Trump’s New York Trial Continues as Supreme Court Considers Immunity Claim

Trump’s New York Trial Continues as Supreme Court Considers Immunity Claim

Former President Donald Trump faced significant developments in two separate legal cases on Thursday. In New York, he appeared in court for a trial related to hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election. Trump is facing 35 felony counts of falsifying business documents, with prosecutors arguing that these actions were part of a larger scheme to influence the election. Simultaneously, the US Supreme Court heard arguments regarding Trump’s claim of immunity from federal prosecution in a case linked to allegations of attempting to overturn the 2020 election results.

During the New York trial, National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified that he was aware the payments made to silence negative stories about Trump violated federal election laws. Pecker admitted to buying unflattering stories and then suppressing them before publication, stating that the intention was to influence the election results. This testimony aimed to establish a pattern of election malfeasance beyond the charges related to payments made to Stormy Daniels.

Contrary to the defense’s argument that the payments were meant to prevent personal harm to Trump, Pecker stated that Trump never expressed concern about potential damage to his family. Instead, Pecker believed the efforts were solely politically motivated. This statement undermines a central aspect of the defense’s case.

Prosecutors have accused Trump of violating a partial gag order multiple times, with allegations of at least four violations since the request for sanctions was made. These alleged violations include public attacks on Michael Cohen and describing jurors as predominantly Democrats. Prosecutors also argued that Trump’s recent statement referring to Pecker as “a nice guy” during a campaign stop could be seen as a form of intimidation towards witnesses.

The defense began cross-examining Pecker, attempting to portray “catch and kill” schemes as standard practice. Pecker acknowledged suppressing stories on behalf of other prominent figures, including Rahm Emanuel and Arnold Schwarzenegger. The cross-examination is set to continue on Friday.

In the Supreme Court hearing, the justices appeared skeptical of Trump’s claim that all his official acts as president should be protected by absolute immunity. Justice Elena Kagan questioned whether a former president could escape prosecution even for severe actions such as ordering a coup or selling nuclear secrets. Trump’s lawyer argued that prosecutions might not be allowed if those actions were deemed official acts, prompting Justice Kagan to express concern.

Author: CrimeDoor

Leave a Reply

Share on:

[mailpoet_form id="1"]

Subscribe to Our Newsletter