A single, short text message discussed during former President Donald Trump's hush money trial in Manhattan carries an "ominous" sign for the former president, legal expert Norm Eisen explained in a writeup for CNN on Thursday.
The text came about during the testimony of Keith Davidson, an attorney who represented adult film star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal. Both allege they were sexually involved with Trump, and received payments to buy their silence. The Daniels payments, and the alleged illegal methods Trump took to conceal them, form the basis of the prosecution.
"Although Davidson is just a supporting actor in this drama, his role innegotiating the alleged payment to Daniels makes him an important witness to lay down the basic facts of the alleged 'catch and kill' plot — and to corroborate the details that former American Media, Inc. CEO and National Enquirer publisher David Pecker established and Cohen will ultimately testify about," wrote Eisen. "Perhaps the most dramatic moment of Davidson’s morning testimony came when he was asked about an election night 2016 text message exchange with Dylan Howard —aformer editor of the National Enquirer who helped broker the negotiations for the story. The prosecution asked Davidson to explain the meaning of a text he had sent to Howard that evening. As the election was about to be called for Trump, Davidson sent a text to Howard asking, 'What have we done?'"
ALSO READ: Revealed: What government officials privately shared about Trump not disclosing finances
This matters, Eisen wrote, because the whole foundation of the trial is not just about hush payments, or business fraud — it's about the allegation Trump did all of this as a means of defrauding voters, to prevent them from having certain information about him when they went to the polls.
"Without the intent to cover up another offense, falsifying documents is just a misdemeanor," wrote Eisen. "The reason Trump has been charged with felony document falsification here is because it was allegedly done with intent to cover up a payment in excess of campaign contribution limits that was made in order to impact an election."
Prosecutors don't need to prove that this scheme swung the election to prove Trump guilty, Eisen wrote — but this nevertheless highlights the fact that unlike his schemes to overturn the 2020 presidential election, being charged in separate cases, Trump's 2016 scheme may have been successful. "I was watching the jury closely when Davidson spoke, and they were riveted," he wrote. "The prosecution is constantly finding ways to tell jurors that they are giving weeks of their life to weigh a matter that is not trivial, but critical for the honesty of our elections and our democracy. We will see if they agree when they ultimately deliver their verdict."
Recommended Links:
- 'We are here': NC business owner finds ominous message from KKK spray-painted on property
- Georgia election officials alert FBI after ominous emails sent by pro-Trump activist
- 'Very ominous' statement from Mark Meadows' lawyer should unnerve Trump: CNN's Evan Perez
- Judge Cannon just gave Jack Smith an 'ominous sign': CNN's Paula Reid
- Carroll trial could predict Trump's 'incarceration' in Stormy Daniels trial: legal analyst
