Turley upends narrative claiming Trump jury requests are 'great news' for prosecutors: 'Pretty chilling'



Legal expert Jonathan Turley believes several jury requests indicate not-so-good news for prosecutors targeting Donald Trump.

Hours after they began deliberations, the 12-person jury deciding Trump's fate in the hush-money case submitted two notes to Judge Juan Merchan.

'That is pretty chilling for people that believe strongly in the criminal justice system and the very high standard of proof that’s required.'

In the first note, jurors made four requests related to the testimony of David Pecker and Michael Cohen, two key witnesses at the trial. In the second note, the jury requested to rehear Merchan's complicated instructions, which took more than an hour to read on Wednesday morning.

From Turley’s perspective, the note requesting the jury instructions does not bode well for the prosecution.

“I’m surprised that some other networks have said, ‘Look, this is really great news that they sent this out.’ I gotta tell you, as a criminal defense attorney, I would not view this as clearly good news for the prosecution,” he said on Fox News.

“The only reason why a jury would send out a request to hear the instructions again is if there’s a disagreement about what the instructions are,” he explained. “That indicates that there may be a conflict with jurors in that room about what their standard is, how they are supposed to look at the evidence.”

The request for transcripts of Cohen’s testimony, Turley added, could indicate the jury is scrutinizing Cohen’s testimony. This is important because Merchan told the jurors they could disregard his testimony if they believe he lied about any material fact.

“I don’t consider this such a clearly positive thing for the prosecution. As a defense attorney, I would welcome this type of request. They were only in there for a few hours, and they asked to hear the instructions again, and they asked to hear core testimony,” Turley explained.

Still, there remains a problem for Trump, Turley said: Merchan’s controversial instructions.

“They are very one-sided, and they have converted this into something of a canned hunt. What Judge Merchan has said is that you could divide four, four, four. You could have three groups of jurors who view the facts materially differently. They could disagree as to what crime was behind this effort to falsify business records, and Merchan will still treat that as a unanimous verdict,” he explained. “That is pretty chilling for people that believe strongly in the criminal justice system and the very high standard of proof that’s required.”

Court resumed on Thursday just after 9:30 a.m.

After the jury was re-empaneled, Merchan re-read his instructions, prompting some jurors — including one of the panel's two attorneys — to write diligent notes. Afterward, the court began re-reading the requested witness testimony.

The jury is expected to restart deliberations after all requested testimony is re-read.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Hope Hicks says Cohen would 'insert himself' into Trump's campaign, go 'rogue': 'He wasn't supposed to be on the campaign'



The New York criminal case against former President Donald Trump continued for the eleventh day on Friday, with one of the prosecution's so-called key witnesses, Hope Hicks, taking the stand. Hicks was Trump's former White House communications director and campaign aide.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo questioned Hicks. During her testimony, Hicks stated that she "was concerned" when she received an email request for comment from the Washington Post regarding a piece on the "Access Hollywood" tape.

"I was concerned about the contents of the email. I was concerned about the lack of time to respond. I was concerned we had a transcript without a tape. There was a lot at play," she said.

Hicks told the jury that she had "a good sense this was going to be a massive story," adding that it was "a damaging development" to the presidential campaign.

"lt was all Trump all the time for the next 36 hours," Hicks said, referring to the media coverage that followed the release of the tape.

Hicks claimed that former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker told her during a phone call that the deal the tabloid made with former Playboy model Karen McDougal — who alleged she had an affair with Trump — was "for magazine covers and fitness columns and that it was all very legitimate."

She said that Trump "wanted to hear that from David as well."

"I believe I have a recollection of us calling and David repeating that to Mr. Trump," Hicks added.

Hicks claimed that Michael Cohen, Trump's former attorney, told her the story about the $130,000 so-called hush money payment to porn actress Stormy Daniels was not true and that no payment had ever been made. She noted that it "would be out of character" for Cohen to make the payment himself.

Before Trump's attorney, Emil Bove, started his cross-examination, Hicks began tearing up on the stand and had to take a short break.

When she returned, she told jurors that Cohen had tried to "insert himself" into Trump's 2016 presidential campaign and go "rogue" by taking actions not approved by the campaign team. She noted that his unauthorized activities frustrated the Trump team.

"He would try to insert himself at certain moments, but he wasn't supposed to be on the campaign in any official capacity," she said of Cohen. "There were things he did in a voluntary capacity because of his interest."

"He liked to call himself a fixer, or Mr. Fix It, and it was only because he first broke it that he was able to then fix it," she told jurors.

Anything else?

On Friday morning, the prosecution submitted recordings from Cohen's phone as evidence in the trial.

Bove noted that between 2016 and 2023, "all sorts of things have happened" with Cohen's phone, which "present questions about the reliability of the evidence."

Prosecutor Chris Conroy asked witness Douglas Daus, a forensics and technology expert, whether he saw "any evidence of tampering or manipulation on any of the data that you pulled related to the recording that's in evidence." Daus replied that he had not.

During Bove's recross-examination, he asked Daus whether he noticed "gaps in the handling of this data that created risk for such tampering," to which Daus replied, "Yes."

House Republicans, led by House Judiciary Chairman Representative Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), recently launched an investigation into Colangelo, a former top Department of Justice official, Blaze News previously reported. In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, Jordan argued that New York County District Attorney Alvin Bragg's decision to recruit Colangelo as a lead prosecutor in the criminal case against Trump gave the "perception" that the DOJ is assisting in the "politicized prosecution" of the former president.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Prosecutors claim Trump violated gag order again: 'This is a political persecution,' defense says



On Thursday morning, acting Justice Juan Merchan held another hearing regarding four additional alleged gag order violations made by Donald Trump. Earlier this week, the judge held Trump in contempt for prior alleged breaches of the order.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's (D) prosecutors accused Trump of "persistent and escalating rhetoric."

"He's already been found to have violated the court's order nine times and he's done it again here," prosecutor Chris Conroy stated.

The first alleged gag order violation presented by the prosecution during the Thursday hearing included comments Trump made during a news interview last week when he noted that the jury pool consisted of mostly Democrats.

"That jury was picked so fast. 95% Democrats," Trump said.

Conroy argued that the former president "used his platform here to criticize the seated jury in this case."

During a recent campaign stop, Trump called witness and former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker "nice."

"The defendant knows what he's doing," Conroy contended. He added that Trump "talks about the testifying witness, says nice things, does it in front of the cameras," which he claimed were "deliberate shots across the bow" to witnesses.

Conroy also claimed that Trump violated the judge's order during an April 23 television interview. Trump called his former attorney Michael Cohen a "convicted liar." Conroy argued that Trump was attempting to discredit the witness' testimony.

The final alleged violation included statements Trump made to reporters outside of the New York trial on April 22.

He said, "When are they going to look at all the lies that Cohen did in the last trial. He got caught lying in the last trial."

Conroy claimed that Trump is "doing everything he can to make this case" about politics, calling his comments "corrosive to this proceeding and the fair administration of justice."

The prosecution is requesting Merchan order Trump to pay $1,000 per violation. Conroy noted that they "are not yet seeking jail."

Trump's attorney, Todd Blanche, argued that Cohen has repeatedly used his podcast to attack Trump.

"Cohen has been inviting and almost daring President Trump to respond to almost everything he's saying," he said. "Personal attacks on his character. Mocking him for being on trial. And also his candidacy for president of the United States."

Blanche stated that Cohen "has started going on TikTok nightly and literally making money" attacking his client.

He claimed that Trump's response to a question about Pecker's testimony was "very factual" and "neutral," noting that the former president "sidestepped" the inquiry to avoid violating the gag order.

"There's no threatening, menacing statements," Blanche added.

"He can't just say 'no comment' repeatedly. He's running for president," the attorney remarked.

Merchan told Blanche that Trump's statements are "about what the other witnesses see."

"It affects those witnesses as well," he said.

Blanche told Merchan, "We very much believe this is a political persecution."

The judge has not yet made a ruling on the new alleged violations.

Earlier this week, the judge held Trump in contempt for allegedly violating the gag order on nine occasions, Blaze News previously reported. The former president was ordered to pay $1,000 per violation and remove several social media posts and statements from his campaign website.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump's attorneys cross-examine David Pecker, poke holes in alleged 'catch-and-kill' scheme



The prosecution wrapped up its direct examination of its first witness, former publisher at National Enquirer David Pecker, on Thursday, leaving the defense team some time to begin its cross-examination the same day.

On Friday, Emil Bove, an attorney for Donald Trump, continued questioning Pecker, who claimed during his testimony that he purchased the rights to multiple unfavorable stories about Trump to ensure they never went to publication. Pecker's actions were referred to as a "catch-and-kill" scheme.

Pecker claimed that he had an arrangement with Trump's former attorney Michael Cohen to ensure the stories never saw the light of day. Also, during his testimony, he said he expected to be reimbursed directly by Trump or the Trump Organization for the scheme.

Pecker gave former Playboy playmate Karen McDougal $150,000 for her story. She claimed that she had had an extramarital affair with Trump. Pecker admitted that Trump never reimbursed him for his purchase of the story. Bove attempted to poke holes in Pecker's testimony, noting that the story would have been beneficial for the tabloid to run, and McDougal was trying to restart her career at the time she made the allegations.

Additionally, Pecker said he paid $30,000 for the exclusive rights to another story that turned out to be untrue, though he admitted he would have run the article if it had been accurate. He also did not receive any money from Trump for that story.

Despite previously being interested in McDougal's story, Pecker claimed that he "didn't want anything to do" with porn actress Stormy Daniels' story. She also claimed she had an affair with Trump.

"I said to Michael Cohen that after paying for the doorman story and the Karen McDougal story, I wasn't going to pay anything further and I wasn't a bank," Pecker testified.

During his testimony earlier this week, Pecker claimed that Trump had thanked him for not running the unfavorable stories. However, Bove pointed out that in a 2018 interview with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Pecker did not state that Trump had expressed any gratitude toward him or the tabloid for such actions.

"Are you suggesting the FBI made a mistake here?" Bove asked Pecker.

Pecker acknowledged that the bureau's notes were inconsistent with his testimony.

"I know what the truth is, I can't state why this is written this way. I know what was said to me," he responded.

Bove questioned whether Pecker still has equity in the National Enquirer's parent company, AMI. Pecker replied that he does.

"Part of AMI's business model was to purchase stories, correct?" Bove questioned.

Pecker confirmed that the company did regularly buy the rights to news stories and that the practice was not unique to Trump. The former publisher noted that there were other celebrities who were promoted by the tabloid and provided a warning when negative press was about to be published. Pecker previously said that he had a similar arrangement with Arnold Schwarzenegger.

He admitted that publishing negative stories about Trump dating back to the 1990s was "not good for business." Pecker further acknowledged that he had never heard the term "catch and kill" prior to the case. Additionally, many of the negative articles about Trump's presidential opponents published by the National Enquirer were "not exclusive" to the tabloid, indicating that other media outlets had first reported the stories.

Rhona Graff, Trump's former executive assistant and former vice president of the Trump Organization, was briefly called to the stand as the prosecution's second witness.

Graff testified that she saw Stormy Daniels in the reception area at Trump Tower before Trump declared his presidential run.

During the defense's cross-examination, Graff told Trump's attorney, Susan Necheles, that Trump was a "fair" and "respectful" boss over her 34 years with the company.

"Sometimes he would peek his head in and say, 'Go home to your family,' which I thought was very thoughtful of him," Graff stated.

She noted that she "vaguely recall[ed]" Trump saying that Daniels was at Trump Tower because she was considering being a contestant on "Celebrity Apprentice."

The prosecution called its third witness to the stand, Gary Farro, a finance executive who worked at First Republic Bank for 15 years. Farro was employed at the bank when Cohen took out a home equity loan to cover the $130,000 payment to Daniels.

"Michael Cohen was assigned to me after a colleague left in 2015," Farro stated, adding that he was "very excited to be working for him."

Farro received an email on October 11, 2016, requesting that he contact Cohen. The email was shown to the jury, along with correspondence written a couple of days later by Farro, which read, "Need an account opened for Mike Cohen immediately. He wants no address on the checks. Calling you now to discuss."

Farro said that Cohen wanted to open a new LLC, Resolution Consultants, claiming it was for "capital real estate." He noted that it was not unusual for an LLC not to put an address on its checks.

"A deposit was never made in the account, so the account never went live," Farro explained. He testified that he received an email roughly two weeks later that said Cohen no longer wanted to open Resolution Consultants but wanted to open a different LLC, Essential Consultants — the account Cohen allegedly used to pay Daniels.

The court will reconvene on Tuesday. Farro will return to the stand to conclude his direct examination and cross-examination.

Anything else?

At the start of Friday's trial, acting Justice Juan Merchan stated that the court would hold a hearing on Thursday regarding allegations that Trump had violated the judge's gag order.

Merchan previously placed the order on Trump, preventing the former president from making any public statements about those involved in the trial or their family members.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and the prosecution accused Trump of violating that order approximately a dozen times, citing posts he wrote on social media as comments he made to the press outside the trial. Prosecutors asked the judge to hold Trump in contempt and order him to pay a $1,000 fine for each alleged violation. Bragg also requested that Merchan remind Trump that he could face jail time for repeatedly violating the order.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Judge, Trump’s attorney get into heated exchange over gag order — prosecution’s first witness returns to stand



During the second day of trial this week, Donald Trump’s attorney and the judge had a somewhat heated exchange over the gag order placed against the former president, according to reports.

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecutors have accused Trump of violating acting Justice Juan Merchan’s gag order, which prohibits him from making public statements about anyone involved in the trial and their family members.

On Tuesday, the trial began with a hearing on the alleged violations. Prosecutor Chris Conroy pushed Merchan to hold Trump in contempt and order him to pay a $1,000 fine for 10 social media posts that he claimed “pose a very real threat” to the court’s proceedings.

In one of the Truth Social posts, Trump mentions “two sleazebags,” which the prosecution argued is a reference to Trump’s former attorney, Michael Cohen, and porn actress Stormy Daniels.

Conroy claimed that Trump’s comments attacked the witnesses’ “credibility.”

“Going after Michael Cohen is a recurring theme in these posts,” Conroy stated.

The defense maintained that Trump did not violate the gag order and that any comments made were in response to attacks.

Conroy claimed that Trump’s legal team attempted to “muddy the waters.”

“There is no provision in this order for responding to attacks,” he added.

In addition to holding Trump in contempt and imposing fines, prosecutors are asking the judge to order him to remove the 10 posts.

Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, reasoned that the social media comments “were in direct response” to statements made by Daniels and Cohen. Blanche and Merchan got into a tense back and forth over whether the posts were political or about the trial.

“President Trump is allowed to respond to political attacks,” Blanche told Merchan.

The judge asked Blanche to pinpoint specific comments made by Cohen and Daniels that Trump was replying to in his social media posts. Blanche responded by stating he was referring to general and repeated remarks, claiming the two witnesses had recently “ramped up their political attacks and their attacks on him as a candidate as well.”

“What I do see is, I keep asking you over and over again for a specific answer, and I’m not getting an answer,” Merchan told Blanche. “I’ve asked you eight or nine times to show me the exact post he was responding to. You’ve been unable to do that even once.”

At one point, Merchan told Blanche he was “losing all credibility with the court.”

Blanche stated that Trump is “being very careful to comply” with the judge’s gag order.

After a break, the trial continued by welcoming the prosecution’s first witness, David Pecker, back to the stand. Pecker, the former publisher at National Enquirer, claimed he was part of a “catch and kill” scheme with Cohen to purchase the rights to unfavorable stories about Trump and never publish them.

“If there was any rumors in the marketplace about Mr. Trump or his family or any negative stories that were coming out or things that I heard overall that I would go through, I would call Michael Cohen directly,” Pecker testified.

Pecker claimed he was asked by Trump and Cohen what the National Enquirer could do to help the 2016 presidential campaign.

“What I would do is I would run or publish positive stories about Mr. Trump, and I would publish negative stories about his opponents, and I said that I would also … be eyes and ears. I said I would be your eyes and ears,” he stated.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked Pecker whether purchasing the rights to stories that the media outlet never ended up publishing was helpful to the National Enquirer; he replied, “No.”

He claimed there was no written agreement with Trump about the alleged arrangement because “it was just an agreement among friends.”

One of the stories Pecker purchased was from a former Trump Tower doorman, who claimed Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock. Pecker gave the man $30,000 for the exclusive rights to the story despite Cohen telling him the rumor was “absolutely not true,” according to Pecker’s testimony.

If the story turned out to be accurate, Pecker said he had plans to publish it after the election, claiming it would have “been very embarrassing to the campaign.”

Pecker said he discovered that the story “was absolutely 1,000% untrue.”

During an interview on Real America’s Voice on Monday evening, Trump stated, “That jury was picked so fast, 95% Democrats, the area’s all, mostly all Democrats. You think of it as a, just a purely Democrat area. It’s a very unfair situation.”

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump trial continues with opening statements, first witness: 'The 34 counts ... are really just pieces of paper,' defense says



The trial against former President Donald Trump continued on Monday morning, with opening statements from the prosecution and the defense, as well as testimony from the first witness.

Assistant District Attorney Matthew Colangelo kicked off the opening statement for the prosecution, stating, "This case is about a criminal conspiracy and a cover-up."

He accused Trump of "orchestrat[ing] a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election."

"Then he covered up that criminal conspiracy by lying in his New York business records over and over and over again," Colangelo continued.

Trump's former attorney, Michael Cohen, allegedly provided so-called "hush money" payments on behalf of Trump to porn actress Stormy Daniels, who claimed the two had an affair.

Colangelo stated that the payments were Trump's attempt "to influence the presidential election."

He further alleged that David Pecker, the former publisher at National Enquirer, also attempted to help Trump's campaign by purchasing the rights to several unfavorable stories about Trump and never publishing them, which has been dubbed a "catch and kill" scheme.

"It's a way of buying damaging information not to publish it, but to hide it, make it go away, and in this case, help the candidate," Colangelo explained.

One of those stories alleged that Trump made a $30,000 payment to a former Trump Tower doorman, who claimed the former president had fathered a child out of wedlock. The story turned out to be false.

"At the end of the case," Colangelo told jurors, wrapping up his opening statements, "we are confident you will have no reasonable doubt that Donald Trump is guilty of falsifying business records with the intent to conceal an illegal conspiracy to undermine the integrity of a presidential election."

Trump's legal team insisted that he "did not commit any crimes."

Tood Blanche, Trump's attorney, made opening statements for the defense, expressing confidence that they would find "plenty of reasonable doubt."

Blanche noted that the prosecution painted what appeared "to be a very clean, nice story" but claimed "it is not simple, as the people just described."

"The 34 counts, ladies and gentlemen, are really just pieces of paper," he continued. "None of this was a crime."

Blanche claimed that Trump's payments to Cohen "were not a payback" but a payment for his legal services. He noted that Cohen sent a $130,000 payment to Daniels, but Trump gave Cohen a $420,000 payment.

"Ask yourself: Would a frugal business man who pinches pennies repay a $130,000 debt to the tune of $420,000?" he told jurors.

Blanche addressed the prosecution's accusations that Trump tried to "corrupt" the presidential election.

"I have a spoiler alert: There's nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It's called democracy," he remarked. "Entering into a nondisclosure agreement is perfectly legal."

Blanche noted that companies enter into similar agreements "with some regularity." He accused Daniels of making up the affair allegations "to extort President Trump."

Prosecutors objected to Blanche's comments, prompting Acting Justice Juan Merchan to call the lawyers to the bench. Merchan sustained the prosecution's objection.

Blanche changed his comments to note that there is "nothing illegal about entering into a nondisclosure agreement period."

He accused Cohen of being "obsessed" with Trump, claiming he could not be trusted. Blanche accused Cohen of perjuring himself at Trump's civil fraud trial last year. Prosecutors again objected to the defense attorney's comments. Merchan sustained the objection.

"His entire financial livelihood depends on President Trump's destruction," Blanche continued, referring to Cohen's media appearances and books.

He argued similarly against Daniels, noting that she "also wrote a book" and "was paid for a documentary."

Blanche also addressed the prosecution's first witness, Pecker.

"It's not a scheme, unless a scheme means something that doesn't matter, that's not illegal," he said about the alleged "catch and kill" agreement.

"Use your common sense. We're New Yorkers. It's why we're here," Blanche concluded. "If you do that, there will be a very swift 'not guilty' verdict."

Following the end of the attorneys' opening statements, the court took a brief recess before calling Pecker to testify. During his short time on the stand, he described his former job and relationship with National Enquirer's former editor in chief Dylan Howard. Pecker claimed that he had a private email for correspondence he did not want his assistant to read.

The trial ended short on Monday because one of the jurors had a dental appointment. The court will continue on Tuesday at 9:30 a.m. local time.

Jurors are allowed to take notes during the trial. More than half of the jurors requested writing materials.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!