re: Cohen: The payment was delayed in election interference trial, it only matter if Trump won

quote:

---

It's about the agreement. When the payment itself occurs is irrelevant unless here, you're trying to prove that the payment was tied to the election. If Trump did say to hold off payment until AFTER the election for the reasons Cohen stated, then it's directly tied to the election. Just strengthens the prosecutor's argument, IMHO.

---

What it strengthens is the fact that Cohen is a dumbass who didn't think his made up testimony through. Who would make an agreement to interfere with the election...after the election is over? How exactly does that work? Two previous witnesses testified that the payment was about Trump's family and had nothing to do with the election. This witness testified that it was the opposite. He's contradicted by two of the prosecution's own witnesses and we haven't even gotten to the cross examination into his record as a convicted perjurer. How in the world does any of this strengthen the prosecutor's argument?