Donald Trump returned to court Thursday morning as witness testimony in his hush money trial readied to enter a third day. The trial resumes at the same time that the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in Washington over whether he should be immune from prosecution for actions he took during his time as president.
Here’s the latest:
Quick Read
- Trump Returns to Court Amid Supreme Court Hearing: Donald Trump appeared in court as his hush money trial continued, coinciding with Supreme Court hearings regarding his immunity from prosecution for actions during his presidency. The trial focuses on allegations that Trump used a “catch-and-kill” strategy to suppress damaging stories during the 2016 election campaign.
- David Pecker’s Testimony: David Pecker, former publisher of the National Enquirer, testified about his role in aiding Trump’s campaign by suppressing negative stories. He is expected to continue his testimony, detailing his involvement in payments made to silence potentially damaging claims against Trump.
- Charges and Legal Proceedings: Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, linked to payments made to silence stories about alleged affairs. This marks the first criminal trial of a former U.S. president, part of multiple legal challenges he faces.
- Trump’s Presence at Court: Trump’s visit to court involved comments on various issues, including the economy and his desire to attend the Supreme Court hearing. He expressed frustration over being unable to attend the Supreme Court arguments due to his ongoing trial in New York.
- Potential Contempt for Violating Gag Order: The trial judge has yet to decide on a motion by prosecutors to find Trump in contempt for violating a gag order with his social media posts. The outcome could influence the conduct of the trial and Trump’s public statements.
- Interplay of Legal and Political Drama: Trump’s legal battles unfold as he campaigns for the presidency, highlighting the intersection of his political ambitions and legal challenges. His legal team argues for presidential immunity, which the Supreme Court is currently considering, potentially setting precedents for executive conduct and accountability.
The Associated Press has the story:
Donald Trump arrives at NY court for hush money trial’s third day
Newslooks- NEW YORK (AP) —
Donald Trump returned to court Thursday morning as witness testimony in his hush money trial readied to enter a third day. The trial resumes at the same time that the U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments in Washington over whether he should be immune from prosecution for actions he took during his time as president.
At his trial in Manhattan, veteran tabloid publisher David Pecker took the stand earlier in the week, testifying about his longtime friendship with the former president and a pledge he made to be the “eyes and ears” of Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
Pecker, the National Enquirer’s former publisher, said the pledge culminated in an agreement to warn Trump’s personal lawyer about potentially damaging stories and help quash them. Pecker said the tabloid ultimately ran negative stories about Trump’s political opponents and even paid $30,000 for a doorman’s silence.
Pecker is expected to return to the stand Thursday.
The testimony was sought to bolster prosecutors’ premise that Trump sought to illegally influence the 2016 election through a “catch-and-kill” strategy to buy up and then spike negative stories. Key to that premise are so-called hush money payments that were paid to porn actor Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal, along with the doorman.
Prosecutors say Trump obscured the true nature of those payments and falsely recorded them as legal expenses.
He has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.
The case is the first-ever criminal trial of a former U.S. president and the first of four prosecutions of Trump to reach a jury.
TRUMP ARRIVES AT COURTHOUSE
Donald Trump’s motorcade arrived at the courthouse in lower Manhattan as his criminal hush money trial readied to resume Thursday.
After a morning campaign event in midtown, the former president returned to Trump Tower, then left again in the motorcade.
Addressing reporters in the hallway before court resumed, Trump began by speaking not about the trial, but instead the economy, griping about gas prices and the latest economic numbers.
He again addressed the Supreme Court, which is hearing oral arguments Thursday on whether he’s immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.
“I would have loved to have been there,” Trump said.
TRUMP: ‘NO IDEA’ IF I’D PAY A CONTEMPT FINE
Donald Trump, visiting construction workers for a campaign stop Thursday before heading to court in his criminal hush money case, was dismissive when asked about prosecutors’ push for the judge to hold him in contempt of violating a gag order because of his social media posts.
“Oh, I have no idea,” Trump said when asked whether he would pay the $1,000 fine for each of 10 posts. He then said, “They’ve taken my constitutional right away with a gag order.”
Trump also briefly remarked on his friendship with tabloid publisher David Pecker, who began testimony Tuesday and is expected to retake the stand again Thursday.
Trump was asked by reporters what he thought of the testimony and when he last spoke to Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, and Trump responded by saying, “David’s been very nice, a nice guy.”
TRUMP ADDRESSES SUPREME COURT ARGUMENTS DURING A CAMPAIGN STOP
Donald Trump addressed Thursday’s Supreme Court arguments from New York, where he was visiting construction workers for a campaign stop before heading to court in his criminal hush money case.
“A president has to have immunity,” he told reporters as a crowd cheered behind him. If you don’t have immunity, you just have a ceremonial president.”
He again complained that the judge in his case in New York wouldn’t excuse him from court to attend the Supreme Court arguments in person. Criminal defendants are expected to appear in court every day during their trials.
A QUICK REMINDER OF THE ALLEGATIONS AT THE HEART OF THIS CASE
Donald Trump is accused of falsifying internal Trump Organization records as part of a scheme to bury damaging stories that he feared could hurt his 2016 campaign, particularly as Trump’s reputation was suffering at the time from comments he had made about women.
The allegations focus on payoffs to two women, porn actor Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal, who said they had extramarital sexual encounters with Trump years earlier, as well as to a Trump Tower doorman who claimed to have a story about a child he alleged Trump had out of wedlock. Trump says none of these supposed sexual encounters occurred.
Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, paid Daniels $130,000 and arranged for the publisher of the National Enquirer supermarket tabloid to pay McDougal $150,000 in a journalistically dubious practice known as “catch-and-kill” in which a publication pays for exclusive rights to someone’s story with no intention of publishing it, either as a favor to a celebrity subject or to gain leverage over the person.
Prosecutors say Trump’s company reimbursed Cohen and paid him bonuses and extra payments, all of which were falsely logged in Trump Organization records as legal expenses. Cohen has separately pleaded guilty to violating federal campaign finance law in connection with the payments.
PECKER’S PRIOR TESTIMONY SHED LIGHT ON AGREEMENT TO BURY NEGATIVE TRUMP STORIES
David Pecker, formerly the publisher of the National Enquirer, took the stand both Monday and Tuesday and testified about how his longtime friendship with the former president culminated in an agreement to warn Donald Trump’s personal lawyer about stories that could damage the White House hopeful’s 2016 campaign and help quash them.
Pecker told the court that the agreement followed an August 2015 meeting with Trump, Michael Cohen and Hope Hicks. He further testified that he told the National Enquirer bureau chiefs to be on the lookout for any stories involving Trump and said he wanted them to verify the stories before alerting Cohen.
“I told him that we are going to try to help the campaign and to do that I want to keep this as quiet as possible,” Pecker testified. “I did not want anyone else to know this agreement I had and what I wanted to do.”
WHAT HAPPENS IF TRUMP IS CONVICTED?
Donald Trump faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records — a charge punishable by up to four years in prison — though it’s not clear if the judge would seek to put him behind bars.
A conviction would not preclude Trump from becoming president again, but because it is a state case, he would not be able to pardon himself if found guilty. He has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing.
DECISION STILL YET TO BE MADE ON WHETHER TRUMP VIOLATED GAG ORDER
Judge Juan M. Merchan has yet to rule on whether or not Donald Trump violated a gag order barring him from making public statements about witnesses in his hush money case.
Merchan held a hearing Tuesday on prosecutors’ earlier request that Trump be held in contempt of court and fined at least $3,000 for allegedly violating his gag order.
Prosecutors cited 10 posts on Trump’s social media account and campaign website that they said breached the order, which bars him from making public statements about witnesses in the case.
They called the posts a “deliberate flouting” of the court’s order.
In one post, from April 10, Trump described his former lawyer-turned-foe Michael Cohen and porn actor Stormy Daniels as “two sleaze bags who have, with their lies and misrepresentations, cost our Country dearly!”
Prosecutors are seeking a $1,000 fine — the maximum allowed by law — for each of the first three alleged violations.
The U.S. Supreme Court is taking up Donald Trump’s bid to avoid prosecution over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden. Arguments are set to begin at 10 a.m.
Trump’s lawyers argue that former presidents are entitled to absolute immunity for their official acts. Otherwise, they say, politically motivated prosecutions of former occupants of the Oval Office would become routine and presidents couldn’t function as the commander in chief if they had to worry about criminal charges.
Lower courts have rejected those arguments, including a unanimous three-judge panel on an appeals court in Washington. And even if the high court resoundingly follows suit, the timing of its decision may be as important as the outcome.
That’s because Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee, has been pushing to delay the trial until after the November election, and the later the justices issue their decision, the more likely he is to succeed.
The court typically issues its last opinions by the end of June, which is roughly four months before the election.
TRUMP TAKES TO SOCIAL MEDIA BEFORE ARGUMENTS
In one, he declared in all caps, “WITHOUT PRESIDENTIAL IMMUNITY, IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE FOR A PRESIDENT TO PROPERLY FUNCTION, PUTTING THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN GREAT AND EVERLASTING DANGER!”
Trump also said that without immunity, a president would just be “ceremonial” and the opposing political party “can extort and blackmail the President by saying that, ‘if you don’t give us everything we want, we will Indict you for things you did while in Office,’ even if everything done was totally Legal and Appropriate.”
EXPECT A FULL BENCH ON THE COURT
Of the nine justices hearing the case, three were nominated by Trump — Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. But it’s the presence of a justice confirmed decades before Trump’s presidency, Justice Clarence Thomas, that’s generated the most controversy.
Thomas’s wife, Ginni Thomas, urged the reversal of the 2020 election results and then attended the rally that preceded the Capitol riot. That has prompted calls for the justice to step aside from several court cases involving Trump and Jan. 6.
But Thomas has ignored the calls, taking part in the unanimous court decision that found states cannot kick Trump off the ballot as well as last week’s arguments over whether prosecutors can use a particular obstruction charge against Capitol riot defendants.
COURT HAS MULTIPLE PATHS TO DECIDE THE CASE
The justices will probably meet in private a short time after arguments to take a preliminary vote on the outcome. Chief Justice John Roberts would be a prime candidate to take on the opinion for the court, assuming he is in the majority.
They could simply reject Trump’s immunity claim outright, permitting the prosecution to move forward and returning the case to U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan to set a trial date.
They could also reverse the lower courts by declaring for the first time that former presidents may not be prosecuted for conduct related to official acts during their time in office. Such a decision would stop the prosecution in its tracks.
There are other options, too, including ruling that former presidents do retain some immunity for their official actions but that, wherever that line is drawn, Trump’s actions fall way beyond it.
Yet another possibility is that the court sends the case back to Chutkan with an assignment to decide whether the actions Trump is alleged to have taken to stay in power constitute official acts.
Currently:
— No one is above the law. Supreme Court will decide if that includes Trump while he was president
— Investigator says Trump, allies were uncharged co-conspirators in plot to overturn Michigan election
— Trump trial day 6 highlights: David Pecker testifies on ‘catch-and-kill’ scheme
— Key players: Who’s who at Donald Trump’s hush money criminal trial
— The hush money case is just one of Trump’s legal cases. See the others here
You must Register or Login to post a comment.