Back when I worked building criminal cases, a thing we always had to remind ourselves was that, “the enemy gets a vote.” In the criminal justice system there is always the risk of “confirmation bias” — that is, seeing things only through the prism of your own wants and interests. 

There’s a lot of that around these days — on both sides of the current Trump trial. So, as shambolic as the case is: Is Bragg’s strategy actually succeeding? 

It could be. 

Consider: the theory of this case remains amorphous at best — no need to belabor that here.

But what Bragg’s REAL case theory seems to be is: “dirty up Donald Trump, make him a felon, and hurt his chances for the presidency.” 

It’s almost as if there are two cases going simultaneously — the outward-facing “Trump Hate Porn” case, and the case as-charged, which hovers in the background somewhere. And so far, Merchan has allowed this nonsense. 

At this writing, Stormy Daniels has just come off the stand. Did she come off as a less-than-upright person? Does it undermine her prior testimony? Sure, perhaps. But the prosecution had to know that was coming. They know she’s no saint. 

But by allowing that portrait of her to emerge, the prosecution has provided a strong motive for Donald Trump to not only have signed an NDA with her — which all agree is legal — but to also have attempted to hide that NDA through some accounting sleight-of-hand. 

The jury likely did not like Stormy. She’s been shown to contradict herself and have venal motives. But if the jury simply buys into one simple fact — that the encounter did take place — could the negative impression of Stormy work for what Bragg’s office is trying to do here? To show that this is a bottom-feeder that Donald Trump wanted in no way to be associated with while running for president? 

Now, to be clear: I have been highly critical of this case. It should never have been brought. The full charges remain unclear, it never would’ve been brought against anyone else, and thanks to Merchan it has been conducted in a way that almost guarantees reversal. 

But on the basis of the (shameful) ulterior motives of Bragg’s office: there’s a chance it’s working. So anyone expecting a mistrial, a directed verdict, a hung jury, or even an acquittal should manage expectations. 

I’m reminded of what I said on air the morning the Hunter Biden plea deal was presented in court: The preservation of faith in our system came down that day to a single person. And lo and behold, the judge there stood fast. 

In the Manhattan DA’s Trump case, it may well come down to a single juror not buying into this convoluted mess. 

Let’s hope that person is there. Because this case is, in many ways, bigger even than Donald Trump.