Trump trial live updates: Hush money case enters final phase as closing arguments begin
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Updated May 28, 2024, 1:32 PM UTCBy NBC News
What to know about the hush money trial
- Closing statements are set to begin today in the trial, with former President Donald Trump's lawyers up first.
- Trump's lead lawyer, Todd Blanche, is expected to say the Manhattan district attorney's office hasn't proved the former president guilty beyond a reasonable doubt on the charges — 34 counts of falsifying business records in connection with a hush money payment to adult film actor Stormy Daniels to keep silent about an alleged affair with Trump. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
- Prosecutors are expected to say they have proved Trump falsified the business records to cover up what was essentially an illegal campaign contribution meant to help him get elected in 2016.
- Jury deliberations could begin as soon as today.
Merchan is on the stand and they're ready on go
Adam Reiss
Daniel Arkin
Adam Reiss and Daniel Arkin
The judge has taken his seat and proceedings are about to get underway.
The prosecution and defense in Trump's criminal hush money trial will begin making their closing arguments to the jury today as the first criminal trial of a former president enters its final phase. NBC's Laura Jarrett reports and Hallie Jackson provides analysis for "TODAY."
'Phony' checks and hush money payments: Breaking down Trump's 34 charges in his New York criminal trial
Rebecca Shabadis in Washington, D.C.
JoElla Carman
Rebecca Shabad and JoElla Carman
Trump faces 34 felony counts in the New York hush money trial that is expected to potentially wrap up as early as this week.
Here's what to know about the charges.
Biden campaign preps for a Trump trial verdict: From the Politics Desk
+2
Monica Alba
Natasha Korecki
Mike Memoli
Monica Alba, Natasha Korecki and Mike Memoli
President Joe Biden has largely steered clear of Trump's legal woes. But with a verdict in the hush money trial coming as soon as this week, Biden's campaign is exploring a shift to a new, more aggressive posture, according to two people familiar with the strategy.
Regardless of the outcome, top Biden campaign officials plan to stress to voters that Trump will be on the ballot in the fall and that no potential court proceeding will change that fact.
A person familiar with the discussions summed it up this way: "Donald Trump's legal troubles are not going to keep him out of the White House. Only one thing will do that: voting this November for Joe Biden."
Read the full story here.
Trump has departed for the courthouse
Brittany Kubicko
The former president has left Trump Tower for the courthouse downtown.
Rudy Giuliani's son argues with anti-Israel protester outside court
Jonathan Allen
Former New York gubernatorial candidate Andrew Giuliani started a heated argument with a protester who was shouting antisemitic tropes outside the courthouse this morning.
Giuliani, a former Trump White House official and the son of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani, followed the demonstrator who was wearing a ski mask around a protest zone and yelled at the man about the Oct. 7 terrorist attack on Israel.
The protester carried a sign with numbers representing Gazans who have been killed in the ensuing conflict and voiced canards about Jews controlling the U.S. government and the entertainment industry.
Trump's guests in court today
Jake Traylor
Matt Korade
Jake Traylor and Matt Korade
Several of Trump's children will be in court for closing arguments, including Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and his wife, Lara Trump, who is the co-chair of the Republican National Committee, as well as Tiffany Trump, the former president's only daughter with his ex-wife Marla Maples, and her husband, Michael Boulos.
Also in attendance will be Trump's longtime friend Steve Witkoff, a real-estate investor who testified as a defense expert in Trump's Manhattan civil fraud trial, Will Scharf, a lawyer for Trump who is running for attorney general in Missouri against Republican incumbent Andrew Bailey, and Deroy Murdock, a contributing editor for National Review Online.
Trump lawyer says she has 'zero confidence' Judge Merchan will issue jury instructions 'in an appropriate manner'
Summer Concepcion
Trump legal spokesperson Alina Habba on Sunday expressed concerns about jury instructions in the hush money trial against the former president and the jurors not being sequestered over the holiday weekend.
"Generally, as an attorney, as an American who understands the law and how to apply to laws to facts, there are no facts that support this alleged crime," Habba said during an interview on Fox News "Sunday Morning Futures." "We're not even sure what the crime is. So it's a books and records issue."
Habba echoed Trump's claims that Merchan is "severely conflicted" without evidence, noting the judge's gag order that bars Trump from issuing disparaging comments on his family members and others involved in the case. Trump has repeatedly accused Merchan of being "conflicted," often citing his daughter's work at a digital fundraising and advertising firm that often collaborates with Democratic politicians.
"This judge is the judge that determines the jury instructions. The jury instructions are the road map for non-attorneys and jurors to follow the law," she said. "It's going to be critical, and frankly, at this point, I have zero confidence in the fact that this person, who should not be sitting on the bench right now, will do the right thing and give jury instructions that are in an appropriate manner without any persuasion towards the prosecution."
Show more
Habba then raised concerns about jurors not being sequestered over the holiday weekend, arguing that they could be swayed by family and friends who have certain opinions.
"They should have been sequestered because, in my opinion, these jurors are handling something that is completely unprecedented and unwarranted in America, and for them to be able to be out and about on a holiday weekend with friends and families who have opinions, who are watching the news TVs on the background at the pool party — I have serious concerns," she said.
Trump blasts Merchan and District Attorney Alvin Bragg in Truth Social posts over the weekend
+2
Alexandra Marquezis based in Washington, D.C.
Isabelle Schmeler
Summer Concepcion
Alexandra Marquez, Isabelle Schmeler and Summer Concepcion
In a series of social media posts over the holiday weekend, Trump attacked Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who brought the charges in this case against him, attacked Judge Juan Merchan and said the case was about a "legal expense" and a "bookkeeping error."
"I have a great case, but with a rigged and conflicted judge," Trump said in one post, before adding in another one, "The City of New York's D.A., Alvin Bragg, is trying to prosecute a Federal case, which cannot be done, and where there is NO CRIME."
One post blasted the case for blowing a "legal expense" out of proportion, saying, "Let's put the President in jail for 150 years because a LEGAL EXPENSE to a lawyer was called, by a bookkeeper."
Another post yesterday accused Merchan, without evidence, of being a "corrupt and conflicted" judge and claimed that Bragg is backed by liberal billionaire megadonor George Soros, who has been a target of antisemitic conspiracy theories.
Trump's lawyers are preparing for the final stretch of the former president's hush money trial in New York. NBC News' Gabe Gutierrez reports on Trump's busy weekend ahead of closing arguments in court.
Closing arguments set to begin in Trump's criminal trial
+3
Adam Reiss
Gary Grumbach
Jillian Frankel
Dareh Gregorian
Adam Reiss, Gary Grumbach, Jillian Frankel and Dareh Gregorian
Closing arguments will begin today in the People of the State of New York v. Donald J. Trump, as the first criminal trial of a former president enters its final phase.
After the prosecution and the defense deliver their concluding arguments, the judge will give instructions to the jury. Then, the 12 ordinary New Yorkers who sit on the jury will begin deliberations on whether or not the former president is guilty of the charges against him.
Read the full story here.
After 20 days in a courtroom, here's what you missed in the Trump hush money trial
Katherine Doyle
Alexandra Marquezis based in Washington, D.C.
Katherine Doyle and Alexandra Marquez
Ahead of this week's closing arguments, catch up on what you missed over the last few weeks of the first criminal trial of a former president.
In sometimes explosive testimony, former Trump "fixer" Michael Cohen said that he did call Trump a "Cheeto-dusted" villain but admitted to past lies and theft upon questioning by Trump's attorneys.
Despite promising to testify, Trump did not ultimately take the stand and pushed back on media reports that he fell asleep multiple times during the trial. On his Truth Social account, the former president claimed he was simply resting his "beautiful blue eyes" while listening "intensely" to the proceedings.
Read the full story here.
NEW UPDATESNBC News
Tags
Who is online
410 visitors
Trump's defense is making his closing argument, weakly...
Unless the corrupt judge orders a directed verdict of guilty, the odds are increasingly likely that the jury will be hung. The prosecution has not come anywhere close to proving any of the allegations.
Let's review the evidence. Prosecution showed the invoices, which were created by Cohen and sent to the Trump accounting department. Per SOP, the invoices and prepared checks were sent to Trump as he likes to sign checks in the impression it keeps him knowledgeable about what his company is doing. Trump signed the checks as per the invoices and sent them back to the accounting department. The accounting department then sent checks out.
In order to believe the "conspiracy" theory, one must believe everything that Cohen stated while on the stand. The prosecution likes to state that everything Cohen stated is backed up by physical evidence, but it all goes back to the invoices that were created by Cohen in the first place.
Due to the partisan breakdown of NYC I would not immediately dismiss conviction but agree that the odds are increasing that the jury will be hung.
So where are the checks?
Presented in evidence in the trial.
There is no paper trail that shows a connection between Cohen's payment of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels and his repayment, that's all on the word of Cohen. What physical evidence does exist paints a different picture, of retainer fee payments.
Making your this whole show mere speculation based on the word of somebody with a history and conviction of lying to not only the courts but to congress.
Yep. That's why I agree that the prosecution has not proven this case but are relying on the "partisanship" of the jury members. I still find it difficult to believe that they would bring this case to trial when it was passed over by the previous DA and both the SEC & DOJ have investigated and declined to prosecute also.
Why would Trump pay Cohen 180,000 TWICE (2X for taxes) if it was a retainer?
The reason is simple, Cohen had used his own money to pay Daniels, and if he only got back from Trump exactly what he paid Daniels a lot of it would have been eaten up by taxes and Cohen would be out a lot of money when all was said and done.
The double payment is evidence that the payments were not a "retainer".
It was brought on the hopes that it would keep Trump off the ballots - Election Interference.
They were hoping nobody would remember that the SEC & DOJ both passed on this, and for good reason - it's a misdemeanor at best.
Again, making THIS trial about nothing but another leftists clown show.
It's not evidence of paying hush money from campaign funds either. As you said, Cohen paid her. Not Trump.
It's a little more than that when including the testimony of Pecker, but leaving Cohen to close the prosecutions case, imo, wasn't a stellar move. There is nothing to back up Cohen's claim he talked to Trump in the short phone call to the body guard, though.
He's not accused of paying hush money from campaign funds.
That is supposition, not evidence. There's no physical evidence that the payments were to repay Cohen, the evidence clearly states retainer. What you say may be true but there's no physical evidence to back that up. Again, one would have to rely on the testimony of Cohen who does not have a good track record for telling the truth.
No matter how you want to play it, it's bullshit that even the Biden DOJ ran away from.
I think the Pecker testimony was used to try to convince the jury of a conspiracy between Trump, Pecker & Cohen which I believe is the second uncharged crime that the prosecution used to elevate the bookkeeping charges to felonies. As the bookkeeping charges are misdemeanors and past the Statute of Limitations, they needed that second crime to elevate to felonies. And the way that law is written, it is vague enough (IMO) that they could use it as there was a meeting between the three to try to hide bad and/or embarrassing articles for the campaign. My problem with that is this is the first time this has ever been used in this fashion and we know that all politicians will attempt and follow the same practices. HRC in the 2016 campaign had to pay an FEC fine for using campaign money to pay for the Steele Dossier.
You are correct. It establishes the conspiracy between the 3 men. Pecker and Cohen admitted to campaign crimes on the stand and that Trump knew they were committing those crimes to help him.
What it doesn't establish is Trump paying Cohen back. That hinges on the one phone call testimony from Cohen and the prosecution's inference that Trump has committed fraud before.
The double payment is evidence that the payments were not a "retainer".
Nope, that's supposition and not evidence. In order to believe that is evidence you have to believe what Cohen said about it. There's nothing in evidence to back that up except for Cohen's testimony. Remember, that scheme as told by Cohen was set up between Cohen & Weisselberg yet there's no evidence to back that up except for Cohen's testimony.
The idea that there was no retainer agreement was even shot down by Todd Blanche.
Prove otherwise. All you've given is opinion.
The jury will decide whether it is proven or not regardless of all your ridiculous proclamations and outrageous denials...
On it's face nothing can, or should be, inferred other than at the time Cohen was paid money for legal services. Why didn't the prosecution roust Weisselberg out of his jail cell and have him testify to corroborate Cohen's testimony? Or the body guard whom Cohen called in the first place?
Agree big time. Without physical evidence, it all rests on Cohen's testimony. The prosecution failed big here and left reasonable doubt all over this case.
Translation: "I can't admit that trump is guilty, so I'll make excuses."
So you can't prove it either.
We'll see what the jury decides.
As I said before, a guilty verdict will not surprise me at all. But I have a very hard time believing that it would not be overturned on appeal. But any appeal will take longer than November so the damage will be done as far as the election is. Sentencing will create a lot of turmoil around the country due to the impact it could have on a presidential nominee being able to campaign.
The rest of the year is gonna be interesting to say the least.
That's what happens when prosecution puts a person convicted of perjury on the stand. They're going to call out the obvious.
Because this isn't about "the law". It's a "Get Trump at all costs" trial.
And that's one of the ways Trump is getting screwed. The Judge is making the law up as he goes.
Which ones?
Trump's entire defense seems to be that Michael Cohen is a liar.
That will not be enough.
The prosecution entire "case" (such that it is) hinges on Michael Cohen's testimony.
Wrong.
No, right. Without Cohen, how would you prove Trump’s knowledge and intent?
No, the most damning evidence are the Trump Org documents...
You believe Trump forgot he screwed Stormy Daniels?
No, he didn’t forget. The key to the case the purpose of the hush money, to protect his family vs his campaign. Cohen is a major corroborating witness.
The jury can find that the purpose was both and he would still be guilty.
They definitely have to find the campaign protection was the motivation to return a guilty verdict.
The signed checks, for starters.
They have to find that campaign protection was a motivation to return a guilty verdict, but not exclusively.
To repeat - the jury can find that the purpose was both and he would still be guilty.
Okay, that doesn’t dispute what I said, protecting his wife isn’t relevant to the charges.
It certainly does dispute what you said. There is a difference between "the" motivation and "a" motivation. "The" motivation implies exclusivity. "A" motivation does not.
No, it matters not if the jury thinks that Trump was trying to shield his family, what matters is if the believe that he was trying to protect his campaign.
That’s about paying, not intent.
That is circumstantial evidence of intent.
The Prosecution is now making their closing arguments!
Jury instructions and then deliberations are tomorrow...
was put up on twitter on memorial day
He looks like an Al Qaeda terrorist wearing a suicide bomb vest.
Can’t be, y’all say they are brown people, not white.
Tim McVeigh was brown skinned?
Not in his news photos, bad lighting?
Nope, that's what y'all say. Knowledgeable people are aware that Al Qaeda operatives come in all colors, including orange like the guy in the picture.
Reference also, for example, Adam Gadahn, a senior Al-Qaeda operative of mixed Jewish and Christian background.
There, that looks more like him.
Or this...
I did order my, "fuck Trump" flag the other day.