Zeldin Says Democrats Unleashed ‘Beast’ In Conviction

Former Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) said this week that the “beast” has been unleashed with the conviction of former President Donald Trump in a New York court. The statement comes as the former president sharply criticized the prosecutors and the Biden administration and vowed to appeal the case.

Zeldin told Breitbart that Democrats had opened a “can of worms” due to the verdict.

“I was a prosecutor, and every single case I had, I told the accused up front exactly what they were being charged with,” Zeldin explained. “They knew every element of the charge, and they were able to prepare their closing statement, their opening statement, their cross-examination, their own witnesses — all to be able to defend their client against every element of the charge,” he said.

“And here, one of the elements was that it was being charged as a felony because of some mysterious, unidentified, underlying charge. It wasn’t even until the prosecution got to their closing argument, which was after President Trump’s counsel gave their closing argument, and then you had jury instructions telling the jury they didn’t even have to agree. They could pick whatever charge they want; they didn’t even have to all agree on it,” said Zeldin.

“So, I mean, that’s just one of many examples of why this case should be overturned on appeal,” he added.

The former president denies all wrongdoing in the case. The trial stemmed from an alleged brief relationship between Trump and former adult film star Stormy Daniels.

Trump’s attorney Alina Habba echoed comments from the former president during a recent media interview, stating that Trump’s legal team would go all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary.

Habba said that the Trump legal team had evidence she believed would clear the former president. She said that the legal team was restricted from bringing forward an expert witness.

The attorney further argued that she and Trump were improperly gagged by New York Judge Juan Merchan. Trump previously argued that the gag order violated his constitutional rights.