5 takeaways from opening arguments in the Trump trial

Former President Trump’s first criminal trial began in earnest on Monday, with opening statements from the prosecutor and defense team and the summoning of the first witness.

Trump has been charged with 34 felonies for falsifying business records.

The charges center on a $130,000 payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels in the final days of the 2016 election campaign. The money was intended to prevent Daniels from going public with her alleged sexual encounter with Trump a decade ago.

President Trump has denied any such contact and denies any legal wrongdoing.

The trial, to be held in Lower Manhattan, will be the first criminal trial against a former president.

If convicted, Trump could face up to four years in prison, which is unusual for a first-time offender.

Here are the main takeaways for Monday:

Prosecutors charge President Trump with conspiring to sway the election

The crimes Trump is accused of are usually misdemeanors, unless prosecutors can argue they were committed for another crime.

This point has always been a sticking point in New York litigation. That’s because Trump has not been charged with any other crimes related to the payments to Daniels, even though he has been indicted in three other unrelated cases.

But Monday’s proceedings made clearer than ever that prosecutors allege that President Trump conspired to influence the 2016 election.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo called President Trump’s actions “election fraud, pure and simple.”

Colangelo added that Trump and his associates were participating in a “criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election.”

The prosecution’s case encompasses the turmoil that followed the public disclosure of the so-called Access Hollywood tapes in early October 2016. In the tape, which dates back to 2005, President Trump can be heard making vulgar boasts about women and claiming that fame can earn him any “star.” ” Grabbing a woman’s genitals.

Prosecutors have argued that Trump knew his campaign was unlikely to be able to withstand any more embarrassing stories, which meant it was critical to bury Daniels’ claims. It is claimed that

“It would have been devastating for his campaign if another article about his sexual infidelity, especially with a porn star, had come out so soon after the Access Hollywood tape,” Colangelo said.

Much will depend on whether prosecutors can follow through on this element of the case.

Trump defender: ‘It’s no big deal’

Mr. Trump’s team tried to counter prosecutors with what was essentially a very simple argument. “What’s important?”

“There’s nothing wrong with trying to influence elections. It’s called democracy,” said Todd Blanche, the former president’s chief lawyer.

The defense also raised the idea that a frugal man like Trump would try to cover up a $130,000 payment he made to Daniels through former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen by paying Cohen $420,000 in installments. I tried to laugh.

The Trump team’s argument is that the payments were not intended to cover up any nefarious plot and were legitimate legal expenses.

Mr. Cohen is expected to take a stand against Mr. Trump, but the former president’s legal team has sought to paint the friend-turned-foe as a rogue driven by hostility toward the former president.

Mr. Cohen previously pleaded guilty to charges related to tax evasion, campaign finance laws, and lying to Congress. This allowed the Trump campaign to trivialize Trump as a “criminal” whose evidence should be ignored.

Blanche told the jury that prosecutors were trying to fabricate a criminal case out of what was effectively an innocuous event.

If jurors used “common sense,” he argued, the result would be “a very quick ‘not guilty’ verdict.”

Trump faces potential danger if he takes a stand

One of the big questions looming over the trial is whether Mr. Trump will take the stand in his own defense.

Judge Juan Melchán, who has been repeatedly targeted by President Trump in speeches and on social media, issued a ruling on Monday that raises the stakes for the former president.

Marchand needed to decide what topics prosecutors could raise against Trump if he did testify.

The judge gave prosecutors considerable discretion.

He decided he could ask about the massive civil fraud case in which Trump and his businesses were fined as much as $454 million.

The judge also gave the green light to questions regarding two defamation lawsuits filed against Trump by author E. Jean Carroll. Carroll said Trump raped her in a New York department store in the 1990s. In May 2023, a civil trial jury found Trump responsible for sexually abusing Carroll.

President Trump’s apparent violation of the gag order in a separate civil case may also be discussed.

Trump may still decide to roll the dice on testimony. Such behavior would be consistent with his fervent belief in himself.

But Marchand’s order should give Trump’s lawyers some respite.

The trial is progressing at a rapid pace

If Marchand moves quickly, it could shatter early predictions that Trump’s trial could last more than six weeks.

Opening arguments were only held on Monday after jury selection was completed earlier than many observers expected last week.

This process may have easily taken two weeks. Instead, 12 jurors and six alternates were chosen in just one week.

Marchan’s desire to keep up his pace on Monday, even on a day shortened due to the Passover holiday, echoed some of the early testimony of his first witness, former magazine executive David Pecker. It was shown that it was compatible.

Pecker had few bombshells in the time allotted to him, but he will be back on the stand Tuesday morning.

Frustrated Trump hits back

Court reporters said Trump appeared irritated at times, unable to listen to hostile arguments and respond in his usual hyper-belligerent manner.

However, at the end of the day, he tried to make his case to the media.

He called himself a “strong candidate” for president and claimed those in power were “trying to throw me off track for a check that goes to my lawyer.”