Legal beagle Ryan Goodman points out that the actual trial transcript shows Hope Hicks’ final testimony is actually worse than was reported. He wrote on twitter:
Trump not only communicates “it would have been bad to have that story come out before the election.” Trump also links it to Cohen hush money: “had Michael not made that payment.”
I think you can see why she burst into tears a minute later. This revelation is damaging to Trump’s defense and she knew it. Hicks admits that Trump was worried about the election and backs up Cohen’s contention that Trump knew what the money was for before he reimbursed him.
What’s the significance of that? Trump’s defense lawyer’s opening statement featured this:
Apparently he didn’t know about this civil case (Daniels was trying to get released from her non-disclosure agreement) in which Trump and Cohen both admitted that Trump had reimbursed Cohen for the hush money.
I guess they might try to blame the lawyer in that case but he’s not the kind of guy you want to mess with.*
Andrew Weissman writes on twitter:
Why Hicks is such a devastating witness against Trump:
1. Hicks makes clear Trump knew of the Cohen payoff scheme to Daniels.
2. Even if you believe his statement to her that he only learned after the fact.
3. Her testimony sinks Trump’s defense since he is on record in a civil case admitting that he reimbursed Cohen the $130,000.
4. Hicks establishes that Trump knew that money was for Daniel’s silence- not for the claimed legal fees for ongoing legal work by Cohen.Hicks suggests that #2 was a lie by Trump to her (because she testified that Cohen was not a charitable kind of guy who would keep his good deed to himself), but it does not matter- even if the jury believes Trump only knew later, he knew PRIOR to making all the reimbursement payments to Cohen.
And Hicks’ crying on the stand makes it that much clearer that she does not want to be implicating her former boss– the DA is making the case, as the J6C did, through Trump loyalists.
He elaborated in this essay on MSNBC:
Here was Hicks, taking her oath with solemnity, filling an apparent hole in the DA’s case: that Trump knew about this payoff (as David Pecker made clear, Trump knew about the payoff to Karen McDougal). That is key, because Trump thereafter reimbursed Cohen for the hush money payments, personally signing the reimbursement checks. Hicks’ testimony makes plain Trump did so knowing that they were not payments for legal fees. And for that reason, the jury need not decide whether Trump knew of the scheme at the time (as Hicks strongly intimated) or only learned of it later (as he claimed to Hicks), since in either scenario, Trump knew of the scheme prior to making the reimbursements.
Not that corroboration of Hicks’ testimony is needed, but it exists in a particularly damning form: Trump’s own admission in a civil case in California brought by Stormy Daniels. In that lawsuit, Trump admitted he reimbursed Michael Cohen for the $130,000 payment to Daniels. Trump’s admission — made with his co-defendant, Cohen — is here, and the California court recognized these statements as admissions. (Trump of course has pleaded not guilty and denied the affairs with McDougal and Daniels.
This is the crux of the case. Did Trump falsify his business records to hide the fact that he had interfered with the election in 2016? Yes, yes he did.
*Charles Harder was the guy who once came after this blog for posting something that Lawrence O’Donnell said on MSNBC. I took it down because I don’t have the kind of money it takes to fight something like that. O’Donnell retracted what he said as well. Harder’s also the lawyer who destroyed Gawker media in the Hulk Hogan matter. I’ve often wondere why we haven’t seen him in Trump’s legal coterie since that period.