Testimony in Trump’s trial in New York continues as the Supreme Court considers an immunity claim in a separate federal case.
Former United States President Donald Trump saw two of the four criminal cases against him move forward on Thursday.
In New York, Trump was again in court in a case involving hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 presidential election, in which he defeated former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
He is charged with 35 felony counts of falsifying business documents, with prosecutors arguing that their actions were part of a larger criminal scheme to influence the vote.
Here are the takeaways from Thursday’s proceedings:
A tabloid publisher knew that ‘catch and kill’ payments were against campaign laws
Speaking at the New York trial, National Enquirer publisher David Pecker said he knew the effort to buy and block negative stories about Trump was a violation of federal election laws.
In the US, corporations must report payments made in coordination with an election campaign. Pecker was witness before that he had agreed to use his position as the “eyes and ears” of the campaign, buying unproven stories and then killing them before publication. In a meeting with Trump and Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, he said that the three planned to block damaging political stories.
Pecker was specifically referring to paying model Karen McDougal $150,000 for her story about an alleged affair with Trump. When asked if the intention in buying the story was to influence the results of the election, he replied: “Yes, it was.”
While the 34 fraud charges against Trump relate primarily to payments made to Daniels, prosecutors have spent the early days of witness testimony trying to establish a broader pattern of Trump’s establishment is engaging in election fraud.
Pecker says Trump wasn’t worried about a family learning about an alleged affair
The publisher said he had never seen Trump indicate he was concerned about any damage to his family that could arise from the allegations of extramarital affairs raised by McDougal and Daniels.
Instead, he said during questioning by prosecutors that he believed the damage control efforts were purely political. “I think it was for the campaign. “
In fact, Pecker added to the lawsuit that Trump never mentioned his family when talking about the faculty allegations.
The plea undermines one of the central tenets of the defense’s argument that the payments to Daniels were intended to prevent personal, not political, harm to Trump.
Prosecutors say Trump has committed more violations of the gag order
Prosecutors have been waiting for Judge Juan Merchan to rule on allegations that Trump violated the partial gag order at least 10 times; earlier the judge banned Trump from speaking publicly about people involved in the case.
Prosecutors said Trump had violated the order four times since requesting sanctions on Tuesday.
These included two new attacks that Trump directed at Cohen while speaking to the media. Trump also referred to jurors as “95 percent Democrats,” in another alleged breach.
Prosecutors also argued that calling Pecker a “nice guy” at Thursday’s campaign stop was a form of intimidation. They said the statement was intended to send a message to Pecker and other witnesses to be nice to Trump or face consequences.
Defense begins cross-examination
Thursday’s proceedings ended with Trump defense attorney Emil Bove cross-examining Pecker.
In the first part of his interrogation, he tried to portray “catch and kill” schemes as “standard operating procedure”.
The Supreme Court appears poised to reject Trump’s appeal
During a day of questioning, US Supreme Court justices appeared skeptical of Trump’s claims that all of his official actions in the White House should be protected by blanket immunity.
Otherwise, Trump’s lawyer John Sauer said, it could be common for former presidents to be sued for unpopular policy decisions.
In response, Justice Elena Kagan asked if a vice president could escape prosecution even if he ordered a coup or sold nuclear secrets. Sauer said the vice president’s charges might not be allowed if those were proven to be official acts.
“That sure sounds bad, doesn’t it? ” Kagan replied.
Trump’s federal case is likely to be delayed
Thursday’s proceedings showed that a quick decision from the Supreme Court is unlikely.
Prosecutors have asked for the decision to be moved quickly, so that the federal case can go to trial before the November election.
The Supreme Court usually issues its final opinion by the end of June, about four months before the election. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, who would preside over the trial, said pretrial proceedings could take up to three months. He could also send the case back down to a lower court.
Underscoring the seriousness of the case on Thursday, Justice Samuel Alito said “whatever we decide will apply to all future presidents”.
2024-04-25 21:31:09
#takeaways #Trumps #immunity #hearing #Yorks #hush #money #trial
