French
DeutschProsecution of Donald Trump in New York
| People of the State of New York v. Trump | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
| Full case name | The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump |
| Submitted | March 30, 2023 |
| Started | April 15, 2024 |
| Decided | May 30, 2024 |
| Verdict | Guilty on all counts[1] |
| Charge | First-degree falsifying business records (34 counts) |
| Citation | IND-71543-23[2] |
| Court membership | |
| Judge sitting | Juan Merchan |
| ||
|---|---|---|
| Business and personal 45th & 47th President of the United States Tenure
Impeachments Civil and criminal prosecutions   | ||
.jpg)
The People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump is a criminal case against Donald Trump, the 45th president of the United States and current president-elect. Trump was charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records to conceal payments made to the pornographic film actress Stormy Daniels as hush money to buy her silence over a sexual encounter between them; with costs related to the transaction included, the payments totaled $420,000. The Manhattan District Attorney (DA), Alvin Bragg, accused Trump of falsifying these business records with the intent to commit other crimes: violation of federal campaign finance limits, unlawfully influencing the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and tax fraud.[a]
The indictment, the first of a former U.S. president, was approved by a Manhattan grand jury on March 30, 2023. On April 3, Trump traveled from his residence in Florida to New York City, where he surrendered to the Manhattan DA's office and was arraigned the next day. Trump pleaded not guilty and stated that he would continue to campaign for the 2024 presidential election, even if convicted. The trial began on April 15, 2024. On April 30, Trump also became the first U.S. president to be held in criminal contempt of court, due to comments he made earlier in the month about individuals involved with the trial.
The prosecution argued that Trump's 2016 campaign sought to benefit from the payment of hush money to Daniels through Trump's former lawyer Michael Cohen, who was reimbursed via a false retainer agreement. The prosecution rested on May 20, 2024, after calling 20 witnesses. The defense argued that Trump was unaware of any allegedly unlawful scheme, that Cohen was unreliable as a witness, and that the retainer agreement between them was valid. The defense rested on May 21 after calling two witnesses. Throughout proceedings, the defense also made unsuccessful requests for the case to be delayed or dismissed, for the judge to recuse himself, and for removal to federal court.
Trump was convicted on all counts on May 30, 2024, becoming the first U.S. president to be convicted of a felony. Following his November 2024 election victory, his sentencing was temporarily suspended. Trump has said he will appeal his conviction, but can only do so after sentencing.
Background
Stormy Daniels–Donald Trump scandal
In July 2006, Stephanie Clifford, a pornographic film actress known professionally as "Stormy Daniels", met Donald Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada. At the time, Trump was the host of the reality TV series The Apprentice and was married to Melania Trump.[4] According to Daniels, Trump invited her to his penthouse at Harrah's Lake Tahoe[5] where the two had sex and talked about making her a guest on The Apprentice.[6][7]
In 2011, Daniels considered selling the story to the celebrity magazine Life & Style for US$15,000 as Trump began exploring a potential presidential bid. His lawyer, Michael Cohen, threatened to sue Life & Style when it asked the Trump Organization for comment. Daniels' agent, Gina Rodriguez, leaked the story to the gossip blog The Dirty in October. The post was taken down following complaints by Trump's lawyers, and Daniels disputed the story's veracity.[8] Cohen acknowledged during court testimony in May 2024 that he advised for the story's removal.[9]
As Trump's 2016 presidential campaign began, Rodriguez approached multiple publications—including the National Enquirer—and attempted to sell the story. Following the publication of a controversial recording of Trump and Access Hollywood host Billy Bush, the National Enquirer sought to suppress the story. Rather than paying Daniels, the National Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard negotiated a $130,000 non-disclosure agreement between Daniels and Michael Cohen. Cohen attempted to find the money as the election neared and repeatedly delayed her payment. Keith Davidson, Daniels' lawyer, canceled the deal in October 2016.[5][8]
Ultimately, Cohen drew the money from his home equity line of credit and sent it through a shell company incorporated in Delaware.[5][8] Trump initially denied knowing about the check made out to Daniels. In April 2018, aboard Air Force One, he told a reporter he did not know where Cohen got the money.[10] Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post described this statement as a lie,[11] as Trump had personally reimbursed Cohen for the payment.[12][11][13] Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for Trump, also refuted Trump's claims in a Fox News interview, saying that Trump was aware of the payments.[14]
Trump wrote several checks totaling $420,000 to Cohen. The checks reimbursed him for the non-disclosure agreement and covered the costs for Cohen to manipulate online polls to boost Trump's status. The $180,000 paid to Cohen was doubled to offset taxes, and $60,000 was added. These payments were made throughout 2017, during Trump's first year of presidency.[15] The payments made to Cohen were declared as a legal expense.[16] Nine monthly checks from Trump to Cohen, dated April to December 2017, exist as evidence.[17]
In January 2018, The Wall Street Journal reported on Cohen's payment to Daniels.[18] Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal counts relating to the payment—as well as another payment made to Karen McDougal—in August. In his admission of guilt, Cohen stated that he acted "at the direction of a candidate for federal office", implicating Trump.[19][20] In December 2018, Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison.[21]
On May 2, 2024, The Daily Beast broke a story that Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg had assisted the 2016 campaign with its finance reports.[22]
Manhattan DA investigation and grand jury
Following Cohen's August 2018 admission of guilt, Manhattan District Attorney (DA) Cyrus Vance Jr. opened an investigation against the Trump Organization and two of its executives.[23] The office paused its inquiry when the office of the federal U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York began a separate investigation into the payments,[24] but the federal inquiry concluded without charges in July 2019.[25][b]
The Manhattan DA's office then issued a subpoena for the Trump Organization in August, seeking documents relating to the payments.[27] Additionally, the office subpoenaed accounting firm Mazars USA, demanding eight years of Trump's corporate tax returns.[28] Trump's lawyers sued Vance to block the subpoena, citing Trump's immunity from criminal inquiries as the president of the United States.[29] In Trump v. Vance, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7–2 in favor of Vance, allowing the subpoena to continue.[30]
Following the 2021 New York County District Attorney election, Alvin Bragg succeeded Vance as the Manhattan DA.[31] In early 2021, Mark Pomerantz, a Manhattan prosecutor, sought to revive the case under the theory that if Daniels had extorted Trump, the money would be criminal proceeds, and efforts to conceal its source would constitute money laundering.[32] On further examination, Pomerantz found that the money laundering statute would not apply, and colleagues were skeptical that the hush money would qualify as extortion.[32] With no path to felony charges, Pomerantz abandoned the inquiry and subsequently resigned in February 2022.[32] In January 2023, the Manhattan DA's office impaneled a grand jury, and began presenting evidence of Trump's role in the Stormy Daniels payment.[33] Cohen met extensively with the DA's office and the grand jury,[34][35][36] and by March 3, Cohen had met with the DA's office 18 times[37][38][39] and had given his cellphones to the DA's prosecutors, who wanted evidence of communications including voice recordings of Daniels' former lawyer Keith Davidson.[40] Several other witnesses met with the DA's office or the grand jury in March 2023, including Kellyanne Conway,[41] Hope Hicks, two Trump Organization employees, two former National Enquirer executives who helped broker the hush-money deal, a lawyer for Daniels,[42][43] Daniels herself,[44] Trump-aligned lawyer Robert Costello (who provided testimony, including emails, in which he attempted to discredit Cohen's reliability),[45][46] and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker.[47][48][c] As early as that February, prosecutors confirmed that they might leverage additional charges, including insurance fraud, against Allen Weisselberg to pressure him to testify against Trump,[51] and in May, The New York Times reported that they were considering perjury charges against him.[52]
.jpg)
In March 2023, District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office indicated that an indictment was likely.[53] By March 9, 2023, prosecutors had offered Trump a chance to testify before the grand jury the following week, indicating that they were likely preparing to indict him.[54][55] Around that time, Trump and his spokesperson began referring to both Daniels' allegation and the DA's proceedings as "extortion".[56] On March 10, 2023, Trump's lawyer Joe Tacopina asked New York City's Department of Investigation to review the criminal probe, asserting its "weaponization".[57] On March 13, Tacopina announced that Trump would not testify.[58] Early the next morning, The Guardian reported that Trump's lawyers had argued to the DA that Trump should not be indicted on the basis that the payment did not draw from campaign funds and would have been made regardless of his candidacy.[59]
In late March 2023, there was reporting around Daniels having reportedly unsuccessfully communicated in 2018 with Tacopina about possibly representing her in the scandal, for which the DA could move to disqualify the lawyer due to attorney–client privilege and because she reputedly disclosed confidential information to his firm.[60][61][62][63] Additionally, it reemerged that, in 2018, Tacopina had called the hush-money payment "an illegal agreement", "a fraud", and "a potential campaign finance issue".[60]
On March 18, 2023, Trump claimed on his social-media platform, Truth Social, that he was to be arrested on March 21[d][e] and that the proceedings were disinformation backed by President Joe Biden, calling for protests in anticipation of a possible indictment.[66][67][68][69][70] Law enforcement and security agencies prepared for potential reactions to an indictment of Trump that week, especially in the areas of the Manhattan Criminal Court and Trump Tower, including by monitoring online threats.[69][71][72][f] New York City Police began to increase security in preparation for the expected indictment on March 21, and a second time for the second expected indictment on March 30.[74] Metal barriers were set up around Trump Tower and the district Criminal Court Building.[75] On March 24, Trump, citing his presidential prospects, insinuated that "potential death & destruction" could result from Bragg's allegedly false charge.[76][g]
Trump has called the investigation a "witch hunt", claiming political persecution.[81] Trump proponents have referred to the case as harassment, calling it a "political hack job".[82] The trial and accompanying political theatrics have been described as a "circus" by the media.[83][84][85] Due to multiple investigation revivals, the case earned the moniker of "zombie case".[32][86]
Eligibility for president
Article II of the U.S. Constitution does not have any rules blocking presidential candidates with criminal records.[87] The U.S. Supreme Court ruled earlier in Trump v. Anderson that Congress would have to pass a special law invoking the prohibition in section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which states "no one who has previously taken an oath of office who engages in insurrection can be an officer of the US".[88]
Initial proceedings
Indictment and charges
The Manhattan grand jury voted to indict Trump on March 30, 2023.[89] The indictment was filed with the New York Supreme Court (the ordinary trial court for felonies in the state of New York and not the final court of appeal for the state) the same day.[90] The charges were under seal until published when Trump was arraigned.[91][92]
The indictment charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, in violation of New York Penal Law §175.10.[93][94] Each count is related to a specific business document, each having a date ranging from February 14 through December 5, 2017:[95]
- 11 for invoices from Michael Cohen
- 9 for general ledger entries for Donald J. Trump
- 9 for checks from Donald J. Trump
- 3 for general ledger entries for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust
- 2 for checks from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust
The allegedly falsified documents are related to Trump's payment to Stormy Daniels as hush money. The payments were listed in the business records as a legal expense payable to Michael Cohen, whereas the indictment alleges that they were actually to reimburse Cohen for the earlier, allegedly illicit, payment to Daniels.[96][97]
Falsifying business records in the first degree is a felony under New York state law that requires that the "intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof". This is in contrast to falsifying business records in the second degree, which is a misdemeanor that does not have that requirement.[95][96][97] The charges neither include, nor even identify, the additional crimes, constituting a relatively unusual strategy for the DA:[98][95]
A New York Times analysis of about 30 false business records cases brought by Mr. Bragg and his predecessor — based on court records, interviews and information the office provided — shows that in this respect, the case against Mr. Trump stands apart. In all but two of the indictments reviewed by The Times, the defendant was charged with an additional crime on top of the false records charge.
In later filings, Bragg listed (but still did not charge) three general types of crime that Trump allegedly intended to commit: violation of federal campaign finance limits, violation of state election laws by unlawfully influencing the 2016 election, and violation of state tax laws regarding the reimbursement.[99] Trump could have moved to allow the jury to convict on the misdemeanor charges as a lesser included offense, but he did not.[100][101]
Each count for which Trump was convicted could result in a prison sentence of up to four years, to be served consecutively, with a maximum sentence of 20 years.[102][95][103][104] He is permitted to assume the presidency even should he be in prison.[105] The judge may also choose to impose no prison sentence.[106]
The conviction did not legally prohibit Trump from continuing his campaign in the 2024 presidential election, which he won.[105] (Trump had stated in an April 2023 Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson that he would continue his candidacy even if convicted.)[107][108]
Arraignment
Trump was arraigned on April 4, 2023. A law enforcement source told Reuters that police would close streets around the courthouse in advance of Trump's expected appearance.[109] On April 3, Trump flew from Palm Beach International Airport into LaGuardia Airport on his private plane, and took his motorcade to Trump Tower, where he stayed the night.[110][111] Todd Blanche, a lawyer who had defended Paul Manafort during his 2016 fraud trial, had recently resigned from his law firm to aid Trump's case.[112] Police increased security in and around Manhattan ahead of the arraignment; authorities said there were no credible threats of violence or organized plans of protests.[111] Eric Adams, the mayor of New York City, warned protestors to be peaceful.[113] Acting New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is presiding over the case.[114] Merchan denied a motion filed by media organizations to allow a television broadcast of the arraignment or to allow electronic devices to be used in the courtroom, but allowed five press pool still photographers.[115][116] Courtroom sketch artists also documented the proceedings.[117] The courtroom's glass doors were covered as a security measure.[118]
Upon entering the courthouse, he was put in police custody and placed under arrest.[119][120] He was booked and fingerprinted, but he was not handcuffed, nor was a mug shot taken.[121][122] Trump entered the courtroom an hour later,[123] pleading not guilty to 34 felony charges.[124] The indictment was unsealed (publicly released) shortly thereafter, charging Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree as part of a "conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election".[125][126] This marked the first indictment of a former U.S. president.[127][128][129] At the arraignment, Merchan warned Trump not to use social media to incite violence.[130]
Possible trial dates were discussed; prosecutors proposed January 2024, but Trump's defense team objected, saying that the trial should be set for later in 2024.[131]
Immediately after the arraignment, Trump returned to Mar-a-Lago and addressed a crowd of supporters in the evening.[132][110] Trump made several false claims about topics such as his handling of government documents, District Attorney Bragg, and the Trump–Raffensperger phone call.[133]
Pre-trial proceedings
.jpg)
During Trump's arraignment, the court set deadlines for pre-trial proceedings, including for prosecutors to provide discovery to the defense.[131] The court set a deadline of August 8, 2023, for pre-trial motions to be filed.[131]
As he had done in other cases, Trump used "attack-and-delay" tactics, targeting the prosecutors and the judge while prolonging proceedings, with the aim that the case might continue into late 2024, near the presidential election.[134][135]
Trump's lawyers maintained that he was unaware of any allegedly unlawful schemes that his allies or associates may have engaged in.[136] On March 12, 2024, the defense team filed their strategy writing "President Trump lacked the requisite intent to commit the conduct charged in the Indictment because of his awareness that various lawyers were involved in the underlying conduct giving rise to the charges."[137] The defense counsel stated that they would not invoke the formal "advice of counsel" defense, but that Trump would "elicit evidence concerning the presence, involvement and advice of lawyers in relevant events giving rise to the charges".[137][138][h]
Request for indictment dismissal
On September 29, 2023, Trump's team submitted omnibus motions to dismiss the indictment and requesting clarification of the charges.[140]
On April 27, Trump's team had asked for the charges to be explained in full.[141] It was possible that the second crime(s) would eventually be specified in a bill of particulars,[142] but according to a governing appeals case from c. 1980 this is not necessary.[143] On May 16, the DA's office argued that it did not need to elaborate further on the basis that Trump already "has more than sufficient information to prepare his defense", while reiterating possible secondary charges.[144][145][i] Trump's team was reportedly considering invoking a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision which emphasizes the importance of specifying punishable criminal charges; additionally, a 1999 decision states that "any fact ... that increases the maximum penalty for [one] crime must be charged in an indictment ... and proved".[141]
On February 15, 2024, the court denied the motions to dismiss.[146][147][148] However, the court did partially grant Trump's request seeking clarification of the charges. Trump is not only accused of falsifying business records, but doing so with the intention to commit or conceal some other crime. Holding it would be unfair to expect Trump to prepare a defense to a newly raised theory mid-trial, the court limited the prosecution to just three theories of "other crimes" that had already been identified during pre-trial procedure.[146][149]
Discovery materials and witnesses
As of Trump's arraignment on April 4, 2023, it was expected that the discovery process would take several months.[150]
On April 17, 2023, the DA's office requested that Merchan obtain further information from Tacopina, including his firm's correspondence with Daniels, to determine whether their history constituted a conflict of interest.[63] On September 1, Merchan ruled that it did not.[151]
On May 4, Merchan heard arguments about the DA office's request to restrict information it turns over to Trump's lawyers from being shared with Trump himself (at least until the trial), citing his past social-media posts attacking Bragg and witnesses. The defense has argued that the government should be equally restrained from discussing information publicly and that Trump should be allowed to defend himself politically.[152][153] On May 8, Merchan ruled in favor of the order, barring evidence from being shared on social media.[154] The judge instructed Trump and his lawyers on their conduct on May 23, informing them that violations could incur a "wide range of sanctions" including being held in contempt of court.[155]
On May 26, prosecutors stated that they had informed Trump's lawyers that evidence in the hush-money case includes various audio recordings, including one of Trump and a witness. It was unclear if this was in reference to secretly recorded audio from September 2016 which Cohen had previously released.[156][157][158][159]
On August 3, federal judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who oversaw E. Jean Carroll's civil lawsuits against Trump alleging sexual assault and defamation,[j] ruled that Carroll's lawyers could provide video of Trump being deposed to Manhattan prosecutors.[162]
On January 15, 2024, Tacopina withdrew from Trump's counsel[163] and Daniels said she expected to testify.[164] Later in the month, the DA was reportedly beginning to meet with witnesses ahead of the trial.[165]
On March 18, the judge ruled that both Daniels and Cohen could testify, placing some restrictions on Daniels (as well as Karen McDougal). The defense had requested that the two be blocked from testifying the previous month. Additionally, the judge ruled that Trump's Access Hollywood tape could not be played during the trial but that it could be discussed.[166]
On April 22, Merchan ruled on what prosecutors may ask Trump if he testified,[167] following a pretrial Sandoval hearing held on April 19.[168][169][170]
On May 10, Judge Juan Merchan suggested that Allen Weisselberg could be called to testify in court after the defense objected to the prosecution's plan to show the jury a $750,000 severance agreement.[171] Neither the defense nor the prosecution had subpoenaed Weisselberg, and there were procedural concerns about adding him to the witness list so late in the trial.[171] Furthermore, Weisselberg's testimony could be in violation of the non-disparagement clause of his severance agreement and he would likely invoke the fifth amendment.[172][173]
Requests for recusal
Justice Juan Merchan, who has experience with financial cases,[174] was randomly assigned to oversee the grand jury proceedings in Trump's case, and continued to oversee handling of the charges approved by the grand jury.[175]
On May 31, 2023, Trump's lawyers filed a motion asking Judge Merchan to recuse himself from the case citing his daughter's position as partner and COO of Authentic Campaigns, a consulting firm that serviced Biden's 2020 presidential campaign. The motion additionally alleged that Merchan had encouraged former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg to cooperate with the prosecution against Trump in a previous case he had presided over, and that Merchan had made three $10–15 donations to various Democratic causes.[176][177][k] On June 20, the DA's office argued against the recusal request, citing Trump's alleged "prolific history of baselessly accusing state and federal judges around the country of bias", saying he seemed to be trying to land a more favorable judge. Prosecutors further argued that there was a lack of hard evidence that a particular trial result would aid Merchan directly or greatly via his daughter's Democratic work,[180] which a state ethics panel had similarly concluded in early May.[181][l] The court denied the motion on August 11, 2023.[185]
On April 1, 2024, the defense asked Merchan for permission to file a motion repeating their prior request that he recuse himself for what the defense said was a conflict of interest due to his daughter's Democratic involvement.[186] On April 1, the New York City Bar Association issued a statement of "unequivocal support" for Merchan's handling of the recusal concerns.[m] On April 2, prosecutors pointed out that the court and an ethics panel had already found that the political activities of a relative are not grounds for questioning a judge's impartiality.[188][n]
The same day, Trump posted a Fox & Friends clip in which co-host Brian Kilmeade criticized the judge's daughter, although Trump highlighted another commentator's statement.[191] As of April 3, Trump had not deleted offending posts made prior to Merchan's expanded order;[192] that night, he linked to a report by far-right activist Laura Loomer criticizing Merchan's daughter and wife.[193] On April 5, Trump's campaign publicized their motion for Merchan to recuse himself (dated April 3),[188] which asserts numerous counts of bias, and falsely cites the state Office of Court Administration (OCA) as saying Merchan's daughter deleted her X account in April 2023, around when the judge "solicited an ethics opinion regarding recusal in a letter ... that the Court declined to disclose".[194][181][195][o][p]
On April 6, Trump posted online that if arrested for violating the gag order, he would consider it a "great honor" to "become a Modern Day Nelson Mandela", the former South African president jailed for anti-apartheid activism.[201] On April 8, Trump's team asked an appeals court to delay the trial and pause the gag order while they appeal the latter; this was denied the following day.[202][203] On April 10, an appeals judge denied another defense delay request which was based on Merchan having not yet ruled on the recusal motion.[204][202] On April 15, Merchan denied the recusal motion.[205] On April 30, an appellate court denied requests for both a recusal and a stay of proceedings.[206]
Request for removal to federal court
On May 4, 2023, Trump's lawyers asked for the case to be moved to a federal court (though it would remain a state-law prosecution conducted by the Manhattan DA), arguing that it involved alleged conduct somehow "performed while in office"—despite the potential federal election-law violations not being specified and occurring prior to Trump's inauguration.[153][145][q] As proceedings continued in the New York Supreme Court,[207] Bragg asked for the removal request to be dismissed, arguing that Trump had failed to establish that he was an officer of the United States during his presidency,[208][209] to which the defense expounded its initial argument.[210][153] Even if the case had been moved to federal court, New York state law would have continued to apply.[211]
In a hearing on June 27, District Judge Alvin Hellerstein opined that Trump's conduct likely did not constitute presidential activity.[212] On July 19, arguing that the matter was apparently a personal "cover-up of an embarrassing event", Hellerstein ruled that the case should remain in state court.[213] Trump appealed the decision on July 28,[214] but withdrew this on November 14.[215]
Trial scheduling
On May 23, 2023, Justice Merchan set the trial for March 25, 2024.[216] Trump's team complained that he expected to have multiple trials around that time. Merchan said he would discuss rescheduling to another time.[217] At a February 15, 2024, hearing, which Trump attended,[218] Merchan reaffirmed the March 25 trial date.[219]
In early February 2024, Trump's federal election obstruction trial, originally set for early March, was postponed pending appeals, increasing the likelihood of the Manhattan criminal trial taking place as planned on March 25, 2024.[220][221]
On March 11, 2024, Trump's lawyers requested a delay of trial until after the federal election obstruction case on the basis that it would bolster his argument of presidential immunity, as some evidence and allegedly some acts overlapped with his time in office.[222] Trump's team cited, from April 2018, Trump's denying knowledge of the hush-money payment to reporters and tweeting in defense of Cohen's credibility.[223] Later on March 11, Merchan pointed out that Trump's team had missed the filing deadline and said either party would need his permission to file additional pretrial motions.[222] On March 3, the judge dismissed the request as untimely.[224]
Also on March 11, Trump asked to delay trial until after the Supreme Court decides whether he is generally immune from prosecution in the federal charges on election obstruction. Granting the motion would have delayed trial until mid-summer or later, as the Supreme Court had already scheduled those arguments for April 25[225] and may not rule until the end of the court's term in early July.[226] Merchan denied the motion on April 3,[227] saying that he doubted its "sincerity and actual purpose", given that Trump made this request only two weeks before trial.[228]
In March 2024, the U.S. Attorney's Office provided prosecutors with approximately 170,000 pages of documents, largely related to the 2017 federal probe of Cohen's payment to Daniels (and mostly reflecting evidence already turned over to Trump's lawyers in June 2023).[229][230][231] Trump's lawyers sought a delay in the trial on the basis of the newly produced records; the DA's office said in court that only 300 of the documents were relevant to Trump's defense.[232] On March 15, 2024, the judge delayed the start of trial until mid-April.[233] On March 25, 2024, the judge set a trial date of April 15, and denied a motion by Trump's team to further delay the trial.[232] On May 23, 2024, Merchan denied Trump's request to sanction prosecutors regarding the document release, ruling that the defense was provided sufficient time to respond.[234]
On March 18, Trump's team requested an additional delay on the basis that pretrial publicity and apparent anti-Trump bias in Manhattan would prohibit a fair jury from being selected in April, although only 35% in the cited poll said they were convinced Trump was guilty in the DA's case specifically. Trump's lawyers cited berating statements by Cohen, e.g. saying he served jail time because his "lying" former boss "couldn't keep his mushroom dick in his pants". On March 25, the assistant DA countered that "publicity is not likely to abate [and] the pretrial publicity has been ... exacerbated by the defendant".[235] On April 8, Trump's team asked the appeals court for a delay to allow an attempt to move the trial to a different county, which was denied the same day.[202]
On April 8, Trump requested to postpone the trial so the court could consider a change of venue, which was denied the same day,[236] and so he could appeal the gag order, which was denied the next day.[237] On April 10, the appeals court denied Trump's request to postpone trial on the basis of Merchan being unqualified.[238] On April 12, Merchan denied the defendant's request to delay trial on the basis of "prejudicial" media coverage.[239] On April 15, Merchan said Trump was "required to be here" on April 25 and "not required to be at the Supreme Court" that day, when it would hear arguments on his immunity claim in the federal election case.[240] Merchan said he was not yet prepared to say whether trial would be held on May 17 to allow Trump to attend his son Barron's high-school graduation, but indicated that he probably would grant him the day off if the proceedings progressed at an expected pace.[241] Trump subsequently complained that he would "not be allowed" to attend the graduation, but on April 30 the judge said he would be able to do so.[242] On May 17, Donald and Melania Trump attended their son's graduation from Oxbridge Academy at West Palm Beach, followed by a visit to Lincoln Reagan Dinner at the 2024 annual Minnesota Republican convention in Saint Paul, Minnesota.[243]
Gag order
In a May 2023 hearing and court filing, prosecutors expressed concern that Trump would misuse evidence obtained through pretrial discovery procedure to attack people involved in the case, including witnesses.[211] Justice Merchan declined to issue a gag order or prohibit Trump from publicly commenting about the case against him,[211] but issued a protective order setting rules for the use of social media involving elements of the case, and set a hearing (with Trump to appear remotely) to explain the rules.[244][245]
At Trump's arraignment, on April 4, 2023, Merchan instructed Blanche to "speak to your client and anybody else you need to, and remind them to please refrain, please refrain from making statements that are likely to incite violence or civil unrest. Please refrain from making comments or engaging in conduct that has the potential to incite violence, create civil unrest, or jeopardize the safety or well-being of any individuals."[246] Blanche had stated that Trump was "frustrated, upset, and believes that there is a grave injustice happening with him being in this courtroom today" which Merchan rebuked "I don't share your view that certain language and certain rhetoric is just by frustration."[246] Merchan did not seek to impose a gag order at the time.[247]
On February 26, 2024, the Manhattan DA asked for a gag order on Trump, noting that Trump has been fined $15,000 for two violations of a gag order in the civil fraud trial by disparaging the judge's law clerk on social media, and reporting that police had logged 89 threats to Bragg, his family, or staff in 2023 (as opposed to a single threat in 2022).[248] On March 7, Merchan ruled that the jury would be anonymous except to some involved in the trial, including Trump, his lawyers, and prosecutors.[249] On March 26, Merchan imposed a gag order on Trump, restricting what he could say publicly about people involved in the case.[250] Additionally, the judge warned the defense, under the threat of contempt, against dilatory tactics such as the late filing of pretrial motions or last-minute demands, pointing out that Trump had "stated publicly that the defense goal is to delay these proceedings ... past the 2024 presidential election".[251][252] On March 26, Trump made online posts attacking the judge, the gag order, and Merchan's daughter, the latter over an anti-Trump social-media post created by someone impersonating her on social media.[253][254][255] The same day, Merchan imposed a gag order forbidding Trump to publicly comment on court staff, prosecutors, prospective jurors, or their families, or to cause others to make such statements, in a way that interferes with the case. Bragg (as a public figure) and Merchan (as the judge) were specifically exempted from protection.[256][257] The court also ordered Trump not to comment on prospective trial witnesses concerning their potential participation in the criminal case.[258]
On March 27 and 28, Trump again attacked Merchan's daughter on social media.[257][259] On March 29, prosecutors requested that the limits of the gag order be explicated regarding family of court staff in hopes of terminating what they considered intentionally defiant behavior by Trump.[254][260] On April 1, Merchan expanded the gag order to protect his and Bragg's family members, saying attacks on them "serve no legitimate purpose".[261][262] He wrote that Trump's continued attacks posted a "very real" threat to the integrity of proceedings and could cause those involved in the case to fear for themselves and their families, which would "undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself".[263] On April 11, Trump disparaged expected witnesses Cohen and Daniels on social media, referring to them as dishonest "sleaze bags".[258] On May 6, Merchan found Trump in contempt of court for the tenth time, but stated that he did not wish to jail Trump due to the fact that Trump was a former and potentially the next president.[264]
Contempt hearings were later held concerning numerous alleged violations of the gag order. On May 14, a New York appeals court denied Trump's request to overturn the order.[265]
Also on May 14, United States Senator Tommy Tuberville called the gag order "ridiculous" for stopping Trump "from having a say-so in his own trial"; Tuberville further said that members of Congress were attending the trial "to speak our piece for President Trump" and "overcome this gag order", and he hoped that "more and more" members of Congress would do so.[266] Republican members of Congress, including Tuberville, JD Vance, Cory Mills, Nicole Malliotakis and Speaker Mike Johnson, have criticized witness Michael Cohen, while Byron Donalds, Rick Scott, Vance, and Johnson have criticized Merchan's daughter.[267][268][269][270] New York magazine journalist Andrew Rice claimed that during Cohen's May 13 testimony, he saw Trump penning revision notes as to statements about the case from his Republican allies.[271] On May 14, Trump commented that "I do have a lot of surrogates, and they're speaking very beautifully."[272]
On May 20, speaking outside the courtroom, Trump mentioned witnesses Robert Costello and Michael Cohen.[273]
On June 25, Merchan lifted parts of Trump's gag order, allowing him to talk about the jury and witnesses who took the stand during the trial.[274] Merchan also stated that the gag order would be completely lifted following sentencing.[275]
Statute of limitations
In New York, the statute of limitations is typically two years for misdemeanors and five years for felonies.[276] Though falsifying business records is typically a misdemeanor, in New York, the charges are upgraded to a felony when used to commit or conceal another crime.[276] Trump was charged with falsifying business records in the first degree, which is a Class E felony (the least severe), whose statute of limitations is five years.[276] On March 20, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo issued Executive Order No. 202.8 tolling (pausing) the statute of limitations for "any specific time limit for the commencement, filing, or service of any legal action, notice, motion, or other process or proceeding, as prescribed by the procedural laws of the state".[276]
Merchan ruled the tolling deadline was through May 6, 2021, thus extending the deadline for the prosecution by one year and 47 days, allowing the felony prosecution to commence within 6 years and 47 days from when the crime was committed.[276] Trump's first indictment occurred on February 14, 2017, and the indictment was filed on March 3, 2023, within days of the deadline.[276] On February 14, 2024, Merchan ruled that the tolled period was sufficient.[276]
The New York statute of limitations provision, CPL§30.10, permits tolling of up to five years while the defendant is continuously outside the state.[276] During his presidency, Trump spent the majority of his time outside New York.[276] Merchan declined to address where this provision was applicable as the tolling occasioned by the Governor's Executive Order was sufficient.[277]
Overview of witnesses
| Witness | Date | Function |
|---|---|---|
| David Pecker | April 22 | Publisher of National Enquirer |
| April 23 | ||
| April 25 | ||
| April 26 | ||
| Rhona Graff | April 26 | Donald Trump executive assistant |
| April 30 | ||
| Gary Farro | April 30 | First Republic banker |
| Robert Browning | April 30 | C-SPAN Executive Director for Archives |
| Phillip Thompson | April 30 | Regional Director of Esquire Deposition Solutions |
| Keith Davidson | April 30 | Former attorney for Stormy Daniels |
| May 2 | ||
| Douglas Daus | May 2 | Computer forensics specialist in the Manhattan DA's office |
| Hope Hicks | May 3 | Former White House Communications Director |
| Jeffrey McConney | May 6 | Former Trump Organization comptroller |
| Deborah Tarasoff | May 6 | Trump Organization accounting employee |
| Sally Franklin | May 7 | Penguin Books executive |
| Stormy Daniels | May 7 | Hush money recipient |
| May 9 | ||
| Rebecca Manochio | May 9 | Trump Organization bookkeeper |
| Tracey Menzies | May 9 | Senior vice president at HarperCollins |
| Madeleine Westerhout | May 9 | Former Director of Oval Office Operations |
| May 10 | ||
| Jennie Tomalin | May 10 | Verizon senior analyst |
| Daniel Dixon | May 10 | AT&T compliance analyst |
| Jaden Jarmel-Schneider | May 10 | Paralegal in the Manhattan DA's office |
| Georgia Longstreet | May 10 | Paralegal in the Manhattan DA's office |
| Michael Cohen | May 13 | Hush money intermediary |
| May 14 | ||
| May 16 | ||
| May 20 |
| Date | Witness | Function |
|---|---|---|
| Daniel Sitko | May 20 | Paralegal for defense attorney |
| Robert Costello | May 20 | Associate of Michael Cohen |
| May 21 |
Trial
The trial began on April 15, 2024, with recessed Wednesdays.[278] Trump was required to attend every day of trial barring a court-approved absence.[279] If he chose to testify, prosecutors could have asked him about his civil lawsuits regarding business fraud, sexual abuse, and defamation as well as the 2018 dissolution of his charitable foundation.[280] Attorneys Todd Blanche and Susan Necheles represented him.[281]
The trial was not televised.[282] Initially, Merchan allowed photographers to stand at the front of the room for a few minutes each morning before the trial began to take photos of Trump seated. Merchan withdrew this permission on May 9 after at least one photo was taken from the side of the table.[283] There are courtroom sketch artists present to capture the milieu.[284][r]
The temperature in the trial courtroom was a point of contention, with Trump repeatedly complaining that it was too cold, akin to an icebox, possibly intentionally.[289][290][291] Judge Juan Merchan acknowledged that the courtroom was chilly, but has stated that he would rather it be a little cold than too hot, and that climate control is limited in the 80-year-old building.[292][291] Despite Trump's complaints, reporters in the courtroom noted that the temperature was not as cold as he claims.[293]
Jury selection and opening statements
On April 8, 2024, the judge gave attorneys a copy of the jury selection questionnaire,[294] with jury selection beginning on April 15[295][296] from a pool of over 500 candidates.[297]
Over the first two days, 96 potential jurors appeared, of which more than half were immediately dismissed after indicating that they could not be impartial. Nine jurors provisionally qualified on the first day, and an additional ten on the second;[298][299][300] from these 19, seven jurors were selected and sworn in.[s]
However, two were excused on April 18, one of whom complaining that her friends and family had recognized her from details published in the news.[300][303][304] Trump was reprimanded by the judge on April 16 for gesturing and audibly speaking in the direction of a potential juror.[305][306]
Another group of 96 potential jurors was brought in later in the week.[304] Twelve jurors, along with one alternate, were selected by April 18.[307] The selection of six alternate jurors concluded on April 19.[308][309] The jury reportedly comprised seven men and five women, who mostly had white-collar careers.[310] The jurors were allowed to tell their family and employers that they were on the jury but could not discuss the case with them.[311]
Trump was described as falling asleep for brief intervals on four out of the first five days of the trial, ahead of opening statements,[312][313][314][315][316] and as being flatulent.[t] Trump has denied dozing off at his trial.[u]
On April 22, opening statements began.[328] Prosecutors accused Trump, Cohen, and Pecker of campaign finance violations, alleging they coordinated payments to two women and concealed them as part of a conspiracy to influence the 2016 election.[329] During their opening statements, prosecutors said the jury would be presented with a document with a handwritten note in the margin by Allen Weisselberg outlining the hush-money payment scheme.[330][331]
The defense argued that the testimony of Cohen, a convicted felon, could not be trusted; that the payments were ordinary business transactions, akin to editorial decisions made by newspapers;[332] and that in democracies it is normal for candidates to attempt to influence an election.[329]
Contempt hearings
On April 15, prosecutors asked the judge to hold Trump in contempt and fine him $3,000 for three alleged violations of the gag order against him;[307] prosecutors also requested to use the attacks on Cohen as evidence.[298][258][333] By the morning of April 18, prosecutors alleged that Trump incurred seven further violations of the order and requested that he be fined another $7,000.[307]
On April 23, Merchan heard arguments about whether Trump had violated the earlier gag order when he made social-media posts about two expected witnesses.[334] Merchan criticized Trump's attorney Todd Blanche for failing to justify Trump's claim that he was merely responding to "political attacks" and for failing to provide any legal precedent supporting Trump's claim that reposting an article could not be a violation of a gag order; Merchan told Blanche, "You're losing credibility."[334][335] Merchan rejected Trump's position that reposting a news article to social media was a merely "passive" rather than active act.[336][v] The defense also declared that "Trump absolutely knows what the gag order allows him to do and does not allow him to do."[336]
On April 30, Trump became the first U.S. president ever to be held in criminal contempt of court, under NY Judiciary Law Section 750(3).[337] (Trump had previously been held in civil contempt, for withholding documents, in the New York business fraud case.)[338] Trump was found in contempt on nine of the ten counts, regarding statements made from April 10–17.[339] Over the next few days, he paid a $9,000 fine.[340][341][342] Merchan said he would consider jailing Trump for further violations "if necessary and appropriate".[343]
On May 2, a second hearing was held to consider four further violation claims.[w] The prosecution said it was "not yet seeking jail".[348][349] On May 6, Trump was found in contempt for one of those four claims (when he on April 22 commented on the jury) and was fined $1,000.[x] The judge again warned Trump of possible incarceration for further violations.[352]
The mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, said that corrections officials would be "ready" if the judge ordered incarceration.[353]
Prosecution witnesses
David Pecker
Prosecutors called former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker to testify on April 22, 23, 25 and 26 as the trial's first witness, taking most of the first week of testimony.[354] He had been given immunity in 2018 in a federal investigation into Michael Cohen in exchange for information regarding hush money deals.[355] During Pecker's testimony, it was implied that former National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard, who Pecker stated was now living in Australia and suffering from a "spinal condition", would not testify.[354][356] It was previously reported that while Pecker and his company American Media Inc. (AMI), the National Enquirer's parent company, facilitated payment to McDougal,[357] Pecker refused to personally do the same with Daniels,[358][359] though he allegedly alerted Trump associates about Daniels' decision to go public with her affair allegation.[360] On April 23, Pecker testified that Cohen used to feed him negative stories about Trump's enemies, which Pecker's staff would then "embellish" and show drafts to Cohen to get his feedback before publishing them.[361] Pecker also detailed how he offered to deploy the "catch and kill" scheme, stating that he offered in 2015 to suppress negative stories about Trump and flag efforts by women attempting to sell stories about him.[362] The prosecution cited a state election law regarding conspiracy to defend their questioning of Pecker about his contacts with Steve Bannon, the chief executive officer of Trump's 2016 campaign.[363]
On April 25, Pecker testified that AMI suppressed negative press about other celebrities, which was emphasized by Trump's team in their cross-examination.[364] Additionally, he stated that he did not believe Cohen was working for Trump's campaign.[365] Pecker discussed his relationship with Trump prior to the 2016 campaign, during which he suppressed other negative stories about him. Pecker detailed how his company, Trump and Cohen facilitated payment to McDougal in mid-2016, in tandem with promising her a ghostwritten monthly column in an attempt to disguise the contract's true nature.[364][282][366] In September 2016, Cohen asked to purchase the boxes of McDougal's source material (valued by Pecker at $25,000) on Trump's behalf. Pecker then told Cohen that he did not want to be reimbursed for the payment to McDougal. According to Pecker, an AMI staff member leaked details of the scheme on November 4, 2016, ahead of the election, after which Pecker released a false statement that AMI had never paid anyone to kill damaging stories about Trump. AMI then amended its contract with McDougal allowing her to speak to the press.[366] Pecker also described a January 2017 meeting in Trump Tower in which Trump thanked Pecker for his work regarding McDougal and another story.[366][367][y] Pecker said his decision not to facilitate payment to Daniels (because she was a porn star) led to it being done by Cohen.[364] Pecker testified he acted at Trump's behest and intended to help him win the presidency, despite his own doubts regarding campaign-finance laws.[366][368] Additionally, Pecker said that after receiving a letter from the Federal Election Commission about possible campaign violations in mid-2021, he signed a non-prosecution deal with federal prosecutors for his cooperation.[366]
Graff, Farro, Browning, and Thompson
_(cropped).jpg)
Four witnesses testified over the latter part of April 26 through the earlier part of April 30.
On April 26, Trump's executive assistant Rhona Graff testified that when she worked outside Trump's office in Trump Tower, she maintained contact information for McDougal and Daniels,[369] and that she had a "vague recollection" of glimpsing Daniels at a Trump Tower reception area.[370] During her cross-examination by the defense, Graff said Trump was sometimes prone to multitasking while signing checks, depending "what was going on ... and how important the checks were".[17][371]
Additional testimony was also provided by former First Republic banker Gary Farro on April 26 and 30. He testified that on October 26, 2016, he helped Cohen open an account for a real-estate limited liability company. According to prosecutors, the same day, Cohen deposited $131,000 from his personal home-equity credit line, and the next day transferred $130,000 to Daniels' lawyer, Keith Davidson.[370][372][373] He detailed how he assisted in setting up the bank account which enabled Cohen to make the hush money payment. Farro stated that Cohen was eager to connect with him, and would set up the account in October 2016. Farro also noted that the account was set up for Essential Consultants LLC, the company the payment was made from, and that it was funded through Cohen's home-equity line of credit at First Republic.[373][374] According to Farro, Cohen did not want addresses on the checks.[373] Prosecution also presented evidence showing emails to and from Cohen, which confirmed the $131,000 deposit to a checking account 20 minutes after it was opened.[374] In texts between Davidson and Cohen, Davidson provided wiring instructions for the $130,000 hush-money payment. According to Farro, First Republic closed Cohen's accounts after the payment to Daniels became public.[375]
April 30 also saw testimony from C-SPAN Executive Director for Archives Robert Browning, who verified the authenticity of C-SPAN videos of Trump, as well as Phillip Thompson, a regional director of Esquire Deposition Solutions, which provided court reporter services for Trump's October 2022 deposition in one of the E. Jean Carroll defamation cases.[376][377]
On May 20, the prosecution tried to contact Browning to see if he would be available to testify again, this time regarding a photograph of Trump with his former bodyguard Keith Schiller.[378][379]
Keith Davidson and Douglas Daus
Keith Davidson, a former attorney for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, appeared on April 30 and May 2. He testified that the Access Hollywood tape helped influence Daniels to go forward with her story.[380] According to Davidson's testimony, he drafted the $130,000 hush-money agreement, in which he used the pseudonyms "Peggy Peterson" for Daniels and "David Dennison" for Trump.[381] The agreement called for payment by October 14, 2016. When the payment did not arrive, Davidson communicated with Cohen,[382] who told him that Trump was traveling.[383] On October 17, Davidson wrote to Cohen that the agreement was void and furthermore that he would no longer be representing Daniels.[384] (Cohen would wire his personal funds to Davidson on October 27.)[385]
Davidson testified that he believed Trump was behind the hush-money talks.[386] However, he also acknowledged how Cohen wired the transfer and that he also had conversations with Howard as well as Daniels' manager Gina Rodriguez regarding the deal. Howard and Rodriguez, who had no direct roles, would encourage Davidson to connect with Cohen. Daniels, Davidson and Rodriguez were also revealed to have received part of the $130,000 settlement payment. Davidson's role in the $150,000 deal with AMI for McDougal's story was noted as well.[375]
On May 2, the jury heard an audio recording of Cohen and Trump from September 6, 2016 appearing to discuss paying Pecker for McDougal's story, wherein Cohen mentions talking to Weisselberg about setting up the payment and Trump asks, "So, what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?"[387] Further audio was played of a phone call in which Cohen tells Davidson that "I can't even tell you how many times [Trump] said to me, you know, I hate the fact that we did it," apparently regarding the payment to Daniels.[157] Davidson acknowledged texting Howard on Election Night 2016: "What have we done?", to which Howard responded "Oh my god."[158] Davidson explained that this was a recognition that "our activities may have assisted the presidential campaign" and that it was "sort of gallows humor".[388] He also confirmed that, after texting with Cohen on February 13, 2018, he sent a statement to CNN anchor Chris Cuomo to corroborate Cohen's claim of having paid $130,000 to Daniels from his personal funds.[389] Davidson testified during his cross-examination that he had never personally met Trump.[157]
On May 2, prosecutors called Douglas Daus, a computer forensics specialist in the district attorney's office. Daus testified to examinations of Cohen's cell phones. Several of the prosecutions proposed exhibits were found by Daus.[390]
Hope Hicks
On May 3, former White House communications director Hope Hicks testified. She said a Wall Street Journal reporter asked her for comment on the alleged Trump–McDougal affair, which is how she learned that AMI had paid to catch and kill the story.[391] She stated that she drafted a statement to respond to The Wall Street Journal, with Cohen offering feedback, but Trump overrode them by telling Hicks to say that McDougal's allegations were "totally untrue",[392][393] which is how she was quoted by the Journal just days before the election.[394][357] Hicks also learned at this time that the Journal planned to publish details of Daniels' allegations, with Trump instructing Hicks to deny any affair.[395] Hicks stated that Trump sought to hide news of both scandals from Melania,[396][395] and after the story of the payment to Daniels broke in early 2018, Trump told her that Cohen had voluntarily decided to pay Daniels to protect him; Hicks opined that this seemed out of character for Cohen.[395] Trump sought Hicks's opinion about how the Daniels story was being perceived, especially in relation to the negative impact it may have had if Cohen had not paid Daniels before the election.[393][397] Hicks further testified that she had heard Trump praise Pecker on multiple occasions for his negative reporting on his Republican rivals in the 2016 election.[395]
According to Hicks, the Access Hollywood tape roiled the Trump campaign.[395] Though Trump tried to minimize its significance,[398] the campaign felt the tape was a "crisis".[399] Hicks stated that the tape's release stressed Trump because he wanted members of his family, including Melania, to be proud of him and not hurt or embarrassed.[400] In her cross-examination by the defense, Hicks stated that Trump "is a very good multitasker [who] is always doing many things at once".[371]
McConney, Tarasoff, and Franklin
Three witnesses appeared during May 6 and the earlier part of May 7.
On May 6, former Trump Organization comptroller Jeffrey McConney testified about how Cohen was reimbursed.[401] He testified that Weisselberg instructed him in early 2017 to send the reimbursement payments to Cohen.[401][402][403] McConney acknowledged that he told organization payroll specialist (and its accounts payable supervisor) Deborah Tarasoff to record the reimbursement payments as "legal expenses"; he said he told her these payments were part of a retainer agreement between Cohen and Trump.[401] McConney further stated that starting in March 2017, the reimbursement checks for Cohen came from Trump's personal bank account.[401] In 2017, Cohen quit working for Trump after setting up shop at Squire Patton Boggs's offices in Midtown, but nevertheless still identified himself as Trump's personal lawyer.[401] Numerous invoice messages from Cohen and related emails between McConney, Tarasoff and Weisselberg were shown in the courtroom.[401] Several general ledger documents associated with Trump and his trust were reviewed which showed that Trump made the reimbursement payments to Cohen.[401]
Following McConney's testimony, Deborah Tarasoff, a 24-year employee of the Trump Organization who works in accounting, took the stand to testify. She said the organization was paying for her attorney.[404][401] She described her job duties: "I get approved bills, I enter them into the system, and I cut checks."[405] Tarasoff stated that she had no decision-making authority and merely followed instructions, but also acknowledged that she would approve invoices if she got them, including the ones which were sent to Cohen.[402] Tarasoff testified that while either Trump or one of his two older sons could approve invoices of over $10,000 since 2015, only Trump could access his personal checking account.[402] Twelve reimbursement checks for $35,000 were signed by Trump, and Tarasoff testified that they were mailed to Cohen.[402] Trump, who used a Sharpie pen when writing checks, could write "void" if he disapproved of checks Tarasoff created for the company[402] (e.g. a $70,000 check to Cohen signed by Eric Trump and Wiesselberg in February 2017, which was voided by Trump).[402] She testified that Weisselberg "had his hands in everything".[403] During cross-examination, Tarasoff acknowledged that she not was present for conversations between Trump and Weisselberg about the payments.[402]
On May 7, 2024, Penguin Books executive Sally Franklin testified. Franklin, whose company published a few Trump books, read excerpts from Trump: How to Get Rich and Trump: Think Like a Billionaire, including Trump quotes, "If you don't know every aspect of what you're doing, down to the paper clips, you're setting yourself up for some unwanted surprises," and, "For many years, I've said that if someone screws you, screw them back."[406]
Stormy Daniels
Stormy Daniels testified for five hours on May 7,[407] and for the earlier part of May 9.[408] She said she met Trump at a celebrity golf tournament near Lake Tahoe, Nevada, in 2006 and detailed a sexual encounter with Trump in his hotel suite after he invited her to dinner.[407][409] Daniels stated that Trump did not use a condom and that during the encounter, "I was staring up at the ceiling, wondering how I got there," despite not having used drugs or alcohol.[407][z] She said she felt like she blacked out during the encounter and was traumatized by the experience.[411][409] It was the only time they reputedly had sex.[412] Daniels said Trump offered to make her a contestant on The Apprentice; she stated that he continued alluding to the idea for a time in subsequent phone conversations, in which he referred to her as "honey bunch" and asked when they could meet again.[406][409] Daniels noted that she met with Trump on multiple occasions, with dozens of witnesses,[409] including a visit to Trump Tower and a final encounter with Trump in Los Angeles in 2007.[409]
In accepting the hush money, Daniels stated that she was not motivated by money (although this appeared to be contradicted by a text message between her and her manager Gina Rodriguez which suggested she was willing to accept the payment).[409] She stated that she had no part in the hush-money negotiations.[409] Daniels also laid out key information about the payment.[409] She maintained her previous allegation that someone threatened her in a Las Vegas parking lot, stating that she did not report it because it would have been upsetting to Trump.[409] Daniels stated that any violation of the hush-money agreement would have cost her a million dollars.[409]
During Daniels' testimony, Merchan sustained many defense objections.[409] He repeatedly admonished Daniels for giving answers that went beyond the scope of the question asked, and at one point interrupting Daniels' testimony, stopping her from describing the sexual position she and Trump used.[407][409] Merchan criticized the "degree of detail" on matters such as the floor size of the hotel suite.[406] In a sidebar conference, Merchan agreed with defense arguments that Daniels described things which were "better left unsaid" regarding the sexual encounter, but denied the defense's request for a mistrial, noting that the defense would have the opportunity to cross-examine Daniels.[407][409] Merchan set confines for Daniels' later testimony and directed the prosecution to encourage her to give shorter answers.[409] Afterward, Daniels gave shorter answers and hewed closer to the question asked.[407]
When testimony resumed, Daniels stated that her lawyer Keith Davidson received the $130,000 hush-money payment, and that she got $96,000 of it. She also acknowledged that she signed a statement dated January 10, 2018, in which she denied the affair, but testified that she did not want to sign it and that it was untrue.[409]
In its cross-examination, the defense questioned Daniels about her account of being traumatized by her encounter with Trump, suggesting that her pornographic career would have made the event unsurprising. Daniels explained that the first time she realized the meeting was intended to be sexual was upon coming out of the bathroom inside Trump's hotel, finding him stripped to his boxers; she elaborated that she was "not expecting [this from] a man twice [her] age".[411] Daniels acknowledged that she had contacted renowned high-profile sexual harassment attorney Gloria Allred about potentially suing Trump for the encounter. Much of the cross-examination focused on questioning the accuracy of her allegation that she was threatened in a Las Vegas parking lot, which was revealed to have been disputed by Davidson via texts with Cohen. Despite accepting the hush money, Daniels maintained that her primary goal was to "get the story out".[409]
On May 9, Daniels concluded her testimony after hours of cross-examination.[408] Trump attorney Susan Necheles pressed Daniels on how she profited from her story and brought up minor inconsistencies in how she has told it.[408] Merchan again denied a defense motion for a mistrial, but would provide the jury instructions instructions limiting the use of her testimony.[413][414] [aa] Trump criticized Merchan for permitting the testimony stating "He’s [Merchan] trying to make it as salacious as possible by allowing testimony that has nothing to do with the case."[418]
Manochio, Menzies, and Westerhout
On May 9, Rebecca Manochio, a junior bookkeeper at the Trump Organization, testified for about a half-hour. She had provided evidence to the prosecution.[419][420] Tracy Menzies, a senior vice president at HarperCollins, then testified about the accuracy of certain excerpts from the book Think Big: Make It Happen in Business and Life, which Trump had co-authored.[421]
Trump's director of Oval Office Operations in 2019 and former Secretary to the President between 2017 and 2019, Madeleine Westerhout, also began testifying the same day.[408][414] She stated that Republican National Committee officials she was working with in 2016 discussed how to replace Trump as the Republican presidential nominee due to concern about the damaging Access Hollywood tape.[422] She also noted how she set up a meeting between Cohen and Trump in February 2017, and how the meeting led to Trump Organization employees sending reimbursement checks to the White House—which Trump would then sign and send to Cohen—through a circuitous mail system.[423] She was in tears when discussing how Trump fired her, reportedly in response to her telling reporters that she had a better relationship with him than his daughters.[424]
Westerhout resumed testifying on May 10.[423] During cross-examination, Westerhout appeared to side with defense arguments that Trump used alternatives to the White House mail system because he wanted to get mail to people more quickly.[423]
Dixon, Tomalin, Longstreet, and Jarmel-Schneider
For the later part of May 10, four other witnesses testified.[425] Among these witnesses were Jennie Tomalin (a Verizon senior analyst), Daniel Dixon (an AT&T compliance analyst), and Jaden Jarmel-Schneider (a paralegal from the Manhattan DA's office).[423] In successive testimonies, Dixon and Tomalin would authenticate cell phone records which were used as trial evidence.[423] Georgia Longstreet, another paralegal from the Manhattan DA's office, again testified after previously doing so days prior.[423] Longstreet also showed some of Trump's old tweets, as well as texts between Gina Rodriguez and Dylan Howard.[423] Jarmel-Schneider then showed a chart which summarized 34 business records which prosecutors say were falsified.[423]
Michael Cohen
On May 13, Michael Cohen, Trump's former "fixer" and attorney (who is considered the case's star witness), began testifying.[426] He would give 17 hours of testimony over four days.[427]
On May 13, Cohen acknowledged that he, Trump and David Pecker conspired to suppress negative stories and promote positive stories about Trump during the 2016 election.[426] He said his work in this matter "was at the direction of and benefit of Mr. Trump", stating that "Everything required Mr. Trump's sign-off."[428] By email (shown as evidence), Cohen informed the National Enquirer that Trump did not want them to report his affair with a "Penthouse Pet".[426] Cohen specified his role in the Enquirer's first catch-and-kill story for Trump, about a Trump Tower doorman who alleged that Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock.[426] Cohen detailed his role in the hush-money payment to McDougal, stating that he monitored progress by text, phone and the Signal app.[426] He repeated that he communicated by "phone, email and text" with McDougal, Daniels and Keith Davidson.[426][9] By text message, Cohen told Dylan Howard that he was making the payments on Trump's behalf.[426] He further noted that after Pecker refused to pay for the Daniels story, he took over as funder of "catch-and-kill operations".[426]
Cohen acknowledged Hicks's testimony about the conversation over the McDougal payment press coverage.[426] According to Cohen, he and everybody at the organization had contact with Weisselberg.[426] He further accused Weisselberg of providing him with the financial advice concerning the payment to McDougal, stating that it foreshadowed the way he arranged for the Daniels payment.[426] Cohen said he first spoke to Trump about the Daniels allegation in 2011 after it was leaked to The Dirty, and that Trump called her "a beautiful woman" (having said the same about McDougal) and said they had met in 2006 at a golf outing and that she had liked him more than football star "Big Ben". Cohen said Trump did not respond when he asked if he had had sex with her and that Trump took him up on his offer to get the story taken down.[9]
Cohen said the release of the Access Hollywood tape was viewed as a campaign liability and that Trump afterwards directed him to pay Daniels to avoid "catastrophic" damage.[426][9] Cohen said that he viewed supermarket tabloids like the National Enquirer to be influential in reaching voters[426] and that Trump was concerned about the effect Daniels' story could have had on female voters.[426] Cohen stated that Trump told him: "Just pay it. There's no reason to keep this thing out there. Just do it."[429] Cohen testified that Weisselberg told him to not make the payment through the Trump Organization and instead to come up with a more creative way to do it.[426] Cohen said that he and Weisselberg discussed processing the $130,000 through one of Trump's golf courses as if it were a membership or event fee but they decided against it. When Weisselberg said he lacked the personal finances, Cohen agreed to pay it.[429] Cohen said he suggested the idea of including a clause in the nondisclosure agreement penalizing Daniels $1,000,000 every time she told her story.[426] After Trump's 2016 election victory, Weisselberg and Cohen discussed the reimbursement plan in Trump's 26th-floor office, and Weisselberg coordinated the repayments to Cohen.[426] A bank statement for Essential Consultants LLC from the end of October 2016 was presented, which showed the $130,000 sent to Keith Davidson and featured a note Cohen said was handwritten by Weisselberg. It showed the doubling of the $180,000 reimbursement—$130,000 for Daniels plus $50,000 for money Trump owed Cohen for paying tech company Red Finch (to poll for the Trump campaign and promote Cohen on Twitter as something of a sex symbol)—so that Cohen would receive the full amount after paying 50% in taxes, plus a $60,000 year-end bonus, totaling $420,000. Cohen said it occurred to him that Weisselberg and Trump had planned this reimbursement scheme in advance and that Weisselberg had said in Trump's presence that the monthly payments would function in the guise of a retainer agreement.[430][401]
Cohen testified that he aspired to be a personal lawyer to the president but that Trump, instead of granting him this role, significantly cut his 2016 bonus. Cohen said his relationship with Trump was falling apart at this time. He said his work for Trump boosted his personal career, including by securing more prominent clients.[426]
On May 14, Cohen said he sent the Trump Organization false invoices requesting money for "services rendered". He said that, in February 2017, he confronted Trump in the Oval Office over his lack of repayment.[431] He said he lied about Daniels to protect Trump (while also "staying on Trump's message" by lying about the Trump Tower Moscow project).[432] Cohen testified that, in January 2018, he pressured Davidson to have Daniels sign a false statement denying the affair and payment, which Daniels signed on January 30, and also offered her an appearance on Fox News with Sean Hannity.[433][434] Cohen testified that Daniels also wanted an appearance on Fox News' Hannity, which she did not go through with.[435][434] Cohen also testified that he decided to stop lying for Trump following a meeting he had with his family shortly before his 2018 guilty plea.[435] Before the day concluded, Cohen began defense cross-examination.[435] On May 16, a Trump lawyer accused Cohen of lying that on October 26, 2016, he was on the phone with Trump's personal bodyguard, Keith Schiller, and had him hand the phone to Trump, who then approved the hush-money deal. The defense cited phone records as showing that a series of prank calls to Cohen had prompted him to contact Schiller for a call lasting one minute and 36 seconds, which Cohen defended as enough time to handle both matters.[436]
On May 20, during cross-examination, Cohen confirmed that around October 26, 2016, he helped Tiffany Trump regarding an extortion issue she faced. He said he was also working with David Pecker that month.[437] Cohen made two brief calls to Donald Trump on the morning of October 26,[438] which he said were about Daniels.[439] On January 27, 2017, Cohen told the Trump Organization he would no longer be working at Trump Tower because he was now Trump's "personal attorney".[440] On January 31, 2017, Weisselberg emailed Cohen with the subject: "Note and mortgage modification agreement for Trump Park Avenue Condominium." Weisselberg asked Cohen to "prepare the agreement discussed" so Weisselberg could start sending monthly payments.[441] Cohen said that Donald Jr. and Eric Trump signed the checks "because they were the trustees".[442] In 2017, he received nine checks for $35,000 apiece directly from Trump, plus two checks from the trust.[443] Cohen confirmed that he lied to Weisselberg about how much he had paid Red Finch, and that his false reimbursement request amounted to theft from the organization.[444][445][446][447] He said he lied in 2018 when he said that Trump had been unaware of the Daniels payment.[448] He said he had no income between his 2018 guilty plea[449] and the publication of his 2020 memoir,[450] but that since then he had earned $4.4 million from podcasts and books.[451] Asked whether he has a "financial interest in the outcome of this case", Cohen said he expected to make more money if Trump was found not guilty, since "it gives me more to talk about".[452][453] He acknowledged that his name recognition comes from his frequent criticism of Trump and that he was even interested in running for Congress.[446]
Defense cross-examination of Cohen concluded on May 20. Cohen testified that the retainer agreement Weisselberg proposed he maintain with Trump to conceal the monthly reimbursements was fraudulent in nature.[454][430]
The defense pointed to occasions when Cohen did legal work, and said this was evidence that he was retained as a lawyer under a valid retainer agreement, as Cohen would not do legal work for free, nor would Trump pay in excess of reimbursements. Additionally, the defense pointed out that CFO Weisselberg requested from Cohen an agreement without suggesting it would be a fake agreement: "please prepare the agreement we discussed so we can pay you monthly."[455][456][457]
The prosecution then conducted redirect examination. The prosecution rested its case the same day.[458][459][460]
Defense witnesses
The defense began its case on May 20, 2024, and rested its case on May 21 after calling two witnesses.[427][461] Trump did not testify.[462][463][ab] On May 22, he stated (in a press interview outside the court proceedings) that he did not testify because (1) he disagreed with Merchan's past rulings, (2) he was concerned about being questioned about his own past, and (3) there was "no case".[464][471][ac]
The defense team had initially planned to call Bradley Smith, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), as an expert witness on campaign finance law.[473] Smith had argued that the payments to Daniels were not campaign payments and not illegal.[474] However, on May 20, Judge Merchan ruled that Smith's testimony would be limited to "general definitions and terms" so as to not supplant the judge's role to determine what the law is.[475][476] Smith was prohibited from mentioning "there had never been a case in which anyone had been convicted of a federal campaign finance law violation for the making of 'hush money payments'" and from discussing "that the FEC dismissed the complaint against defendant and the DOJ decided against prosecuting defendant for potential FECA violations" due to irrelevance.[477] In February 2024, prosecutors pointed out that Smith had previously been barred from testifying for the defense in two unrelated federal cases in Manhattan where the defense had improperly sought to have Smith interpret campaign finance law for the jury: United States v. Bankman-Fried and United States v. Suarez.[476] As a result, the defense decided not to call Smith as a witness.[478][479] Trump then falsely stated that Merchan had not allowed Smith to be called,[480] and Smith wrote that the "judge's bias is very evident."[481]
Daniel Sitko
On May 20, Daniel Sitko, a paralegal for Todd Blanche, provided testimony.[482] A chart of phone calls between Cohen and Robert Costello, the lawyer that Giuliani suggested Cohen hire in 2018, was submitted into evidence.[483]
Robert Costello
On May 20, Robert Costello also testified.[484] Merchan admonished the witness for making comments on the stand objecting to rulings, staring at the judge, and rolling his eyes.[485]
On May 21, Costello was cross-examined by the prosecution.[486] Emails from Costello to his law partner Jeff Citron and Cohen were shown. In a May 2018 email to Citron, Costello said it was a goal to get Cohen "on the right page without giving him the appearance that we are following instructions from Giuliani or the president" and said he believed it was "the clear and correct strategy".[486][487] When asked if "the email speaks for itself" as he had asserted the day before, Costello said "Sometimes." He also wrote to Citron about Cohen, "What should I say to this asshole? He is playing with the most powerful man on the planet." (Cohen testified that Costello and Trump's campaign had attempted to pressure him to realign to their interests.)[486] In an email to Cohen, Costello wrote: "You are making a very big mistake if you believe the stories these 'journalists' are writing about you. They want you to cave. They want you to fail. They do not want you to persevere and succeed. If you really believe you are not being supported properly by your former boss, then you should make your opinion known."[486] The defense rested its case thereafter.[486]
Closing arguments and jury instructions
Later on May 21, arguments over jury instruction language were held.[486] Merchan announced that the jury would be excused until the beginning of summations on May 28.[486][463] Merchan stated that the closing arguments "will not be quick" and that he expected his final instructions to the jury to last an hour.[486] On Memorial Day, May 27, Trump complained that the prosecution would get the last word as "very unfair", though this is standard procedure in criminal trials where the state has the burden of proof.[488][ad]
On May 28, the defense gave a three-hour closing argument including breaks.[492] Trump lawyer Todd Blanche claimed Trump had nothing to do with checks which were written by Trump's sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump.[493] Blanche questioned why prosecutors did not call Donald Jr. and Eric as witnesses despite their signing payment checks to Cohen.[493] Blanche also showed an email revealing that McConnery sought approval from both Donald Jr. and Eric.[493] Blanche alleged that it was Cohen's decision to make the hush-money payment and variously branded him a prolific liar.[493] Blanche sought to discredit Daniels' ambitions, noting (among other things) text messages between her manager and publicist Gina Rodriguez and Dylan Howard which showed that Howard believed Pecker would pay for her story shortly after the Access Hollywood tape was released.[493] Merchan admonished Blanche for telling the jury: "You cannot send someone to prison, you cannot convict somebody, based upon the words of Michael Cohen." Merchan said this type of comment is "highly inappropriate" and "not allowed",[494] as the jury is instructed not to consider how Merchan might sentence Trump.[495][496][497]
The same day, the prosecution gave a four-hour and 41 minute closing argument including breaks.[493] Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass described Pecker's testimony as "utterly damning".[493] Steinglass noted that some key parts of Daniels' story were proven true[493] and noted that the defense appeared to acknowledge that Trump knew about the Daniels payment as early as 2017.[493] Steinglass stated that it made sense that Cohen was interested in the outcome of the case, noting that Trump dropped him "like a hot potato" when their relationship soured.[498] Steinglass argued that Cohen was Trump's "fixer" and that his knowledge was "limited to what actually happened".[493] It was noted that Cohen did not work for the Trump Organization's legal department and answered directly to Trump.[493] A footnote from the 2018 Office of Government Ethics form was shown, which stated that "In 2016 expenses were incurred by one of Donald J. Trump's attorneys, Michael Cohen. Mr. Cohen sought reimbursement of those expenses and Mr. Trump fully reimbursed Mr. Cohen in 2017."[493]
Steinglass went over phone conversations between Trump and Cohen regarding the hush-money payment and showed a December 2017 check to Cohen signed via Sharpie by Donald Trump,[493] arguing that the latter must have known the purpose of such checks, as his "entire business philosophy was and is to be involved in everything".[499] Steinglass cited a 2018 tweet by Trump in which he acknowledged that Cohen was reimbursed for an NDA via a retainer agreement, but said it had "nothing to do with the campaign".[499] Steinglass said the defense's characterization of the payments to Cohen was undermined by his lack of pay from Trump in 2018 despite Cohen doing legal work for him that year.[499] Steinglass further stated that the payment was made to "hoodwink the American voter".[493][500] At the end of closing arguments, Merchan said that jury instructions would be read on May 29 and were expected to last an hour.[493] Trump described the closing arguments as "BORING!" on Truth Social.[501][502][503]
Jury deliberations and verdict
On May 29, the jury began deliberations.[504] A few hours in, they asked to hear a readback of about 30 minutes of testimony by Pecker and Cohen; the readback was held the following day.[505] It regarded an August 2015 meeting between Pecker, Cohen, Trump, and Hicks, in which Pecker pledged to be Trump's "eyes and ears" regarding negative stories about him; additionally, the jury wanted to hear Pecker's testimony regarding an alleged phone call from Trump in which the two discussed a rumor that McDougal had gone to another outlet to publish her story.[506][507][508]
On May 30 at 5:07 pm EDT, Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts,[1][509] making him the first former U.S. president to be convicted of a felony.[510] Merchan denied a defense motion for an acquittal.[511]
Post-trial proceedings
Prohibitory consequences
Trump had turned over two of the three pistols he was licensed for to the New York Police Department (NYPD) on March 31, 2023, with a third pistol moved to Florida.[512] Trump's New York State concealed carry license was suspended on April 1, 2023, following his indictment on criminal charges.[513] New York state law and federal law prohibit people with felony convictions from possessing firearms, and federal law even prohibits people under indictment or information for a felony (but not convicted) from possessing firearms, a violation of which can result in up to 15 years imprisonment, or life imprisonment if one is subject to the enhanced penalties imposed by the Armed Career Criminal Act.[514] [515] As of June 5, 2024, Trump's New York firearm license was expected to be revoked after the NYPD's legal bureau completes its investigation.[516] As of June 10, Trump was reportedly still in possession of the third firearm in Florida.[517][518]
On June 10, 2024, Trump and his lawyer Todd Blanche attended his probation interview via videoconference.[519][ae] If placed on probation, Trump cannot associate with other convicted felons.[520][524]
On June 28, 2024, the New Jersey Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control declined to renew the liquor licenses for Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster and Colts Neck, instead issuing temporary permits.[525] The alcohol laws of New Jersey prohibit a liquor license from being issued to "any person who has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude", typically involving a serious crime involving "dishonesty, fraud or depravity".[525][526][527] Though the Trump Organization has stated that Trump is not connected with the liquor licenses, the New Jersey attorney general pointed out that Trump is the sole beneficiary of his revocable trust, which owns the licenses.[525][528] A hearing for the licenses was expected to be held on July 19, but was delayed until after Trump's sentencing.[529][525]
Gag order
On May 31, 2024, the day after the trial ended, Trump told reporters he wanted to have the "nasty gag order" lifted.[530] On June 4, Blanche filed a motion to have the gag order lifted, stating: "Now that the trial is concluded, the concerns articulated by the government and the Court do not justify restrictions on the First Amendment rights of President Trump."[531] On June 5, Matthew Colangelo asked that the gag order remain in place "to protect the integrity of these proceedings and the fair administration of justice at least through the sentencing hearing and the resolution of any post-trial motions".[532] Many expected Trump, had the gag order been lifted, to assail trial participants including the witnesses, jury, and court staff, as well as their families.[533][534]
On June 18, 2024, the New York Court of Appeals said it would not hear an earlier appeal by Trump on the gag order, leaving it in place.[535]
On June 25, two days before the first 2024 U.S. presidential debate, Merchan partially lifted the gag order permitting Trump to comment on witnesses and jurors, but Trump cannot reveal the jurors' identities, nor comment about court staffers, the prosecution team or their families until after sentencing.[536][537][538]
In July 2024, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a lawsuit against New York State in an attempt to invoke the U.S. Supreme Court's exclusive jurisdiction to hear disputes between two states.[539] The lawsuit sought to block Trump's gag order and sentencing until after the election, accusing New York of interfering with the election in Missouri and violating Missourians' First Amendment rights.[539] On August 5, the Supreme Court ruled against intervening.[540]
On December 17, 2024, Trump excoriated Merchan on Truth Social, stating that the judge "has so little respect for the Constitution that he is keeping in place an illegal gag order on me ... just so I cannot expose his and his family's disqualifying and illegal conflicts".[541]
Delayed sentencing hearing
Before his conviction, officials in state and federal agencies began preparing for possible incarceration.[542][543] Trump's rhetoric and lack of acknowledgement of any wrongdoing was expected to negatively impact the leniency of his sentence.[544]
Trump's sentencing hearing was originally scheduled for July 11, 2024.[545] On July 1, Trump's counsel requested to delay sentencing to consider the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States released that day.[222][546] The Manhattan DA's office agreed to the delay, but said the defense's position lacked merit.[547] On July 2, Merchan postponed the sentencing hearing to September 18.[548] In August, Trump's team asked Merchan to again postpone the sentencing hearing until after the election,[549] and the Manhattan DA stated that it would defer to Merchan on this matter.[550] On August 29 (in a request to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to seize control of the case), Trump's lawyers complained that a September sentencing date would amount to election interference.[551] On September 6, Merchan postponed the sentencing hearing to November 26.[552][553] At the presidential immunity hearing on November 19, the Manhattan DA's office said it would consent to postpone sentencing until Trump leaves office.[554] Three days later, Merchan canceled the sentencing date without setting a new one.[555]
Immunity ruling
District Judge Alvin Hellerstein had previously rejected defense arguments regarding presidential immunity in 2023, when Trump attempted to remove the case to federal court, ruling that "the matter was purely a personal item of the President."[556]
On July 1, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States, supporting presidential immunity for official acts committed by the seated president. Later that day, Trump's counsel requested permission to move to dismiss the conviction on the basis that some evidence presented in the trial constituted official actions by Trump.[222][546] This includes 2018 social media posts by Trump, phone records between Trump and Cohen, a government ethics disclosure referencing the hush money payment, and some of Hicks' and Westerhout's testimony.[557][558][559] Trump's motion was formally made on July 11.[559] Merchan's ruling will center on whether the evidence presented constituted official actions, and whether it influenced the verdict.[557] If the conviction is overturned, prosecutors would need to convene another grand jury to issue a new indictment.[559]
Merchan's ruling on immunity was initially expected by September 6, 2024. It was postponed so he could consider Trump's third recusal motion, which he denied on August 13.[560] The immunity ruling was expected by September 16.[561][562] On September 3, 2024, hours before Hellerstein rejected Trump's request to remove his case to federal court, prosecutors urged Merchan to rule swiftly on the immunity question, expressing concern that Hellerstein might pause state court proceedings.[563] On September 6, Merchan postponed the immunity ruling to November 12.[552] On that day, Merchan agreed to a request from prosecutors to pause the case for a week while they considered how Trump's election could impact proceedings.[564][565] On November 19, the Manhattan DA argued that the conviction should stand because no law states that temporary presidential immunity nullifies proceedings conducted during the president's time outside of office and regarding activities deemed unofficial to that post.[554]
On December 16, Merchan ruled that the Supreme Court decision had no effect on Trump's conviction. Merchan stated that Trump's conduct pertains to personal acts and that any disputed evidence was "harmless in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt".[566][567]
Dismissal and removal requests
On August 29, 2024, Trump's lawyers asked the federal court for the Southern District of New York to seize control of the case.[551] On September 3, Judge Hellerstein rejected Trump's request on the basis that the payments were an unofficial act.[568][569] Hours later, Trump's attorneys filed a notice of appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.[570] On October 14, Trump's counsel asked the Second Circuit to reconsider Hellerstein's rejection, arguing that it was based upon "profoundly flawed analysis" and continuing to assert that instead of being personally prosecuted, Trump was being politically persecuted.[569]
On December 2, 2024, the defense asked for the case to be dismissed, arguing that it was invalid due to Trump's 2024 election.[571] On December 9, the prosecution asked the court to deny the request on the bases that the trial had already concluded, the immunity question had yet to be ruled on and "President-elect immunity does not exist."[572][573] On these lines, the prosecution suggested that sentencing could take place before the presidency without an incarceratory penalty, or—more novelly—that the sentencing could be vacated, but not Trump's guilty status.[574] Trump's lawyers lambasted the latter suggestion as irresponsible because of its typical use for a dead defendant and in light of assassination attempts on their client.[575]
On December 3, 2024, the defense suggested that the case should be dismissed on the basis of alleged "grave juror misconduct", implying that if Merchan ruled otherwise, Trump's team would pursue its appeal to the Second Circuit regarding the denied removal request.[576][577][570] On December 5, prosecutors replied that the juror misconduct claim stemmed from "unsworn, unsupported, hearsay allegations" from a source who "has refused to endorse and has at least partially disclaimed" them.[578]
Potential appeal
The expected appeal of conviction cannot take place until after sentencing.[462]
.jpg)
Trump has a right to one level of appeal for the conviction itself, which he is expected to use.[579][462] The appeal would be heard by the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, which is the intermediate state appellate court covering Manhattan and the Bronx. If unsuccessful, the next step would be the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, which has discretion whether to hear an appeal.[580]
Reactions
See also
Notes
- ^ In New York, falsifying business records is a misdemeanor, but can become a felony if done to further another crime.[3]
- ^ On July 19, 2019, William H. Pauley III, a district judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, ordered that the documents in the federal campaign finance probe be unsealed, finding, "The campaign finance violations discussed in the [m]aterials are a matter of national importance. Now that the [g]overnment's investigation into those violations has concluded, it is time that every American has an opportunity to scrutinize the [m]aterials."[26] Cases are typically unsealed only after the underlying matter has concluded.[26]
- ^ Pecker, a longtime associate and friend of Trump's, participated in a catch and kill operation to suppress stories that might damage Trump's 2016 campaign and helped connect Cohen with a lawyer for Daniels.[49][50]
- ^ Trump asserted that the DA had leaked his plans to indict Trump to the press. A Trump lawyer later revealed that Trump's assertion that he would be indicted was based on news media reports.[64]
- ^ By that day, Trump claimed that he welcomed the idea of being perp walked, a scenario which would likely not occur as a result of his indictment.[65]
- ^ After an initial online wave of support for protesting, far-right activists appeared to begin viewing the potential arrest as a leftist trap intended to cause riots which would hurt Trump's political career. Momentum shifted to instead supporting Trump's planned first 2024 rally in Waco, Texas, on March 25.[73]
- ^ On March 24, 2023, Trump posted (and subsequently deleted) an image of himself at the White House wielding a baseball bat next to a picture of Bragg.[77] On March 26, in an interview with NBC News Meet the Press, Tacopina called these posts "ill-advised".[78][79][74] On March 27, in an interview with Fox News Sean Hannity, Trump stated that the post was to be a standalone photo of Trump "holding the baseball bat in order to promote 'Made in America'", and that somebody later added Bragg's photo.[80] Threatening a prosecutor in New York is a crime.[77]
- ^ Trump had previously stated that he would invoke the "advice of counsel" defense.[138] For Trump, this defense would allow him to prove that he disclosed the details of the hush money payment to his legal counsel, sought and obtained guidance that the payment was lawful, and then acted upon that advice in good faith.[138] On May 28, 2024, Trump claimed he was prohibited from using the advice of counsel defense writing "THE GREATEST CASE I'VE EVER SEEN FOR RELIANCE ON COUNSEL, AND JUDGE MERCHAN WILL NOT, FOR WHATEVER REASON, LET ME USE THAT AS A DEFENSE IN THIS RIGGED TRIAL. ANOTHER TERM, ADVICE OF COUNSEL DEFENSE!"[139]
- ^ In a post-arraignment news conference, Bragg cited potential violations including the alleged (1) unlawful promotion of a candidacy, (2) payment to Daniels exceeding the federal campaign contribution allowance, (3) illegal catch and kill operation coordinated with American Media, Inc., which may have falsely characterized related payments, and (4) underlying tax fraud when Weisselberg apparently recorded the reimbursement to Cohen as taxable income.[142][34]
- ^ The day of Trump's arraignment, although his DNA was not collected, Forbes speculated that it might be accessible to Carroll's team (though inadmissible at her April 25 trial).[160] The Daily Show guest host Roy Wood Jr. joked that a DNA sample from Trump is "kind of how he got into this mess in the first place", alluding to his alleged affair with Daniels, and said his DNA could likely "solve a bunch of cold cases from the '80s!"[161]
- ^ During the 2020 election, Merchan donated a total of $35 to Democrats: $15 to Joe Biden's campaign, $10 to the voter mobilization "Progressive Turnout Project" and $10 to the digital ad campaign "Stop Republicans" group.[178][179]
- ^ In July 2023, Merchan received a Letter of Caution by the New York Commission on Judicial Misconduct for prohibited political activity following a complaint stemming from the $35 donations to Democrats.[182] A Letter of Caution is issued following a formal disciplinary proceeding where a judge's misconduct is established, but public discipline is not warranted and contains no penalty.[183][184] The commission's proceedings are confidential unless public censure or discipline are imposed or the judge voluntarily makes them public.[183] The commission's 2024 annual report noted that 34 New York judges received a caution for prohibited political activity.[182][184]
- ^ On April 1, 2024 the New York City Bar Association issued a statement of support for Judge Merchan stating: "In light of the foregoing, the New York City Bar Association expresses its unequivocal support for the way in which Justice Merchan is handling this issue. Justice Merchan's actions in this proceeding are consistent with this state's ethics rules and well settled national and international ethics requirements, by which the dignity and independence of the judiciary are maintained." The statement also condemned "The former President's decision, on the eve of trial, to broadcast baseless claims that have previously been the subject of a motion for recusal—and which may be covered by the current gag order's prohibition on statements made about family members of court staff—appear to be an attempt to derail the mechanics of the judicial process by casting aspersions against a non-party to the action for statements that an investigation determined were falsely attributed to her and serve only to harass the judge."[187]
- ^ On May 4, 2023, following an inquiry by Merchan, the New York State Advisory Committee on Judicial Ethics issued an opinion stating: "(1) A judge's impartiality cannot reasonably be questioned based on (a) de minimis political contributions made more than two years ago or (b) the business and/or political activities of the judge's first-degree relative, where the relative has no direct or indirect involvement in the proceeding and no interests that could be substantially affected by the proceeding. (2) As a result, the judge is not ethically required to disclose such facts or circumstances sua sponte in the proceeding, regardless of any surrounding publicity or lack thereof. The judge may continue to preside in the matter provided the judge believes he/she can be fair and impartial."[189][190]
- ^ Merchan's daughter, Loren Merchan, created her Twitter account @LorenM426 in February 2016, later changing handles to @LorenM0604 and going private by April 2023.[196] A new Twitter account, utilizing the old handle (@LorenM426) was created by an unknown operator on April 6, 2023, a day after Trump posted an article on Truth Social highlighting Loren Merchan's social media.[196] The new account featured a profile picture of Trump behind bars and had zero followers.[196] On March 27, 2024, the OCA issued a statement that: "The X, formerly Twitter, account being attributed to Judge Merchan's daughter no longer belongs to her since she deleted it approximately a year ago. It is not linked to her email address, nor has she posted under that screenname since she deleted the account. Rather, it represents the reconstitution, last April, and manipulation of an account she long ago abandoned."[197]
- ^ On March 27, Trump referenced the fake account via Truth Social: "So, let me get this straight, The Judge's daughter is allowed to post pictures of her 'dream' of putting me in jail, the Manhattan D.A. is able to say whatever lies about me he wants, the Judge can violate our Laws and Constitution at every turn, but I am not allowed to talk about the attacks against me, and the Lunatics trying to destroy my life, and prevent me from winning the 2024 Presidential Election, which I am dominating?"[198] The false claim was originated by activist Laura Loomer on March 26, 2024, several hours after Trump's initial gag order was imposed.[199] The previous year, Loomer had originated false claims propagated by Trump that Dawn Engoron, the wife of Judge Arthur Engoron (who was overseeing the New York business fraud lawsuit against the Trump Organization), was criticizing Trump on Twitter, though Dawn had never had a Twitter account.[200]
- ^ Additionally, Merchan asked the defense and prosecution to agree on a trial date.[153]
- ^ There were three courtroom sketch artists, hired by various news agencies, who attended the trial daily: Christine Cornell, Elizabeth Williams, and Jane Rosenberg.[284] The sketch artists, positioned in the third row of the gallery (the first two rows were reserved by the defense and prosecution),[285] often struggled to gain a clear view of the witnesses due to their distance and obstructions caused by security personnel, instead often relying on binoculars to observe the proceedings through an internal video feed.[284] Due to the security restrictions, the sketch artists delivered their work during breaks, by propping up their sketches on a trash can in the court bathroom and then using cell phones to photograph them.[285] The sketches have been criticized by the public for their lack of detail,[284] likeness,[286] and negative depictions.[287] Trump has criticized the sketches as being unflattering.[288]
- ^ On April 17, 2024, Trump incorrectly complained that he had not received sufficient peremptory strikes, posting on Truth Social, "I thought STRIKES were supposed to be 'unlimited' when we were picking our jury? I was then told we only had 10, not nearly enough when we were purposely given the 2nd Worst Venue in the Country. Don't worry, we have the First Worst also, as the Witch Hunt continues! ELECTION INTERFERENCE!".[301] The number of permitted peremptory challenges are determined by the class of the felony charge under state law.[301] Trump was charged with a Class E felony, a lower-level felony, which under New York state law entitles the prosecutors and defense to ten peremptory strikes each.[301] Under New York law, each side does have an unlimited number of strikes for cause, but these must be approved by the presiding judge.[302]
- ^ It was described by Ben Meiselas and George Conway that Trump seemed to have an odoriferous flatulence, sometimes while appearing to doze off, during proceedings.[317] The claims were subsequently reiterated by the media.[318][319][320][321][322]
- ^ Trump's campaign repeatedly denied Trump's naps, stating that "None of these sources know what the hell they're talking about and clearly have no access to any type of factual information".[288][323][324] On May 2, Trump denied sleeping, posting on Truth Social, "I simply close my beautiful blue eyes, sometimes, listen intensely, and take it ALL in!!![325] On May 9, in an interview with Telemundo Miami, Trump stated "No, I don't fall asleep. I sometimes will sit back, close my eyes. I hear everything perfectly. At some point I may fall asleep. But I will let you know when that is."[326][327] Sleeping in court is unusual for a criminal defendant and would be viewed as disdainful by a jury.[326]
- ^ The judge stated that "Passive conduct would be if someone makes a post and it somehow ends up in the client's account without anybody doing anything."[336]
- ^ At the May 2, 2024, contempt hearing, Blanche noted that Trump was unable to respond to a quip made by Joe Biden at the White House Correspondents' Association dinner that "Donald has had a few tough days lately. You might call it stormy weather", nor Cohen's tweet that read "Hey [Donald] Von ShitzInPantz...Your attacks on me stink of desperation."[344][345][346][347] Merchan rebuffed that the gag order did not extend to Biden.[344]
- ^ On May 6, 2024, Judge Merchan wrote: "Defendant violated the Order by making public statements about the jury and how it was selected. In doing so, Defendant not only called into question the integrity, and therefore the legitimacy of these proceedings, but again raised the specter of fear for the safety of the jurors and of their loved ones. Such concerns undoubtedly threaten to "interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law." It remains this Court's fundamental responsibility to protect the decency of the criminal process and to control disruptive influences in the courtroom."[350][351]
- ^ James Comey, Mike Pompeo, Reince Priebus, and Sean Spicer were also reputedly present.[367]
- ^ Daniels testified that her sexual partners in her movies always wore a condom.[410]
- ^ On May 9, following Daniels testimony, Merchan denied a defense motion for a mistrial noting "for some unexplained reason that I still don’t understand there was no objection to certain testimony cited in the motion for a mistrial and again today."[415] Merchan noted the assertion made by the defense that the sexual encounter did not occur during opening arguments entitled the prosecution to make an effort to rehabilitate credibility through detailed questions stating "The more specificity Ms. Daniels can provide about the encounter, the more the jury can weigh whether the encounter did occur and if so whether they choose to credit Ms. Daniels’ story."[415][416] With regards to more salient topics, Merchan noted that "I wish those questions hadn’t been asked, and I wish those answers hadn’t been given", but that the defense had ample opportunity to object.[417]
- ^ On April 12, 2024, Trump stated that he would "absolutely" testify.[464] On April 26, Trump stated he would testify "if it's necessary."[465] On May 2, Trump falsely claimed that the gag order prevented him from testifying.[464] Merchan clarified the next morning that Trump had a constitutional right to testify,[466] later asking Blanche on May 14 and May 16 whether Trump would do so.[467][468] On May 20, during a lunch recess, Blanche stated "there is a likelihood that we will rest today" indicating that Trump would likely not testify.[465] On May 21, at a press conference following closing arguments, Trump declined to discuss his decision not to testify.[469] In criminal trials, intentionally delaying the revelation of a defendant's decision to testify until the latest possible juncture is a common strategic legal maneuver as maintaining such tactical ambiguity may influence the direction of the trial.[470] Criminal defendants often do not testify in their own defense due to the increased legal risks.[470]
- ^ Trump has previously declined to testify in matters that could pose legal or political risks.[472] In criminal trials, defendants are not obligated to testify, juries are instructed not to draw any inferences from a defendant's decision not to testify, and prosecutors cannot comment on a defendant's decision not to testify.[472]
- ^ On Memorial Day, May 28, 2024, Trump questioned the order of closing arguments via Truth Social writing, "Why Is The Corrupt Government Allowed To Make The Final Argument In The Case Against Me? Why Can't The Defense Go Last? Big Advantage, Very Unfair. Witch Hunt!".[489] Following the closing arguments, Trump again complained writing "CAN YOU IMAGINE THAT I, AS A DEFENDANT, AM NOT ALLOWED TO REBUT OR CORRECT THE MANY LIES TOLD DURUNG THE 5 HOUR FILIBUSTER JUST PUT ON BY THE SOROS BACKED D.A.'s OFFICE IN THE MANHATTAN COURT."[490] In criminal trials, the order of presentation for closing arguments is reversed from that of opening statements, allowing the defense to present their closing summations first, followed by the prosecution.[491] The prosecution typically get an opportunity to deliver a rebuttal during closings because burden of proof lies with them, not the defense.[491]
- ^ Trump will be attending the probation interview remotely (on a special virtual network with added security measures) at Mar-a-Lago with his attorney, Blanche, present.[520] Probation interviews are normally conducted in person, but experts said that Trump's visit to the Manhattan Criminal Courts Building probation office would be "very disruptive".[520] It is also unusual to have an attorney present at the interview, and this was criticized by the city's public defenders as "special treatment."[521][522][523] Following the interview with the probation office, which may include a social worker or psychologist, a presentence investigation report will be submitted to the court.[523]
References
- ^ a b The Editorial Board (May 30, 2024). "Donald Trump, Felon". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 31, 2024. Retrieved May 31, 2024.
- ^ Pompilio, Katherine (March 31, 2023). "New York Supreme Court Judge Allows Public Disclosure of Trump Indictment". Lawfare. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Cathy, Libby (March 31, 2023). "Why Trump indictment might hinge on a 'novel legal theory'". ABC News. Archived from the original on April 1, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Perper, Rosie (March 25, 2018). "Stormy Daniels: Here's what Trump said when I asked about Melania and newborn, Barron, just before the affair". Business Insider. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ a b c Rothfeld, Michael (March 19, 2023). "Inside the Payoff to a Porn Star That Could Lead to Trump's Indictment". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Dunham, Will; Cohen, Luc (March 31, 2023). "Who is Stormy Daniels and how is she involved in Donald Trump indictment?". Reuters. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023.
- ^ Bubalo, Mattea; King, Robin Levinson (March 11, 2023). "What happened between Stormy Daniels and Donald Trump?". BBC News. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023.
- ^ a b c Rothsfeld, Michael (March 30, 2023). "This is the sordid story behind the hush-money deal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ a b c d "Live updates: Michael Cohen testifies he lied and bullied on Trump's behalf". Associated Press. May 13, 2024. Archived from the original on May 13, 2024. Retrieved May 13, 2024.
- ^ Hirschfeld Davis, Julie (April 5, 2018). "Trump Denies Knowing of Any Hush Money Paid to Porn Actress". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 29, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ a b Kessler, Glenn (August 22, 2018). "Analysis | Not just misleading. Not merely false. A lie". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on June 9, 2020. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
- ^ Dale, Daniel (January 16, 2021). "Analysis: The 15 most notable lies of Donald Trump's presidency". CNN. Archived from the original on August 10, 2021. Retrieved September 19, 2021.
- ^ Liptak, Kevin (May 16, 2018). "Trump discloses payment to Cohen in financial form". CNN. Archived from the original on October 19, 2021. Retrieved October 17, 2021.
- ^ Shear, Michael; Haberman, Maggie (May 2, 2018). "Giuliani Says Trump Repaid Cohen for Stormy Daniels Hush Money". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 26, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Baker, Peter; Haberman, Maggie (March 5, 2019). "In the Middle of His Official Business, Trump Took the Time to Send Checks to Michael Cohen". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Cole, Devan (April 1, 2023). "Donald Trump has been indicted following an investigation into a hush money payment scheme. Here's what we know". CNN. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved April 1, 2023.
- ^ a b Italiano, Laura (April 26, 2024). "Too busy for hush money? Trump debuts longshot 'multi-tasking' defense during testimony by longtime assistant Rhona Graff". Business Insider. Archived from the original on April 27, 2024. Retrieved April 27, 2024.
- ^ Rothfeld, Michael; Palazzolo, Joe (January 12, 2018). "Trump Lawyer Arranged $130,000 Payment for Adult-Film Star's Silence". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on January 14, 2018. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Orden, Erica; Morales, Mark; Scannell, Kara; Prokupecz, Shimon; Jarrett, Laura (March 30, 2023). "Michael Cohen implicates Trump in hush money scheme". CNN. Archived from the original on February 18, 2021. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Bowman, Bridget (March 31, 2023). "Michael Cohen would be key witness in Trump trial, per his lawyer". Meet the Press. NBC News. Archived from the original on April 9, 2023.
- ^ Weiser, Benjamin; Rashbaum, William (December 12, 2018). "Michael Cohen Sentenced to 3 Years After Implicating Trump in Hush-Money Scandal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 26, 2018. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Sollenberger, Roger (May 2, 2024). "Emails Reveal Top Trump Accountant Had Secret Campaign Role". The Daily Beast. Archived from the original on May 3, 2024. Retrieved May 3, 2024.
- ^ Rashbaum, William (August 23, 2018). "Trump Organization Could Face Criminal Charges From Manhattan D.A." The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 24, 2018. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Vance, Cyrus Jr. (April 2, 2023). "Former Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance calls Trump indictment 'extraordinary event'". All Things Considered (Interview). Interviewed by Scott Detrow. NPR. Archived from the original on April 3, 2023. Retrieved April 3, 2023.
- ^ Rashbaum, William; Protess, Ben (July 18, 2019). "New Charges in Stormy Daniels Hush Money Inquiry Are Unlikely, Prosecutors Signal". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ a b Samuelsohn, Darren (July 17, 2019). "Feds' probe into Trump hush money payments is over, judge says". Politico. Archived from the original on February 3, 2024. Retrieved May 30, 2024.
- ^ Protess, Ben; Rashbaum, William (August 1, 2019). "Manhattan D.A. Subpoenas Trump Organization Over Stormy Daniels Hush Money". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 1, 2019. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Rashbaum, William; Protess, Ben (September 16, 2019). "8 Years of Trump Tax Returns Are Subpoenaed by Manhattan D.A." The New York Times. Archived from the original on September 16, 2019. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Gold, Michael (September 19, 2019). "Trump Lawyers Argue He Cannot Be Criminally Investigated". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 8, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Liptak, Adam (July 9, 2020). "Supreme Court Rules Trump Cannot Block Release of Financial Records". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 9, 2020. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Vakil, Caroline (January 1, 2022). "First Black Manhattan DA sworn in, to take over Trump case". The Hill. Archived from the original on December 29, 2022. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ a b c d Cohen, Luc (April 9, 2024). "Trump hush money trial stems from 'zombie case' brought back to life". Reuters. Archived from the original on April 11, 2024. Retrieved May 27, 2024.
- ^ Rashbaum, William; Protess, Ben; Bromwich; Meko, Hurubie (January 30, 2023). "Manhattan Prosecutors Begin Presenting Trump Case to Grand Jury". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ a b Rashbaum, William K. (August 23, 2018). "Manhattan D.A. Eyes Criminal Charges Against Trump Organization". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 24, 2018. Retrieved July 5, 2021.
- ^ Protess, Ben; Rashbaum, William K. (January 17, 2023). "Trump's Former Lawyer Meets With Prosecutors About Hush Money". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on January 18, 2023. Retrieved January 18, 2023.
- ^ Stanton, Joshua; Eisen, Norman L.; Perry, E. Danya; Wertheimer, Fred (March 20, 2023). "The Manhattan DA's Charges and Trump's Defenses: A Detailed Preview". Just Security. Archived from the original on March 20, 2023. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
- ^ Mangan, Dan (March 3, 2023). "Former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen expects to testify 'very soon' to grand jury". CNBC. Archived from the original on March 3, 2023. Retrieved March 3, 2023.
- ^ Rubin, Jordan (March 13, 2023). "Michael Cohen testifying in New York suggests Trump indictment is coming". MSNBC.com. Archived from the original on March 14, 2023. Retrieved March 14, 2023.
- ^ Reid, Joy (March 15, 2023). "Michael Cohen after testifying before Trump grand jury: 'I'm probably the last witness they need'". MSNBC.com. Archived from the original on March 16, 2023. Retrieved March 16, 2023.
- ^ Pellish, Aaron; de Vries, Karl (February 1, 2023). "Cohen says he handed over phones to Manhattan DA". CNN. Archived from the original on March 23, 2023. Retrieved February 2, 2023.
- ^ Piccoli, Sean; Bromwich, Jonah E.; Protess, Ben; Rashbaum, William K. (March 1, 2023). "Kellyanne Conway Meets With Prosecutors as Trump Inquiry Escalates". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 1, 2023. Retrieved March 2, 2023.
- ^ Christobek, Kate; Protess, Ben; Bromwich, Jonah E.; Rashbaum, William K. (March 6, 2023). "Hope Hicks Meets With Manhattan Prosecutors as Trump Inquiry Intensifies". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 7, 2023. Retrieved March 7, 2023.
- ^ Italiano, Laura (March 8, 2023). "As possibility of a Trump indictment grows, Kellyanne Conway jokes with Manhattan DA staff before 2-hour visit". Business Insider. Archived from the original on March 17, 2023. Retrieved March 17, 2023.
- ^ Yilek, Caitlin; Kates, Graham (March 15, 2023). "Stormy Daniels meets with Manhattan prosecutors amid Trump probe". CBS News. Archived from the original on March 16, 2023. Retrieved March 16, 2023.
- ^ Reiss, Adam; Gregorian, Dareh; McCausland, Phil (March 20, 2023). "Trump ally attempts to undercut Michael Cohen in hush money probe". NBC News. Archived from the original on March 21, 2023. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
- ^ "Grand jury in Trump hush money probe to meet Thursday". NBC News. March 22, 2023. Archived from the original on March 23, 2023. Retrieved March 23, 2023.
- ^ Katersky, Aaron (March 23, 2023). "Trump live updates: Manhattan grand jury expected to reconvene Thursday". ABC News. Archived from the original on March 23, 2023. Retrieved March 24, 2023.
- ^ Orden, Erica; Parnell, Wesley (March 27, 2023). "Former National Enquirer publisher testifies before Trump grand jury". Politico. Archived from the original on March 27, 2023. Retrieved March 28, 2023.
- ^ Rutenberg, Jim; Steel, Emily; McIntire, Mike (April 11, 2018). "Investigators Focus on Another Trump Ally: The National Enquirer". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 28, 2023. Retrieved March 27, 2023.
- ^ Kates, Graham; Milton, Pat (March 27, 2023). "Manhattan grand jury investigating Trump hears from key witness". CBS News. Archived from the original on March 27, 2023. Retrieved March 28, 2023.
- ^ Protess, Ben; Rashbaum, William K.; Bromwich, Jonah E. (February 2, 2023). "Former Trump Executive, Already Jailed, Could Face More Fraud Charges". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on February 3, 2023. Retrieved February 3, 2023.
- ^ Rubin, Lisa (May 19, 2023). "Why former Trump Org executive Allen Weisselberg could face perjury charges". MSNBC. Archived from the original on April 13, 2024. Retrieved May 19, 2023.
- ^ Rashbaum, William; Protess, Ben; Bromwich, Jonah (March 9, 2023). "Prosecutors Signal Criminal Charges for Trump Are Likely". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 29, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Rashbaum, William K.; Protess, Ben; Bromwich, Jonah E. (March 9, 2023). "Prosecutors Signal Criminal Charges for Trump Are Likely". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 9, 2023. Retrieved March 10, 2023.
- ^ Feinberg, Andrew (March 10, 2023). "New York prosecutors warn Trump of possible indictment, report says". The Independent. Archived from the original on March 10, 2023. Retrieved March 10, 2023.
- ^ Benen, Steve (March 13, 2023). "Fearing indictment, Trump changes his story in hush money mess". MSNBC.com. Archived from the original on March 13, 2023. Retrieved March 14, 2023.
- ^ Hurtado, Patricia (March 13, 2023). "Trump Probe 'Weaponized' by Manhattan DA, Lawyer Says in Calling for Review". Bloomberg. Archived from the original on March 17, 2023. Retrieved March 14, 2023.
- ^ Rubin, Jordan (March 13, 2023). "Trump won't testify to New York grand jury in hush money case, attorney says". MSNBC.com. Archived from the original on March 13, 2023. Retrieved March 14, 2023.
- ^ Lowell, Hugo (March 16, 2023). "Stormy Daniels: Donald Trump legal team 'pushes for end to hush money case'". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on March 16, 2023. Retrieved March 16, 2023.
- ^ a b McDougall, A. J. (March 22, 2023). "Trump Lawyer's Emails to Stormy Daniels Given to Manhattan Prosecutors: Report". The Daily Beast. Archived from the original on March 22, 2023. Retrieved March 23, 2023.
- ^ Dye, Liz (March 17, 2023). "Trump Lawyer Joseph Tacopina Formerly Consulted With Stormy Daniels? Whoopsie!". Above the Law. Archived from the original on April 23, 2024. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
- ^ "Transcripts". Don Lemon Tonight. March 16, 2018. Archived from the original on March 18, 2023. Retrieved March 19, 2023 – via CNN.com.
- ^ a b Katersky, Aaron (April 17, 2023). "Manhattan DA asks judge to look into Trump attorney's potential conflict of interest". ABC News. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved April 18, 2023.
- ^ Mangan, Dan; Breuninger, Kevin (March 20, 2023). "Trump grand jury live updates: Expected indictment in payoff to porn star Stormy Daniels". CNBC. Archived from the original on March 20, 2023. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
- ^ Bender, Michael C.; Haberman, Maggie (March 21, 2023). "Trump at Mar-a-Lago: Magical Thinking and a Perp-Walk Fixation". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 21, 2023. Retrieved March 22, 2023.
- ^ Haberman, Maggie; Bromwich, Jonah E.; Protess, Ben; Feuer, Alan; Rashbaum, William K. (March 18, 2023). "Trump Claims His Arrest Is Imminent and Calls for Protests, Echoing Jan. 6". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Tucker, Eric; Kunzelman, Michael (March 20, 2023). "Some Trump supporters ambivalent on calls for protests". AP News. Archived from the original on March 27, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Collins, Kaitlan; Holmes, Kristen; Reid, Paula (March 18, 2023). "Trump says he expects to be arrested Tuesday as New York law enforcement prepares for possible indictment". CNN. Archived from the original on March 18, 2023. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
- ^ a b Dienst, Jonathan; Santia, Marc; Tucker, Eric; Colvin, Jill; Price, Michelle L. (March 20, 2023). "Barricades Go Up at Trump Tower, Manhattan Court as NYC Readies for Possible Protests". NBC New York. Archived from the original on March 20, 2023. Retrieved March 20, 2023.
- ^ Teh, Cheryl (March 20, 2023). "George Conway says an insanity defense is Donald Trump's best shot against a possible indictment in New York, but that he'll never use it". Business Insider. Archived from the original on March 20, 2023. Retrieved March 20, 2023.
- ^ Dienst, Jonathan; Fitzpatrick, Sarah (March 17, 2023). "NYC Security Preps Underway for Possible Trump Indictment as Soon as Next Week: Sources". NBC New York. Archived from the original on March 19, 2023. Retrieved March 19, 2023.
- ^ Tucker, Eric; Kunzelman, Michael (March 20, 2023). "Some Trump supporters ambivalent on calls for protests". Associated Press. Archived from the original on March 27, 2023. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
- ^ Slattery, Gram (March 20, 2023). "Far-right activists wary of 'trap' after Trump calls for protests". Reuters. Archived from the original on March 21, 2023. Retrieved March 21, 2023.
- ^ a b Dienst, Jonathan; Russo, Melissa; Santia, Marc; Copenhagen, Courtney; Millman, Jennifer; Shea, Tom; Miller, Myles (March 30, 2023). "NYC Ramps Up Security Again Ahead of Possible Grand Jury Action Against Trump, Police Sources Say". NBC New York. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Rashbaum, William K.; Bromwich, Jonah E.; Feuer, Alan (March 30, 2023). "These are the security measures New York is putting in place". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Haberman, Maggie (March 24, 2023). "Trump, Turning Up Heat, Raises Specter of Violence if He Is Charged". Yahoo! News. Archived from the original on March 24, 2023. Retrieved March 25, 2023.
- ^ a b Massie, Graeme (March 24, 2023). "Anger as Trump posts picture of himself wielding baseball bat next to Alvin Bragg's head". The Independent. Archived from the original on June 4, 2023. Retrieved May 31, 2024.
- ^ Sharma, Shweta (March 27, 2023). "Trump's own lawyer Joe Tacopina calls violent Truth Social post attacking Alvin Bragg 'ill advised'". The Independent. Archived from the original on April 13, 2024. Retrieved May 31, 2024.
I'm not his social media consultant," he replied. "I think that was an ill-advised post that one of his social media people put up and he quickly took down when he realised the rhetoric and the photo that was attached to it.
- ^ Kika, Thomas (March 26, 2023). "Trump's lawyer admits social media attack on Alvin Bragg 'ill-advised'". Newsweek. Archived from the original on March 26, 2023. Retrieved March 26, 2023.
- ^ Mishra, Stuti (March 28, 2023). "Trump offers rambling defence of post of him wielding bat next to Alvin Bragg's head". The Independent. Archived from the original on February 9, 2024. Retrieved May 31, 2024.
- ^ Khardori, Ankush (March 30, 2023). "Trump Seems to Be the Victim of a Witch Hunt. So What?". Politico. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved May 30, 2024.
- ^ Weiss, Benjamin S. (May 31, 2024). "Republicans close ranks around Trump after felony conviction". Courthouse News Service. Archived from the original on June 1, 2024. Retrieved May 31, 2024.
- ^ Sonenshine, Tara D. (August 18, 2023). "As the Trump trials plunge into political theater, the world is watching". The Hill. Archived from the original on May 30, 2024. Retrieved May 30, 2024.
- ^ Wren, Adam (April 15, 2024). "When the circus came to Manhattan". Politico. Archived from the original on May 30, 2024. Retrieved May 30, 2024.
- ^ Swan, Jonathan; Haberman, Maggie; Schweber, Nate (April 22, 2024). "The Circus Trump Wanted Outside His Trial Hasn't Arrived". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 25, 2024. Retrieved May 30, 2024.
- ^ Miller, Joe (April 10, 2024). "Donald Trump's 'zombie' case lurches towards an unlikely place in history". Financial Times. Archived from the original on May 14, 2024. Retrieved May 31, 2024.
Yet on Monday, the "zombie" case — abandoned by a former district attorney and by federal prosecutors who presumably thought it too flimsy to charge, before being revived last year — will roar back to life, as the first-ever criminal indictment of a former US president proceeds to trial in New York.
- ^ "Can Trump run for president as a convicted felon?". www.bbc.com. Archived from the original on May 31, 2024. Retrieved June 2, 2024.
- ^ Wolf, Zachary B. (May 30, 2024). "Analysis: Can Trump still run for president? Can he still vote? | CNN Politics". CNN. Archived from the original on May 31, 2024. Retrieved June 2, 2024.
- ^ Stein, Perry (March 30, 2023). "Trump is indicted in N.Y. Here's what it means and what happens next". The Washington Post. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Feinberg, Andrew (March 30, 2023). "Trump indicted over hush money payments in Stormy Daniels probe". The Independent. Archived from the original on March 30, 2023. Retrieved March 30, 2023.
- ^ Sangal, Aditi; Vogt, Adrienne; Hayes, Mike; Powell, Tori B.; Iyer, Kaanita (April 4, 2023). "The Trump indictment is now public. Read it here". CNN. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023.
- ^ Cramer, Maria (March 31, 2023). "Here's how indictments work in the United States' legal system". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Boboltz, Sara (May 14, 2024). "Manhattan DA Releases Visual Detailing 34 Counts Against Trump". HuffPost. Archived from the original on May 14, 2024. Retrieved May 14, 2024.
- ^ "New York Penal Law Section 175.10, Falsifying business records in the first degree". Archived from the original on April 3, 2024. Retrieved April 3, 2024.
- ^ a b c d Marimow, Ann E. (April 4, 2023). "Here are the 34 charges against Trump and what they mean". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023."The People of the State of New York against Donald J. Trump" (PDF). The Washington Post. April 4, 2023. Archived from the original (PDF) on April 4, 2023.
- ^ a b "Alvin Bragg, the district attorney behind the case against Trump". Financial Times. March 31, 2023. Archived from the original on March 27, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ a b Chaffin, Joshua (March 31, 2023). "Donald Trump indictment thrusts a divided nation into new chapter of chaos". Financial Times. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Protess, Ben et al. "In Trump Case, Bragg Pursues a Common Charge With a Rarely Used Strategy" Archived May 7, 2023, at the Wayback Machine New York Times (May 7, 2023).
- ^ Nakamura, David (April 10, 2024). "What to know about Trump's New York charges — and any potential sentence". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on April 23, 2024. Retrieved April 10, 2024.
- ^ Khardori, Ankush (April 11, 2024). "The Surprising Strategy Trump Could Use to Win His Manhattan Trial". Politico. Archived from the original on April 12, 2024. Retrieved April 12, 2024.
- ^ Orden, Erica (May 27, 2024). "It's not just guilty or not guilty. Here are all the possible outcomes of the Trump trial". Politico. Archived from the original on May 31, 2024. Retrieved June 1, 2024.
- ^ Wolf, Zachary B. (April 13, 2024). "Your questions about Trump's trial, answered". CNN. Archived from the original on April 14, 2024. Retrieved April 14, 2024.
- ^ Isikoff, Michael (April 4, 2023). "Exclusive: Trump to be charged Tuesday with 34 felony counts, but spared handcuffs and mug shot". Yahoo! News. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023.
- ^ Massie, Graeme (April 4, 2023). "Trump to face 34 felony charges but won't have mugshot or be handcuffed, report says". The Independent. Archived from the original on April 4, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023.
- ^ a b Astor, Maggie (February 2, 2024). "What Happens if a Presidential Candidate Is Convicted?". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 17, 2024. Retrieved February 17, 2024.
- ^ Marimow, Anne E. (April 4, 2023). "Here are the 34 charges against Trump and what they mean". Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 5, 2023. Retrieved April 4, 2023.
- ^ Gerstein, Josh (April 6, 2023). "Can Trump run for president from prison? Yes, and it's been done before". Politico. Archived from the original on April 7, 2023. Retrieved April 7, 2023.
- ^ Watson, Kathryn (April 11, 2023). "Trump says he won't drop out of presidential race if convicted". CBS News. Archived from the original on April 12, 2023. Retrieved April 12, 2023.
- ^ Freifeld, Karen; Cohen, Luc; Clifford, Tyler (March 31, 2023). "Trump to face criminal charges, sending US into uncharted waters". Reuters. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ a b Freifeld, Karen; Mckay, Rich (April 3, 2023). "Trump arrives in New York for surrender, opposes TV court coverage". Reuters. Archived from the original on April 3, 2023. Retrieved April 3, 2023.
- ^ a b Yu, Janice (April 3, 2023). "Security stepped up at Trump Tower, Lower Manhattan courthouse ahead of Trump arraignment". WABC-TV. Archived from the original on April 3, 2023. Retrieved April 3, 2023.
- ^ Orden, Erica (April 3, 2023). "Trump taps white-collar attorney to helm indictment defense". Politico. Archived from the original on April 3, 2023. Retrieved April 3, 2023.
- ^ Kilgannon, Corey (April 3, 2023). "Trump Arrives in New York for an Arraignment That Will Make History". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on April 3, 2023. Retrieved April 3, 2023.
- ^ Rashbaum, William K.; Bromwich, Jonah E. (March 31, 2023). "Judge Who Oversaw Tax Fraud Case Against Trump's Business Expected to Preside Over His Arraignment". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 31, 2023. Retrieved March 31, 2023.
- ^ Kelly Garrity (April 3, 2023). "No electronics in courtroom for Trump's arraignment, judge says". Politico. Archived from the original on April 5, 2023. Retrieved April 5, 2023.