NEW YORK (NewsNation) — Closing arguments concluded Tuesday in the criminal hush money trial against former President Donald Trump, with prosecutors and defense attorneys having had one final opportunity to convince the jury of their respective cases before deliberations begin.
Judge Juan Merchan said it was likely the trial would run late, due to the length of arguments, which are anticipated to take around two and a half hours for the defense and about four and a half for the prosecution, and he would be keeping jurors late.
Merchan said some jurors made child care and other arrangements allowing them to stay until 8 p.m. ET.
Merchan did note he would be giving the jury snack breaks because they “seem to like that.” He also admonished Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche for suggesting the jury could send Trump to jail, noting that he would issue a jury instruction remaining the panel that possible punishment is not supposed to be considered when determining guilt or innocence.
Trump, the presumptive Republican candidate for president, faces 34 criminal charges alleging that he falsified business records during the 2016 presidential election. Prosecutors allege the records were falsified to hide $130,000 in payments that were tied to a porn star’s allegations that she had a sexual relationship with Trump.
Hush money payments themselves aren’t necessarily illegal but may become illegal if done in connection to another crime or as blackmail. In this case, the payments are being considered by prosecutors as illegal campaign contributions, making them a violation of campaign finance law.
Trump has maintained his innocence since being charged and has claimed he is the victim of a political witch hunt.
Proceedings will continue Wednesday at 10 a.m. ET where jury instructions and then deliberations are expected to begin.
Prosecution closing arguments
Attorney Joshua Steinglass delivered closing remarks for the prosecution, saying the state has presented “powerful evidence” of Trump’s guilt. He pushed back on defense arguments that a lack of definitive proof for certain events, like receipts, meant they had not happened.
Steinglass also went after the defense for “demonizing” Stormy Daniels while acknowledging her testimony was at times uncomfortable. He also admitted it was true that former fixer Michael Cohen “had baggage” but said the defense was trying to have it both ways by casting doubt on actions and also acknowledging payments were made in the first place.
The prosecution’s arguments emphasized the need for jurors to really examine the documents at the heart of the case. Steinglass also appealed to jurors to set aside their own personal opinions on whether Trump’s alleged affair was a big deal, arguing that voters should get to decide that for themselves rather than having information kept from them.
Steinglass also emphasized evidence presented by the prosecution that indicated Trump was more involved with the transactions than the defense argument portrayed, including a recording of a conversation between Cohen and Trump.
After returning from a break, Steinglass focused on emails, testimony and financial records and said the evidence included “smoking guns” showing the payoff was improperly listed as legal fees.
“Is there anything you’ve learned about Donald Trump during this trial that makes you think he would pay twice what he owes someone?” Steinglass asked jurors.
The prosecutor recounted testimony from Cohen about Trump directing the hush money reimbursement over 12 months through inflated invoices for legal services. He showed jurors a handwritten note indicating $130,000 payments to Cohen on Trump Organization stationery.
Steinglass said Trump Organization records improperly labeled the reimbursements for Daniels’ silence as compensation to Cohen, despite no retainer agreement for Cohen to consult. The lawyer representing Trump’s company, Michael Blanche, argued the payment wasn’t fraud because records weren’t destroyed.
The prosecutor pushed back, saying “it was worth it” for Trump to avoid public disclosure before the election.
Steinglass poked fun at Cohen’s supposedly lucrative legal consulting for Trump in 2017, joking that the former lawyer spent more time being cross-examined at the trial than he did actual work for the ex-president that year.
“The plan was always to disguise the payment as income pursuant to a retainer,” Steinglass told jurors, who appeared engaged despite the day’s lengthy proceedings. Some jurors glanced at the clock while the prosecutor spoke, though they had diligently taken notes earlier.
Defense lawyers objected when Steinglass said Trump authorized Cohen to make false statements about his relationship with Daniels, but the prosecutor pressed that Trump tried avoiding a paper trail by directing subordinates.
Steinglass cited testimony from former Trump aide Hope Hicks about the then-candidate saying it was “better to deal with” a Wall Street Journal story on the hush money in 2018 rather than before the election. Steinglass told jurors this showed the payment’s purpose was political, not personal.
Steinglass said it was all about the election and not about protecting Melania Trump, which was Trump’s stated reason for payments to conceal the alleged affair.
Steinglass pushed back on defense assertions that Trump was too consumed with the presidency to scrutinize reimbursements to Cohen for facilitating the payment to Daniels. The prosecutor read excerpts from Trump’s books emphasizing his attention to financial details.
Quoting Trump’s book “Think Like a Billionaire,” which states “no detail is too small to consider” and managers must “always look at the numbers” themselves, Steinglass asked jurors, “Don’t buy this bogus narrative the defendant was too busy to look at the checks.”
The prosecutor reminded them that in New York, the business capital of the world, companies have an obligation to keep accurate records whether private or public enterprises.
“You cannot lie in your business records,” Steinglass said bluntly.
He stated that under New York law, the Trump Organization qualified as an “enterprise” subject to the business records rules, defined as any entity engaged in public or personal transactions.
Steinglass showed a March 2023 Trump Truth Social post saying, “If you go after me, I’m coming after you,” which he argued was seen by Trump’s supporters as a call to arms before an objection was sustained. He displayed another Trump post calling Daniels “horseface” after she testified about the hush money payments.
Steinglass revisited excerpts from Trump’s books emphasizing his attention to financial details to rebut claims Trump was too busy to scrutinize reimbursements. He questioned the credibility of Trump attorney Robert Costello as a witness, showing emails that Steinglass said undermined Costello’s claims about properly advising Cohen.
With over 5 hours of closing arguments so far, the lengthy proceedings seemed to be weighing on jurors, who looked at the clock during objection discussions. The jury took their last afternoon break around 6:56 p.m. after some audible groans about the lengthy proceedings.
Steinglass said the defense wants the jury to believe Cohen “went rogue” in facilitating the hush money payments, but the prosecutor provided three counterarguments:
- Trump is a known micromanager
- Cohen was a self-promoter who wouldn’t act alone
- Trump was the beneficiary of the scheme
He said it’s “inconceivable” Trump would be so involved in negotiating payments to Daniels and Karen McDougal and then “stick his head in the sand” for the reimbursements to Cohen. Steinglass displayed a timeline laying out Trump’s alleged direct involvement, quickly recapping key dates from 2016 to 2018 that prosecutors say show Trump’s intent to falsify records.
He read from Cohen’s testimony that Cohen had “$130,000 reasons” to get Trump’s blessing for the Daniels payment. Steinglass cited Hope Hicks’ view that it would be out of character for Cohen to make such payments on his own.
The federal prosecutor urged jurors to convict Trump, arguing “all roads lead” to the former president, who he said sought to cover up affairs that could have derailed his 2016 campaign.
“In the interest of justice and in the name of the people of the state of New York, I ask you to find the defendant guilty,” Steinglass told jurors.
“Everything Mr. Trump and his cohorts did in this case was cloaked in lies,” Steinglass said, listing alleged falsehoods in Trump company records and financial paperwork.
The prosecutor rejected any “special standard” for the famous defendant, stating, “The law is the law, and it applies to everyone equally.”
When a defense objection was sustained after Steinglass quipped Trump couldn’t shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it, he apologized to jurors for sacrificing “brevity for thoroughness” in his hourslong closing.
Defense closing arguments
Trump attorney Todd Blanche began closing arguments Tuesday morning by telling jurors this was not a case about Trump’s alleged sexual encounter with adult film actress Stormy Daniels, but rather about the business records. He also attacked the credibility of former Trump attorney and fixer Michael Cohen, telling jurors they could not convict Trump on Cohen’s testimony
In his arguments, Blanche characterized Trump’s payments to Cohen as part of a retainer fee rather than a specific payment. The prosecution objected, but the objection was overruled by the judge, a win for the defense.
Addressing the prosecution’s argument regarding a conspiracy to influence the election, Blanche argued that every campaign is a conspiracy made up of a group of people working to promote a candidate. He also tried to cast doubt on the idea that a “catch-and-kill” operation orchestrated by former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker would have influenced voters.
“The idea that positive stories in the National Enquirer would influence the election is preposterous,” he said “Millions and millions of people voted. The idea that they really thought this meeting at Trump Tower in 2015 would influence an election makes no sense.”
Blanche also cast doubt on the idea that the scheme would matter, noting that some of the allegations against Trump were already public without stories from the National Enquirer being published.
Regarding Daniels’ claims, Blanche characterized her actions as extortion, noting that she came out ahead financially. He also dismissed her testimony as designed to play to jurors’ emotions, Merchan overruling an objection from the prosecution regarding that characterization.
Blanche ended closing arguments by listing 10 reasons for reasonable doubt, which included the public nature of some stories and defense arguments that there is no evidence proving intent to defraud or Trump’s direct involvement in payments.
Looking ahead to jury deliberations
While 18 jurors were chosen, 12 will decide Trump’s fate (the other six are alternates). Once closing arguments conclude, the jury will be sent to deliberate on a verdict.
The panel of jurors must consider each of the 34 charges against Trump and reach the same decision for the judge in the case to move forward. If the jury cannot reach the same decision, the judge could declare a mistrial.
The 34 charges Trump faces include 11 counts of falsified invoices, 12 counts of falsified general ledger entries and 11 counts of falsely recording hush money payments.
20-year maximum sentence
The maximum sentence Trump could face if convicted is 20 years in jail. While each felony count carries up to four years in jail, adding up to 136 years, New York law limits the sentence for this type of crime to a maximum of 20 years.
Should Trump go to prison, he won’t be going alone, as the Secret Service will have to go with him to continue his protection.
Not all first-time offenders go to jail, however, and Merchan could impose a lesser sentence, which could include fines and/or some combination of probation or community service. The fine for falsifying business records as a felony count is $5,000, though it’s not entirely clear if that would be per count, which would add up to a maximum of $170,000.
It’s also possible the jury could find Trump guilty of a lesser misdemeanor offense, which comes with the possibility of fines, probation, or up to one year in jail per count.
The jury could also return a mixed verdict, finding Trump guilty on some counts but not others, which would also impact the possible sentence.
Trump’s family in attendance
Three of Trump’s five children are attending the closing arguments Tuesday, according to multiple Trump sources.
Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. are back, as well as Trump’s fourth child, Tiffany Trump, and Eric’s wife, Lara Trump, who is the co-chair of the Republican National Committee.
Tiffany Trump is making her first appearance in the New York court.
Three members of Trump’s immediate family have not attended any days of the trial since it began in April: His wife, Melania Trump, daughter Ivanka Trump, and his youngest son, Barron Trump.
Witness testimony
During the trial, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg called 20 witnesses while making his case, and Trump’s legal team summoned two witnesses to the stand.
Star witnesses included Cohen — who has already pleaded guilty to federal charges of campaign finance violations — as well as former Trump aide Hope Hicks and Pecker, the former CEO of American Media, Inc.
Daniels, who received one of the payments, also took the stand with salacious testimony about her alleged sexual interaction with Trump.
Prosecutors spent 15 days laying out their case, and the defense team took just two to make arguments.
Bragg’s team alleged that Trump was aware records were being falsified to cover up the nature of hush money payments made in an effort to mislead voters prior to the 2016 election. The defense, meanwhile, has disputed testimony from Daniels and Cohen and attempted to distance Trump from the payments.
Remaining cases against Trump
Regardless of what happens in New York, Trump is still facing two federal criminal cases and a criminal case in Georgia. However, it’s appearing increasingly unlikely that those will go to trial before the November election.
Trump’s Georgia election interference case is on hold pending Trump’s appeal of a judge’s decision to allow Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis to remain on the case despite her romantic involvement with former prosecutor Nathan Wade. Trump’s defense team in that case argued the relationship presented a conflict of interest, and a judge ruled that either Wade or Willis had to step down from the case, which Wade did.
The federal election interference case against Trump, brought by special counsel Jack Smith, is also delayed while the Supreme Court weighs Trump’s claims that presidents should have absolute immunity from prosecution.
The court hasn’t ruled yet, but one possible outcome is for the case to be sent back to the lower courts, which would mean more delays.
Trump is also facing charges for unlawfully retaining and improperly storing classified documents after he left office. That case, also brought by Smith, has been put on indefinite hold by Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee.
Cannon cited arguments about how classified evidence should be handled as the reason, but others have blamed incompetence or accused her of making the decision to help Trump stall his cases until after the election.
2024 presidential election
Even if Trump is found guilty in one or more of these cases, he is still able to run for president. He is also eligible to run and serve even if he is in prison, though it’s not entirely clear how that would work.
Running from behind bars isn’t entirely without precedent. In 1920, socialist Eugene Debs ran for the presidency from a federal prison while serving time for sedition after urging people to resist the military draft.
The multiple criminal cases against Trump haven’t dimmed support from Republican voters, but there is polling that indicates a conviction could sway moderate and swing voters when it comes to the ballot box.
NewsNation’s Jeff Arnold contributed to this report.