Florida Judge Jeff Swartz praised ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker as an “outstanding” first witness in former President Trump’s hush money trial, stating he was “incredibly credible.” “I think David pecker was an outstanding choice for the first witness,” Swartz said during his Saturday appearance on CNN.
“He set the stage and he set the whole scene up for the jury.” “And he was really very good on cross-examination,” he continued.
“I don’t think that he actually got impeached in any really serious way.
I think that people are going to look at his testimony and start building around it.
I think the jury paid attention to him from all accounts, they pay very close attention to him.
“I think that that became pretty clear too that this was part of what needed to be done to help the campaign.” Pecker was picked as the first witness in Trump’s first-ever criminal trial.
“Did you suppress the stories to help a presidential candidate,” prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked during the redirect examination, with the candidate in reference being Trump.
The second witness to take the stand was Rhona Graff, the former president’s longtime executive assistant.
In the first witness in the hush money trial of former President Trump, Florida Judge Jeff Swartz commended former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker as “outstanding” and “incredibly credible.”. “.
During his Saturday CNN appearance, Swartz stated, “I think David Peck was an outstanding choice for the first witness.”. He readied the entire scene and set the stage for the jury. “.
He went on, “And he was really very good on cross-examination.”. “I don’t believe he was impeached in a significant manner. Upon reviewing his testimony, I believe that people will begin to construct around it. Based on all the evidence presented, I believe the jury gave him careful consideration. Furthermore, he struck me as being very credible. And in my opinion, the prosecution really benefited greatly from that. “.
Professor of law Swartz praised Pecker’s cross-examination performance, pointing out that Trump’s attorneys did “very little” to undermine his credibility.
“However, things at AMI got really intense and they ran a lot of stories beyond what they used to run when it came down to Trump and Hillary [Clinton], who were running for president,” Swartz remarked. The fact that this was a necessary step in supporting the campaign, in my opinion, also became fairly obvious. “.
Pecker was chosen to testify as the first witness in Trump’s very first criminal prosecution. His testimony this week, which covered all four trial days, provided additional insight into the National Enquirer’s role in dispelling unfavorable rumors about the former president and spreading unfavorable, frequently untrue, rumors about his opponents.
Attorney Joshua Steinglass questioned during the redirect examination, referring to Trump as the candidate, “Did you suppress the stories to help a presidential candidate?”.
Pecker responded, “Yes, I did.”.
Longtime executive assistant to the former president Rhona Graff was the second witness to testify.
In an effort to support Michael Cohen, Swartz suggested that the prosecutors “start dealing with more of the records” as they developed their case against the former president. “.
“I believe that additional individuals who are essentially involved in the campaign will be brought in to set the stage once more for Mr. Trump’s demeanor, his outbursts of rage, and his apprehension about information pertaining to the campaign and the conversations that took place around it, which sets the stage for Michael Cohen to close it out,” the man stated.
