Hush money trial to hear opening statements
Chris Michael
Well, after all the appeals and bombast and tears, itâs finally here: opening statements in the first criminal trial of a US president.
Jury selection in the case of the People of the State of New York versus Donald Trump wrapped up last week, though not without some difficulty. Hundreds of prospective jurors were dismissed, several cried, and a couple of them quit after they were chosen.
But at last judge Juan Merchan has landed on 18 people (12 jurors and six alternates) living in Manhattan who say they donât have strong enough opinions about Donald Trump to bias them against the facts.
And facts there are aplenty. Prosecutors accuse Trump of falsifying business records in order to cover up an attempt to influence the 2016 election. Specifically, they say he tried right before that election â at a time when was already facing serious heat because of the Access Hollywood tape, in which he bragged he could sexually assault women because he was famous â to buy the silence of a porn star, Stormy Daniels, who says she had an affair with him 10 years before.
Prosecutors say Trump feared yet another sex scandal could sink his election prospects, so he paid her to keep silent about the affair, his coercive behavior in the bedroom, and of course his âtoadstoolâ.
Itâs going to be edifying. Weâre at the courthouse. Stay with us.
Key events
![Chris Michael](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/uploads/2018/03/20/chrismichael.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=5442defbaf96c35e82a7ea3edd28c1cc)
Chris Michael
If thereâs enough time in the day (court may wrap around 2pm today because of Passover), the trial could see its first witness.
This is expected to be David Pecker, the CEO of American Media Inc (AMI), which publishes the National Enquirer.
Pecker will be asked about his alleged deals with Trump to âcatch and killâ negative stories by buying them from people and then not publishing them, in order to save Trump the bad publicity before the 2016 election.
For example, thereâs the Trump Tower doorman who said he heard Trump fathered a child with one of his employees (a story that turned out to be false but the National Enquirer bought anyway, to kill it).
And thereâs the model Karen McDougal, who said she had a 10-month affair with Trump while his wife, Melania, was pregnant with his son Barron (though the judge has ruled that the prosecution cannot mention that little titbit). AMI paid McDougal $150,000 to stay quiet.
In a twist, AMI actually decided not to pay Stormy Daniels for her story, baulking at her $120,000 asking price. Thatâs why it was left to Trumpâs fixer Cohen to make the payments ($130,000 in the end) directly to her attorney. History turns on such things.
![Chris Michael](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/uploads/2018/03/20/chrismichael.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=5442defbaf96c35e82a7ea3edd28c1cc)
Chris Michael
Next up most likely would be opening statements.
The prosecution will likely try to frame the trial not as a sex scandal, but as another case of Trumpâs attempts to interfere with elections. After all, thatâs what they argues elevates this case to a felony: the prosecution say Trump falsified business records (normally a misdemeanour) in order to violate US campaign finance law (a federal crime).
Politico also reports that people close to the case say the prosecution will be working hard to ârehabilitate the credibilityâ of Michael Cohen â Trumpâs former fixer, who already served time for his role in the hush-money payments, but who has also previously been found guilty of lying in court. Luckily for them, there is a fair amount of evidence to corroborate Cohenâs central claim: that he paid Stormy Daniels at Trumpâs behest.
The defense, for their part, will be trying to downplay the events as a sordid but forgivable case of trying to hide an affair, which doesnât rise to the level of a federal crime. Theyâll also likely pile on Cohenâs own shady history in order to throw doubt on his claim that he discussed the deal with Trump in the Oval Office in 2017.
Trump himself may or may not testify. The one thing we know heâll definitely do, however, is pitch the trial every day in the courthouse corridors to anyone who will listen as a âBiden-inspired witch huntâ â evidence that he sees two juries: the 12 people in the courthouse and the 160 million-plus American voters, who, letâs remember, could still elect him even if heâs convicted.
Whatâs happening today?
![Chris Michael](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/uploads/2018/03/20/chrismichael.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=5442defbaf96c35e82a7ea3edd28c1cc)
Chris Michael
Likely to come first is whatâs known as a âSandovalâ decision. Here, the judge rules in advance about what prosecutors are allowed to ask Trump if he takes the stand â helping Trump decide whether to do so. (He has said he would, but signs indicate he may not.)
In this case, prosecutors have asked the judge for several things, such as permission to ask Trump about the two civil fraud trials he just lost: one for defaming E Jean Carroll after she accused him of raping her, which a judge ruled was âsubstantially trueâ, and the other for fradulently inflating the value of his properties.
They also want to grill him, among other matters, about criticism from a judge in a different case that Trump didnât seem to be a truthful witness. Colour us shocked.
![Chris Michael](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/uploads/2018/03/20/chrismichael.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=5442defbaf96c35e82a7ea3edd28c1cc)
Chris Michael
So: who are those jurors?
Itâs understandable that youâd be interested. So are we. And there is some limited information about them here:
But many media outlets seem determined to doxx (or reveal the identity and personal information, like addresses) of the jurors.
This would likely expose them to threats and abuse from Trumpâs legions of fans, even without him telling them to.
So curiosity is normal. But given Merchan has unusually decided not to sequester the jury (often standard procedure in such high-profile trials), perhaps itâs best to give these people a little privacy, too.
Hush money trial to hear opening statements
![Chris Michael](https://i.guim.co.uk/img/uploads/2018/03/20/chrismichael.jpeg?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=5442defbaf96c35e82a7ea3edd28c1cc)
Chris Michael
Well, after all the appeals and bombast and tears, itâs finally here: opening statements in the first criminal trial of a US president.
Jury selection in the case of the People of the State of New York versus Donald Trump wrapped up last week, though not without some difficulty. Hundreds of prospective jurors were dismissed, several cried, and a couple of them quit after they were chosen.
But at last judge Juan Merchan has landed on 18 people (12 jurors and six alternates) living in Manhattan who say they donât have strong enough opinions about Donald Trump to bias them against the facts.
And facts there are aplenty. Prosecutors accuse Trump of falsifying business records in order to cover up an attempt to influence the 2016 election. Specifically, they say he tried right before that election â at a time when was already facing serious heat because of the Access Hollywood tape, in which he bragged he could sexually assault women because he was famous â to buy the silence of a porn star, Stormy Daniels, who says she had an affair with him 10 years before.
Prosecutors say Trump feared yet another sex scandal could sink his election prospects, so he paid her to keep silent about the affair, his coercive behavior in the bedroom, and of course his âtoadstoolâ.
Itâs going to be edifying. Weâre at the courthouse. Stay with us.