The big moment
We’re now in the second day of extensive testimony in former president Donald Trump’s Manhattan hush-money/election-interference criminal trial. That means things are really just getting started.
With that in mind, I’ve decided to spotlight some of the biggest political questions moving forward for Trump’s legal predicaments.
Can people be convinced Trump’s actions were “election interference?”
It’s vital for prosecutors to prove the hush-money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels — with whom the former president allegedly had an affair — and the ensuing cover-up were geared toward influencing the 2016 election. (This is what prosecutors say makes the charges felonies rather than misdemeanors.)
Trump has suggested the payment to Daniels was more personal in nature, and some conservative legal experts argue this question could be a stumbling block for the prosecution, as it was in the John Edwards case.
So prosecutors called as their first witness former National Enquirer tabloid executive David Pecker. Pecker laid out the ways in which the broader Trump scheme was indeed geared toward helping Trump win the 2016 campaign — including efforts to “catch and kill” negative stories and plant favorable ones in Pecker’s tabloid.
Pecker testified that the initial request for help from Trump and his then-lawyer Michael Cohen in August 2015 was about aiding the campaign by burying the story of Trump’s potentially damaging affair in the months leading up to the election. Pecker noted that the coverage arrangement between the two sides — which also included attacking Trump’s rivals and running positive stories about him — began shortly after Trump launched his 2016 campaign. He said Cohen repeatedly emphasized the campaign as they strategized about burying another story about a Trump Tower doorman alleging Trump had a child out of wedlock — and that Pecker had more freedom to do what he wanted with the doorman’s story after the election.
That point is also key politically. YouGov polling has shown Americans say by more than a 3-to-1 margin that they believe it’s a crime to “to pay someone to remain silent about an issue that may affect the outcome of an election.” Even Republicans once overwhelmingly agreed with that — at least, before Trump was charged with such a crime.
Does public opinion shift as we get to the nitty-gritty?
This question has long loomed over Trump’s criminal cases: How much more concerned might people become as they actually learn more about the former president? And how much will people be reminded of the things they didn’t like about Trump, at a time when views of him and his presidency have improved?
Early signs are the various trials could be getting more troubling for Trump, including two state ones involving the hush money and subverting the 2020 election; and two federal ones on Jan. 6 and classified documents.
Dating back to 2018, polls have shown between 31 and 41 percent of Americans thought Trump did something illegal in the hush-money case. (Many others thought he merely did something unethical.) Those numbers have come up well shy of Trump’s other criminal cases.
But a new poll Wednesday from Quinnipiac University showed 46 percent now think Trump broke the law in the case — similar to the other cases.
Trump has also lost some ground in recent national polls, which have shown him suddenly ceding more votes to independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. than President Biden. Whether that’s attributable to the hush-money case isn’t yet clear.
How does the highly flawed witness who is Michael Cohen play?
Trump’s former lawyer is expected to be the big witness in this case, given his intimate involvement in the scheme. But he’s also a convicted criminal, including for perjury, and not a terribly sympathetic or credible character — including to liberals.
Recognizing those facts, the prosecution in its opening statement tried to set the tone. You don’t just have to believe Cohen, they argued, because his account will line up with plenty of evidence.
“His testimony will be backed up by testimony from other witnesses you will hear from, including David Pecker …,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said. “It will be backed up by an extensive paper trail of bank records, emails, text messages, phone logs, business documents and other records that we will show you, sometimes at length, during this trial. And it will be backed up by Donald Trump’s own words on tape, in social media posts, in his own books, and in video of his own speeches.”
Even if that’s the case, Cohen getting tripped up or not appearing honest could undermine prosecutors’ case.
“Shortly after getting caught in 2018, you will learn that [Cohen] made a decision,” Trump lawyer Todd Blanche said in his opening statement. “The decision that he made was to blame President Trump for virtually all of his problems.
“He had been eventually disbarred as an attorney. He’s a convicted felon. And he also is a convicted perjurer. He is an admitted liar.”
For now, Cohen appears to have thought better of his social-media broadsides against Trump during the trial, promising to stop posting about the case until after he testifies.
How does Trump’s conduct play?
The verdict or even the facts of the case aren’t the whole ballgame. That’s because Trump has made clear throughout his career that he’s a volatile character who is going to fight these things in the court of public opinion, using all available tools.
We’re awaiting a hugely important ruling from New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan on whether Trump has violated his gag order in the case by attacking witnesses, prospective jurors and even the judge’s daughter. While it would seem unlikely Trump would be jailed for doing so, he’s consistently tested limits in these cases — potentially in hopes of turning himself into a martyr, and in ways that tempt a more severe crackdown.
Having Trump sit in the courtroom for weeks — and listening to the airing of his dirty laundry — is also a situation that threatens to spill over. The presumptive GOP nominee has already been reprimanded by Merchan for potentially intimidating a witness. And remember that this is a highly personal issue for Trump and his family.
Trump wants to convince people he’s being persecuted, but that’s far from a majority view right now. So he needs to push harder. And we’ve seen how oftentimes he can be his own worst enemy when, under legal pressure, he appeals to his base at the expense of the broader electorate.
A momentous quote
“Wow! Former A.G. Bill Barr … has just Endorsed me for President despite the fact that I called him ‘Weak, Slow Moving, Lethargic, Gutless, and Lazy’ … Based on the fact that I greatly appreciate his wholehearted Endorsement, I am removing the word ‘Lethargic’ from my statement. Thank you Bill.”
-Trump on Truth Social late Wednesday night, after his former attorney general signaled he’d back Trump despite saying electing Trump would amount to “playing Russian roulette with the country.” (Barr said electing Joe Biden, on the other hand, would be “suicide.”) It’s a potent reminder that toeing Trump’s line doesn’t always restore pride.
Take a moment to read: