May 28, 2024 9:08 PM
Lessons learned from lengthy closing arguments in Trump hush money trial
From CNN’s Jeremy Herb, Lauren Del Valle and Kara Scannell
Former US President Donald Trump will appear again in Manhattan Criminal Court in New York on Tuesday, May 28, for his hush money trial.
Julia Nickinson/Pool/Getty Images
The defense and prosecutors in President Donald Trump’s New York hush-money trial delivered closing arguments that stretched for hours into the night on Tuesday, presenting opposing cases to jurors about the amount paid to Stormy Daniels in October 2016 and the amount repaid to Cohen the following year.
Prosecutors told jurors on Tuesday they had seen a “mountain of evidence” to prove that Trump falsified business records to cover up damaging news about his alleged affair at the end of the 2016 election. The defense said the prosecution’s criminal case against the former president relied entirely on the testimony of “lying MVP” Michael Cohen, who tried to frame Trump.
Which story the jury believes could ultimately determine Trump’s legal fate.
Here are some takeaways from Day 21 of the hush money trial:
The defense argued that a jury could not convict someone based on what Michael Cohen said. Todd Blanche took the stage first and spent much of his two-hour closing argument attacking the credibility of Cohen, a former fixer for President Trump.
- In addition to the lies he was convicted of, Blanche accused Cohen of lying directly to the jury. He argued that Cohen lied so much that he should be considered the Tom Brady of Lies, a “GLOAT” – “the biggest liar of all time.”
- Branche focused on Cohen’s allegations regarding a phone call with Trump on Oct. 24, 2016. Cohen testified that Trump’s bodyguard, Keith Schiller, had placed the call with Trump to tell him he would go ahead with the payment to Daniels.
- Blanche told jurors it was clear they were talking about a prank because Cohen hung up the phone and texted Schiller about the situation, and followed up the next morning. “That’s perjury,” Blanche said, raising her voice, emphasizing the last word slowly.
Prosecutors are defending Cohen but arguing there is more to the case. Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass spoke for four hours and 41 minutes, refuting Mr. Branche’s attacks and arguing there was ample evidence to support Mr. Cohen’s account, based on documents and testimony from others, particularly former AMI director David Pecker.
- Steinglass attempted to refute Ms. Branche’s claims about the Oct. 24, 2016, phone call through role-playing, acting out a fictitious call in which Cohen was supposed to have had with both Schiller and Trump. “These are two guys who know each other really well. They speak in code, they talk fast,” Steinglass said of Cohen and Trump.
- Steinglass also placed emphasis on Pecker’s testimony to bolster Cohen’s credibility, showing, for example, that Cohen’s story was corroborated by Pecker’s account of a June 2016 phone call with Trump about Karen McDougal.
- He also walked jurors through all the documents and testimony they heard during the six-week trial, from the 2015 Trump Tower meeting to Trump’s pressure on Cohen in 2018, before Cohen began cooperating with federal investigators and pleaded guilty. “The game is a cover-up, and all roads lead inevitably to the defendant who benefited most from it: former President Donald J. Trump,” he said.
What’s next: Now that closing arguments are over, the jury of seven men and five women is scheduled to begin deliberations Wednesday.
