George Conway Calls Trump Trial Moment a 'Complete Disaster'

Conway critiques defense tactics in high-profile legal battle

by Zain ul Abedin
George Conway Calls Trump Trial Moment a 'Complete Disaster'
© George Conway

In a striking evaluation of former President Donald Trump's legal woes, conservative attorney George Conway deemed Trump's defense team's latest courtroom tactics a "complete disaster" during the ongoing hush money trial.

Speaking after Thursday's session, Conway, who was present in court, did not mince words while discussing the proceedings on CNN. The day centered around the cross-examination of adult film actress Stormy Daniels, a critical witness in the case alleging that Trump paid her to remain silent about an affair.

According to Conway, the defense's approach not only failed to favor their client but plunged into the realms of the ridiculous. "The continued cross-examination of Stormy Daniels was a fiasco for the defense," he asserted.

Strategy Backfires Spectacularly

Cross-examination, a tool typically used to extract favorable admissions or cast doubt on a witness's credibility, should be concise and impactful. However, Conway highlighted that Trump's team, led by attorney Susan Necheles, veered off course.

Despite acknowledging Necheles' capabilities as an experienced cross-examiner, Conway criticized the direction she was forced to take, driven by Trump's personality traits. "Her client is a narcissistic sociopath obsessed with disproving the alleged affair with Daniels," he commented, noting the detrimental detour into proving irrelevant points.

Conway suggested a more strategic focus for the defense would be to argue the irrelevance of the alleged affair rather than attacking Daniels' character, which he labeled as "counter-productive." This approach seemed to backfire spectacularly, as the line of questioning not only reached absurdity but also appeared to amuse the jury, rather than convince them.

"It was just garbage, and it was embarrassing," Conway lamented. He observed several jurors struggling to stifle laughter at Daniels' sharp retorts during the cross-examination, indicating the diminishing strength of the defense's position.

Conway argued that by extending the cross-examination unnecessarily, Necheles allowed Daniels more opportunities to counter the questioning effectively, overshadowing the defense's efforts. "By keeping your cross simple and short, you can control the witness.

But the longer you go, the more the witness can pop off at you," he explained.