Tag: Live updates: Donald Trump's hush money trial

Robert Costello, an attorney connected with Michael Cohen, will resume his testimony today on the witness stand after yesterday’s contentious exchange with the judge.

Costello, who is a witness for the defense, was admonished by Judge Juan Merchan after he audibly complained when the judge sustained objections to the questions he was being asked.

Costello has been brought up numerous times during the trial, including Monday, when Donald Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche asked Cohen to confirm instances in which the two communicated and met.

Costello testified on May 15 in front of a House Judiciary subcommittee and consistently criticized Cohen, saying “virtually every statement” Cohen made on the stand about Costello was a lie. Following the testimony, Trump’s team reached out to Costello.

Costello previously appeared as the only defense witness before the grand jury investigating the case in March 2023.

Trump’s attorneys called Costello as a way to try to rebut Cohen’s testimony about the pressure he was receiving in 2018 when the FBI searched his home and office.

Costello advised Cohen in the weeks after the search, though Cohen did not sign a retainer agreement and did not pay Costello, who touted in email communications his close connections with Rudy Giuliani. The former New York mayor also joined Trump’s legal team in 2018.

Read more about Costello’s testimony yesterday in the Trump trial.

CNN’s Jeremy Herb, Lauren del Valle and Kara Scannell contributed reporting to this post.

In a written order Friday Judge Juan Merchan granted prosecutors motion to quash a subpoena from Donald Trump’s lawyers seeking to compel former Manhattan prosecutor Mark Pomerantz to turn over more records.

Merchan called Trump’s request for “all Documents” for a 13-month period from several individuals covering a range of topics including “Cohen’s recollection of interactions with President Trump” and “any form of bias or animosity toward President Trump” an improper fishing expedition.

Trump’s lawyers also asked for all documents relating to a February 2021 internal memo on “whether Stephanie Clifford a/k/a ‘Stormy Daniels,’ committed ‘extortion and or ‘larceny,’ and (b) whether President Trump was a ‘victim of blackmail.”

The order notes Trump’s legal team has received some discovery from Pomerantz as recently as March before the trial began.

Trump’s legal team signaled ahead of the hush money criminal trial that they would attack the veracity and completeness of the information on Michael Cohen’s electronic devices — part of a broader strategy to chip away at the credibility of a key witness.

Before the trial began, Trump’s team tried to subpoena the Manhattan district attorney’s employee who was responsible for the phones during the four-day lapse before delivering the devices for review by the department of Douglas Daus, the man who we’ve been hearing testify.

Trump’s lawyers indicated in the letter they wanted to “challenge the integrity of evidence DANY will seek to offer from Cohen’s phones, for use in cross-examination of Cohen” and “regarding the bias and hostility toward President Trump to attack the lack of integrity of DANY’s investigation under federal constitutional.”

Prosecutors have sought to push back on this angle from the defense in court today.

“Did you see any evidence of tampering or manipulation on any of the data that you pulled related to the recording that’s in evidence as people’s 246?” prosecutor Chris Conroy asked a short time ago.

“I did not,” Daus testified.

Remember: Cohen, Trump’s former personal lawyer and “fixer,” served federal prison time for actions he took while playing that role. Now he is a key prosecution witness who will testify later in the case.

Several witnesses have already testified to unsavory things about Cohen, and the defense has been highlighting his past wrongdoing in hopes of chipping away at his credibility before he takes the stand.

In last week’s hearing on gag order violations, Trump’s defense made two key arguments in his favor: (1) Reposts of other people’s words do not violate the gag order, and (2) the posts represent protected political speech in response to attacks.

Judge Juan Merchan rejected both arguments in his contempt ruling Tuesday.

First, he found that reposts are, in this case, endorsements. “There can be no doubt whatsoever, that Defendant’s intent and purpose when reposting, is to communicate to his audience that he endorses and adopts the posted statement as his own,” he wrote.

Second, Merchan acknowledged that the gag order does allow Trump to respond to political attacks, but said criticisms of key witnesses were not allowed.

“To allow such attacks upon protected witnesses with blanket assertions that they are all responses to ‘political attacks’ would be an exception that swallowed the rule. The Expanded Order does not contain such an exception,” he wrote.

While Donald Trump attends his hush money criminal trial in Manhattan, the Supreme Court will hear arguments Thursday ahead of another case that the former president is facing.

The Supreme Court will decide whether Trump may claim immunity from prosecution in the federal election subversion case brought by special counsel Jack Smith separately, that charged the former president last August with four crimes over his efforts to reverse the 2020 election results.

The indictment alleges Trump and a co-conspirator “attempted to exploit the violence and chaos at the Capitol by calling lawmakers to convince them … to delay the certification” of the election.

The Manhattan court case and the election subversion case are two of four criminal cases Trump faces while also juggling his presidential campaign.

The former president is facing at least 88 charges over the four criminal indictments in Georgia, New York, Washington, DC, and Florida. Trump has pleaded not guilty to every charge in these cases. 

Here’s a recap of the other two cases:

Read more about the four criminal cases Trump faces. 

The judge overseeing Donald Trump’s first criminal trial will consider this morning whether the former president should be fined for repeatedly violating the gag order barring Trump from publicly discussing witnesses or jurors in the criminal hush money case.

Here’s what to know about the gag order imposed on Trump by Judge Juan Merchan in late March:

Why was it imposed? Merchan implemented the gag order because, he said, the former president has a history of making “threatening, inflammatory, denigrating” statements against people at all levels of the justice system, including jurors. According to CNN Senior Legal Analyst Elie Honig, the fundamental reason for the gag order is to protect members of the jury.

What does it do? The ruling limits the former president from making statements about potential witnesses in his hush money criminal trial. It prevents Trump from criticizing his former attorney, Michael Cohen, or adult film star Stormy Daniels, who will be witnesses at trial. But it does not prevent Trump from talking about New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who is a public figure, or Merchan himself.

Merchan also ruled that Trump can’t make statements about attorneys, court staff or the family members of prosecutors, lawyers, family members of the court and family members of the Manhattan district attorney. Trump is also barred from making statements about any potential or actual juror.

What does Trump say? Trump and his attorneys have argued that as the leading Republican candidate for president, Trump’s speech should not be restricted as he appeals to voters in the 2024 election. When Merchan expanded the original order to include family members of the court in early April, Trump’s lawyers indicated they would appeal it, arguing it went too far.

A possible alternate juror was allowed to remain through the questionnaire process after revealing she had been convicted of a crime in another state.

Before the questionnaire process started, she told the judge she was convicted of a crime in another state and would be disqualified.

At one point, her voice cracked. Trump watched intently as she shared her story.

Judge Juan Merchan had her approach the bench so they could discuss it privately. He ultimately allowed her stay and she was not disqualified.

After the prospective jurors left the courtroom for the break, Merchan addressed the room, saying everyone inside “heard from a very brave woman who shared very personal things about her life. I know that wasn’t easy to do in a room full of strangers. I want to encourage the press, please be kind. Please be kind to this person.”

Remember: On Thursday, after a paneled juror expressed concerns in court about her ability to serve, the judge addressed the press in court, telling them “there’s a reason this is an anonymous jury” and to “refrain from writing about anything that has to do with physical descriptions.”

“We just lost what probably would’ve been a very good juror,” Merchan said. “The first thing she said was she was afraid and intimidating by the press.”