Media analysts and contributors have worried that the hush money case involving Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels might be the "weakest" legal effort against the former president as a Manhattan grand jury decides whether to issue an indictment.
MSNBC contributor Charlie Sykes conceded during "Morning Joe" this week that this may be the "weakest case" against Trump, though it could be the first in a line to come.
Host Mika Brzenzinski agreed, "If this is the weakest case, then look at all the others that are in line behind this one."
Jonathan Lemire told the panelists that some Democrats and senior White House officials "fear that because this case is weakest, that if it is brought first, that it will be potential – allow Trump to then paint this one as illegitimate, that it's weak, and suggest that all of the other cases against him are as well. And that is something they're worried about."
During "CNN This Morning" on Wednesday, former Barack Obama adviser Van Jones said that the hush money case was not the "strongest."
"This is going to be, I think a tough decision because unless the grand jury is just overwhelming, if there are any breaks or cracks in the grand jury, you add to that, a psychological reality that a lot of Democrats think, would you let Georgia go first? Could you get Trump in trouble for the coup? Do we have to start with porn star payouts? That’s just a political reality, and he is at the end of the day, trying to figure out the right thing to do, and he has not, as best we can tell, made a decision," Jones said.
On Tuesday's show, CNN legal analyst Elie Honig told host Don Lemon that the case was not easy to prove just because it involved a paper trail.
"It’s easy to prove the paper crime if the person’s name is on the paper. Here the paper trail can show us exactly how this payment was made, exactly how Michael Cohen was reimbursed, and exactly how they booked it. What I'd be shocked if the paperwork showed is a direct link to Donald Trump. If there is an email, text, a memo where Donald Trump says ‘Yes guys, do it this way’ or 'I'd like you to do it this way,' that’s a smoking gun. But short of that, the paperwork is an important part of the story, but just saying it’s a paper case, there's a paper trail, doesn’t necessarily get you to the core issue of the defendant or the potential defendants’ criminal liability," Honig said.
NEW YORK PROSECUTORS SIGNAL TRUMP MAY FACE CRIMINAL CHARGES FROM STORMY DANIELS SCANDAL
During ABC's "The View" on Monday, co-host Alyssa Farah Griffin seemed to doubt that the Stormy Daniels case was a "slam dunk."
Farah Griffin said she felt "uneasy" about the case because it "carries the shortest sentence."
"I am nervous that of the six both civil and criminal investigations, this one seems like it’s — to the to say the weakest, it’s a strong case but it carries the shortest sentence," she said. "I would feel a lot better if the unprecedented step of a former president, being, whether he is or isn’t perpwalked and arraigned, arrested, had his mug shot taken, I want that to be a rock solid slam dunk case."
TRUMP PROBE: LAW ENFORCEMENT DON’T EXPECT ARRAIGNMENT UNTIL NEXT WEEK, VIRTUAL OPTION NOT CONSIDERED
Former U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia Michael Moore told MSNBC's Alex Wagner on March 15 that he didn't find the Stormy Daniels case "very compelling."
"I have some real misgivings about where we are in the cases. I wish these prosecutors would get somewhere in a room together and talk about who has the strongest case and who's got the most evidence, who can actually do something as opposed to worrying about who is going get to be the first one at the watering trough. And I am afraid that is where we are at. And I just don’t find the case very compelling, we are talking about a case, it’s as old as the New York case, over a misdemeanor charge which they think maybe if they charge it a certain way or have certain evidence added to it, it might become a felony, I just am not sure that's the case you want to bring first to try to bring a historic case against a former President of the United States," Moore said.
He said a "weak case" would make "bad law" for the other cases that might be stronger.
A New York Magazine piece published on Sunday noted that the "prevailing mood" among Trump's critics is "nervousness and skepticism."
"We find ourselves on tenterhooks waiting for Trump to be indicted by the Manhattan district attorney’s office in what would be the first-ever criminal prosecution of a former U.S. president, but the prevailing mood among many of Trump’s detractors and antagonists is one of nervousness and skepticism, not excitement," the piece headlined, "The First Case Against Trump Is … This?" said.
The Washington Post's Ruth Marcus wrote in early March that she was "nervous" this case might allow Trump to "escape punishment."
An MSNBC op-ed headlined, "The risks of indicting Trump in the N.Y. hush money case," argued this case might be the "hardest to prove." Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, wrote that "for some of Trump’s biggest critics, the prospect of an indictment related to the Daniels case leads to little but existential dread."
Trump said Saturday that he expected to be arrested on Tuesday amid reports saying the Manhattan district attorney's office is preparing to issue an indictment for alleged hush money payments that Trump made as a presidential candidate in 2016.
Fox News Digital's Lindsay Kornick and Aaron Kliegman contributed to this report.
