As former President Donald Trump faces four pending criminal cases, some of his associates, allies, and co-defendants are starting to employ a common strategy in cases with multiple defendants: portraying themselves as pawns while directing blame toward Trump.
In court documents and hearings, lawyers for individuals connected to Trump’s orbit, including both high-ranking advisers and lesser-known associates, are beginning to distance themselves from the former president, suggesting that they were merely following his orders.
Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and now a star witness against him in a New York criminal case related to hush money payments, noted that Trump prioritizes his own interests above all else, suggesting that every defendant will act in their own self-interest.
Recent events support this assertion. An IT aide at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort altered his story regarding efforts to erase surveillance video and agreed to cooperate with special counsel Jack Smith, who has charged Trump with hoarding classified documents. While the aide, Yuscil Taveras, was not charged in the case, his cooperation may help him avoid potential perjury charges. It is also likely to strengthen Smith’s obstruction-of-justice case against Trump and two other aides.
Furthermore, three GOP activists indicted alongside Trump in Georgia for attempting to interfere with the certification of President Joe Biden’s election victory claimed that they were acting on Trump’s instructions.
In addition, Trump’s former White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, who also faces charges in the Georgia case, hinted that his defense would involve shifting responsibility to the former president as the primary driver of the election interference effort.
While it is common for co-defendants to point fingers at each other to minimize their culpability, it is unusual for this strategy to play out with a former president as the alleged ringleader.
The Georgia case, which includes numerous defendants with smaller roles than Trump or his top aides, may see this strategy intensify as it approaches trial. If a jury primarily assigns blame to Trump for events following the 2020 election, the lower-profile co-defendants may appear less culpable by comparison.
Legal experts suggest that lesser-known co-defendants may benefit from being tried alongside Trump, as the focus will likely be on the former president.
Trump’s co-defendants in the Georgia case, including David Shafer, Cathleen Latham, and Shawn Still, have indicated that they acted under Trump’s instructions and legal advice in their legal filings. The scheme involving false electors, where they posed as pro-Trump presidential electors, is a key aspect of both the Georgia indictment and a separate federal case in which Trump is charged with conspiring to overturn the election.
Meadows, in his testimony, highlighted that Trump viewed the false electors as an essential part of his strategy to retain power, reinforcing the narrative that the former president was the driving force behind these actions.
As these criminal cases progress, the strategy of deflecting blame toward Trump could play a significant role in shaping the outcomes. However, it also underscores the extraordinary nature of having a former president as the central figure in such legal proceedings.
COMMENTS