Connect with us

Politics

NY v Trump: Judge to consider defense motion to dismiss after prosecution rests case

Published

on

NY v Trump: Judge to consider defense motion to dismiss after prosecution rests case

Judge Juan Merchan could rule Tuesday morning on Trump defense attorneys’ motion to dismiss the case against the former president altogether after the prosecution rested its case following days of testimony from its star witness, Michael Cohen.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree. Prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump falsified business records 34 times to conceal a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels, a pornographic performer, in the lead-up to the 2016 election to silence her about an alleged affair with Trump in 2006. 

Trump has pleaded not guilty to all charges and maintains his innocence.

This courtroom sketch shows Michael Cohen being questioned by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger on redirect during former President Trump’s criminal trial in New York City on May 20, 2024. (Reuters/Jane Rosenberg)

TRUMP SLAMS NY COURT SYSTEM, BOASTS HE’S GOING ‘TO WIN’ EMPIRE STATE

Advertisement

After Michael Cohen’s fourth day of testimony was complete, the prosecution rested its case, and Trump defense attorneys called two of their own witnesses. 

At the end of court for the day, Trump defense attorney Todd Blanche asked for an immediate order of dismissal, saying there is “no evidence” that the filings or business records at the center of the case were false, that there are “absolutely no false business filings.” 

Blanche said there is no dispute that Cohen acted as a personal attorney for Trump in 2017 and that there is no evidence or intent by Trump to mislead, hide or falsify business records.

Donald Trump and Michael Cohen (Getty Images)

Blanche said there would be records of intent to defraud, if they existed, and that there were no other crimes being covered up. He said there was no evidence of anyone thinking of a campaign finance charge when the payment was made to Stormy Daniels or when Cohen and then-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg developed the repayment plan.

Advertisement

Blanche said Trump paid Cohen a $35,000 “monthly retainer,” which is what the records state, and said there is no evidence from any witness to prove any criminal intent.

Reflecting on the prosecution’s case, Blanche pointed to the alleged “catch and kill” strategy used to prevent a “demonstrably false” story a Trump Tower doorman had about Trump from being published.

“How on Earth is keeping a false story from voters criminal?” Blanche asked, adding it was “not a catch and kill and certainly not a criminal catch and kill.”

NY V TRUMP: MICHAEL COHEN ADMITS TO STEALING TENS OF THOUSANDS FROM FORMER PRESIDENT’S BUSINESS

“There is no way the court should let this case go to the jury with Mr. Cohen’s testimony,” Blanche said, adding that Cohen has lied under oath in the past and during the current criminal trial in Merchan’s courtroom. 

Advertisement

Merchan asked Blanche if he should “find Mr. Cohen not credible by a matter of law,” to which Blanche said “yes.”

“So, you want me to take it out of the jury’s hands?” Merchan asked, with Blanche responding that Cohen’s entire testimony should not be considered by the jury. 

Merchan told Blanche that if Cohen’s “lies” were “irrefutable,” then he would be able to convince the jury of that.

Michael Cohen is cross-examined by defense lawyer Todd Blanche during former President Trump’s criminal trial in New York City on May 16, 2024, as shown in this courtroom sketch. (Reuters/Jane Rosenberg)

The prosecution then argued that under the New York state falsifying business records statute, anyone “causing” the falsified records can be punished.

Advertisement

“As a matter of law, it is sufficient, more than sufficient, that the defendant set in motion the sequence of events leading to the falsification of business records,” prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argued.

Merchan said he would reserve a ruling on whether to dismiss the case before the jury can deliberate.

Before the afternoon development, Trump defense attorneys on Monday continued to cross-examine Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and self-described “fixer,” who testified that he stole $30,000 from the Trump Organization.

Cohen said the move was “almost like self-help” because he was “angry” about his bonus being reduced.

Cohen testified that he was supposed to pay the $30,000 he withdrew from the bank to a tech company, Red Finch, in addition to $20,000 he had already paid them. Instead, he failed to make the payment, collected the $30,000 for himself, and led the Trump Organization to believe he had paid the total.

Advertisement

Prosecutors then briefly questioned Cohen on redirect, where he said that he had “more than 20” conversations with Trump about Stormy Daniels in 2016 and that Trump “no doubt” had signed off on the hush money payment for Daniels. 

NY V TRUMP: MICHAEL COHEN TESTIFIES HE’S CONSIDERING CONGRESSIONAL RUN

Cohen has testified that he personally made the $130,000 payment to Daniels using a home equity line of credit in an effort to conceal the payment from his wife. Cohen said he did this because Trump told him to “handle it” and prevent a negative story from coming out ahead of the 2016 election.

Cohen testified that he was “reimbursed $420,000” for the $130,000 he paid to Daniels. Cohen said Weisselberg suggested he “gross up” the payments and that Trump knew the details of that reimbursement. 

Last week, the prosecution presented Cohen with 11 checks totaling $420,000. Cohen confirmed that they were all received and deposited. The checks had a description of “retainer,” which Cohen said was false.

Advertisement

But Monday, the prosecution rested its case against the former president.

Trump defense attorneys called two witnesses: paralegal Daniel Sitko and a former legal adviser to Michael Cohen, Robert Costello. 

Sitko testified that Cohen and Costello had 75 phone calls in which Cohen told Costello that Trump knew nothing about the payment to Stormy Daniels. 

This courtroom sketch shows presiding Judge Juan Merchan during former President Trump’s criminal trial in New York City on May 14, 2024. (Reuters/Jane Rosenberg)

Costello took the stand and testified that Cohen told him “numerous times” that Trump knew nothing of the payments, recalling Cohen telling him: “I swear to God, Bob, I don’t have anything on Donald Trump.”

Advertisement

Cohen, earlier in the day, recalled that he told numerous people that Trump knew nothing about the payment.

COHEN’S BOMBSHELL ADMISSION COULD LEAD TO HUNG JURY, IF NOT ACQUITTAL: EXPERT

But during his testimony, Costello clashed with Merchan. Costello audibly and visibly responded with disapproval to Merchan sustaining multiple objections from the prosecution concerning his testimony about Cohen. 

“I’m sorry?” Merchan said to Costello after one reaction before clearing the courtroom.

“I want to discuss proper decorum in my courtroom,” Merchan said after the jury left. “You don’t say strike it, because I’m the only one who can strike it.”

Advertisement

Merchan directed Costello, a former federal prosecutor, not to respond, roll his eyes or react in any way to his rulings.

Before the jury returned to the courtroom, Costello looked at Merchan, prompting the judge to ask, “Are you staring me down?” 

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger was leading the cross-examination of Costello. She said she had approximately 45 minutes left for questioning.

The defense said they won’t call any other witnesses, signaling that Trump won’t take the stand in his own defense.

Advertisement

Closing arguments are currently set for next Tuesday.

Politics

Video: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

Published

on

Video: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

new video loaded: U.S. ‘Accelerating’ Military Assault in Iran, Hegseth Says

On the fifth day of the war in Iran, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said that the U.S. military operation was intensifying and that more warplanes were arriving in the region.

By Christina Kelso

March 4, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

US submarine sinks Iranian warship by torpedo in a first since World War II

Published

on

US submarine sinks Iranian warship by torpedo in a first since World War II

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A U.S. submarine sank a prized Iranian warship by torpedo, the first such sinking of an enemy ship since World War II, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said Wednesday morning.

Hegseth joined Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine at the Pentagon to provide an update to reporters on “Operation Epic Fury” in Iran.

“An American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters,” Hegseth said. “Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo. Quiet death. The first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since World War Two. Like in that war, back when we were still the War Department. We are fighting to win.”

Caine said that an Iranian vessel was “effectively neutralized” in a Navy “fast attack” using a single Mark 48 torpedo. He added that the U.S. Navy achieved “immediate effect, sending the warship to the bottom of the sea.”

Advertisement

WATCH HEGSETH’S ANNOUNCEMENT:

Hegseth said that the U.S. Navy sank the Iranian warship, the Soleimani. The flagship was named for Qasem Soleimani, an Iranian military officer who served in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps who the U.S. killed in a January 2020 drone strike during President Donald Trump’s first term.

“The Iranian Navy rests at the bottom of the Persian Gulf. Combat ineffective, decimated, destroyed, defeated. Pick your adjective,” Hegseth said. “In fact, last night we sunk their prize ship, the Soleimani. Looks like POTUS got him twice. Their navy, not a factor. Pick your adjective. It is no more.”

This map shows U.S. and Israeli strikes against Iranian naval forces as of March 1. (Fox News)

Hegseth also told reporters at the briefing that the U.S. and Israel will soon achieve “complete control” over Iranian airspace after Iran’s missile capabilities were drastically diminished in the four days of fighting.

Advertisement

US ‘WINNING DECISIVELY’ AGAINST IRAN, WILL ACHIEVE ‘COMPLETE CONTROL’ OF AIRSPACE WITHIN DAYS, HEGSETH SAYS

“More bombers and more fighters are arriving just today and now, with complete control of the skies, we will be using 500 pound, one thousand pound and 2,000 pound laser-guided precision gravity bombs, of which we have a nearly unlimited stockpile,” he said.

The war has killed more than 1,000 people in Iran and dozens in Lebanon, while U.S. officials said six American troops were killed in a fatal drone strike in Kuwait.

Thousands of travelers have been left stranded across the Middle East.

This map shows security and travel updates for Americans regarding countries in the Middle East region. (Fox News)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Caine told reporters that the U.S. military is helping thousands of Americans stranded in the Middle East after the U.S. State Department urged citizens to leave more than a dozen countries.

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Related Article

Israel says fighter jet took down Iranian warplane, the first shootdown of its kind
Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Sen. Padilla preps for Trump trying to seize control of elections via emergency order

Published

on

Sen. Padilla preps for Trump trying to seize control of elections via emergency order

Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) is preparing for President Trump to declare a national emergency in order to seize control of this year’s midterm elections from the states, including by bracing his Senate colleagues for a vote in which they would be forced to either co-sign on the power grab or resist it.

In the wake of reporting last week that conservative activists with connections to the White House were circulating such an order, Padilla sent a letter to his Senate colleagues Friday stating that any such order would be “wildly illegal and unconstitutional,” and would no doubt face “extremely strict scrutiny” in the courts.

“Nevertheless, if the President does escalate his unprecedented assault on our democracy by declaring an election-related emergency, I will swiftly introduce a privileged resolution [and] force a vote in the Senate to terminate the fake emergency,” wrote Padilla, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration.

Padilla wrote that such an order — which could possibly “include banning mail-in voting, eliminating major voting registration methods, voter purges, and/or new document barriers for registering to vote and voting” — would clearly go beyond Trump’s authority.

Advertisement

“Put simply, no President has the power under the Constitution or any law to take over elections, and no declaration or order can create one out of thin air,” Padilla wrote.

The same day Padilla sent his letter, Trump was asked whether he was considering declaring a national emergency around the midterms. “Who told you that?” he asked — before saying he was not considering such an order.

The White House referred The Times to that exchange when asked Tuesday for comment on Padilla’s letter.

If Trump did declare such an emergency, a “privileged resolution,” as Padilla proposed, would require the full Senate to vote on the record on whether or not to terminate it — forcing any Senate allies of the president to own the policy politically, along with him.

Experts say there is no evidence that U.S. elections are significantly affected or swung by widespread fraud or foreign interference, despite robust efforts by Trump and his allies for years to find it.

Advertisement

Nonetheless, Trump has been emphatic that such fraud is occurring, particularly in blue states such as California that allow for mail-in ballots and do not have strict voter ID laws. He and others in his administration have asserted, again without evidence, that large numbers of noncitizen residents are casting votes and that others are “harvesting” ballots out of the mail and filling them out in bulk.

Soon after taking office, Trump issued an executive order purporting to require voters to show proof of U.S. citizenship before registering and barring the counting of mail-in ballots received after election day, but it was largely blocked by the courts.

Trump’s loyalist Justice Department sued red and blue states across the country for their full voter rolls, but those efforts also have largely been blocked, including in California. The FBI also raided an elections office in Georgia that has been the focus of Trump’s baseless claims that the 2020 presidential election was stolen from him.

Trump is also pushing for the passage of the SAVE Act, a voter ID bill passed by the House, but it has stalled in the Senate.

In recent weeks, Trump has expressed frustration that his demands around voting security have not translated into changes in blue state policies ahead of the upcoming midterm elections, where his shrinking approval could translate into major gains for Democrats.

Advertisement

Last month, Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, “I have searched the depths of Legal Arguments not yet articulated or vetted on this subject, and will be presenting an irrefutable one in the very near future. There will be Voter I.D. for the Midterm Elections, whether approved by Congress or not!”

Then, last week, the Washington Post reported that a draft executive order being circulated by activists with ties to Trump suggests that unproven claims of Chinese interference in the 2020 election could be used as a pretext to declare an elections emergency granting Trump sweeping authority to unilaterally institute the changes he wants to see in state-run elections.

Election experts said the Constitution is clear that states control and run elections, not with the executive branch.

Democrats have widely denounced any federal takeover of elections by Trump. And some Republicans have expressed similar concerns, including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who chairs the Senate rules committee.

In the Wall Street Journal last year, McConnell warned against Trump or any Republican president asserting sweeping authority to control elections, in part because Democrats would then be empowered to claim similar authority if and when they retake power.

Advertisement

McConnell’s office referred The Times to that Journal opinion piece when asked about the circulating emergency order and Padilla’s resolution.

Padilla’s office said his resolution would be introduced in response to an emergency declaration by Trump, but hoped it wouldn’t be necessary.

“Instead of trying to evade accountability at the ballot box,” Padilla wrote, “the President should focus on the needs of Americans struggling to pay for groceries, health care, housing and other everyday needs and put these illegal and unconstitutional election orders in the trash can where they belong.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending