Trump’s hush money trial is nearing an end after a day of heated Cohen cross

NEW YORK — By this time next week, Donald Trump could be a convicted felon — or a newly acquitted man declaring complete and total exoneration.

His Manhattan trial on charges for concealing a 2016 hush money scheme is suddenly hurtling toward a conclusion, with Justice Juan Merchan encouraging attorneys to prepare for closing arguments as soon as Tuesday. He would then instruct jurors on legal matters before sending them to deliberate.

For now, Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen — the most important and likely final witness for the prosecution — remains on the stand after three full days of testimony. After a scheduled day off on Friday, Cohen will return on Monday morning, when Trump’s defense team expects to complete a cross-examination that has been punishing, if uneven.

Once Cohen is done testifying, prosecutors appear poised to rest their case. And on Thursday afternoon, Trump’s lead lawyer Todd Blanche predicted the defense case, if they present one at all, would likely be quick. It could wrap by the end of Monday.

There’s one crucial variable, though: Will Trump himself take the stand? Blanche told the judge he would discuss it with Trump over the weekend before a final decision.

If Trump opts to testify, it would likely prolong the trial by several more days. Most legal experts, however, doubt he will take the stand because it would open him to a cross-examination that could prove legally ruinous and politically damaging.

It all means that 14 months after a New York grand jury indicted him for falsifying business records to conceal an affair with a porn star, Trump’s odyssey through the Manhattan criminal courts appears to be nearing a close. The outcome will be an inflection point both in American history — Trump is the first former president to face criminal charges — and in Trump’s bid to return to the White House.

A conviction, of course, would raise questions about when and whether Trump might be sentenced to prison, even while he barrels toward Election Day as the certain GOP nominee for president. Many experts see prison time for the low-level, non-violent felonies as unlikely, though not out of the realm of possibility.

An acquittal, on the other hand, would buttress Trump’s effort to portray the criminal cases against him as deeply flawed and politically motivated. And it would be a rebuke of District Attorney Alvin Bragg for his decision to bring a case that many legal scholars have questioned.

The jury has other options that would result in a muddle — including convicting Trump of the misdemeanor, rather than the felony, version of the crimes, or returning a mixed verdict that convicted Trump on some of the 34 counts while acquitting him of others. And of course, the jury could hang, failing to agree on any of the charges. That would result in a mistrial, though Trump would surely claim it as an effective win.

Which outcome the jury arrives at may hinge substantially on what played out in court across three trial days this week: the testimony of Cohen, the prosecution’s brash and mercurial star witness.

Though Cohen has attempted — largely successfully — to remain subdued and measured in his tone, Blanche spent hours portraying him to jurors as compulsively dishonest, self-serving and willing to lie to achieve a desired result.

And while Blanche’s cross-examination didn’t deliver a knockout punch, coming off disjointed and at times confusing to follow, it wounded Cohen with a series of small cuts that impaired his credibility and raised questions about his motivations.

On Thursday, it reached a crescendo soon before the trial’s lunch break, when Blanche grilled Cohen about apparent inconsistencies with his memory of a key phone call.

Two days earlier, under direct examination from the prosecution, Cohen had testified that he spoke on the phone with Trump on Oct. 24, 2016, and informed him that the hush money deal with porn star Stormy Daniels was finalized. Cohen said he delivered the news by calling Trump’s bodyguard, Keith Schiller, who handed the phone to Trump.

Blanche showed jurors evidence that, in the days prior to that call, Cohen had received numerous threatening phone calls from a purported 14-year-old “dope.” The defense attorney suggested Cohen called Schiller that day to speak about the threats — not to confirm the hush money payment with Trump. The substance and timing of the call is significant because it may show how much Trump knew about the hush money scheme in the final weeks of the 2016 presidential campaign.

Blanche’s evidence included a text from Cohen to Schiller that day to inform him about the threatening calls. After the text, Schiller left Cohen a voicemail, and the former fixer called him back soon after, according to the evidence.

Blanche, raising his voice from a courtroom lectern, questioned Cohen about whether his previous testimony at the trial about the call was accurate.

“That was a lie,” Blanche insisted multiple times, his voice growing louder and impassioned. “You can admit it.”

“No, sir, I can’t,” Cohen said, repeating that in addition to the conversation with Schiller about the calls, “I believe that I also spoke to Mr. Trump and told him everything regarding Stormy Daniels was being worked on and it’s going to be resolved.”

“We are not asking for your belief,” Blanche said angrily. “This jury doesn’t want to hear what you think happened.”

Blanche also cleverly undermined Cohen’s carefully maintained placid demeanor, puncturing it for the jury by presenting them with clips from Cohen’s podcast, “Mea Culpa.” While a demure, polite Cohen sat before them on the witness stand, jurors heard a snarling, foul-mouthed Cohen’s voice filling the courtroom.

And, as might be expected for a witness who has pleaded guilty to multiple felonies, Cohen was subject to Blanche repeatedly drilling down on Cohen’s criminal record and his credibility.

Cohen testified earlier that while he believed the underlying facts of criminal tax charges brought against him weren’t wrong, he maintained that he had been wrongfully prosecuted.

On Thursday, however, Blanche presented Cohen with evidence from his public statements and his books showing that he called the tax charges “100% inaccurate” and that he recently said on TikTok that his case in the Southern District of New York was “the most corrupt prosecution in the last 100 years.” Blanche suggested the evidence demonstrated that Cohen’s testimony was inconsistent not only with his public comments on the matter but also with his federal guilty pleas in court.

And Blanche asked Cohen a series of questions about testimony he gave to Congress in 2019 that tied back to his guilty plea in federal court the year before. Blanche asked if Cohen omitted the fact that he lied in the plea hearing, despite telling Congress that he “accepted responsibility.“

“Do you agree with me that lying under oath is not accepting responsibility?” Blanche asked.

Rather than responding with a “yes” or “no,” Cohen simply said he accepted responsibility for the crime.