Acquittal! - Announcement Rocks Trump Hush Money Case

Hey ladies and gentlemen, this is Carmine Sabia for Explain America and there is fantastic

news for former President Donald Trump coming out of that hush money trial in New York

Before we get started, please make sure you like, comment, share and subscribe

Those little things really help us out and they help our channel continue to grow

Folks, things are looking tough for Alvin Bragg, Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, and

the rest of the lot who want to get Donald Trump. They may want to get him, but it's falling apart because now, now we have a situation

where well, even the judge in the case is starting to lean towards Trump

You see Judge Juan Marchand approved something yesterday or looks like he's going to approve something

He sided with the defense and this one little jury instruction could be the thing that actually

seals the deal for our Trump acquittal. Not a hung jury. No, a hung jury was, you know, before that was the best we could hope for

Not anymore. We're looking at acquittal now. This is a massive deal

Now I want you to listen to this one legal expert explain it and then you'll have a better

understanding of what's going on as I did. So watch this and let me know what you think

Is Trump going to be acquitted in New York? I want to know your thoughts

When you like, comment, share and subscribe. Let's take a look at the video

Influence the election and then are they equal? Does one have to outweigh the other

Can they both be there? Does one have to be there? I mean, it's, it's some, uh, you know, nuanced verbiage that they're going to have to agree on

So, so of course Costello was a very famous and contentious, uh, witness for the defense

but the one that they really wanted to call was Brad Smith, former chairman of the FEC

because he would have talked about whether or not this NDA actually did qualify as a

campaign contribution or finance violation or whatever. And the likelihood was he was going to say, no, it wasn't

And Cohen should have never pled guilty to it because there was no underlying crime

Here's what Laura Ingram said about his testimony not being allowed in

Eliminating the possibility of an FEC expert testifying was I think extremely prejudicial

to the Trump defense because that that's the predicate crime here. Unless, unless we're going to hear of a new crime, um, that we haven't heard of yet

So, um, this just got me from Lydia who, uh, a big deal here

Mershawn seems to agree with the defense that they should include this line and the instructions

to the jury quote, if the payment would have been made even in the absence of a candidacy

payment should not be treated as a contribution. This would mean if Trump would have paid Stormy Daniels NDA even in the absence of a campaign

like he was concerned about a business brand or family, then it's not a campaign contribution

And that she says, that's what Brad Smith would have explained. And Mershawn seems to agree with the defense on that point

John, that's huge because so many of these pro prosecution pundits have said, well, it

came right after the, the TMZ tape right before the election. Other NDAs were paid the, uh, the, the liar doorman about the illegitimate child that

didn't exist, the McDougall money. So if the money would have been paid anyway, and the judge is willing to instruct the jury

that way, that moves the ball a lot further towards the not guilty yard line

Well, maybe after, you know, having a huge strike zone for the prosecution and very small

one for the defense. Mershawn is opening it up just a little bit. We'll see

Bill, thank you so much. John Sandra.