|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:12:01 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Defense begins opening statement: 'President Trump is innocent'And now it’s the defense’s turn. Defense attorney Todd Blanche is telling jurors: President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney should never have brought this case.Blanche is trying hard to humanize Trump, while also repeatedly calling him “President Trump”. It’s an odd balance to strike – trying to portray him as a normal guy, but also the former commander-in-chief. -- President Trump, you’ve seen him, of course, for years and years and years … He’s, in some ways, larger than life. But he’s also here in this courtroom doing what any of us would do – defending himself.As for why they’re using “President” for a man who’s no longer in the White House? -- This is a title that he has earned, because he was our 45th president. We will call him President Trump, out of respect for the office that he held from 2017 to 2021.Blanche, shortly thereafter, said: “He’s also a man, he’s a husband, he’s a father, he’s a person who’s just like you and just like me.” Trump lawyer argues 'there's nothing wrong with trying to influence an election'Trump lead lawyer Todd Blanche’s defense opening statement to the jury appears to be that Trump was unaware about the specifics of the hush-money payments because Trump left it all to his ex-lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen. Trump had nothing to do with the 34 checks other than to sign them, Blanche says. Trump had nothing to do with generating the checks or the allegedly falsified entries on the Trump Organization ledger, he says. Blanche adds that there’s nothing wrong with trying to influence the 2016 election: “It’s called democracy.” And that’s the other thrust of Trump’s defense: Entering into a non-disclosure agreement is perfectly legal; companies do that all the time.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:13:40 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Trump lawyer Todd Blanche then downplayed prosecutors’ theory of the case. He said: I have a spoiler alert: there’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election, it’s called democracy.Prosecutors, he said, “They put something sinister on this idea, as if it was a crime. You’ll learn: it’s not.”
As for Stormy Daniels wanting to come forward with her alleged affair with Trump, and his decision to address it, Trump lawyer Todd Blanche defended his doing so, leaning hard into the everyman motif yet again – that Trump was just a man who wanted to protect his loved ones. -- It was sinister, and it was an attempt to try to embarrass President Trump, to embarrass his family, because as the people alluded to at that time, there were all kinds of salacious allegations going around about President Trump, and it was damaging to him and it was damaging to his family.Blanche also said: You will hear during this trial President Trump fought back – like he always does – like he’s entitled to do to protect his family, his reputation, and his brand – that is not a crime.
Trump lawyer Todd Blanche has been hammering down on the prosecution’s expected star witnesses: Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels. Cohen, Blanche said, was incredibly loyal to his then-boss. He wanted a job in his administration and didn’t get one. Blanche said: He’s obsessed with President Trump – he’s obsessed with President Trump, even to this day.So much so that Cohen has multiple podcasts over Trump and routinely waxes enthusiastic about the possibility of his former boss’s conviction. Cohen, he noted, was found to have lied under oath, further undermining his reliability. As for Daniels? She had “made a life” off of her alleged liaison with Trump, Blanche said. But, in the end, her role here was immaterial. -- It doesn’t matter. What I mean by that is, I expect you will learn that Ms Daniels doesn’t have any idea. She doesn’t know anything about the charge, 34 counts in this case. She has no idea what Michael Cohen wrote on the invoice ... her testimony, while salacious, does not matter.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:17:14 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Trump lawyer Todd Blanche also insisted that catch-and-kills are legally OK. “There’s nothing illegal about a scheme,” Blanche said, insisting nothing was legally untoward with what purportedly went down between Trump, Michael Cohen and David Pecker. “This sort of things happens regularly, where newspapers [make] decisions about what to publish, where to publish, how to publish,” Blanche said. -- It happens with politicians, famous people, wealthy people …Blanche’s opening statement has ended. We have a brief break.
Donald Trump raised his fist and did not speak to reporters as he left the courtroom after opening statements, per pool. The court is taking a short 10-minute recess.
Anti-Trump protesters and supporters of the former president gathered outside the Manhattan courthouse on the first day of opening statements in his hush-money criminal trial. Police had discussed the possibility of closing the park across the street after a man set himself on fire there last week, but it remained open to the public today.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:18:41 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Prosecution calls first witness: David PeckerAnd we’re off to the races. Judge Juan Merchan directs prosecution to call first witness. “The people call David Pecker.” Pecker, with his silvery hair slicked back, sporting a slate suit and a yellow tie, walked to the witness stand. He was instructed to raise his right hand while being sworn in and when he was directed to stand in a different direction, offered a smile. He’s seated at the stand. Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass just said “good afternoon, Mr Pecker,” to which he replied, “Good afternoon.” Who is David Pecker?David Pecker was a key Trump ally who served as the CEO of American Media Inc (AMI), the publisher of the National Enquirer. Pecker helped Trump by purchasing the rights to potentially damaging stories and then never publishing them, a practice known as “catch and kill”. In 2015, AMI paid $30,000 to Dino Sajudin, a former doorman at Trump Tower, who was trying to sell a story that Trump had allegedly fathered a child out of wedlock. In June of 2016, AMI paid Karen McDougal, a former Playboy model, $150,000 to suppress a story about an affair. AMI bought the story with the understanding that Trump would reimburse them, according to the indictment. Michael Cohen would later release a tape of him and Trump discussing repaying Pecker. In 2016, Dylan Howard, then the editor-in-chief of the National Enquirer, alerted Pecker that Daniels had potentially damaging information about Trump, according to the indictment. Pecker advised Howard to reach out to Cohen, and Cohen subsequently negotiated the deal with Stormy Daniels’ lawyer.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:19:35 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Right now, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is going through preliminary information, establish who David Pecker is, and why he matters. This is normally when witnesses first take the stand. --What kind of work do you do? Consulting. --What did you used to do? Pecker said he chaired AMI. The company had titles such as the National Enquirer and The Globe, he said.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass is trying to establish that David Pecker had the power as head of AMI to control coverage – which will help him later on as the prosecution tries to prove that Pecker was integral to the catch-and-kill conspiracy. Pecker said: We used checkbook journalism and we paid for stories. I gave a number to the editors that they could not spend more than $10,000 to investigate or produce or publish a story, anything over $10,000 they would spend on a story, they would have to be vetted and brought up to me, for approval.Did he have final editorial say, Steinglass pressed. Pecker replied: Being in the publishing industry for 40 years, I realized early in my career that the only thing that was important is the cover of a magazine, so when the editors produced the story or prepared a cover, we would have a meeting and they would present to me what the story would be, what the concept was, what the cost was going to be.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:20:58 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Donald Trump is very attentive to and focused on David Pecker’s testimony. He has been conferring both with his lawyers Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, in between watching Pecker on the monitor in front of him. Trump has also started to take notes on the yellow legal pad in front of him.
Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked David Pecker: if the story was big or involved a major figure, would he have final say? “Yes, I did,” the former publisher said.The prosecution now appears poised to use Pecker’s testimony for documentary evidence in relation to the conspiracy. Steinglass asked Pecker to tell jurors what the last four digits of several phone numbers that he used around election time. When Pecker had trouble remembering one, Steinglass joked, “This isn’t a quiz!” Pecker cackled.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:21:41 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Court adjournsDavid Pecker has completed his testimony for the day and is dismissed from the stand. He is expected to return tomorrow. The jury is slowly filing out.
The defense team and prosecutors are still in the courtroom after jurors left. Lawyers on both sides are squabbling over various objections.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 22, 2024 12:22:58 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Trump lawyer Alina Habba spoke to reporters a little while earlier as the court took a short recess, where she called the former president’s trials a “disgrace to the American judicial system”, per pool. Habba, flanked by Christopher Kise and Clifford Robert, said: The fact that we have two courts not one, criminal and civil, being used against one man because they cannot beat him in the polls is a disgrace to the American judicial system. You should not have two teams of lawyers here today. You should not even be here today, because you didn’t know is the epitome of a witch-hunt.She did not take any questions.
Donald Trump spoke to the media after court was adjourned for the day, where he complained that the hush-money case is "a case of bookkeeping, which is a very minor thing”. He said: I’m the leading candidate ... and this is what they’re trying to take me off the trail for. Checks being paid to a lawyer.Trump attacked Michael Cohen, claiming that the things Cohen got in trouble for “had nothing to do with me”. He said: [Cohen] represented a lot of people over the years but they take this payment and they call it a legal expense ... and this is what I got indicted over.The former president said he should be campaigning in Georgia, Florida and other places and instead “I’m sitting here and this will go on for a long time,” adding: It’s very unfair what’s going on and I should be allowed to campaign.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:25:24 GMT -5
(The Guardian) First witness David Pecker to return to the stand in Trump hush-money trialIt was a day full of salacious details and outrageous claims yesterday as Donald Trump appeared in a Manhattan courtroom for opening statements in his hush-money trial – the first ever criminal trial of a former US president. A 12-person jury in the case of the People of the State of New York versus Donald Trump heard prosecutors and defense lawyers give their side of events. The prosecution said Trump “orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election” in his efforts to cover up an alleged affair with the adult film star Stormy Daniels, calling it “election fraud – pure and simple”. The defense countered that there was no crime committed because paying hush money is not illegal and neither is trying to influence the outcome of an election – “It’s called democracy.” Obviously that’s not quite what the prosecution are claiming, but we now have an early sense of how the two sides want to frame the story. Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up the alleged affair Daniels just weeks before the election. The case, brought by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, is the first of four criminal cases against the presumptive Republican nominee to reach trial. It hinges on a $130,000 payment that Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, made to Daniels to keep her story under wraps. Bragg contends that Trump masked the true nature of the payment in business records, by describing repayments to Cohen as lawful legal expenses. The prosecution claims the fact he paid the money to influence the election makes it a campaign expense, and by lying about it he violated federal campaign law – causing the fraud to rise from a misdemeanour to a felony. Court is scheduled to begin at 9.30am ET, and the jury will return at 11am, with the first witness – David Pecker of the National Enquirer, a man at the heart of the alleged crimes – expected to return to the stand after a very brief appearance yesterday.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:26:04 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Judge to hold hearing over gag orderFirst off today, before we get to Pecker in the witness box, judge Merchan is likely to address whether Trump violated a court-imposed gag order with a series of social media posts about witnesses. Prosecutors have accused Trump of violating the order 10 times since the start of the trial, and last week filed a motion to hold the former president in contempt of court, and to fine him $1,000 per violation. Merchan subjected Trump to a gag order before the trial began, covering prosecutors (but not the Manhattan district attorney, Bragg), witnesses, court employees, jurors and their families. Before the trial, Merchan then extended the gag order to cover his own family and Bragg’s family, after Trump posted about Merchan’s daughter, who worked for a company that helped Democratic candidates with digital campaigns. Trump remains free to criticize Merchan himself, though doing so would be unlikely to win any favors from the judge, who will decide Trump’s sentence should the jury find him guilty.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:27:06 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Hush money was ‘election fraud pure and simple’, argued prosecutors during opening statementsIn his opening statements, the prosecutor Matthew Colangelo told an entertaining and damning tale. In it, a presidential candidate tried criminally to cover up an alleged affair with an adult film star to keep damaging information away from the American public weeks before the 2016 election. Specifically, Colangelo said, Trump’s campaign was terrified after the release of the Access Hollywood tape, which revealed Trump on a hot mic bragging that he could sexually assault women because he was famous. His campaign spun that story as “locker room talk”, but should US voters hear about an affair with a porn star (and who said Trump’s behavior in the bedroom was unpleasant), that wouldn’t be “talk” – it would be action. Colangelo said the effort to manipulate media began from the beginning of the campaign. He said Trump invited his friend and the former publisher of the National Enquirer, Pecker, to a meeting at Trump Tower in summer 2015. Trump had recently thrown his hat into the ring for the 2016 Republican nomination, and Colangelo said Trump, his former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen and Pecker hatched a plan to keep damaging information about Trump out of the press. According to the prosecution, Pecker agreed to run damaging information in the National Enquirer about opponents – including an item claiming, falsely, that Senator Ted Cruz had family connections to the JFK assassination. Pecker would also buy up negative stories for the express purpose of preventing them from being published – a “catch-and-kill” campaign that Colangelo said was geared towards helping Trump’s 2016 election campaign. He mentioned an earlier payment to Karen McDougal, the Playboy model who claimed to have had an affair with Trump. Colangelo said: Pecker will also testify that $150,000 was way more than AMI would normally pay for this kind of story, but he discussed it with Donald Trump and he discussed it with Michael Cohen, and he agreed on the deal with the understanding what Trump would find a way to pay AMI back … The company coordinated directly with the candidate.
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:28:00 GMT -5
(The Guardian) One amusing detail from yesterday – Colangelo using Trump’s famous cheapness as evidence of motive. The prosecutor noted that even though Cohen paid off Daniels to the tune of $130,000, he was ultimately repaid $420,000. Colangelo alleged that Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg met with Cohen to discuss the repayment, and added $50,000 to the tab for “tech services” – then double that amount “to account for taxes”. The fact Trump overpaid, Colangelo said, shows he knew the payoff was wrong. Donald Trump was a very frugal businessman. He believed in pinching pennies … He believed in negotiating every bill. -- … Donald Trump’s willingness to [overpay] here shows just how important it was to hide the true nature of Cohen’s [payment] to Ms Daniels and the overall election conspiracy they had launched in August of 2015.
Then it was the defense’s turn for opening statements. Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche started by making an effort to humanize Trump, while also repeatedly calling him “President Trump”. “He’s, in some ways, larger than life. But he’s also here in this courtroom doing what any of us would do – defending himself,” Blanche said. “He’s also a man, he’s a husband, he’s a father, he’s a person who’s just like you and just like me.” Leaving aside whether Donald Trump is anything like anyone else at all, Blanche then moved on to claiming Trump was unaware about the specifics of the hush-money payments because he left it all to Cohen. In a moment that caused some guffaws in the Guardian newsroom, Blanche said Trump had nothing to do with the 34 checks other than to sign them. He added: “There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy.” Prosecutors, he said, “they put something sinister on this idea, as if it was a crime. You’ll learn: it’s not.”
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:35:58 GMT -5
(The Guardian) The defense then moved on to attacking the key witnesses. First off, Blanche explained Trump’s actions after he heard the so-called “sinister” allegations of Stormy Daniels. He described these allegations an attempt to try to “embarrass President Trump, to embarrass his family, because as the people alluded to at that time, there were all kinds of salacious allegations going around about President Trump, and it was damaging to him and it was damaging to his family. “You will hear during this trial President Trump fought back – like he always does – like he’s entitled to do to protect his family, his reputation, and his brand – that is not a crime.” Blanche then attacked Cohen, who he claimed was peeved for not landing a job in the Trump administration. “He’s obsessed with President Trump, even to this day”, Blanche said, to the extent of having multiple podcasts over Trump and waxing enthusiastic about the possibility of his former boss’ conviction. He then noted that Cohen was found to have lied under oath, further undermining his reliability. As for Daniels, he dismissed her role in the trial as immaterial: “It doesn’t matter. What I mean by that is, I expect you will learn that Ms Daniels doesn’t have any idea. She doesn’t know anything about the charge, 34 counts in this case. She has no idea what Michael Cohen wrote on the invoice. “Her testimony, while salacious, does not matter.” Blanche concluded by emphasizing that catch-and-kills of the kind arranged by Trump, Cohen and Pecker of the National Enquirer are not illegal. “This sort of thing happens regularly, where newspapers [make] decisions about what to publish, where to publish, how to publish,” Blanche said. “It happens with politicians, famous people, wealthy people.”
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:37:03 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Trump 'a person just like you and me', argued defense in opening statementsIn the defense’s opening statements, Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche said: President Trump is innocent. President Trump did not commit any crimes. The Manhattan district attorney should never have brought this case. Blanche made an effort to humanize Trump, while also repeatedly calling him “President Trump”. -- He’s, in some ways, larger than life. But he’s also here in this courtroom doing what any of us would do – defending himself … He’s also a man, he’s a husband, he’s a father, he’s a person who’s just like you and just like me.Blanche argued that Trump was unaware about the specifics of the hush-money payments because he left it all to Trump’s former fixer and lawyer, Michael Cohen. Trump had nothing to do with the 34 checks other than to sign them, Blanche said. He added: There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It’s called democracy.Prosecutors, he said, “they put something sinister on this idea, as if it was a crime. You’ll learn: it’s not.”
|
|
|
Post by Webster on Apr 23, 2024 11:38:01 GMT -5
(The Guardian) Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche on Monday defended Trump’s attempt to address Stormy Daniels’s “sinister” allegations, calling it an attempt to try to “embarrass President Trump, to embarrass his family, because as the people alluded to at that time, there were all kinds of salacious allegations going around about President Trump, and it was damaging to him and it was damaging to his family”. -- You will hear during this trial President Trump fought back – like he always does – like he’s entitled to do to protect his family, his reputation, and his brand – that is not a crime.He attacked Michael Cohen, alleging he wanted a job in the Trump administration but did not get one, and saying “he’s obsessed with President Trump, even to this day” to the extent of having multiple podcasts over Trump and waxing enthusiastic about the possibility of his former boss’ conviction. Cohen, he noted, was found to have lied under oath, further undermining his reliability. As for Daniels, he dismissed her role in the trial as immaterial: It doesn’t matter. What I mean by that is, I expect you will learn that Ms Daniels doesn’t have any idea. She doesn’t know anything about the charge, 34 counts in this case. She has no idea what Michael Cohen wrote on the invoice … her testimony, while salacious, does not matter.
|
|