CNN’s Elie Honig Reveals How He Would Have Kicked Off Michael Cohen’s Cross Examination With One Damning Question

CNN’s pre-game for hush money trial of former President Donald Trump included a “what if” scenario from legal analyst Elie Honig, who shared how he would have conducted the cross examination of Michael Cohen.

Cohen, once a staunch ally and “fixer” for Trump, is not known for his bulletproof credibility. And this, Honig explained on Thursday to anchor Jake Tapper and the panel, was how he would have questioned Cohen. Tapper prompted Honig with a question about Trump lawyer Todd Blanche’s initial approach during cross, which was to outline the various insults Cohen has made about Trump (and Blanche):

Tapper: Do you have an idea why Blanche would start with that? Because, I mean, it does kind of make it seem as though Michael Cohen is kind of just like a shoot-from-the-hip jerk and not necessarily focused entirely on Trump as a motive.

Honig: Well, I think it was a mistake to open the way that Todd Blanche opened. I absolutely never would have done it. It was properly sustained. First of all, it’s not the point. It’s not the point, does Michael Cohen hate Todd Blanche? The point is, Michael Cohen hates and desperately wants the defendant, Donald Trump, in prison. Let me give you what I would have started with. We like to play like armchair prosecutor now that we’re no longer actual prosecutors. First question would have been, “Mr. Cohen, are you a perjurer?” Okay? If he says “Yes,” great! Folks, he’s a perjurer. He says “No,” then you just hit him with the dozens of lies that he’s… He is a perjurer. I mean, that’s a fact. So it leaves him, it’s a win-win. You want to start safe. I thought it was a misstep by Blanche. I actually was not impressed with Blanche’s cross, the two hours or so that he did on Tuesday at all. I thought it was meandering and unfocused.

Watch the video above via CNN.