Mehek Cooke: Defense in Trump Assassination Case Has ‘No Evidence—Only Distraction’

The Daily Signal’s Senior National Security and Legal Analyst Mehek Cooke argued that the defense in the alleged assassination plot against President Donald Trump lacks both the facts and the evidence.

Appearing on Fox & Friends First Monday, Cooke said the defense is resorting to distraction tactics to undermine the prosecution and obscure the case against suspect Cole Allen, 31. She addressed the defense’s claims that the presence of senior officials at the high-profile White House Correspondents’ Dinner, the site of the alleged attempted assassination, somehow tainted the case or should disqualify federal prosecutors.

Jeannine Pirro, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, was present at the event, as was acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. Pirro’s office is prosecuting the case against Allen.

“That is a good question, and they absolutely can [prosecute],” Cooke said. “The defense does not have evidence or facts on their side. They are doing everything they can to create distraction and try to put the DOJ on the stand.”

Cooke also rejected the notion that proximity to government officials creates an immediate conflict of interest, emphasizing that disqualification requires proof of specific influence.

“If Jeannine Pirro or any of the higher-up officials have specific or unique evidence, then no, they should not be prosecuting the case because they would be a witness in the case,” Cooke explained. Mere presence is not going to automatically disqualify them. “Half of Washington would be disqualified.”

Allen appeared in federal court in Washington, D.C. on Monday and pleaded not guilty to charges that included attempting to assassinate the president, transporting a firearm across state lines, and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence.

Cooke also warned the case reflects growing concerns about the inconsistent application of justice in politically sensitive prosecutions.

“We’re already seeing a lot of political bias in this case… it’s either going to follow the rule of law or we’re going to have a two-tier system,” she said, pointing to comparisons with so-called Russiagate where judges, FBI agents, and prosecutors had close proximity to the president at the time. She argued this case should be treated no differently.

Ultimately, Cooke argued that the case must remain focused on facts over narratives. The defense is trying to make this case about “Trump’s team versus everybody else because the evidence is so explosive, the defense has nothing else to turn to,” she said. “If this judge has respect for the rule of law, he will not rule in favor of this motion.”