OPINION | This article contains the author's opinion.
Even before the jury selection process commenced, former President Donald Trump encountered two setbacks in his trial concerning hush money payments. The initial criminal trial involving Trump kicked off in Manhattan, with both prosecutors and Trump’s legal team working to select a jury of 12 individuals to oversee the proceedings.
Trump is accused of 34 counts of falsifying business records related to an alleged hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.
This Manhattan case is just one of four criminal indictments facing Trump, and it might be the sole one to proceed to trial before Election Day.
Dismissed
Prior to the commencement of jury selection, Judge Juan Merchan dismissed two attempts made by Trump’s legal team.
The judge denied the former president’s motion for recusal and approved prosecutors’ requests to present jurors with headlines and articles from the National Enquirer.
“There is no basis for recusal. The motion is denied,” Merchan said of Trump’s efforts to have the judge removed from the case.
Trump has repeatedly claimed that the judge overseeing his case is prejudiced against him and has demanded that Judge Merchan step down from the proceedings.
Criticized
Additionally, the former president has criticized Merchan’s daughter for her involvement in political consulting, including her work at a Democratic firm affiliated with Joe Biden’s 2020 campaign.
In response to the accusations concerning his daughter, Merchan directly addressed the situation by referencing a podcast interview she participated in back in 2019.
In the interview, she stated that her father disapproved of politicians using Twitter and clarified that a Twitter account linked to her by Trump was not actually hers.
Twitter usage
The judge emphasized that his disapproval of Twitter usage did not indicate any bias towards either political party and clarified that the Twitter account in question did not belong to his daughter.
Following that, the judge considered a request from the prosecutors, who sought permission to present evidence utilizing National Enquirer articles published during the 2016 election period.
These articles targeted Trump’s political opponents, such as Senator Ted Cruz, and featured favorable headlines about Trump that were purportedly authorized by Trump prior to publication.
Catch and kill scheme
It is anticipated that the prosecution will utilize these headlines to support their argument that this was a component of the “catch and kill scheme” relating to Karen McDougal’s reported affair with Trump.
McDougal, a former Playboy model, reportedly received a hush money payment in 2016 through indirect channels after asserting that she had engaged in a relationship with Trump.
The National Enquirer allegedly facilitated the payment using funds from Trump’s ex-lawyer, Michael Cohen, enabling the tabloid to acquire the rights to her story and prevent her from sharing it with other media outlets.
Presented in court
Additionally, Merchan ruled that testimony regarding McDougal could be presented in court. However, he specified that witnesses would not be permitted to discuss whether the alleged affair occurred during Melania Trump’s pregnancy or after the birth of her child.
“At this moment, the prejudicial value of that exceeds the probative value,” the judge ruled. Furthermore, he banned the well-known Access Hollywood tape from being shown in the trial due to its prejudicial nature.