Trump Lawyer Hush-Money Uses DA Evidence Against Former President

Prosecutors say Trump falsified 34 business records to hide a year’s worth of reimbursements from his then-lawyer Michael Cohen, who made a secret $130,000 payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

Trump was not involved in any such conspiracy to influence the 2016 election, Blanche told jurors in detail Tuesday — during a three-hour wrap-up in which he presented them with a slideshow of more than 180 games before starting to deliberate on Wednesday.

But if he was involved, there was no intent to commit fraud, Blanche argued. How could this happen, he asked, when Trump has freely and repeatedly admitted to repaying Cohen?

Blanche then showed the jury three pieces of evidence from the prosecution’s own case.

Each exhibit — showing a tax form, a tweet and a government ethics form — was projected onto the courtroom display screens.

Each of these elements reinforces the prosecution’s case: Trump knew very well that the $130,000 he paid to Cohen in several installments throughout 2017 was intended for reimbursement and not for legal fees. , as his entries in his professional file falsely claimed.

“The government has to prove to you that President Trump caused these entries — even though they were false — with the intent to defraud,” Blanche told jurors.

“Where is the intent to defraud on President Trump’s part?” the lawyer asked the jury.

Prosecutors must demonstrate that Trump intended to defraud in order to prove first-degree tampering with business records, the state charge Trump allegedly violated 34 times in 2017, including when he personally signed nine of the Cohen’s reimbursement checks.

In his own closing argument, Assistant Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said Trump must have approved the reimbursement program.

Cohen would never have paid Daniels’ $130,000 in hush money without the prior approval and guarantee of reimbursement from his micromanaging boss, Steinglass contended.

“Michael Cohen had 130,000 reasons to get Mr. Trump’s approval,” the prosecutor told jurors.

During her closing argument, Blanche angered the judge by telling jurors that “you can’t send someone to prison based on what Michael Cohen says.”

Jurors are supposed to weigh only the facts in their deliberations, not the potential punishment.

“It was outrageous, Mr. Blanche,” state Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan told Blanche after jurors were dismissed for lunch.

“Someone who has been a prosecutor as long, and a defense attorney as long as you, knows that this is completely inappropriate,” the judge said.

“It’s just not allowed. Period,” the judge added. He gave a curative instruction to the jury, explaining that Blanche’s comment was “inappropriate” and that if Trump were found guilty, “prison time is not required.” Falsifying commercial documents is punishable by zero to four years in prison.

Here are the three pieces of evidence that Blanche presented in court to jurors as “proof” that Trump had nothing to hide and, therefore, could not have intended to defraud anyone.

But each of them is highly incriminating against Trump, prosecutors argued.

1. A 1099 tax form from 2017

The Trump Organization – and Trump as an individual – reported paying Michael Cohen a total income of $420,000 in 2017.

Prosecutors say that’s the sum Trump’s chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, calculated to repay Cohen’s secret spending, plus taxes and other money Trump owed him.

Why would Trump make an announcement to the IRS “if there was a deeply rooted intent to defraud on the part of President Trump,” Blanche asked jurors.

But the 1099s are “false,” Steinglass, the prosecutor, told jurors in his own closing arguments, which lasted five hours and ended at 8 p.m.

The 1099s demonstrate that Trump “filled out false forms,” ​​reporting income for Cohen that didn’t exist, Steinglass said — “because it wasn’t income. It was a reimbursement.”

2. A tweet from 2018

On May 3, 2018, Trump posted a somewhat truncated tweet acknowledging that payments he made to Cohen throughout 2017 were, in his words, “reimbursement.”

This tweet was written just five months after the last of nine $35,000 checks were signed in Cohen’s name. Each check was marked “RETAINER”.

3. A government ethics form

Finally, during closing arguments, Blanche showed jurors what is called an “Executive Branch Personnel Public Financial Disclosure Report” for the year 2017. This was the mandatory disclosure by the president of the time of its assets and debts.

Under “Liabilities” – which is the section in which Trump must list the money he borrowed – Trump certified that in 2017 he had “fully repaid” Cohen an interest-free sum of between $100,000 and $250,000. dollars.

“President Trump tweeted what happened on his way out,” then signed a government ethics form that also acknowledged the reimbursement, Blanche told jurors Tuesday.

“This does not prove any intent to defraud,” Blanche said.

But prosecutors argued that this form shows that Trump knew that the money he paid to Cohen was a repayment of money loaned — Daniels’ hush money.

Cohen the GLOAT

Blanche spent most of her summary impugning the credibility of Cohen, whose testimony is central to the prosecution’s case.

Cohen is “literally like an MVP of liars,” the defense attorney told jurors. Two jurors – a woman in the front row and a man in the back row, smiled as Blanche then dubbed Cohen “The ‘GLOAT'” – for the biggest liar of all time.

The prosecutor’s reliance on Cohen’s testimony demonstrates the weakness of the prosecution’s case, Blanche said. He said Cohen committed a “per-ju-ry” — emphasizing every syllable — on the witness stand and was “the human embodiment of reasonable doubt.”

“You should want and expect more than Michael Cohen’s testimony,” he said.

Blanche has evaded the case’s most crucial documents, handwritten notes from Weisselberg and company controller Jeffrey McConney that appear to explain how Cohen would be repaid the hush money in installments of $35,000, including a ” surcharge” to cover taxes.

Blanche claimed that if the document was truly evidence of an illegal conspiracy, the Trump Organization would have destroyed it instead of keeping it in a filing cabinet — where it would ultimately have been turned over to prosecutors.

Steinglass countered that it must have been difficult for Blanche to make this argument “with a straight face”, saying the illegal plot was laid out “in the document itself”.

“These documents are so damning that you almost want to laugh,” he said.

At the start of the prosecution’s closing argument Tuesday afternoon, Steinglass said that although Cohen had a history of dishonesty, he had been honest and had “consistently explained the facts of this case for six years.”

“We didn’t pick Michael Cohen. We didn’t pick him up at the witness store,” Steinglass said. “The defendant chose Michael Cohen because of his willingness to lie.”

Blanche had also criticized prosecutors for spending time extracting Daniels’ testimony, which he said was not essential to the criminal charges, linked to falsified documents. Prosecutors, the defense attorney said, simply wanted to “embarrass” Trump.

Daniels’ vivid, “newsworthy” details “ring true” and were “uncomfortable,” which is why they were so important, Steinglass said. Trump wanted to cover up his story to influence the election, he said.

“That’s kind of the problem,” Steinglass said. “This is the demonstration that the defendant did not want the American people to see.”

Trump didn’t pay $130,000 to cover up a photo of him and Daniels on a golf course, but to cover up a scandal, Steinglass said.

“Stormy Daniels is the motive,” he said.