Former President Donald Trump left Manhattan Criminal Court at the end of the day of his criminal trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments in New York City on Tuesday.
Charly Triballeau/AFP via Getty Images
hide caption
caption conversion
Charly Triballeau/AFP via Getty Images
NEW YORK – Attorneys delivered closing arguments Tuesday in their bid to convict or acquit former President Donald Trump on 34 counts of falsifying business records as the historic trial neared a close.
A 12-person jury, which has heard from 22 witnesses and more than six hours of arguments, will begin deliberations on Wednesday. It may take hours, days or weeks before they make a decision. A unanimous jury is needed to convict or acquit Trump.
Trump, who has pleaded not guilty, frequently called the trial “election interference” for preventing him from campaigning for president, falsely claiming a partisan plot against him.
On Tuesday, Trump had more family members in court than usual. Children Donald Jr., Eric and Tiffany were all in the courtroom, along with son-in-law Michael Boulos and daughter-in-law and RNC co-chair Lara Trump.
As Trump Attorney Todd Blanche began his closing arguments, the Biden-Harris campaign held an event outside the courthouse in Manhattan featuring actor Robert DeNiro and officers U.S. Capitol police officers Harry Dunn and Michael Fanone.
Prosecutors allege that Trump knew about settlement negotiations with adult film actor Stormy Daniels to keep her alleged affair out of the press before the 2016 election and that Trump directed former “fixer” Michael Cohen to pay her $130,000. Prosecutors argued that the fake business records, partly labeled as “legal custodians,” were a paper trail for Cohen.
Trump has long argued that he only pays his lawyers.
The defense presented its closing argument first, focusing on Michael Cohen
Under New York law, Trump’s defense delivered the first set of closing arguments, which lasted more than two hours. Blanche focuses on the reputational issues surrounding Cohen.
Here are four highlights from his summary of their defense:
1. Who does not testify
The defense spent time pointing to potential witnesses that the jury did not hear – specifically Allen Weisselberg, Don Jr. or Eric Trump, who ran the Trump Organization at the time; Dylan Howard, former editor of the paper National Inquirer; Gina Rodriguez, who manages Stormy Daniels; or Trump’s bodyguard, Keith Schiller.
2. Documents
Blanche argued that Trump’s sons signed two checks that constituted several felonies. And he also told the jury that Cohen was the one who created the 11 bills that made up the 11 crimes against Trump.
He asserted that the alleged wrongdoer was the legal custodian of the services — especially since Cohen identified himself as Trump’s personal attorney.
“You shouldn’t think of the word ‘down payment’ as distinct from the reason for payment — it’s just one word,” says Blanche.
3. Cohen’s reliability
Blanche attempted to cast doubt on various conversations Cohen recalled having with Trump, including at the White House, allegedly about the agreement to silence Daniels. But the defense also argued that Cohen lied on the stand, answering questions one way for the prosecution but another way for the defense.
“Cohen lied to you,” Blanche declared several times to emphasize the jury’s point at various stages in his speech.
He also spent time casting doubt on a secret recording Cohen made of a conversation with Trump, which allegedly confirmed knowledge of the payment and agreement with his ex. dissipated model Karen McDougal.
4. Electoral influence
Blanche reiterated one of the points he made in his opening statement: It doesn’t matter if there is a conspiracy to try to influence the election. “Every campaign is a conspiracy to promote a candidacy,” said Blanche.
It’s common for celebrities and candidates to work with media organizations, such as tabloids, to promote themselves and their campaigns, Blanche said.
Blanche argued that it was “nonsense” that Trump, Cohen and former publisher David Pecker actually believed they could influence the 2016 election through the use of National questioner tabloid.
“There’s nothing wrong with President Trump wanting positive news,” Blanche said. But he added: “The idea that hipsters believe that positive stories in the National Enquirer can influence the election is absurd.”
Blanche said the tabloid’s reach was far below what was needed to swing the election.
The prosecution pushed back
Prosecutors spent six hours walking the jury through each part of the case and refuting the defense’s claims. Prosecutor Josh Steinglass walked the jury through all of their evidence: about the 2006 sexual encounter described by Daniels, saying Cohen knew what happened in that hotel room “and that leads to motivation”. “It was a performance the defendant did not want the public to see,” Steinglass told the jury of Stormy Daniels’ testimony.
Here are four highlights from their closing argument:
1. Phone call 1 minute 36 seconds
Prosecutor Josh Steinglass took out his phone, set the timer and replayed the call that was the focus of Cohen’s in-person investigation two weeks ago. Cohen testified that in one phone call, he spoke privately with Trump’s bodyguard about a harassing teenager and spoke privately with Trump about the payment to Daniels. Trump’s lawyers aimed to discredit Cohen’s recollection of that conversation — arguing that it would be difficult to broach both topics in such short notice.
Start with “Hey, Keith, how’s it going?” Steinglass made a simulated phone call in which he discussed the problem of a teenage prankster who had been harassing Cohen, then said, “Can I talk to the boss?” Steinglass then simulates a short conversation about taking care of “that thing” and a small talk.
“And it all took 49 seconds,” about half the time of the call in question, Steinglass said, adding that it was just one of 20 calls Cohen made.
2. The value of witnesses
Steinglass told the jury that to acquit Trump, they would have to ignore the testimony of several witnesses — not just Cohen’s — including the testimony of former Trump Organization controller Jeffrey McConney, and other evidence. Other evidence such as handwritten notes on bank statements detailing the calculations. about how payment will be made.
Steinglass referred to a variety of witnesses who testified, including current and former employees of Trump’s business and operations departments. He also referred to witnesses working for Trump’s book publishing companies about his business philosophy.
Rereading passages from the book, Steinglass further emphasized Trump’s “thriftiness” and reminded the jury of Pecker’s testimony, where Trump was also described as frugal.
2. Trump’s business activities
Steinglass again looked at the specific checks and invoices in question and how Deborah Tarasoff, who oversees accounts payable at the Trump Organization, packaged them together to send to Trump even after he went to the White House.
Prosecutors allege that even finance director Weisselberg could only approve invoices up to $10,000.
“Despite being thrifty and attentive to detail, the defendant did not ask any questions because he already knew the answers,” Steinglass argued, asking the jury not to believe “the narrative.” false claim that the defendant was too busy” while in court. The White House found that large sums of money were being spent.
There are two documents showing handwritten notes from Trump’s chief financial officer and his financial controller, which spell out the repayment plan: 130 times two, to cover taxes, plus an expense other, plus bonuses, for a total of $420,000. “They are smoking guns,” Steinglass said.
“They completely refute the defense’s claim that these were for legal work,” he said, adding, “I’m almost speechless that they’re still trying to make an argument that this is for the lawful custodian.”
3. Election concerns
Steinglass focused on concerns he told Trump about how the story of an alleged affair with an adult film star could damage his 2016 presidential bid. He argued that Trump himself asked Pecker and Cohen to handle the suppression of negative media – especially allegations from women about Trump before 2016.
Prosecutors say it all started with an August 2015 meeting at Trump Tower with National questioner Pecker Publishing House. “Once money starts changing hands, it’s a violation of federal election law,” Steinglass said.
He insisted that Trump’s concern was not his family but the election and that the deal with the tabloid suggested that was the impetus for a settlement 10 years after the alleged encounter.
“This is buying a story that you don’t intend to print so that no one else can print it,” Steinglass said, referring to Blanche’s argument that tabloids often buy stories and then choose not to. post them.
Linking this to Daniels’ payment, Steinglass reminded the jury of the timing – how the agreement for Daniels to sign a non-disclosure agreement was made after the Access Hollywood tape became public.
“Stormy Daniels is a walking and talking reminder that defendants are more than just words,” Steinglass said.
NPR’s Andrea Bernstein contributed to this report.
