Prosecution of Donald Trump in New York

 

In July 2006, Stephanie Clifford, a pornographic film actress known professionally as "Stormy Daniels", met Donald Trump at a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada. At the time, Trump was the host of the reality TV series The Apprentice and was married to Melania Trump.^[4] According to Daniels, Trump invited her to his penthouse at Harrah's Lake Tahoe^[5] where the two had sex and talked about making her a guest on The Apprentice.^[6][7]

In 2011, Daniels considered selling the story to the celebrity magazine Life & Style for US$15,000 as Trump began exploring a potential presidential bid. His lawyer, Michael Cohen, threatened to sue Life & Style when it asked the Trump Organization for comment. Daniels' agent, Gina Rodriguez, leaked the story to the gossip blog The Dirty in October. The post was taken down following complaints by Trump's lawyers, and Daniels disputed the story's veracity.^[8] Cohen acknowledged during court testimony in May 2024 that he advised for the story's removal.^[9]

As Trump's 2016 presidential campaign began, Rodriguez approached multiple publications—including the National Enquirer—and attempted to sell the story. Following the publication of a controversial recording of Trump and Access Hollywood host Billy Bush, the National Enquirer sought to suppress the story. Rather than paying Daniels, the National Enquirer editor-in-chief Dylan Howard negotiated a $130,000 non-disclosure agreement between Daniels and Michael Cohen. Cohen attempted to find the money as the election neared and repeatedly delayed her payment. Keith Davidson, Daniels' lawyer, canceled the deal in October 2016.^[5][8]

Ultimately, Cohen drew the money from his home equity line of credit and sent it through a shell company incorporated in Delaware.^[5][8] Trump initially denied knowing about the check made out to Daniels. In April 2018, aboard Air Force One, he told a reporter he did not know where Cohen got the money.^[10] Glenn Kessler of The Washington Post described this statement as a lie,^[11] as Trump had personally reimbursed Cohen for the payment.^[12][11][13] Rudy Giuliani, an attorney for Trump, also refuted Trump's claims in a Fox News interview, saying that Trump was aware of the payments.^[14]

Trump wrote several checks totaling $420,000 to Cohen. The checks reimbursed him for the non-disclosure agreement and covered the costs for Cohen to manipulate online polls to boost Trump's status. The $180,000 paid to Cohen was doubled to offset taxes, and $60,000 was added. These payments were made throughout 2017, during Trump's first year of presidency.^[15] The payments made to Cohen were declared as a legal expense.^[16] Nine monthly checks from Trump to Cohen, dated April to December 2017, exist as evidence.^[17]

In January 2018, The Wall Street Journal reported on Cohen's payment to Daniels.^[18] Cohen pleaded guilty to eight criminal counts relating to the payment—as well as another payment made to Karen McDougal—in August. In his admission of guilt, Cohen stated that he acted "at the direction of a candidate for federal office", implicating Trump.^[19][20] In December 2018, Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison.^[21]

On May 2, 2024, The Daily Beast broke a story that Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg had assisted the 2016 campaign with its finance reports.^[22]

 

Following Cohen's August 2018 admission of guilt, Manhattan District Attorney (DA) Cyrus Vance Jr. opened an investigation against the Trump Organization and two of its executives.^[23] The office paused its inquiry when the office of the federal U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York began a separate investigation into the payments,^[24] but the federal inquiry concluded without charges in July 2019.^[25][b]

The Manhattan DA's office then issued a subpoena for the Trump Organization in August, seeking documents relating to the payments.^[27] Additionally, the office subpoenaed accounting firm Mazars USA, demanding eight years of Trump's corporate tax returns.^[28] Trump's lawyers sued Vance to block the subpoena, citing Trump's immunity from criminal inquiries as the president of the United States.^[29] In Trump v. Vance, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 7–2 in favor of Vance, allowing the subpoena to continue.^[30]

Following the 2021 New York County District Attorney election, Alvin Bragg succeeded Vance as the Manhattan DA.^[31] In early 2021, Mark Pomerantz, a Manhattan prosecutor, sought to revive the case under the theory that if Daniels had extorted Trump, the money would be criminal proceeds, and efforts to conceal its source would constitute money laundering.^[32] On further examination, Pomerantz found that the money laundering statute would not apply, and colleagues were skeptical that the hush money would qualify as extortion.^[32] With no path to felony charges, Pomerantz abandoned the inquiry and subsequently resigned in February 2022.^[32] In January 2023, the Manhattan DA's office impaneled a grand jury, and began presenting evidence of Trump's role in the Stormy Daniels payment.^[33] Cohen met extensively with the DA's office and the grand jury,^[34][35][36] and by March 3, Cohen had met with the DA's office 18 times^[37][38][39] and had given his cellphones to the DA's prosecutors, who wanted evidence of communications including voice recordings of Daniels' former lawyer Keith Davidson.^[40] Several other witnesses met with the DA's office or the grand jury in March 2023, including Kellyanne Conway,^[41] Hope Hicks, two Trump Organization employees, two former National Enquirer executives who helped broker the hush-money deal, a lawyer for Daniels,^[42][43] Daniels herself,^[44] Trump-aligned lawyer Robert Costello (who provided testimony, including emails, in which he attempted to discredit Cohen's reliability),^[45][46] and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker.^[47][48][c] As early as that February, prosecutors confirmed that they might leverage additional charges, including insurance fraud, against Allen Weisselberg to pressure him to testify against Trump,^[51] and in May, The New York Times reported that they were considering perjury charges against him.^[52]

 

In March 2023, District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office indicated that an indictment was likely.^[53] By March 9, 2023, prosecutors had offered Trump a chance to testify before the grand jury the following week, indicating that they were likely preparing to indict him.^[54][55] Around that time, Trump and his spokesperson began referring to both Daniels' allegation and the DA's proceedings as "extortion".^[56] On March 10, 2023, Trump's lawyer Joe Tacopina asked New York City's Department of Investigation to review the criminal probe, asserting its "weaponization".^[57] On March 13, Tacopina announced that Trump would not testify.^[58] Early the next morning, The Guardian reported that Trump's lawyers had argued to the DA that Trump should not be indicted on the basis that the payment did not draw from campaign funds and would have been made regardless of his candidacy.^[59]

In late March 2023, there was reporting around Daniels having reportedly unsuccessfully communicated in 2018 with Tacopina about possibly representing her in the scandal, for which the DA could move to disqualify the lawyer due to attorney–client privilege and because she reputedly disclosed confidential information to his firm.^{[60][61][62][63]} Additionally, it reemerged that, in 2018, Tacopina had called the hush-money payment "an illegal agreement", "a fraud", and "a potential campaign finance issue".^[60]

On March 18, 2023, Trump claimed on his social-media platform, Truth Social, that he was to be arrested on March 21^[d][e] and that the proceedings were disinformation backed by President Joe Biden, calling for protests in anticipation of a possible indictment.^{[66][67][68][69][70]} Law enforcement and security agencies prepared for potential reactions to an indictment of Trump that week, especially in the areas of the Manhattan Criminal Court and Trump Tower, including by monitoring online threats.^{[69][71][72][f]} New York City Police began to increase security in preparation for the expected indictment on March 21, and a second time for the second expected indictment on March 30.^[74] Metal barriers were set up around Trump Tower and the district Criminal Court Building.^[75] On March 24, Trump, citing his presidential prospects, insinuated that "potential death & destruction" could result from Bragg's allegedly false charge.^[76][g]

Trump has called the investigation a "witch hunt", claiming political persecution.^[81] Trump proponents have referred to the case as harassment, calling it a "political hack job".^[82] The trial and accompanying political theatrics have been described as a "circus" by the media.^[83][84][85] Due to multiple investigation revivals, the case earned the moniker of "zombie case".^[32][86]

Article II of the U.S. Constitution does not have any rules blocking presidential candidates with criminal records.^[87] The U.S. Supreme Court ruled earlier in Trump v. Anderson that Congress would have to pass a special law invoking the prohibition in section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which states "no one who has previously taken an oath of office who engages in insurrection can be an officer of the US".^[88]

 

The Manhattan grand jury voted to indict Trump on March 30, 2023.^[89] The indictment was filed with the New York Supreme Court (the ordinary trial court for felonies in the state of New York and not the final court of appeal for the state) the same day.^[90] The charges were under seal until published when Trump was arraigned.^[91][92]

The indictment charged Trump with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, in violation of New York Penal Law §175.10.^[93][94] Each count is related to a specific business document, each having a date ranging from February 14 through December 5, 2017:^[95]

• 11 for invoices from Michael Cohen
• 9 for general ledger entries for Donald J. Trump
• 9 for checks from Donald J. Trump
• 3 for general ledger entries for the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust
• 2 for checks from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust

The allegedly falsified documents are related to Trump's payment to Stormy Daniels as hush money. The payments were listed in the business records as a legal expense payable to Michael Cohen, whereas the indictment alleges that they were actually to reimburse Cohen for the earlier, allegedly illicit, payment to Daniels.^[96][97]

Falsifying business records in the first degree is a felony under New York state law that requires that the "intent to defraud includes an intent to commit another crime or to aid or conceal the commission thereof". This is in contrast to falsifying business records in the second degree, which is a misdemeanor that does not have that requirement.^[95][96][97] The charges neither include, nor even identify, the additional crimes, constituting a relatively unusual strategy for the DA:^[98][95]

A New York Times analysis of about 30 false business records cases brought by Mr. Bragg and his predecessor — based on court records, interviews and information the office provided — shows that in this respect, the case against Mr. Trump stands apart. In all but two of the indictments reviewed by The Times, the defendant was charged with an additional crime on top of the false records charge.

In later filings, Bragg listed (but still did not charge) three general types of crime that Trump allegedly intended to commit: violation of federal campaign finance limits, violation of state election laws by unlawfully influencing the 2016 election, and violation of state tax laws regarding the reimbursement.^[99] Trump could have moved to allow the jury to convict on the misdemeanor charges as a lesser included offense, but he did not.^[100][101]

Each count for which Trump was convicted could result in a prison sentence of up to four years, to be served consecutively, with a maximum sentence of 20 years.^{[102][95][103][104]} He is permitted to assume the presidency even should he be in prison.^[105] The judge may also choose to impose no prison sentence.^[106]

The conviction did not legally prohibit Trump from continuing his campaign in the 2024 presidential election, which he won.^[105] (Trump had stated in an April 2023 Fox News interview with Tucker Carlson that he would continue his candidacy even if convicted.)^[107][108]

 

 

Trump was arraigned on April 4, 2023. A law enforcement source told Reuters that police would close streets around the courthouse in advance of Trump's expected appearance.^[109] On April 3, Trump flew from Palm Beach International Airport into LaGuardia Airport on his private plane, and took his motorcade to Trump Tower, where he stayed the night.^[110][111] Todd Blanche, a lawyer who had defended Paul Manafort during his 2016 fraud trial, had recently resigned from his law firm to aid Trump's case.^[112] Police increased security in and around Manhattan ahead of the arraignment; authorities said there were no credible threats of violence or organized plans of protests.^[111] Eric Adams, the mayor of New York City, warned protestors to be peaceful.^[113] Acting New York Supreme Court Justice Juan Merchan is presiding over the case.^[114] Merchan denied a motion filed by media organizations to allow a television broadcast of the arraignment or to allow electronic devices to be used in the courtroom, but allowed five press pool still photographers.^[115][116] Courtroom sketch artists also documented the proceedings.^[117] The courtroom's glass doors were covered as a security measure.^[118]

Upon entering the courthouse, he was put in police custody and placed under arrest.^[119][120] He was booked and fingerprinted, but he was not handcuffed, nor was a mug shot taken.^[121][122] Trump entered the courtroom an hour later,^[123] pleading not guilty to 34 felony charges.^[124] The indictment was unsealed (publicly released) shortly thereafter, charging Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree as part of a "conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election".^[125][126] This marked the first indictment of a former U.S. president.^{[127][128][129]} At the arraignment, Merchan warned Trump not to use social media to incite violence.^[130]

Possible trial dates were discussed; prosecutors proposed January 2024, but Trump's defense team objected, saying that the trial should be set for later in 2024.^[131]

Immediately after the arraignment, Trump returned to Mar-a-Lago and addressed a crowd of supporters in the evening.^[132][110] Trump made several false claims about topics such as his handling of government documents, District Attorney Bragg, and the Trump–Raffensperger phone call.^[133]

 

During Trump's arraignment, the court set deadlines for pre-trial proceedings, including for prosecutors to provide discovery to the defense.^[131] The court set a deadline of August 8, 2023, for pre-trial motions to be filed.^[131]

As he had done in other cases, Trump used "attack-and-delay" tactics, targeting the prosecutors and the judge while prolonging proceedings, with the aim that the case might continue into late 2024, near the presidential election.^[134][135]

Trump's lawyers maintained that he was unaware of any allegedly unlawful schemes that his allies or associates may have engaged in.^[136] On March 12, 2024, the defense team filed their strategy writing "President Trump lacked the requisite intent to commit the conduct charged in the Indictment because of his awareness that various lawyers were involved in the underlying conduct giving rise to the charges."^[137] The defense counsel stated that they would not invoke the formal "advice of counsel" defense, but that Trump would "elicit evidence concerning the presence, involvement and advice of lawyers in relevant events giving rise to the charges".^{[137][138][h]}

On September 29, 2023, Trump's team submitted omnibus motions to dismiss the indictment and requesting clarification of the charges.^[140]

On April 27, Trump's team had asked for the charges to be explained in full.^[141] It was possible that the second crime(s) would eventually be specified in a bill of particulars,^[142] but according to a governing appeals case from c. 1980 this is not necessary.^[143] On May 16, the DA's office argued that it did not need to elaborate further on the basis that Trump already "has more than sufficient information to prepare his defense", while reiterating possible secondary charges.^{[144][145][i]} Trump's team was reportedly considering invoking a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision which emphasizes the importance of specifying punishable criminal charges; additionally, a 1999 decision states that "any fact ... that increases the maximum penalty for [one] crime must be charged in an indictment ... and proved".^[141]

On February 15, 2024, the court denied the motions to dismiss.^{[146][147][148]} However, the court did partially grant Trump's request seeking clarification of the charges. Trump is not only accused of falsifying business records, but doing so with the intention to commit or conceal some other crime. Holding it would be unfair to expect Trump to prepare a defense to a newly raised theory mid-trial, the court limited the prosecution to just three theories of "other crimes" that had already been identified during pre-trial procedure.^[146][149]

As of Trump's arraignment on April 4, 2023, it was expected that the discovery process would take several months.^[150]

On April 17, 2023, the DA's office requested that Merchan obtain further information from Tacopina, including his firm's correspondence with Daniels, to determine whether their history constituted a conflict of interest.^[63] On September 1, Merchan ruled that it did not.^[151]

On May 4, Merchan heard arguments about the DA office's request to restrict information it turns over to Trump's lawyers from being shared with Trump himself (at least until the trial), citing his past social-media posts attacking Bragg and witnesses. The defense has argued that the government should be equally restrained from discussing information publicly and that Trump should be allowed to defend himself politically.^[152][153] On May 8, Merchan ruled in favor of the order, barring evidence from being shared on social media.^[154] The judge instructed Trump and his lawyers on their conduct on May 23, informing them that violations could incur a "wide range of sanctions" including being held in contempt of court.^[155]

On May 26, prosecutors stated that they had informed Trump's lawyers that evidence in the hush-money case includes various audio recordings, including one of Trump and a witness. It was unclear if this was in reference to secretly recorded audio from September 2016 which Cohen had previously released.^{[156][157][158][159]}

On August 3, federal judge Lewis A. Kaplan, who oversaw E. Jean Carroll's civil lawsuits against Trump alleging sexual assault and defamation,^[j] ruled that Carroll's lawyers could provide video of Trump being deposed to Manhattan prosecutors.^[162]

On January 15, 2024, Tacopina withdrew from Trump's counsel^[163] and Daniels said she expected to testify.^[164] Later in the month, the DA was reportedly beginning to meet with witnesses ahead of the trial.^[165]

On March 18, the judge ruled that both Daniels and Cohen could testify, placing some restrictions on Daniels (as well as Karen McDougal). The defense had requested that the two be blocked from testifying the previous month. Additionally, the judge ruled that Trump's Access Hollywood tape could not be played during the trial but that it could be discussed.^[166]

On April 22, Merchan ruled on what prosecutors may ask Trump if he testified,^[167] following a pretrial Sandoval hearing held on April 19.^{[168][169][170]}

On May 10, Judge Juan Merchan suggested that Allen Weisselberg could be called to testify in court after the defense objected to the prosecution's plan to show the jury a $750,000 severance agreement.^[171] Neither the defense nor the prosecution had subpoenaed Weisselberg, and there were procedural concerns about adding him to the witness list so late in the trial.^[171] Furthermore, Weisselberg's testimony could be in violation of the non-disparagement clause of his severance agreement and he would likely invoke the fifth amendment.^[172][173]

Justice Juan Merchan, who has experience with financial cases,^[174] was randomly assigned to oversee the grand jury proceedings in Trump's case, and continued to oversee handling of the charges approved by the grand jury.^[175]

On May 31, 2023, Trump's lawyers filed a motion asking Judge Merchan to recuse himself from the case citing his daughter's position as partner and COO of Authentic Campaigns, a consulting firm that serviced Biden's 2020 presidential campaign. The motion additionally alleged that Merchan had encouraged former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg to cooperate with the prosecution against Trump in a previous case he had presided over, and that Merchan had made three $10–15 donations to various Democratic causes.^{[176][177][k]} On June 20, the DA's office argued against the recusal request, citing Trump's alleged "prolific history of baselessly accusing state and federal judges around the country of bias", saying he seemed to be trying to land a more favorable judge. Prosecutors further argued that there was a lack of hard evidence that a particular trial result would aid Merchan directly or greatly via his daughter's Democratic work,^[180] which a state ethics panel had similarly concluded in early May.^[181][l] The court denied the motion on August 11, 2023.^[185]

On April 1, 2024, the defense asked Merchan for permission to file a motion repeating their prior request that he recuse himself for what the defense said was a conflict of interest due to his daughter's Democratic involvement.^[186] On April 1, the New York City Bar Association issued a statement of "unequivocal support" for Merchan's handling of the recusal concerns.^[m] On April 2, prosecutors pointed out that the court and an ethics panel had already found that the political activities of a relative are not grounds for questioning a judge's impartiality.^[188][n]

The same day, Trump posted a Fox & Friends clip in which co-host Brian Kilmeade criticized the judge's daughter, although Trump highlighted another commentator's statement.^[191] As of April 3, Trump had not deleted offending posts made prior to Merchan's expanded order;^[192] that night, he linked to a report by far-right activist Laura Loomer criticizing Merchan's daughter and wife.^[193] On April 5, Trump's campaign publicized their motion for Merchan to recuse himself (dated April 3),^[188] which asserts numerous counts of bias, and falsely cites the state Office of Court Administration (OCA) as saying Merchan's daughter deleted her X account in April 2023, around when the judge "solicited an ethics opinion regarding recusal in a letter ... that the Court declined to disclose".^{[194][181][195][o][p]}

On April 6, Trump posted online that if arrested for violating the gag order, he would consider it a "great honor" to "become a Modern Day Nelson Mandela", the former South African president jailed for anti-apartheid activism.^[201] On April 8, Trump's team asked an appeals court to delay the trial and pause the gag order while they appeal the latter; this was denied the following day.^[202][203] On April 10, an appeals judge denied another defense delay request which was based on Merchan having not yet ruled on the recusal motion.^[204][202] On April 15, Merchan denied the recusal motion.^[205] On April 30, an appellate court denied requests for both a recusal and a stay of proceedings.^[206]

 

On May 4, 2023, Trump's lawyers asked for the case to be moved to a federal court (though it would remain a state-law prosecution conducted by the Manhattan DA), arguing that it involved alleged conduct somehow "performed while in office"—despite the potential federal election-law violations not being specified and occurring prior to Trump's inauguration.^{[153][145][q]} As proceedings continued in the New York Supreme Court,^[207] Bragg asked for the removal request to be dismissed, arguing that Trump had failed to establish that he was an officer of the United States during his presidency,^[208][209] to which the defense expounded its initial argument.^[210][153] Even if the case had been moved to federal court, New York state law would have continued to apply.^[211]

In a hearing on June 27, District Judge Alvin Hellerstein opined that Trump's conduct likely did not constitute presidential activity.^[212] On July 19, arguing that the matter was apparently a personal "cover-up of an embarrassing event", Hellerstein ruled that the case should remain in state court.^[213] Trump appealed the decision on July 28,^[214] but withdrew this on November 14.^[215]

On May 23, 2023, Justice Merchan set the trial for March 25, 2024.^[216] Trump's team complained that he expected to have multiple trials around that time. Merchan said he would discuss rescheduling to another time.^[217] At a February 15, 2024, hearing, which Trump attended,^[218] Merchan reaffirmed the March 25 trial date.^[219]

In early February 2024, Trump's federal election obstruction trial, originally set for early March, was postponed pending appeals, increasing the likelihood of the Manhattan criminal trial taking place as planned on March 25, 2024.^[220][221]

On March 11, 2024, Trump's lawyers requested a delay of trial until after the federal election obstruction case on the basis that it would bolster his argument of presidential immunity, as some evidence and allegedly some acts overlapped with his time in office.^[222] Trump's team cited, from April 2018, Trump's denying knowledge of the hush-money payment to reporters and tweeting in defense of Cohen's credibility.^[223] Later on March 11, Merchan pointed out that Trump's team had missed the filing deadline and said either party would need his permission to file additional pretrial motions.^[222] On March 3, the judge dismissed the request as untimely.^[224]

Also on March 11, Trump asked to delay trial until after the Supreme Court decides whether he is generally immune from prosecution in the federal charges on election obstruction. Granting the motion would have delayed trial until mid-summer or later, as the Supreme Court had already scheduled those arguments for April 25^[225] and may not rule until the end of the court's term in early July.^[226] Merchan denied the motion on April 3,^[227] saying that he doubted its "sincerity and actual purpose", given that Trump made this request only two weeks before trial.^[228]

In March 2024, the U.S. Attorney's Office provided prosecutors with approximately 170,000 pages of documents, largely related to the 2017 federal probe of Cohen's payment to Daniels (and mostly reflecting evidence already turned over to Trump's lawyers in June 2023).^{[229][230][231]} Trump's lawyers sought a delay in the trial on the basis of the newly produced records; the DA's office said in court that only 300 of the documents were relevant to Trump's defense.^[232] On March 15, 2024, the judge delayed the start of trial until mid-April.^[233] On March 25, 2024, the judge set a trial date of April 15, and denied a motion by Trump's team to further delay the trial.^[232] On May 23, 2024, Merchan denied Trump's request to sanction prosecutors regarding the document release, ruling that the defense was provided sufficient time to respond.^[234]

On March 18, Trump's team requested an additional delay on the basis that pretrial publicity and apparent anti-Trump bias in Manhattan would prohibit a fair jury from being selected in April, although only 35% in the cited poll said they were convinced Trump was guilty in the DA's case specifically. Trump's lawyers cited berating statements by Cohen, e.g. saying he served jail time because his "lying" former boss "couldn't keep his mushroom dick in his pants". On March 25, the assistant DA countered that "publicity is not likely to abate [and] the pretrial publicity has been ... exacerbated by the defendant".^[235] On April 8, Trump's team asked the appeals court for a delay to allow an attempt to move the trial to a different county, which was denied the same day.^[202]

On April 8, Trump requested to postpone the trial so the court could consider a change of venue, which was denied the same day,^[236] and so he could appeal the gag order, which was denied the next day.^[237] On April 10, the appeals court denied Trump's request to postpone trial on the basis of Merchan being unqualified.^[238] On April 12, Merchan denied the defendant's request to delay trial on the basis of "prejudicial" media coverage.^[239] On April 15, Merchan said Trump was "required to be here" on April 25 and "not required to be at the Supreme Court" that day, when it would hear arguments on his immunity claim in the federal election case.^[240] Merchan said he was not yet prepared to say whether trial would be held on May 17 to allow Trump to attend his son Barron's high-school graduation, but indicated that he probably would grant him the day off if the proceedings progressed at an expected pace.^[241] Trump subsequently complained that he would "not be allowed" to attend the graduation, but on April 30 the judge said he would be able to do so.^[242] On May 17, Donald and Melania Trump attended their son's graduation from Oxbridge Academy at West Palm Beach, followed by a visit to Lincoln Reagan Dinner at the 2024 annual Minnesota Republican convention in Saint Paul, Minnesota.^[243]

In a May 2023 hearing and court filing, prosecutors expressed concern that Trump would misuse evidence obtained through pretrial discovery procedure to attack people involved in the case, including witnesses.^[211] Justice Merchan declined to issue a gag order or prohibit Trump from publicly commenting about the case against him,^[211] but issued a protective order setting rules for the use of social media involving elements of the case, and set a hearing (with Trump to appear remotely) to explain the rules.^[244][245]

At Trump's arraignment, on April 4, 2023, Merchan instructed Blanche to "speak to your client and anybody else you need to, and remind them to please refrain, please refrain from making statements that are likely to incite violence or civil unrest. Please refrain from making comments or engaging in conduct that has the potential to incite violence, create civil unrest, or jeopardize the safety or well-being of any individuals."^[246] Blanche had stated that Trump was "frustrated, upset, and believes that there is a grave injustice happening with him being in this courtroom today" which Merchan rebuked "I don't share your view that certain language and certain rhetoric is just by frustration."^[246] Merchan did not seek to impose a gag order at the time.^[247]

On February 26, 2024, the Manhattan DA asked for a gag order on Trump, noting that Trump has been fined $15,000 for two violations of a gag order in the civil fraud trial by disparaging the judge's law clerk on social media, and reporting that police had logged 89 threats to Bragg, his family, or staff in 2023 (as opposed to a single threat in 2022).^[248] On March 7, Merchan ruled that the jury would be anonymous except to some involved in the trial, including Trump, his lawyers, and prosecutors.^[249] On March 26, Merchan imposed a gag order on Trump, restricting what he could say publicly about people involved in the case.^[250] Additionally, the judge warned the defense, under the threat of contempt, against dilatory tactics such as the late filing of pretrial motions or last-minute demands, pointing out that Trump had "stated publicly that the defense goal is to delay these proceedings ... past the 2024 presidential election".^[251][252] On March 26, Trump made online posts attacking the judge, the gag order, and Merchan's daughter, the latter over an anti-Trump social-media post created by someone impersonating her on social media.^{[253][254][255]} The same day, Merchan imposed a gag order forbidding Trump to publicly comment on court staff, prosecutors, prospective jurors, or their families, or to cause others to make such statements, in a way that interferes with the case. Bragg (as a public figure) and Merchan (as the judge) were specifically exempted from protection.^[256][257] The court also ordered Trump not to comment on prospective trial witnesses concerning their potential participation in the criminal case.^[258]

On March 27 and 28, Trump again attacked Merchan's daughter on social media.^[257][259] On March 29, prosecutors requested that the limits of the gag order be explicated regarding family of court staff in hopes of terminating what they considered intentionally defiant behavior by Trump.^[254][260] On April 1, Merchan expanded the gag order to protect his and Bragg's family members, saying attacks on them "serve no legitimate purpose".^[261][262] He wrote that Trump's continued attacks posted a "very real" threat to the integrity of proceedings and could cause those involved in the case to fear for themselves and their families, which would "undoubtedly interfere with the fair administration of justice and constitutes a direct attack on the Rule of Law itself".^[263] On April 11, Trump disparaged expected witnesses Cohen and Daniels on social media, referring to them as dishonest "sleaze bags".^[258] On May 6, Merchan found Trump in contempt of court for the tenth time, but stated that he did not wish to jail Trump due to the fact that Trump was a former and potentially the next president.^[264]

Contempt hearings were later held concerning numerous alleged violations of the gag order. On May 14, a New York appeals court denied Trump's request to overturn the order.^[265]

Also on May 14, United States Senator Tommy Tuberville called the gag order "ridiculous" for stopping Trump "from having a say-so in his own trial"; Tuberville further said that members of Congress were attending the trial "to speak our piece for President Trump" and "overcome this gag order", and he hoped that "more and more" members of Congress would do so.^[266] Republican members of Congress, including Tuberville, JD Vance, Cory Mills, Nicole Malliotakis and Speaker Mike Johnson, have criticized witness Michael Cohen, while Byron Donalds, Rick Scott, Vance, and Johnson have criticized Merchan's daughter.^{[267][268][269][270]} New York magazine journalist Andrew Rice claimed that during Cohen's May 13 testimony, he saw Trump penning revision notes as to statements about the case from his Republican allies.^[271] On May 14, Trump commented that "I do have a lot of surrogates, and they're speaking very beautifully."^[272]

On May 20, speaking outside the courtroom, Trump mentioned witnesses Robert Costello and Michael Cohen.^[273]

On June 25, Merchan lifted parts of Trump's gag order, allowing him to talk about the jury and witnesses who took the stand during the trial.^[274] Merchan also stated that the gag order would be completely lifted following sentencing.^[275]

In New York, the statute of limitations is typically two years for misdemeanors and five years for felonies.^[276] Though falsifying business records is typically a misdemeanor, in New York, the charges are upgraded to a felony when used to commit or conceal another crime.^[276] Trump was charged with falsifying business records in the first degree, which is a Class E felony (the least severe), whose statute of limitations is five years.^[276] On March 20, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, New York Governor Andrew M. Cuomo issued Executive Order No. 202.8 tolling (pausing) the statute of limitations for "any specific time limit for the commencement, filing, or service of any legal action, notice, motion, or other process or proceeding, as prescribed by the procedural laws of the state".^[276]

Merchan ruled the tolling deadline was through May 6, 2021, thus extending the deadline for the prosecution by one year and 47 days, allowing the felony prosecution to commence within 6 years and 47 days from when the crime was committed.^[276] Trump's first indictment occurred on February 14, 2017, and the indictment was filed on March 3, 2023, within days of the deadline.^[276] On February 14, 2024, Merchan ruled that the tolled period was sufficient.^[276]

The New York statute of limitations provision, CPL§30.10, permits tolling of up to five years while the defendant is continuously outside the state.^[276] During his presidency, Trump spent the majority of his time outside New York.^[276] Merchan declined to address where this provision was applicable as the tolling occasioned by the Governor's Executive Order was sufficient.^[277]

The trial began on April 15, 2024, with recessed Wednesdays.^[278] Trump was required to attend every day of trial barring a court-approved absence.^[279] If he chose to testify, prosecutors could have asked him about his civil lawsuits regarding business fraud, sexual abuse, and defamation as well as the 2018 dissolution of his charitable foundation.^[280] Attorneys Todd Blanche and Susan Necheles represented him.^[281]

The trial was not televised.^[282] Initially, Merchan allowed photographers to stand at the front of the room for a few minutes each morning before the trial began to take photos of Trump seated. Merchan withdrew this permission on May 9 after at least one photo was taken from the side of the table.^[283] There are courtroom sketch artists present to capture the milieu.^[284][r]

The temperature in the trial courtroom was a point of contention, with Trump repeatedly complaining that it was too cold, akin to an icebox, possibly intentionally.^{[289][290][291]} Judge Juan Merchan acknowledged that the courtroom was chilly, but has stated that he would rather it be a little cold than too hot, and that climate control is limited in the 80-year-old building.^[292][291] Despite Trump's complaints, reporters in the courtroom noted that the temperature was not as cold as he claims.^[293]

On April 8, 2024, the judge gave attorneys a copy of the jury selection questionnaire,^[294] with jury selection beginning on April 15^[295][296] from a pool of over 500 candidates.^[297]

Over the first two days, 96 potential jurors appeared, of which more than half were immediately dismissed after indicating that they could not be impartial. Nine jurors provisionally qualified on the first day, and an additional ten on the second;^{[298][299][300]} from these 19, seven jurors were selected and sworn in.^[s]

However, two were excused on April 18, one of whom complaining that her friends and family had recognized her from details published in the news.^{[300][303][304]} Trump was reprimanded by the judge on April 16 for gesturing and audibly speaking in the direction of a potential juror.^[305][306]

Another group of 96 potential jurors was brought in later in the week.^[304] Twelve jurors, along with one alternate, were selected by April 18.^[307] The selection of six alternate jurors concluded on April 19.^[308][309] The jury reportedly comprised seven men and five women, who mostly had white-collar careers.^[310] The jurors were allowed to tell their family and employers that they were on the jury but could not discuss the case with them.^[311]

Trump was described as falling asleep for brief intervals on four out of the first five days of the trial, ahead of opening statements,^{[312][313][314][315][316]} and as being flatulent.^[t] Trump has denied dozing off at his trial.^[u]

On April 22, opening statements began.^[328] Prosecutors accused Trump, Cohen, and Pecker of campaign finance violations, alleging they coordinated payments to two women and concealed them as part of a conspiracy to influence the 2016 election.^[329] During their opening statements, prosecutors said the jury would be presented with a document with a handwritten note in the margin by Allen Weisselberg outlining the hush-money payment scheme.^[330][331]

The defense argued that the testimony of Cohen, a convicted felon, could not be trusted; that the payments were ordinary business transactions, akin to editorial decisions made by newspapers;^[332] and that in democracies it is normal for candidates to attempt to influence an election.^[329]

On April 15, prosecutors asked the judge to hold Trump in contempt and fine him $3,000 for three alleged violations of the gag order against him;^[307] prosecutors also requested to use the attacks on Cohen as evidence.^{[298][258][333]} By the morning of April 18, prosecutors alleged that Trump incurred seven further violations of the order and requested that he be fined another $7,000.^[307]

On April 23, Merchan heard arguments about whether Trump had violated the earlier gag order when he made social-media posts about two expected witnesses.^[334] Merchan criticized Trump's attorney Todd Blanche for failing to justify Trump's claim that he was merely responding to "political attacks" and for failing to provide any legal precedent supporting Trump's claim that reposting an article could not be a violation of a gag order; Merchan told Blanche, "You're losing credibility."^[334][335] Merchan rejected Trump's position that reposting a news article to social media was a merely "passive" rather than active act.^[336][v] The defense also declared that "Trump absolutely knows what the gag order allows him to do and does not allow him to do."^[336]

On April 30, Trump became the first U.S. president ever to be held in criminal contempt of court, under NY Judiciary Law Section 750(3).^[337] (Trump had previously been held in civil contempt, for withholding documents, in the New York business fraud case.)^[338] Trump was found in contempt on nine of the ten counts, regarding statements made from April 10–17.^[339] Over the next few days, he paid a $9,000 fine.^{[340][341][342]} Merchan said he would consider jailing Trump for further violations "if necessary and appropriate".^[343]

On May 2, a second hearing was held to consider four further violation claims.^[w] The prosecution said it was "not yet seeking jail".^[348][349] On May 6, Trump was found in contempt for one of those four claims (when he on April 22 commented on the jury) and was fined $1,000.^[x] The judge again warned Trump of possible incarceration for further violations.^[352]

The mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, said that corrections officials would be "ready" if the judge ordered incarceration.^[353]

Prosecutors called former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker to testify on April 22, 23, 25 and 26 as the trial's first witness, taking most of the first week of testimony.^[354] He had been given immunity in 2018 in a federal investigation into Michael Cohen in exchange for information regarding hush money deals.^[355] During Pecker's testimony, it was implied that former National Enquirer editor Dylan Howard, who Pecker stated was now living in Australia and suffering from a "spinal condition", would not testify.^[354][356] It was previously reported that while Pecker and his company American Media Inc. (AMI), the National Enquirer's parent company, facilitated payment to McDougal,^[357] Pecker refused to personally do the same with Daniels,^[358][359] though he allegedly alerted Trump associates about Daniels' decision to go public with her affair allegation.^[360] On April 23, Pecker testified that Cohen used to feed him negative stories about Trump's enemies, which Pecker's staff would then "embellish" and show drafts to Cohen to get his feedback before publishing them.^[361] Pecker also detailed how he offered to deploy the "catch and kill" scheme, stating that he offered in 2015 to suppress negative stories about Trump and flag efforts by women attempting to sell stories about him.^[362] The prosecution cited a state election law regarding conspiracy to defend their questioning of Pecker about his contacts with Steve Bannon, the chief executive officer of Trump's 2016 campaign.^[363]

On April 25, Pecker testified that AMI suppressed negative press about other celebrities, which was emphasized by Trump's team in their cross-examination.^[364] Additionally, he stated that he did not believe Cohen was working for Trump's campaign.^[365] Pecker discussed his relationship with Trump prior to the 2016 campaign, during which he suppressed other negative stories about him. Pecker detailed how his company, Trump and Cohen facilitated payment to McDougal in mid-2016, in tandem with promising her a ghostwritten monthly column in an attempt to disguise the contract's true nature.^{[364][282][366]} In September 2016, Cohen asked to purchase the boxes of McDougal's source material (valued by Pecker at $25,000) on Trump's behalf. Pecker then told Cohen that he did not want to be reimbursed for the payment to McDougal. According to Pecker, an AMI staff member leaked details of the scheme on November 4, 2016, ahead of the election, after which Pecker released a false statement that AMI had never paid anyone to kill damaging stories about Trump. AMI then amended its contract with McDougal allowing her to speak to the press.^[366] Pecker also described a January 2017 meeting in Trump Tower in which Trump thanked Pecker for his work regarding McDougal and another story.^{[366][367][y]} Pecker said his decision not to facilitate payment to Daniels (because she was a porn star) led to it being done by Cohen.^[364] Pecker testified he acted at Trump's behest and intended to help him win the presidency, despite his own doubts regarding campaign-finance laws.^[366][368] Additionally, Pecker said that after receiving a letter from the Federal Election Commission about possible campaign violations in mid-2021, he signed a non-prosecution deal with federal prosecutors for his cooperation.^[366]

 

Four witnesses testified over the latter part of April 26 through the earlier part of April 30.

On April 26, Trump's executive assistant Rhona Graff testified that when she worked outside Trump's office in Trump Tower, she maintained contact information for McDougal and Daniels,^[369] and that she had a "vague recollection" of glimpsing Daniels at a Trump Tower reception area.^[370] During her cross-examination by the defense, Graff said Trump was sometimes prone to multitasking while signing checks, depending "what was going on ... and how important the checks were".^[17][371]

Additional testimony was also provided by former First Republic banker Gary Farro on April 26 and 30. He testified that on October 26, 2016, he helped Cohen open an account for a real-estate limited liability company. According to prosecutors, the same day, Cohen deposited $131,000 from his personal home-equity credit line, and the next day transferred $130,000 to Daniels' lawyer, Keith Davidson.^{[370][372][373]} He detailed how he assisted in setting up the bank account which enabled Cohen to make the hush money payment. Farro stated that Cohen was eager to connect with him, and would set up the account in October 2016. Farro also noted that the account was set up for Essential Consultants LLC, the company the payment was made from, and that it was funded through Cohen's home-equity line of credit at First Republic.^[373][374] According to Farro, Cohen did not want addresses on the checks.^[373] Prosecution also presented evidence showing emails to and from Cohen, which confirmed the $131,000 deposit to a checking account 20 minutes after it was opened.^[374] In texts between Davidson and Cohen, Davidson provided wiring instructions for the $130,000 hush-money payment. According to Farro, First Republic closed Cohen's accounts after the payment to Daniels became public.^[375]

April 30 also saw testimony from C-SPAN Executive Director for Archives Robert Browning, who verified the authenticity of C-SPAN videos of Trump, as well as Phillip Thompson, a regional director of Esquire Deposition Solutions, which provided court reporter services for Trump's October 2022 deposition in one of the E. Jean Carroll defamation cases.^[376][377]

On May 20, the prosecution tried to contact Browning to see if he would be available to testify again, this time regarding a photograph of Trump with his former bodyguard Keith Schiller.^[378][379]

Keith Davidson, a former attorney for Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, appeared on April 30 and May 2. He testified that the Access Hollywood tape helped influence Daniels to go forward with her story.^[380] According to Davidson's testimony, he drafted the $130,000 hush-money agreement, in which he used the pseudonyms "Peggy Peterson" for Daniels and "David Dennison" for Trump.^[381] The agreement called for payment by October 14, 2016. When the payment did not arrive, Davidson communicated with Cohen,^[382] who told him that Trump was traveling.^[383] On October 17, Davidson wrote to Cohen that the agreement was void and furthermore that he would no longer be representing Daniels.^[384] (Cohen would wire his personal funds to Davidson on October 27.)^[385]

Davidson testified that he believed Trump was behind the hush-money talks.^[386] However, he also acknowledged how Cohen wired the transfer and that he also had conversations with Howard as well as Daniels' manager Gina Rodriguez regarding the deal. Howard and Rodriguez, who had no direct roles, would encourage Davidson to connect with Cohen. Daniels, Davidson and Rodriguez were also revealed to have received part of the $130,000 settlement payment. Davidson's role in the $150,000 deal with AMI for McDougal's story was noted as well.^[375]

On May 2, the jury heard an audio recording of Cohen and Trump from September 6, 2016 appearing to discuss paying Pecker for McDougal's story, wherein Cohen mentions talking to Weisselberg about setting up the payment and Trump asks, "So, what do we got to pay for this? One-fifty?"^[387] Further audio was played of a phone call in which Cohen tells Davidson that "I can't even tell you how many times [Trump] said to me, you know, I hate the fact that we did it," apparently regarding the payment to Daniels.^[157] Davidson acknowledged texting Howard on Election Night 2016: "What have we done?", to which Howard responded "Oh my god."^[158] Davidson explained that this was a recognition that "our activities may have assisted the presidential campaign" and that it was "sort of gallows humor".^[388] He also confirmed that, after texting with Cohen on February 13, 2018, he sent a statement to CNN anchor Chris Cuomo to corroborate Cohen's claim of having paid $130,000 to Daniels from his personal funds.^[389] Davidson testified during his cross-examination that he had never personally met Trump.^[157]

On May 2, prosecutors called Douglas Daus, a computer forensics specialist in the district attorney's office. Daus testified to examinations of Cohen's cell phones. Several of the prosecutions proposed exhibits were found by Daus.^[390]

 

On May 3, former White House communications director Hope Hicks testified. She said a Wall Street Journal reporter asked her for comment on the alleged Trump–McDougal affair, which is how she learned that AMI had paid to catch and kill the story.^[391] She stated that she drafted a statement to respond to The Wall Street Journal, with Cohen offering feedback, but Trump overrode them by telling Hicks to say that McDougal's allegations were "totally untrue",^[392][393] which is how she was quoted by the Journal just days before the election.^[394][357] Hicks also learned at this time that the Journal planned to publish details of Daniels' allegations, with Trump instructing Hicks to deny any affair.^[395] Hicks stated that Trump sought to hide news of both scandals from Melania,^[396][395] and after the story of the payment to Daniels broke in early 2018, Trump told her that Cohen had voluntarily decided to pay Daniels to protect him; Hicks opined that this seemed out of character for Cohen.^[395] Trump sought Hicks's opinion about how the Daniels story was being perceived, especially in relation to the negative impact it may have had if Cohen had not paid Daniels before the election.^[393][397] Hicks further testified that she had heard Trump praise Pecker on multiple occasions for his negative reporting on his Republican rivals in the 2016 election.^[395]

According to Hicks, the Access Hollywood tape roiled the Trump campaign.^[395] Though Trump tried to minimize its significance,^[398] the campaign felt the tape was a "crisis".^[399] Hicks stated that the tape's release stressed Trump because he wanted members of his family, including Melania, to be proud of him and not hurt or embarrassed.^[400] In her cross-examination by the defense, Hicks stated that Trump "is a very good multitasker [who] is always doing many things at once".^[371]

Three witnesses appeared during May 6 and the earlier part of May 7.

On May 6, former Trump Organization comptroller Jeffrey McConney testified about how Cohen was reimbursed.^[401] He testified that Weisselberg instructed him in early 2017 to send the reimbursement payments to Cohen.^{[401][402][403]} McConney acknowledged that he told organization payroll specialist (and its accounts payable supervisor) Deborah Tarasoff to record the reimbursement payments as "legal expenses"; he said he told her these payments were part of a retainer agreement between Cohen and Trump.^[401] McConney further stated that starting in March 2017, the reimbursement checks for Cohen came from Trump's personal bank account.^[401] In 2017, Cohen quit working for Trump after setting up shop at Squire Patton Boggs's offices in Midtown, but nevertheless still identified himself as Trump's personal lawyer.^[401] Numerous invoice messages from Cohen and related emails between McConney, Tarasoff and Weisselberg were shown in the courtroom.^[401] Several general ledger documents associated with Trump and his trust were reviewed which showed that Trump made the reimbursement payments to Cohen.^[401]

Following McConney's testimony, Deborah Tarasoff, a 24-year employee of the Trump Organization who works in accounting, took the stand to testify. She said the organization was paying for her attorney.^[404][401] She described her job duties: "I get approved bills, I enter them into the system, and I cut checks."^[405] Tarasoff stated that she had no decision-making authority and merely followed instructions, but also acknowledged that she would approve invoices if she got them, including the ones which were sent to Cohen.^[402] Tarasoff testified that while either Trump or one of his two older sons could approve invoices of over $10,000 since 2015, only Trump could access his personal checking account.^[402] Twelve reimbursement checks for $35,000 were signed by Trump, and Tarasoff testified that they were mailed to Cohen.^[402] Trump, who used a Sharpie pen when writing checks, could write "void" if he disapproved of checks Tarasoff created for the company^[402] (e.g. a $70,000 check to Cohen signed by Eric Trump and Wiesselberg in February 2017, which was voided by Trump).^[402] She testified that Weisselberg "had his hands in everything".^[403] During cross-examination, Tarasoff acknowledged that she not was present for conversations between Trump and Weisselberg about the payments.^[402]

On May 7, 2024, Penguin Books executive Sally Franklin testified. Franklin, whose company published a few Trump books, read excerpts from Trump: How to Get Rich and Trump: Think Like a Billionaire, including Trump quotes, "If you don't know every aspect of what you're doing, down to the paper clips, you're setting yourself up for some unwanted surprises," and, "For many years, I've said that if someone screws you, screw them back."^[406]

Stormy Daniels testified for five hours on May 7,^[407] and for the earlier part of May 9.^[408] She said she met Trump at a celebrity golf tournament near Lake Tahoe, Nevada, in 2006 and detailed a sexual encounter with Trump in his hotel suite after he invited her to dinner.^[407][409] Daniels stated that Trump did not use a condom and that during the encounter, "I was staring up at the ceiling, wondering how I got there," despite not having used drugs or alcohol.^[407][z] She said she felt like she blacked out during the encounter and was traumatized by the experience.^[411][409] It was the only time they reputedly had sex.^[412] Daniels said Trump offered to make her a contestant on The Apprentice; she stated that he continued alluding to the idea for a time in subsequent phone conversations, in which he referred to her as "honey bunch" and asked when they could meet again.^[406][409] Daniels noted that she met with Trump on multiple occasions, with dozens of witnesses,^[409] including a visit to Trump Tower and a final encounter with Trump in Los Angeles in 2007.^[409]

In accepting the hush money, Daniels stated that she was not motivated by money (although this appeared to be contradicted by a text message between her and her manager Gina Rodriguez which suggested she was willing to accept the payment).^[409] She stated that she had no part in the hush-money negotiations.^[409] Daniels also laid out key information about the payment.^[409] She maintained her previous allegation that someone threatened her in a Las Vegas parking lot, stating that she did not report it because it would have been upsetting to Trump.^[409] Daniels stated that any violation of the hush-money agreement would have cost her a million dollars.^[409]

During Daniels' testimony, Merchan sustained many defense objections.^[409] He repeatedly admonished Daniels for giving answers that went beyond the scope of the question asked, and at one point interrupting Daniels' testimony, stopping her from describing the sexual position she and Trump used.^[407][409] Merchan criticized the "degree of detail" on matters such as the floor size of the hotel suite.^[406] In a sidebar conference, Merchan agreed with defense arguments that Daniels described things which were "better left unsaid" regarding the sexual encounter, but denied the defense's request for a mistrial, noting that the defense would have the opportunity to cross-examine Daniels.^[407][409] Merchan set confines for Daniels' later testimony and directed the prosecution to encourage her to give shorter answers.^[409] Afterward, Daniels gave shorter answers and hewed closer to the question asked.^[407]

When testimony resumed, Daniels stated that her lawyer Keith Davidson received the $130,000 hush-money payment, and that she got $96,000 of it. She also acknowledged that she signed a statement dated January 10, 2018, in which she denied the affair, but testified that she did not want to sign it and that it was untrue.^[409]

In its cross-examination, the defense questioned Daniels about her account of being traumatized by her encounter with Trump, suggesting that her pornographic career would have made the event unsurprising. Daniels explained that the first time she realized the meeting was intended to be sexual was upon coming out of the bathroom inside Trump's hotel, finding him stripped to his boxers; she elaborated that she was "not expecting [this from] a man twice [her] age".^[411] Daniels acknowledged that she had contacted renowned high-profile sexual harassment attorney Gloria Allred about potentially suing Trump for the encounter. Much of the cross-examination focused on questioning the accuracy of her allegation that she was threatened in a Las Vegas parking lot, which was revealed to have been disputed by Davidson via texts with Cohen. Despite accepting the hush money, Daniels maintained that her primary goal was to "get the story out".^[409]

On May 9, Daniels concluded her testimony after hours of cross-examination.^[408] Trump attorney Susan Necheles pressed Daniels on how she profited from her story and brought up minor inconsistencies in how she has told it.^[408] Merchan again denied a defense motion for a mistrial, but would provide the jury instructions instructions limiting the use of her testimony.^{[413][414] [aa]} Trump criticized Merchan for permitting the testimony stating "He’s [Merchan] trying to make it as salacious as possible by allowing testimony that has nothing to do with the case."^[418]

 

On May 9, Rebecca Manochio, a junior bookkeeper at the Trump Organization, testified for about a half-hour. She had provided evidence to the prosecution.^[419][420] Tracy Menzies, a senior vice president at HarperCollins, then testified about the accuracy of certain excerpts from the book Think Big: Make It Happen in Business and Life, which Trump had co-authored.^[421]

Trump's director of Oval Office Operations in 2019 and former Secretary to the President between 2017 and 2019, Madeleine Westerhout, also began testifying the same day.^[408][414] She stated that Republican National Committee officials she was working with in 2016 discussed how to replace Trump as the Republican presidential nominee due to concern about the damaging Access Hollywood tape.^[422] She also noted how she set up a meeting between Cohen and Trump in February 2017, and how the meeting led to Trump Organization employees sending reimbursement checks to the White House—which Trump would then sign and send to Cohen—through a circuitous mail system.^[423] She was in tears when discussing how Trump fired her, reportedly in response to her telling reporters that she had a better relationship with him than his daughters.^[424]

Westerhout resumed testifying on May 10.^[423] During cross-examination, Westerhout appeared to side with defense arguments that Trump used alternatives to the White House mail system because he wanted to get mail to people more quickly.^[423]

For the later part of May 10, four other witnesses testified.^[425] Among these witnesses were Jennie Tomalin (a Verizon senior analyst), Daniel Dixon (an AT&T compliance analyst), and Jaden Jarmel-Schneider (a paralegal from the Manhattan DA's office).^[423] In successive testimonies, Dixon and Tomalin would authenticate cell phone records which were used as trial evidence.^[423] Georgia Longstreet, another paralegal from the Manhattan DA's office, again testified after previously doing so days prior.^[423] Longstreet also showed some of Trump's old tweets, as well as texts between Gina Rodriguez and Dylan Howard.^[423] Jarmel-Schneider then showed a chart which summarized 34 business records which prosecutors say were falsified.^[423]

 

On May 13, Michael Cohen, Trump's former "fixer" and attorney (who is considered the case's star witness), began testifying.^[426] He would give 17 hours of testimony over four days.^[427]

On May 13, Cohen acknowledged that he, Trump and David Pecker conspired to suppress negative stories and promote positive stories about Trump during the 2016 election.^[426] He said his work in this matter "was at the direction of and benefit of Mr. Trump", stating that "Everything required Mr. Trump's sign-off."^[428] By email (shown as evidence), Cohen informed the National Enquirer that Trump did not want them to report his affair with a "Penthouse Pet".^[426] Cohen specified his role in the Enquirer's first catch-and-kill story for Trump, about a Trump Tower doorman who alleged that Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock.^[426] Cohen detailed his role in the hush-money payment to McDougal, stating that he monitored progress by text, phone and the Signal app.^[426] He repeated that he communicated by "phone, email and text" with McDougal, Daniels and Keith Davidson.^[426][9] By text message, Cohen told Dylan Howard that he was making the payments on Trump's behalf.^[426] He further noted that after Pecker refused to pay for the Daniels story, he took over as funder of "catch-and-kill operations".^[426]

Cohen acknowledged Hicks's testimony about the conversation over the McDougal payment press coverage.^[426] According to Cohen, he and everybody at the organization had contact with Weisselberg.^[426] He further accused Weisselberg of providing him with the financial advice concerning the payment to McDougal, stating that it foreshadowed the way he arranged for the Daniels payment.^[426] Cohen said he first spoke to Trump about the Daniels allegation in 2011 after it was leaked to The Dirty, and that Trump called her "a beautiful woman" (having said the same about McDougal) and said they had met in 2006 at a golf outing and that she had liked him more than football star "Big Ben". Cohen said Trump did not respond when he asked if he had had sex with her and that Trump took him up on his offer to get the story taken down.^[9]

Cohen said the release of the Access Hollywood tape was viewed as a campaign liability and that Trump afterwards directed him to pay Daniels to avoid "catastrophic" damage.^[426][9] Cohen said that he viewed supermarket tabloids like the National Enquirer to be influential in reaching voters^[426] and that Trump was concerned about the effect Daniels' story could have had on female voters.^[426] Cohen stated that Trump told him: "Just pay it. There's no reason to keep this thing out there. Just do it."^[429] Cohen testified that Weisselberg told him to not make the payment through the Trump Organization and instead to come up with a more creative way to do it.^[426] Cohen said that he and Weisselberg discussed processing the $130,000 through one of Trump's golf courses as if it were a membership or event fee but they decided against it. When Weisselberg said he lacked the personal finances, Cohen agreed to pay it.^[429] Cohen said he suggested the idea of including a clause in the nondisclosure agreement penalizing Daniels $1,000,000 every time she told her story.^[426] After Trump's 2016 election victory, Weisselberg and Cohen discussed the reimbursement plan in Trump's 26th-floor office, and Weisselberg coordinated the repayments to Cohen.^[426] A bank statement for Essential Consultants LLC from the end of October 2016 was presented, which showed the $130,000 sent to Keith Davidson and featured a note Cohen said was handwritten by Weisselberg. It showed the doubling of the $180,000 reimbursement—$130,000 for Daniels plus $50,000 for money Trump owed Cohen for paying tech company Red Finch (to poll for the Trump campaign and promote Cohen on Twitter as something of a sex symbol)—so that Cohen would receive the full amount after paying 50% in taxes, plus a $60,000 year-end bonus, totaling $420,000. Cohen said it occurred to him that Weisselberg and Trump had planned this reimbursement scheme in advance and that Weisselberg had said in Trump's presence that the monthly payments would function in the guise of a retainer agreement.^[430][401]

Cohen testified that he aspired to be a personal lawyer to the president but that Trump, instead of granting him this role, significantly cut his 2016 bonus. Cohen said his relationship with Trump was falling apart at this time. He said his work for Trump boosted his personal career, including by securing more prominent clients.^[426]

On May 14, Cohen said he sent the Trump Organization false invoices requesting money for "services rendered". He said that, in February 2017, he confronted Trump in the Oval Office over his lack of repayment.^[431] He said he lied about Daniels to protect Trump (while also "staying on Trump's message" by lying about the Trump Tower Moscow project).^[432] Cohen testified that, in January 2018, he pressured Davidson to have Daniels sign a false statement denying the affair and payment, which Daniels signed on January 30, and also offered her an appearance on Fox News with Sean Hannity.^[433][434] Cohen testified that Daniels also wanted an appearance on Fox News' Hannity, which she did not go through with.^[435][434] Cohen also testified that he decided to stop lying for Trump following a meeting he had with his family shortly before his 2018 guilty plea.^[435] Before the day concluded, Cohen began defense cross-examination.^[435] On May 16, a Trump lawyer accused Cohen of lying that on October 26, 2016, he was on the phone with Trump's personal bodyguard, Keith Schiller, and had him hand the phone to Trump, who then approved the hush-money deal. The defense cited phone records as showing that a series of prank calls to Cohen had prompted him to contact Schiller for a call lasting one minute and 36 seconds, which Cohen defended as enough time to handle both matters.^[436]

On May 20, during cross-examination, Cohen confirmed that around October 26, 2016, he helped Tiffany Trump regarding an extortion issue she faced. He said he was also working with David Pecker that month.^[437] Cohen made two brief calls to Donald Trump on the morning of October 26,^[438] which he said were about Daniels.^[439] On January 27, 2017, Cohen told the Trump Organization he would no longer be working at Trump Tower because he was now Trump's "personal attorney".^[440] On January 31, 2017, Weisselberg emailed Cohen with the subject: "Note and mortgage modification agreement for Trump Park Avenue Condominium." Weisselberg asked Cohen to "prepare the agreement discussed" so Weisselberg could start sending monthly payments.^[441] Cohen said that Donald Jr. and Eric Trump signed the checks "because they were the trustees".^[442] In 2017, he received nine checks for $35,000 apiece directly from Trump, plus two checks from the trust.^[443] Cohen confirmed that he lied to Weisselberg about how much he had paid Red Finch, and that his false reimbursement request amounted to theft from the organization.^{[444][445][446][447]} He said he lied in 2018 when he said that Trump had been unaware of the Daniels payment.^[448] He said he had no income between his 2018 guilty plea^[449] and the publication of his 2020 memoir,^[450] but that since then he had earned $4.4 million from podcasts and books.^[451] Asked whether he has a "financial interest in the outcome of this case", Cohen said he expected to make more money if Trump was found not guilty, since "it gives me more to talk about".^[452][453] He acknowledged that his name recognition comes from his frequent criticism of Trump and that he was even interested in running for Congress.^[446]

Defense cross-examination of Cohen concluded on May 20. Cohen testified that the retainer agreement Weisselberg proposed he maintain with Trump to conceal the monthly reimbursements was fraudulent in nature.^[454][430]

The defense pointed to occasions when Cohen did legal work, and said this was evidence that he was retained as a lawyer under a valid retainer agreement, as Cohen would not do legal work for free, nor would Trump pay in excess of reimbursements. Additionally, the defense pointed out that CFO Weisselberg requested from Cohen an agreement without suggesting it would be a fake agreement: "please prepare the agreement we discussed so we can pay you monthly."^{[455][456][457]}

The prosecution then conducted redirect examination. The prosecution rested its case the same day.^{[458][459][460]}

The defense began its case on May 20, 2024, and rested its case on May 21 after calling two witnesses.^[427][461] Trump did not testify.^{[462][463][ab]} On May 22, he stated (in a press interview outside the court proceedings) that he did not testify because (1) he disagreed with Merchan's past rulings, (2) he was concerned about being questioned about his own past, and (3) there was "no case".^{[464][471][ac]}

The defense team had initially planned to call Bradley Smith, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission (FEC), as an expert witness on campaign finance law.^[473] Smith had argued that the payments to Daniels were not campaign payments and not illegal.^[474] However, on May 20, Judge Merchan ruled that Smith's testimony would be limited to "general definitions and terms" so as to not supplant the judge's role to determine what the law is.^[475][476] Smith was prohibited from mentioning "there had never been a case in which anyone had been convicted of a federal campaign finance law violation for the making of 'hush money payments'" and from discussing "that the FEC dismissed the complaint against defendant and the DOJ decided against prosecuting defendant for potential FECA violations" due to irrelevance.^[477] In February 2024, prosecutors pointed out that Smith had previously been barred from testifying for the defense in two unrelated federal cases in Manhattan where the defense had improperly sought to have Smith interpret campaign finance law for the jury: United States v. Bankman-Fried and United States v. Suarez.^[476] As a result, the defense decided not to call Smith as a witness.^[478][479] Trump then falsely stated that Merchan had not allowed Smith to be called,^[480] and Smith wrote that the "judge's bias is very evident."^[481]

On May 20, Daniel Sitko, a paralegal for Todd Blanche, provided testimony.^[482] A chart of phone calls between Cohen and Robert Costello, the lawyer that Giuliani suggested Cohen hire in 2018, was submitted into evidence.^[483]

On May 20, Robert Costello also testified.^[484] Merchan admonished the witness for making comments on the stand objecting to rulings, staring at the judge, and rolling his eyes.^[485]

On May 21, Costello was cross-examined by the prosecution.^[486] Emails from Costello to his law partner Jeff Citron and Cohen were shown. In a May 2018 email to Citron, Costello said it was a goal to get Cohen "on the right page without giving him the appearance that we are following instructions from Giuliani or the president" and said he believed it was "the clear and correct strategy".^[486][487] When asked if "the email speaks for itself" as he had asserted the day before, Costello said "Sometimes." He also wrote to Citron about Cohen, "What should I say to this asshole? He is playing with the most powerful man on the planet." (Cohen testified that Costello and Trump's campaign had attempted to pressure him to realign to their interests.)^[486] In an email to Cohen, Costello wrote: "You are making a very big mistake if you believe the stories these 'journalists' are writing about you. They want you to cave. They want you to fail. They do not want you to persevere and succeed. If you really believe you are not being supported properly by your former boss, then you should make your opinion known."^[486] The defense rested its case thereafter.^[486]

Later on May 21, arguments over jury instruction language were held.^[486] Merchan announced that the jury would be excused until the beginning of summations on May 28.^[486][463] Merchan stated that the closing arguments "will not be quick" and that he expected his final instructions to the jury to last an hour.^[486] On Memorial Day, May 27, Trump complained that the prosecution would get the last word as "very unfair", though this is standard procedure in criminal trials where the state has the burden of proof.^[488][ad]

On May 28, the defense gave a three-hour closing argument including breaks.^[492] Trump lawyer Todd Blanche claimed Trump had nothing to do with checks which were written by Trump's sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump.^[493] Blanche questioned why prosecutors did not call Donald Jr. and Eric as witnesses despite their signing payment checks to Cohen.^[493] Blanche also showed an email revealing that McConnery sought approval from both Donald Jr. and Eric.^[493] Blanche alleged that it was Cohen's decision to make the hush-money payment and variously branded him a prolific liar.^[493] Blanche sought to discredit Daniels' ambitions, noting (among other things) text messages between her manager and publicist Gina Rodriguez and Dylan Howard which showed that Howard believed Pecker would pay for her story shortly after the Access Hollywood tape was released.^[493] Merchan admonished Blanche for telling the jury: "You cannot send someone to prison, you cannot convict somebody, based upon the words of Michael Cohen." Merchan said this type of comment is "highly inappropriate" and "not allowed",^[494] as the jury is instructed not to consider how Merchan might sentence Trump.^{[495][496][497]}

The same day, the prosecution gave a four-hour and 41 minute closing argument including breaks.^[493] Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass described Pecker's testimony as "utterly damning".^[493] Steinglass noted that some key parts of Daniels' story were proven true^[493] and noted that the defense appeared to acknowledge that Trump knew about the Daniels payment as early as 2017.^[493] Steinglass stated that it made sense that Cohen was interested in the outcome of the case, noting that Trump dropped him "like a hot potato" when their relationship soured.^[498] Steinglass argued that Cohen was Trump's "fixer" and that his knowledge was "limited to what actually happened".^[493] It was noted that Cohen did not work for the Trump Organization's legal department and answered directly to Trump.^[493] A footnote from the 2018 Office of Government Ethics form was shown, which stated that "In 2016 expenses were incurred by one of Donald J. Trump's attorneys, Michael Cohen. Mr. Cohen sought reimbursement of those expenses and Mr. Trump fully reimbursed Mr. Cohen in 2017."^[493]

Steinglass went over phone conversations between Trump and Cohen regarding the hush-money payment and showed a December 2017 check to Cohen signed via Sharpie by Donald Trump,^[493] arguing that the latter must have known the purpose of such checks, as his "entire business philosophy was and is to be involved in everything".^[499] Steinglass cited a 2018 tweet by Trump in which he acknowledged that Cohen was reimbursed for an NDA via a retainer agreement, but said it had "nothing to do with the campaign".^[499] Steinglass said the defense's characterization of the payments to Cohen was undermined by his lack of pay from Trump in 2018 despite Cohen doing legal work for him that year.^[499] Steinglass further stated that the payment was made to "hoodwink the American voter".^[493][500] At the end of closing arguments, Merchan said that jury instructions would be read on May 29 and were expected to last an hour.^[493] Trump described the closing arguments as "BORING!" on Truth Social.^{[501][502][503]}

On May 29, the jury began deliberations.^[504] A few hours in, they asked to hear a readback of about 30 minutes of testimony by Pecker and Cohen; the readback was held the following day.^[505] It regarded an August 2015 meeting between Pecker, Cohen, Trump, and Hicks, in which Pecker pledged to be Trump's "eyes and ears" regarding negative stories about him; additionally, the jury wanted to hear Pecker's testimony regarding an alleged phone call from Trump in which the two discussed a rumor that McDougal had gone to another outlet to publish her story.^{[506][507][508]}

On May 30 at 5:07 pm EDT, Trump was found guilty on all 34 counts,^[1][509] making him the first former U.S. president to be convicted of a felony.^[510] Merchan denied a defense motion for an acquittal.^[511]

On May 31, 2024, the day after the trial ended, Trump told reporters he wanted to have the "nasty gag order" lifted.^[512] On June 4, Blanche filed a motion to have the gag order lifted, stating: "Now that the trial is concluded, the concerns articulated by the government and the Court do not justify restrictions on the First Amendment rights of President Trump".^[513] On June 5, Matthew Colangelo asked that the gag order remain in place to "to protect the integrity of these proceedings and the fair administration of justice at least through the sentencing hearing and the resolution of any post-trial motions."^[514][515] Many expected Trump, had the gag order been lifted, to assail trial participants including the witnesses, jury, and court staff, as well as their families.^[516][517]

On June 18, the New York Court of Appeals said it would not hear an earlier appeal by Trump on the gag order, leaving it in place.^[518]

On June 25, two days before the first 2024 United States presidential debates, Merchan partially lifted the gag order permitting Trump to comment on witnesses and jurors, but Trump cannot reveal the jurors' identities, nor comment about court staffers, the prosecution team nor their families until after sentencing.^{[519][520][521]}

In July 2024, Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey filed a lawsuit against New York State in an attempt to invoke the Supreme Court's exclusive jurisdiction to hear disputes between two states.^[522] The lawsuit sought to block Trump's gag order and sentencing until after the November election, accusing New York of interfering with the presidential election in Missouri and violating Missourians' First Amendment rights.^[522] On August 5, the Supreme Court ruled against intervening in the case.^[523]

On July 1, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States, supporting presidential immunity for official acts committed by the seated president. Later that day, Trump's counsel requested permission to move to dismiss the conviction on the basis that some evidence presented in the trial constituted official actions by Trump.^[222][524] This includes 2018 social media posts by Trump, phone records between Trump and Cohen, a government ethics disclosure referencing the hush money payment, and some of Hicks' and Westerhout's testimony.^{[525][526][527]}

Trump's motion was formally made on July 11.^[527] Merchan's ruling will center on whether the evidence presented constituted official actions, and whether it influenced the verdict.^[525] If the conviction is overturned, prosecutors would need to convene another grand jury to issue a new indictment.^[527]

Judge Hellerstein had previously rejected defense arguments to this effect in July 2023 when Trump attempted to remove the case to federal court, saying that "the matter was purely a personal item of the President."^[352]

Merchan's ruling on immunity was initially expected by September 6. It was postponed so he could consider Trump's third recusal motion, which he denied on August 13.^[528] The immunity ruling was expected by September 16.^[529][530] On September 3, hours before Hellerstein rejected Trump's request to remove his case to federal court, prosecutors urged Merchan to rule swiftly on the immunity question, expressing concern that Hellerstein might pause state court proceedings.^[531] On September 6, Merchan postponed the immunity ruling to November 12.^[532] On that day, Merchan agreed to a request from prosecutors to pause the case for a week while they considered how Trump's election could impact proceedings.^[533][534] On November 19, the Manhattan DA argued that the conviction should stand because no law states that temporary presidential immunity nullifies—post-trial—proceedings conducted during the president's time outside of office and regarding activities deemed unofficial to that post.^[535]

Before his conviction, officials in state and federal agencies began preparing for possible incarceration.^[536][537] Trump's rhetoric and lack of acknowledgement of any wrongdoing is expected to negatively impact the leniency of his sentence.^[538] Trump's proponents have argued that any sentence restricting Trump's mobility or communication with voters could undermine confidence in the 2024 election.^[539] Trump was the presumptive 2024 Republican Party nominee leading up to the 2024 Republican National Convention, and the party prepared for a prison nomination broadcast were he to be incarcerated before the start of the Republican National Convention on July 15.^[540]

Trump's sentencing hearing was originally scheduled for July 11.^[541] However, Trump's counsel requested on July 1 to delay sentencing to consider the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Trump v. United States released that day.^[222][524] The Manhattan DA's office agreed to the delay, though it said the Trump team's position lacked merit.^[542] On July 2, Merchan postponed the sentencing hearing to September 18.^[543] In August, Trump's team asked Merchan to again postpone the sentencing hearing until after the election,^[544] and the Manhattan DA stated that it would defer to Merchan on this matter.^[545] On September 6, Merchan postponed the sentencing hearing to November 26.^[532][546]

On August 29, Trump's lawyers asked the federal court for the Southern District of New York to seize control of the case, complaining that a September sentencing date would amount to election interference.^[547] On September 3, District Judge Alvin Hellerstein rejected Trump's request on the basis that the payments were an unofficial act.^[548][549] Hours later, Trump's attorneys filed a notice of appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.^[550] Although Merchan granted the sentencing delay, on October 14 Trump's counsel asked the Second Circuit to reconsider Hellerstein's rejection, arguing that it was based upon "profoundly flawed analysis" and continuing to assert that instead of being personally prosecuted, Trump was being politically persecuted.^[549]

On November 12, the immunity hearing was delayed a week.^[551] On that day, November 19, the Manhattan DA agreed to postpone sentencing until Trump leaves office.^[535] On November 22, Merchan canceled the November 26 sentencing date without setting a new one.^[552] Trump's appeal cannot take place until after sentencing.^[462]

Trump had turned over two of the three pistols he was licensed for to the New York Police Department (NYPD) on March 31, 2023, with a third pistol moved to Florida.^[553] Trump's New York State concealed carry license was suspended on April 1, 2023, following his indictment on criminal charges.^[554] New York state law and federal law prohibit people with felony convictions from possessing firearms, and federal law even prohibits people under indictment or information for a felony (but not convicted) from possessing firearms, a violation of which can result in up to 15 years imprisonment, or life imprisonment if one is subject to the enhanced penalties imposed by the Armed Career Criminal Act.^{[555] [556]} As of June 5, 2024, Trump's New York firearm license is expected to be revoked after the NYPD's legal bureau completes its investigation.^[557] At Trump's pre-sentence hearing on June 10, 2024, CNN reported that Trump was still in possession of the third firearm in Florida.^[558][559]

On June 10, 2024, Trump and his lawyer Todd Blanche attended his probation interview via videoconference.^[560][ae] If placed on probation, Trump cannot associate with other convicted felons.^[561][565]

On June 28, 2024, the New Jersey Division of Alcoholic Beverage Control declined to renew the liquor licenses for Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster and Colts Neck, instead issuing temporary permits.^[566] The alcohol laws of New Jersey prohibit a liquor license from being issued to "any person who has been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude", typically involving a serious crime involving "dishonesty, fraud or depravity".^{[566][567][568]} Though the Trump Organization has stated that Trump is not connected with the liquor licenses, New Jersey attorney general pointed out that Trump is the sole beneficiary of his revocable trust, which owns the licenses.^[566][569] A hearing for the licenses was expected to be held on July 19, but was delayed until after Trump's sentencing.^[570][566]

 

Trump has a right to one level of appeal for the conviction itself, which he is expected to use.^[571][462] The appeal would be heard by the New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, which is the intermediate state appellate court covering Manhattan and the Bronx. If unsuccessful, the next step would be the New York Court of Appeals, the state's highest court, which has discretion whether to hear an appeal.^[572]

• Arrests of Ulysses S. Grant
• Legal affairs of Donald Trump
• Public image of Donald Trump