Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley reacted to Michael Cohen’s witness during an appearance on FNC’s Hannity on Tuesday during a statement from the principal witness in a Donald Trump bookkeeping investigation.
According to Turley, Cohen appeared to have perjured himself once during that evidence.
” Jonathan, let’s get your entire measurements of the day — not exactly the most reliable see, to say the least”, host Sean Hannity said.
” No, not at all”, Turley replied. One of the most remarkable things to happen in the past two days is that Cohen may have allegedly committed perjury once more. You know, some of us do n’t think his explanations on a number of issues are accurate. You know when he claimed that he had secretly taped the president, which only blasts ahead ethical obligations, that he claimed he was doing it to aid Trump and maintain David Pecker honest. It makes no sense that — it’s really, no one can get their mind around that. However, that was just one of the many instances in which you really have to be impressed with this man because he has consistently shown that he will only tell the truth when there is no other choice.
He continued,” The prosecutors said they would close their case, which I believe is the most wonderful thing that has happened now.” They’ll sleep their event after Cohen’s evidence is done. There’s only one problem: anyone has established the parts of any violence. The government has n’t even explained or stated why it is improper to list these payments as legal expenses. They have n’t put on any material evidence to support those elements. Most judges had been insulted for prosecutors to state,’ Well, that’s a wrap,’ without actually making the basis for a case”.
” So, the judge is going to include this activity for a directed conviction, and I think any judge in good faith would give that activity”, Turley added. If he sends this to the judge, he is giving a judge a situation where no violence has been claimed and perhaps fundamental facts are still largely unsolved. I ca n’t figure out what the government is arguing as to how this should have been denoted. Not only ca n’t figure out what the crime was that brought this dead misdemeanor to life. If it was n’t a legal expense, what’s the notation some accountant should have put in a ledger? None of us are aware of it because they have merely shrugged. And that’s what this situation is, it’s a shake, and they expect the prosecutor to do the same”.
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor
