CNN Legal Analyst Concedes Trump Civil Trial ‘Tends to Look Political’ — But ‘The Facts Do Not Lie’

CNN legal analysts Elie Honig and Caroline Polisi weighed in on Thursday’s closing arguments in former President Donald Trump’s civil trial in New York.

Anchor John Berman kicked off the discussion by noting, “The very first thing in the closing argument was to make the claim this is all political.”

“Absolutely. I mean, Elie, Caroline weigh in on this as well. I think I took it, I think I scribbled it down, can’t read my own writing, scribbled it down as, as Paula was reporting it out, “This entire case is a manufactured claim to serve a political agenda.” First words out of Chris Kise’s mouth,” replied Kate Bolduan.

“Well, two things can be true and are true at once,” replied Honig, adding:

Yes, Donald Trump inflated the value of his assets by a lot. I think that’s been established by this case. There’s a separate question whether anyone was actually harmed because the banks made the loans. They knew what they were doing, they got paid back. But it is a fact that Letitia James, as Paula Reid said, Letitia James campaigned for attorney general in 2018, specifically on a promise of “vote for me and I’ll get Donald Trump.” That’s not something she said once. She said it dozens of times. She said it in writing, she fundraised off it, and she wasn’t even specific.

She didn’t say, “I’ll get him for inflating his assets.” At one point, she said he could be indicted for money laundering. At one point, she said the day after she was elected, she said, and I quote, “We’re definitely going to sue his ass. He’ll know my name.” And when you make statements like that, how can you say there’s no political angle to this? You can maybe say the facts are there, but it’s also political. That’s Letitia James’ own doing.

“So what if two things, counselor, if we move forward, that these two things are true at the same time, what does it mean? What does it mean to all of this?” Bolduan asked Polisi.

“That’s what’s so hard about Trump in all of these cases. The question is, you know, we hear this phrase often repeated, no one is above the law. But the question is, is he being unfairly treated on both sides?” Polisi replied, adding:

Right. Whether he’s being over prosecuted to some extent because of who he is or given unfair treatment and under prosecuted, as it were. And so it makes it very difficult. I mean, of course, we’ve got a lot of different prosecutors. I agree, it’s not a good look for Tish James to be, you know, speaking on the courtroom steps. It only adds to this argument, um, that that Trump is making, that it is political. It tends to look political.

Um, but then then you have to think about the actual facts of the case. And as Elie said, I mean, you know, square footage doesn’t lie, right? You can’t. Some of these things are just on paper. It’s a paper case to some extent. And the facts don’t lie. He, you know, inflated and played up the value of his assets, obviously. Um, but the question is, if it weren’t him, would this have been prosecuted? And, you know, we might never know that answer.

“Right. The judge has already found him liable for persistent and repeated fraud. The scope of the damages is part of what is at stake. But also, again, the political reality that this is a campaign event for Donald Trump at the very same time,” Bolduan concluded.

Watch the full clip above via CNN.