Legal Analyst on CNN Says Prosecution ‘Fell Way Short’ of Proving Case Against Trump

BOLDUAN: “Randy, what Michael’s getting at is the — is the burden of proof is an important one to remind everyone. It’s on the prosecution, right? They need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed that — that Donald Trump broke the law. And you think — after listening to all of this you think they fell short? How?”
ZELIN: “They fell way short because let’s start with reasonable doubt. What is reasonable doubt? And it’s not simply a doubt based upon reason. Any time a human being needs to make an important decision in life, if you have enough information — for example, doctor says you need open heart surgery. Doc, go ahead and schedule. I don’t have a reasonable doubt. Conversely, if I say I appreciate it, but I need a second opinion. I need more information. That is having a reasonable doubt. There is reasonable doubt all over this case. Where is Keith Schiller? Where is Allen Weisselberg? How did Michael Cohen get away with stealing $30,000? Hold a pity party for him. Made $4 million on this. Thought he’d be chief of staff. He’s a fixer. If the plumber comes to my house to fix my leak, I could be home. That doesn’t mean I know how he’s doing it and what it’s taking to be fixed. Stormy Daniels — let’s hold a pity party for her. Why do we need to know whether or not the former president wore a condom or not? It’s simply about did the former president know that books — his records — false entries for legal fees. Michael Cohen was his lawyer. Did he intend to cover up the election or to protect his family? It’s everywhere.”
BOLDUAN: “When Randy gets to whisper tones, I start getting concerned.”