the defense went through the social media history of everyone who remained in the room. It is hard to hide your bias in the internet age. In addition, they filled out jury questionnaires. The defense had unlimited strikes for cause. And they had 10 additional peremptory — no reason needed — disqualifications. In addition, while Manhattan is a Democratic stronghold, there are Republicans on the island. Indeed, the prosecution struck some of the prospective jurors because of a pro-Trump bias. When all was said and done, Trump only needed one dissenter to hang the jury. But the 12 jurors were unanimous. Blanche also complained that “the timing of this trial was really unfair to President Trump.” Really? I wish Collins had asked him what would have been a good time. Because, you know that whenever the trial happened, the defense would have moaned about the timing. Blanche also whined about the publicity the case generated, saying: “There is so much publicity around the witnesses and around leading up to the trial that it just, our system of justice isn’t supposed to be a system of justice where every person that walks in the courtroom knows about the case.” Who the hell does Blanche think generated the publicity? Hint: He does not have to look far. It was not the prosecution. His reasoning could give a new definition to chutzpah . The interview ended with a discussion of who was in charge of defense strategy, how Todd got along with Donald, and some other fluff. It gave Blanche one more opportunity to say something sublimely ridiculous. He summed up Trump’s time in court by saying: “The one thing I left with today is he [Trump] impressed hopefully everybody that got to see what happened today the way that he handled himself in the courtroom, hearing that verdict, you know 34 counts of guilty. The way that he handled himself really throughout the entire trial as somebody who is the Republican nominee not campaigning, sitting in court all day. And I was right there with him the whole time. And I have no complaints about it.” Blanche thinks that a defendant sleeping through his trial, slack-jawed, drooling, and farting is impressive. I do not understand the MAGA mind, so perhaps he is correct as far as they are concerned. Meanwhile, the rest of us are astounded that this is the best the Republicans can do. And we continue to be amazed at those lawyers, who should know better, who still get in the sty with the pig. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/5/31/2243942/-Trump-lawyer-rips-prosecutors-for-not-helping-the-defense-because-we-live-in-America?pm_campaign=front_page&pm_source=trending&pm_medium=web Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/