Jeffrey Toobin, that former CNN legal analyst who managed to use a Zoom call to transform his name into a verb, returned to that network on Friday to stroke his theories on the Georgia election interference case against former President Donald Trump.
Jeffrey Toobin, a former CNN legal analyst, returned to the network on Friday and argued that the Georgia case against Donald Trump was "going nowhere," and said it had been a "very good day for Donald Trump."
Toobin, a former federal prosecutor, and Gwen Keyes, a former district attorney in DeKalb County, Georgia, joined CNN's Elie Honig and Anderson Cooper on Friday to discuss the election interference case against Trump in Georgia.
"Today was a very good day for Donald Trump," Toobin said during his media appearance. "This case is going nowhere."
He's probably right; things aren't looking good for Fani Willis or any of her... associates.
Here Are More of Those Texts That Made Terrence Bradley Say 'Oh, Dang,'
Mr. Toobin, while taking Elie Honig and Anderson Cooper on a self-guided tour of this case, seemed to bear down hard on the idea that the time taken for jury selection may doom any chances of this coming to trial before the election. While we should always be grateful for any appearance in which Mr. Toobin manages not to be caught having a threesome with a couple of no-shows, once we get past that happy note we see that another CNN guest appearing on the same program disagrees.
Gwen Keyes, a former district attorney in DeKalb County, Georgia, said she respectfully disagreed with Toobin.
"I do think that there is enough evidence to go forward. I think that particularly the timing in this case, while we’ve had one racketeering case that has taken a long time to go to a jury, that’s an anomaly. In my 17 years as a state prosecutor. I’ve never seen it take 10 or 12 months to get a jury."
That jury, of course, was not being empaneled against a former President of the United States. I won't comment on the evidence as I'm not an attorney and the general public probably isn't privy to everything here, but I'm skeptical. President Trump is one of those people that everyone either loves or hates; there seems to be very little middle ground, and to my thinking, that will make jury selection difficult at best.
Here's where Toobin speed-shifted and made a truly horrifying observation:
Toobin chimed in again on the state of the trail (sic) and quipped it was "so far behind," that it would occur in the presidency of Malia Obama.
Now there's a thought - Malia Obama as President? Why? I'm not sure what saints Jeffrey Toobin is appealing to to see this happen; I'm not aware as to whether or not Toobin is Catholic, although he certainly observes Palm Sunday. The idea of another Obama serving as the figurehead-in-chief is enough to give anyone pause.
Fortunately, Toobins' observations are about as successful as his former employer.
Still, to be charitable, I'm sure Jeffrey Toobin is giving us what he thinks is an honest analysis, and while he may be fond of playing a little five-on-one in his spare time, for all we know he's sincere in this evaluation. To Mr. Toobin, I can only say thanks for bringing us your best insights on this case; we all know you're pulling for us.