Trump is actually on trial for election interference – not hush money payouts: expert
Donald Trump's first criminal trial has been commonly described as the "hush money case," but a legal expert said that vastly understates the seriousness of his alleged crimes.
Jury selection began Monday in the Manhattan trial involving Trump's alleged falsifications of business records to cover up hush money payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels, but legal expert Norm Eisen wrote a column for CNN arguing that the case should be understood as election interference – as the presiding judge seems to agree.
“The allegations are in substance," New York judge Juan Merchan told prospective jurors, "that Donald Trump falsified business records to conceal an agreement with others to unlawfully influence the 2016 presidential election."
Merchan understands that the core issue in the trial is not the payments made in October 2016 to an adult film star to conceal their alleged sexual relationship, but why Trump made them.
RELATED: 'Good morning Mr. Trump': Key takeaways from day one of the historic trial
"Paying hush money by itself is not a crime," Eisen wrote. "The crime alleged in this case is felony document falsification, as the judge detailed. That requires intent to conceal, aid or commit another crime. Here, the prosecution alleges that the intent was to violate federal campaign finance laws and also the state statute prohibiting the 'unlawful influence' of an election — i.e., election interference."
Prosecutors structured their evidence during the first part of the day's proceedings, which were set aside to resolve remaining legal disputes, to put Trump's alleged crimes in chronological order, which Eisen said showed how the scheme unfolded through 2015 and 2016.
"It was a virtuoso summary of what we can expect at trial," Eisen wrote.
"Of course, it’s one thing, as the judge also explained, for the DA to make those allegations," he added. "It’s another thing to prove them, and District Attorney Alvin Bragg must now do that. Trump, as the judge reminded the prospective jurors, is innocent until proven guilty and the case against him must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump says he is innocent and will by all indications vigorously contest the proceedings."
Referring to the trial simply as the hush money case diminished the seriousness of Trump's alleged crimes and helps explain why he won a surprise election win over Hillary Clinton, Eisen said.
"Trump’s alleged 2020 attempt to overthrow our government distorts perceptions of how serious the charges related to the 2016 election are," Eisen wrote. "We can’t allow the extreme nature of Trump’s later behavior to change the benchmark for what is a serious alleged offense. The Manhattan case meets that standard – and then some."