What Trump's hush money trial might really be about

15 April 2024

When Monday morning, April 15 arrived, reporters anxiously awaited jury selection in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's criminal case against former President Donald Trump. Bragg's case is typically referred to as the "hush money case" in media reports, and that description is technically accurate.

But hush money payments per se are not a crime in New York State, and the case also involves falsifying business records during a presidential race.

In a column published on April 15, MSNBC legal analyst Jordan Rubin lays out some reasons why the case is about much more than hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels.

"It's been called the hush money case," Rubin explains, "but Donald Trump isn't charged with paying hush money. It's been called an election interference case, but that might not fully explain it, either. A more precise, if less concise, way to describe the case is that it's about allegedly covering up a hush money scheme — or, allegedly covering up 2016 election interference."

Rubin notes that Justice Juan Merchan, the judge assigned to the case, described the charges in a letter sent to Trump attorney Todd Blanche and the Manhattan District Attorney's Office on April 8.

Merchan wrote, "The allegations are in substance, that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election. Specifically, it is alleged that Donald Trump made or caused false business records to hide the true nature of payments made to Michael Cohen, by characterizing them as payment for legal services rendered pursuant to a retainer agreement."

Altogether, Trump is facing 34 criminal counts in Bragg's case.

"So, technically, it’s a falsifying business records case," Rubin observes. "Of course, that doesn't have the same ring to it as hush money or election interference. Perhaps more importantly, that dry description doesn’t get to the heart of the matter."

Rubin adds, "Ultimately, people are free to call the case what they want. What's clear is that People v. Trump, the first criminal trial against a former U.S. president, is historic."

Jordan Rubin's full MSNBC column is available at this link.

From Your Site Articles