'Nonsense!' George Conway hits back as Trump lawyer gives CNN hush money 'talking points'

George Conway knocked down the "talking points" of a Donald Trump lawyer who appeared on CNN Monday to defend the former president against criminal charges in the New York hush money case.

Trump lawyer Will Scharf, who is not involved himself in the trial, claimed that prosecutors were using "smoke and mirrors" to charge the former president, saying the trial would almost certainly end with an acquittal.

But Conway pushed back and argued that a hung jury was the best outcome the ex-president could expect.

"I think a lot of it is nonsense," Conway said. "I mean, I think if he gets a hung jury here, and I think he's not going to get an acquittal. I think it's going to be because somebody does not make that connection between Trump and these records, but the problem for the defense is he signed some of the checks.

"He paid very close attention to things that were expenditures made on his behalf. We heard the testimony about [former executive assistant] Madeleine Westerhout and the $600 for whatever it was. He looked at these things, the backup for checks that he was signing, he had backup on it. The fake invoice, what it was for, and the point about it is, it's not about the Trump talking points here, which you'll hear from a lot of the lawyers. It seems to be that, unless he was there at the computer, any click that on the drop-down menu a false — he did it himself. Beyond a reasonable doubt, acquittal."

ALSO READ: My Mother’s Day gift to my mom: honesty

"That's just not the case," Conway added. "The statute says did he cause this to happen? And if you look at the entirety of the evidence, not look at the way a defense lawyers and spinmeisters look at it, which is take every little piece and not connect the dots. We can't figure out what the alternative theory is, the alternative theory that would allow a jury to say, Well, we have all these facts, they're not really disputed."

"I think we heard one of the Trump lawyers say the facts aren't really disputed. What's their innocent explanation for this? There is none."

Watch the video below or at this link.

- YouTubeyoutu.be