Key Takeaways from Trump Trial Closing Arguments

First Day of Trump Trial Ends After Opening Statements

Yesterday’s closing arguments centered on whether Trump knowingly engaged in illegal activities and relied heavily on the credibility of Michael Cohen’s testimony. Here are key takeaways from the marathon day of closing arguments. 

1. Did Trump Order Fake Invoices and Records, or Did Michael Cohen Create Them?

Defense attorney Blanche argued that Cohen, not Trump, created the 11 invoices for $35,000 each, intended to reimburse Cohen for paying hush money to Stormy Daniels. Blanche stated, “Trump had no part in creating the invoices,” which were marked as “legal expenses” by Trump Organization staff using their multi-data system dropdown menu.

2. Did Trump Willfully Violate Federal Campaign Finance Laws?

Blanche contended that Trump could not have conspired to influence the 2016 election unlawfully since he would need to have known that he was using “unlawful means” to influence the election. Blanche argued there was no evidence Trump knew the $130,000 payment to Daniels was an illegal campaign contribution that needed to be covered up.

3. The Case Rests on Cohen, a Proven Liar

Blanche attacked Cohen’s credibility, labeling him the “Gloat” or “greatest liar of all time.” He noted Cohen’s history of lying to Congress, federal judges, and the US justice department during this trial, making his testimony unreliable. Blanche suggested Cohen’s motivation was personal and financial gain, arguing that Cohen had an axe to grind against Trump.

4. Trump Didn’t Create the Invoices but ‘Caused’ Them to Be Made 

Lead prosecutor Joshua Steinglass argued that under New York state law, it only needed to be proven that Trump helped “cause” Cohen or others to create false records. Steinglass suggested that Cohen was executing an illicit repayment scheme devised by Trump.

5. Trump’s Unlawful Acts Were to Pay to Kill Negative Stories

Steinglass asserted that when money changed hands to benefit Trump’s 2016 campaign, it constituted “unlawful means” by exceeding federal campaign contribution limits of $2,700 per person per election. Whether the jury will accept this argument is still uncertain, as Judge Juan Merchan has not yet ruled on the standards jurors must use.

6. Attacks on Cohen’s Credibility Were Not Consistent

Steinglass countered the defense’s attacks on Cohen, pointing out that Cohen lied to Congress at Trump’s request about interactions with Russia, gaining no benefit other than staying in Trump’s favor. Additionally, Steinglass highlighted the inconsistency in Blanche’s claims, noting that if Cohen stole $60,000 by overbilling Trump, it contradicts the defense’s argument that Cohen was merely reimbursed for hush money.

The post Key Takeaways from Trump Trial Closing Arguments first appeared on The Source.

The post Key Takeaways from Trump Trial Closing Arguments appeared first on The Source.

The Rundown After Another Contentious Day of Testimony at Trump’s Trial

The Rundown After Another Contentious Day of Testimony at Trump’s Trial

After another contentious day of former President Donald Trump’s criminal trial, his defense attorneys didn’t let up their barrage of attacks against Stormy Daniels’s credibility on Thursday. Trump’s defense attorney, Susan Necheles, flat-out accused the adult film performer of completely making up the story of her sexual encounter with Trump to make money. Here’s the rundown on the rest of the courtroom drama after Day 14 of the Trump hush money trial:

Stormy Daniels faced another day of cross-examination, adamantly asserting the truth of her account despite defense attorney Susan Necheles’ attempts to undermine her credibility. Daniels remained steadfast in her assertion that her sexual encounter with Trump was genuine, even when confronted with inconsistencies in her narrative.

Trump’s defense team and prosecutors clashed over Stormy Daniels’ financial situation, with Necheles insinuating that Daniels fabricated her story for monetary gain. Conflicting accounts were presented regarding Daniels’ earnings from recounting her alleged affair with Trump, including references to tweets and online store promotions.

Former Trump aide Madeleine Westerhout provided insights into the inner workings of the White House, detailing her experiences working in Trump’s West Wing for over two years. Testimony included discussions about a list of Trump’s contacts, ranging from media personalities to sports figures, received from his longtime assistant Rhona Graff.

Trump’s legal team sought modifications to the gag order against him and requested a mistrial following Daniels’ testimony. The judge denied both motions, rejecting arguments that Trump should be allowed to respond to Daniels’ allegations publicly. The defense contended that Daniels’ testimony unfairly prejudiced the jury against Trump.

Judge Merchan rebuffed Trump’s renewed motion for a mistrial, citing the defense’s actions in challenging Daniels’ credibility as a factor in allowing the salacious testimony. Despite arguments from Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, that Daniels’ trial testimony presented a new version of events, Merchan disagreed and denied the mistrial motion.

The post The Rundown After Another Contentious Day of Testimony at Trump’s Trial first appeared on The Source.

The post The Rundown After Another Contentious Day of Testimony at Trump’s Trial appeared first on The Source.

Emotional Day 11 in Trump Hush Money Criminal Trial

Emotional Day 11 in Trump Hush Money Criminal Trial

Hope Hicks, former campaign press secretary and White House communications director for Donald Trump found herself in the hot seat on Friday. She faced questions about pivotal moments during Trump’s presidential campaign and his subsequent occupation of the White House. Sitting just feet away from her former boss, Hicks recounted the chaotic fallout from the release of the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape and the subsequent response from the Trump administration regarding allegations of hush money payments.

Appearing visibly nervous, Hicks struggled to maintain eye contact with Trump. She answered questions from prosecutors for over two hours. The courtroom was tense, with Trump occasionally exchanging notes with his attorneys while closely observing the proceedings. Guess he wasn’t sleeping for this one. The gist of Hicks’ testimony centered around her role in the Trump campaign in October 2016, particularly in the aftermath of the “Access Hollywood” tape revelation. You know where he was exposed on a hot mic bragging about grabbing women by the you know what. She described the tape’s release as a “crisis” for the campaign, which subsequently influenced their response to reports of hush money payments involving Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. Hicks adamantly denied allegations of Trump’s affairs with these women. Hopefully, no pun intended she can sleep well at night after her public stance.

During cross-examination, Hicks revealed Trump’s concerns regarding the impact of these scandals on his family, particularly his wife Melania. Jurors were presented with a full transcript of the “Access Hollywood” tape, exposing Trump’s incendiary remarks. Thankfully. Prosecutors meticulously outlined the timeline of events surrounding the hush money payments, inching closer to establishing Trump’s culpability in the alleged cover-up. Hicks recounted Trump’s reaction upon learning about the payments, emphasizing his desire to mitigate any potential damage to his reputation. Hicks still denied direct knowledge of any coverup. 

Then, Trump’s legal team relentlessly attacked the credibility of Michael Cohen. Hicks corroborated these assertions, portraying Cohen as a self-proclaimed “fixer.” The trial also saw contentious exchanges regarding the integrity of digital evidence, with Trump’s lawyers attempting to cast doubt on the reliability of Cohen’s cell phone data. Despite efforts to undermine the prosecution’s case, forensic experts testified to the absence of tampering or manipulation in the evidence presented. As the trial adjourned for the day, the courtroom buzzed with anticipation for the testimonies yet to come, promising further revelations in the unfolding saga of the Trump hush money scandal.

The post Emotional Day 11 in Trump Hush Money Criminal Trial first appeared on The Source.

The post Emotional Day 11 in Trump Hush Money Criminal Trial appeared first on The Source.

Trump Criminal Trial: Day 8 Key Takeaways

Here’s What We Know About the Jurors Seated in Trump Historic Criminal Trial

As the first full week of testimony wrapped up in the historic Donald Trump hush money trial, jurors were granted a three-day weekend to mull over what they had heard. After over 10 hours of detailed testimony across four days, David Pecker, the former chief of American Media Inc., concluded his time on the witness stand. 

Pecker outlined how he assisted Trump in suppressing negative stories and attacking his rivals in the National Enquirer during the 2016 campaign. Upcoming testimonies from Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen are heavily anticipated.

Friday afternoon, the prosecution called Rhona Graff, Trump’s longtime assistant at the Trump Organization, followed by a banker for Cohen, indicating a shift towards the pivotal documents central to the charges against Trump.

The courtroom drama unfolded with more of the alleged scandalous affair, where the focus shifted to 34 counts of falsified business records. Prosecutors meticulously presented evidence, including a shell company and its dormant bank account, intended for hush money payments that never materialized. 

Pecker’s testimony, portraying a narrative of unique dealings and campaign assistance, clashed with Trump’s legal team’s efforts to discredit him by pointing out alleged inconsistencies. The jury was given testimony to navigate through a complex paper trail.

The Trump legal team worked to undermine Pecker’s credibility during his extensive testimony. Meanwhile, prosecutors portrayed Pecker’s deal with Trump as vital and positioned him as a campaign insider. Trump’s attorneys challenged this narrative by the prosecution. They pointed out alleged inconsistencies in Pecker’s testimony and disputed his claims about AMI’s acknowledgment of campaign finance violations.

Pecker concluded his time on the stand. The courtroom tension was high, with both sides contesting the credibility of his statements.

Of course, Trump raged outside the courtroom about witnesses and still violating his gag order. BTW, he’s still nodding off in court; He’s also complaining about how cold the courtroom is. But wait, isn’t he a strong alpha male that will make America great again? Or just another criminal defendant who can’t stand a little air conditioning? Meh, who knows at this point? 

The post Trump Criminal Trial: Day 8 Key Takeaways first appeared on The Source.

The post Trump Criminal Trial: Day 8 Key Takeaways appeared first on The Source.

First Day of Testimony in Trump Criminal Trial Ends After Opening Statements and First Witness

First Day of Trump Trial Ends After Opening Statements

The first day of testimony wrapped up Donald Trump’s history in New York’s hush money criminal trial. This is the first time a former President has been tried in criminal court, so here’s what you need to know.

Open statements were laid out. Prosecutors said this case is about a “criminal conspiracy and a cover-up.” The defense, unsurprisingly, tried to discredit their points. That’s their job, but let’s see if the jury buys it after the first day.

Then, the first witness testified. Now get this, his name is David Pecker. Insert chuckle. He’s the ex-publisher of the National Enquirer, arguably the most prominent tabloid magazine in the country. Pecker will resume testimony Tuesday. He only briefly took the stand on Monday. CNN reports that prosecutors believe Pecker was “a central player in the alleged hush money scheme in an effort to suppress” or kill negative details about Trump before the 2016 election.

The judge ruled that, on Monday, he would allow Trump to be asked about the civil fraud and the E. Jean Carroll verdicts, among other previous cases, if he decided to testify. ICYMI, Trump was ordered to pay over $400 million in penalties after a New York civil court found he defrauded the state of NY through years of fraudulent business dealings. As for Carroll, a civil jury found that Trump defamed her when he said he did not rape her in the mid-nineties. A jury believed some of her accounts and found he sexually assaulted Ms. Carroll and defamed her. When Trump defamed her again, he was ordered to pay over $80 million in damages. The former President is appealing both verdicts. 

Now, get this. Trump is under a strict gag order. The judge said there will be a gag order hearing to determine if Trump violated the order. That is set for 9:30 a.m. ET tomorrow, and the jury has been excused until 11 a.m. ET while the prosecution and defense argue over Trump and his gag order, which he seemingly is violating. 

The Trump legal saga continues.

The post First Day of Testimony in Trump Criminal Trial Ends After Opening Statements and First Witness first appeared on The Source.

The post First Day of Testimony in Trump Criminal Trial Ends After Opening Statements and First Witness appeared first on The Source.

Here’s What We Know About the Jurors Seated in Trump’s Historic Criminal Trial

Here’s What We Know About the Jurors Seated in Trump Historic Criminal Trial

CNN reports that so far, and in lightening quick fashion seven people have been seated on the jury in the unprecedented Donald Trump hush money trial in Manhattan. Court will not be in session Wednesday. Jury selection will continue Thursday until prosecutors and defense counsel can agree on 12 jurors and probably six alternates in the first criminal trial of a former President of the United States.

Let’s get to what we know about the seven jurors that have been already seated. Not that this reporting comes from CNN:

  1. The first seated juror, who will be the foreperson on Trump’s jury, is a man originally from Ireland. He works in sales and has some college education. He is married but doesn’t have kids. He reads the New York Times and Daily Mail and watches some Fox News and MSNBC.
  2. The second juror is an oncology nurse who lives with her fiancé. She’s a native New Yorker. She reads the New York Times and watches CNN.
  3. The third seated juror is a corporate lawyer. He’s originally from Oregon. He gets his news from The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Google. He’s a younger man who’s never been married and doesn’t have kids. 
  4. The fourth juror is an older Puerto Rican man who’s married with adult children and two grandkids. When asked about his hobbies, he said, “I guess my hobby is my family.” He has an IT business for training and consulting and attended one year of college. He told the court he finds Trump fascinating and mysterious. “So many people are set off one way or the other and that is interesting,” the man said. “Really, this one guy can do all of this, wow.” Trump “makes things interesting,” the man said, but also didn’t indicate any strong feelings about his politics.
  5. The fifth juror is a young Black woman who teaches English language in a public charter school system. She has a master’s degree in education, is not married and doesn’t have any kids. The juror said that as a person of color she has friends who have strong opinions on Trump, but she personally is not a political person. She said she tries to avoid political conversations and doesn’t really care for the news. The juror did say she appreciates Trump’s candor: “President Trump speaks his mind and I’d rather that than someone who’s in office who you don’t know what they’re thinking.” She was also the only juror of 18 in the box Tuesday morning who said she wasn’t aware that Trump is facing charges in other criminal cases.
  6. The sixth juror is a software engineer at a large broadcast company who recently graduated from college. She voiced no strong feelings about Donald Trump one way or the other and said, “I will be fair and impartial.” She is not married and has no kids, currently living with three roommates in Chelsea. The juror gets her news from the New York Times, Google, Facebook and TikTok. She asked the judge whether her sister’s wedding on a Sunday in September would be a scheduling conflict. Merchan quipped, “If we were still here in September that would be a big problem,” garnering laughs in the courtroom.
  7. The seventh juror is a civil litigator who is married with two kids and lives on the Upper East Side in Manhattan. Originally from North Carolina, he reads the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, New York Post and Washington Post. He said he has “political views as to the Trump presidency” and that he thinks there were likely Trump administration policies he disagreed with. “I don’t know the man and I don’t have opinions about him personally,” he said. “I certainly follow the news, I’m aware there are other lawsuits out there. But I’m not sure that I know anyone’s character.”

The post Here’s What We Know About the Jurors Seated in Trump’s Historic Criminal Trial first appeared on The Source.

The post Here’s What We Know About the Jurors Seated in Trump’s Historic Criminal Trial appeared first on The Source.