April 5, 2023 The latest on Trump's historic indictment

Tuesday’s arraignment of former President Donald Trump was a whirlwind of historic firsts.

Now the wait begins for the long slog of the judicial system to play out, with the next scheduled actions in court months away.

Away from the courthouse, however, Trump quickly went back to attacking Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and New York Judge Juan Merchan, along with their families – raising questions about whether his rhetoric could land him in hot water legally.

Here’s what’s next in Trump’s New York criminal case: During Tuesday’s arraignment, prosecutors said they were negotiating the logistics of a “protective order” with Trump’s defense team, which would limit how Trump and his attorneys can use the documents they will be given from the grand jury proceedings during the discovery process.

Prosecutors specifically said they want to prohibit Trump from posting any discovery materials to social media or sharing them with third parties, such as journalists. They also said they plan to allow Trump to review certain sensitive materials only with his lawyers.

Trump’s attorneys will have to agree to the specifics of the agreement, but the exchanges showed the concern in the district attorney’s office about what Trump might say or post about the evidence they hand over.

“The entirety of the prosecution’s case file will soon have to be turned over to the defense,” Agnifilo said. “Prosecutors don’t want it made public because they’re focused on the proceedings and know Trump will try this in the court of public opinion way before any trial in a court. That’s where the integrity of the proceedings can get really dicey — and that’s what they’re trying to accomplish with a protective order.”

When could a trial actually start? If the case goes to trial, it’s not going to be until next year — when Trump could be in the thick of the 2024 Republican presidential primary.

Merchan set an August 8 deadline for Trump’s lawyers to file motions in the case — such as an attempt to get the charges dismissed or reduced to misdemeanors. Prosecutors will have until September 19 to respond, and then Merchan expects to rule on the motions at the December hearing.

The next hearing date for the case is December 4.

Prosecutors asked Merchan to plan on a trial beginning in January 2024, but Trump’s attorneys suggested that the spring might be more realistic, given they had not yet received any documents in the case.

Merchan seemed to side with Trump’s lawyers.

“I understand what you are saying,” Merchan said. “I think that is reasonable. You have not received discovery. It is difficult to anticipate if you will be ready for trial in January of 2024. The message I would like to deliver is we would like to move ahead as expeditiously as possible, without undue delay.”

Read more.

The former Trump World Tower doorman referenced in case documents accompanying former President Donald Trump’s unsealed indictment told CNN Wednesday he was in “complete shock” to learn of his involvement in the charges brought against Trump. 

The comments made to CNN mark Sajudin’s first statement to the media since the unsealing of Trump’s indictment Tuesday.

According to the statement of facts that accompanied the indictment, AMI – the publisher of National Inquirer – sought to silence a former Trump World Tower doorman who claimed to have knowledge about an alleged affair between Trump and an ex-housekeeper.

“AMI negotiated and signed an agreement to pay the Doorman $30,000 to acquire exclusive rights to the story,” the statement of facts read. 

AMI purchased the information from the doorman “without fully investigating his claims,” and at a later date “concluded that the story was not true,” it said. 

While “the Doorman” is not named in the documents, Sajudin told CNN in April 2018: "I can confirm that while working at Trump World Tower I was instructed not to criticize President Trump's former housekeeper due to a prior relationship she had with President Trump which produced a child."

His suggestion that Trump had fathered a child out of wedlock with an ex-housekeeper was not verified by CNN. 

CNN reported later in 2018 that Sajudin had been released from his contract with AMI. A copy of the signed “source agreement” obtained at the time appeared to have been signed in November 2015, and stated that AMI had exclusive rights to Sajudin’s story “regarding Donald Trump’s illegitimate child.”

Former President Donald Trump thanked the court staff and police officers involved in his arraignment in Manhattan Tuesday.

“Court attendants, Police Officers, and others were all very professional, and represented New York City sooo well. Thank you to all," Trump said in a statement the day after his arraignment.

Trump pleaded not guilty to 34 felony criminal charges of falsifying business records in a historic and unprecedented court appearance Tuesday.

Prosecutors allege Trump sought to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election through a hush money scheme with payments made to women who claimed they had extramarital affairs with Trump.

Several Republican lawmakers, both allies and critics of former President Donald Trump, issued statements following the former president's arraignment on Tuesday.

Trump pleaded not guilty in a Manhattan court to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the first degree after hearing charges against him stemming from a hush money payment to an adult film actress in 2016.

Here's how lawmakers are reacting:

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy accused Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg of seeking to interfere in the elections and said Congress will hold him accountable.

“Alvin Bragg is attempting to interfere in our democratic process by invoking federal law to bring politicized charges against President Trump, admittedly using federal funds, while at the same time arguing that the peoples’ representatives in Congress lack jurisdiction to investigate this farce. Not so. Bragg’s weaponization of the federal justice process will be held accountable by Congress,” McCarthy tweeted.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has not spoken out.

GOP Sen. Mitt Romney, a sharp Trump critic, criticized what he called Bragg’s overreach, saying it sets a "dangerous precedent."

"I believe President Trump’s character and conduct make him unfit for office," Romney said in a statement. "Even so, I believe the New York prosecutor has stretched to reach felony criminal charges in order to fit a political agenda. No one is above the law, not even former presidents, but everyone is entitled to equal treatment under the law. The prosecutor’s overreach sets a dangerous precedent for criminalizing political opponents and damages the public’s faith in our justice system."

House GOP Chair Elise Stefanik, a key Trump ally, called Trump's arrest “shameful,” adding that it would help him in his bid for the White House.

“President Trump continues to skyrocket in the polls, and just like with the Russia hoax and both sham impeachments, President Trump will defeat the latest witch-hunt, defeat Joe Biden, and will be sworn in as President of the United States in January 2025,” she said in a statement.

House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan tweeted Tuesday, “equal justice under the law, unless you’re a Republican running for president,” after Trump was arraigned. 

When asked on Fox News on Wednesday if he will subpoena Bragg, Jordan said that some lawmakers do want to talk to the district attorney. “He’s asked what questions we have,” Jordan said, referring to the correspondence he has had with Bragg’s office so far. “So I think he’s almost conceding the point that we should be able to talk to him. Everything is on the table. We are going to figure out how we proceed next. But we do want some answers to some key questions.”

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise retweeted Jordan’s post.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer said that he will have a call with McCarthy and Jordan “this week” to discuss how to move forward with their investigation Bragg.

“And we are going to try to figure out a path moving forward. This is very serious,” Comer told Fox and Friends on Wednesday, “We are not going to stop on this. Nothing changed. We believe he has overstepped.”

Trump ally Sen. Marsha Blackburn accused Bragg of being politically motivated in his investigation in a number of tweets. In one post, Blackburn called Bragg a “radical left-wing activist abusing his power in an attempt to help Biden remain in office.”

GOP Sen. JD Vance tweeted that “Bragg’s entire career is about normalizing violent crime. Just crazy that he’s bringing this weak case in the middle of a presidential election.” The Ohio senator, who was once a Trump critic, has embraced Trump and already endorsed him in the 2024 presidential race. 

GOP Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, who is weighing a 2024 presidential run, slammed Bragg ahead of the indictment, saying that he “doesn’t prosecute criminals, yet weaponizes the law against his political enemies.”

GOP Rep. Nancy Mace, whose primary opponent former President Trump endorsed last cycle, tweeted that his indictment is “bs” and “clearly political prosecution.”

Senate Minority Whip John Thune aligned himself with other GOP lawmakers who call Bragg's case politically motivated. "This indictment looks like a political agenda run amok, and it’s becoming increasingly clear why previous district attorneys opted against prosecution," Thune said in a statement.

Former President Donald Trump is involved in four different criminal investigations by three different levels of government – the Manhattan district attorney, the Fulton County, Georgia, district attorney, and the Department of Justice.

Despite being indicted in the New York case, he can still absolutely run for president.

“Nothing stops Trump from running while indicted, or even convicted,” the University of California, Los Angeles law professor Richard Hasen told CNN in an email.

The Constitution requires only three things of candidates. They must be:

• A natural born citizen.
• At least 35 years old.
• A resident of the US for at least 14 years.

As a political matter, it’s maybe more difficult for an indicted candidate, who could become a convicted criminal, to win votes. Trials don’t let candidates put their best foot forward. But it is not forbidden for them to run or be elected.

There are a few asterisks both in the Constitution and the 14th and 22nd Amendments, none of which currently apply to Trump.

Term limits: The 22nd Amendment forbids anyone who has twice been president (meaning twice been elected or served half of someone else’s term and then won his or her own) from running again. That doesn’t apply to Trump since he lost the 2020 election.

Impeachment: If a person is impeached by the House and convicted by the Senate of high crimes and misdemeanors, he or she is removed from office and disqualified from serving again. Trump, although twice impeached by the House during his presidency, was also twice acquitted by the Senate.

Disqualification: The 14th Amendment includes a “disqualification clause,” written specifically with an eye toward former Confederate soldiers.

It reads:

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

The indictment in New York City with regard to the hush-money payment to an adult-film star has nothing to do with rebellion or insurrection. Nor do potential federal charges with regard to classified documents.

Potential charges in Fulton County, Georgia, with regard to 2020 election meddling or at the federal level with regard to the January 6, 2021, insurrection could perhaps be construed by some as a form of insurrection. But that is an open question that would have to work its way through the courts. The 2024 election is fast approaching.

Notably, if he was convicted of a felony in New York, Trump would be barred from voting in his adoptive home state of Florida, at least until he had served out a potential sentence.

Several top House and Senate Democrats are staying away from commenting on the merits of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's case against Donald Trump, underscoring the belief among party leaders that it makes more political sense to steer clear from the high-profile proceeding.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, the top House Democrat, has not issued a statement after the indictment. And when asked by a local reporter in New York yesterday, Jeffries had a muted response, saying that they should "follow the facts" and see "what the legal process yields."

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer issued a statement yesterday afternoon before the indictment was unsealed, saying that he believes Trump will have a "fair trial" and that there should be no "outside influence or intimidation" of the legal process. He hasn't commented since the charges were unveiled.

Some Democrats believe it doesn't benefit them to align themselves with the case, given the questions many legal experts have raised about its merits, aides say, plus adding their voice in defending Bragg could only give Republicans ammunition to contend the case is political. 

While many Democrats have been silent, some rank-and-file Democrats have issued statements praising Bragg and criticizing Trump.

Rep. Jerry Nadler, the top Democrat on House Judiciary, praised the indictment as "well-reasoned" and criticized Republicans for trying to "obstruct" the probe by seeking Bragg's testimony.

While he was warned by Judge Juan Merchan during Tuesday’s arraignment not to make comments that could “jeopardize the rule of law” or create civil unrest, former President Donald Trump railed later that evening against Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and the judge himself.

The indictment returned last week by a grand jury against Trump was unsealed Tuesday and provided the public – and Trump’s legal team – with the first details about the specific charges he will face.

While there had been some discussion about Trump speaking to the media while in the courthouse Tuesday, he did not do so. Instead, Trump responded at his event at Mar-a-Lago that night, making his first on-camera remarks while surrounded by supporters.

Trump has consistently denied all wrongdoing and condemned the indictment as political persecution.

Some of Trump’s comments came to the fore during the arraignment when prosecutors handed the judge a packet of Trump’s social media postings and informed the court that Trump was making threats with “irresponsible” social media posts, specifically citing Trump’s sharing of an article that showed a photo of Trump with a baseball bat.

Trump’s attorneys responded that Trump has First Amendment rights and said that he was expressing his frustration with alleged illegal leaks about the indictment from the district attorney’s office. Trump’s lawyers also claimed that Trump’s social media posts were not threatening.

Judge Merchan acknowledged Trump’s right to free speech, but warned both sides about making comments with the potential to “incite violence, create civil unrest or jeopardize the safety or well-being of any individuals.”

Neither side made a request for a gag order.

Despite the judge’s comments, Trump in his speech Tuesday evening claimed he had a “Trump-hating judge” in the New York case. Trump also attacked Bragg and the indictment – as well as the other prosecutors investigating him, President Joe Biden and additional political opponents.

“This fake case was brought only to interfere with the upcoming 2024 election. And it should be dropped immediately,” Trump said.

Bragg’s indictment marks the first criminal charges against Trump, but it’s not the only potential legal trouble in front of the former president: Special counsel Jack Smith is still moving forward with an investigation into Trump’s role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol and the handling of classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. And a Fulton County special grand jury has completed its investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election in Georgia.

Alvin Bragg, a former New York state and federal prosecutor, drew national attention when he made history as the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office first Black district attorney. Now, he is back in the spotlight after a grand jury voted to indict Donald Trump after a yearslong investigation into the former president’s alleged role in a hush money scheme.

In Bragg’s first comments following Trump's Tuesday arraignment, he called the charges the “bread and butter” of his office’s work.

“At its core, this case today is one with allegations like so many of our white collar cases,” he said.

Here's what you need to know about the official:

The Harvard-educated attorney previously served as an assistant US attorney in the Southern District of New York, worked as a civil rights lawyer and as a professor and co-director of the New York Law School Racial Justice Project, where he represented family members of Eric Garner, who died in 2014 after being placed in an unauthorized chokehold by a then-police officer, in a lawsuit against the City of New York seeking information.

Bragg has aggressively pursued Trump and other progressive priorities so far in his tenure, including not prosecuting some low-level crimes and finding alternatives to incarceration.

Before Bragg’s swearing-in last year, he had already worked on cases related to Trump and other notable names in his role as a New York state chief deputy attorney general.

He said he had helped sue the Trump administration more than 100 times, as well as led a team that sued the Donald J. Trump Foundation, which resulted in the former president paying $2 million to a number of charities and the foundation’s dissolution.

Bragg also led the suit against disgraced film producer Harvey Weinstein and his company, which alleged a hostile work environment.

Bragg emerged the winner in a crowded Democratic primary in the summer of 2021 to lead the coveted Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, for which Vance had announced earlier that year he would not seek reelection. While campaigning, he often spoke about his experience growing up in Harlem, saying he was once a 15-year-old stopped “numerous times at gunpoint by police.”

“In addition to being the first Black district attorney, I think I’ll probably be the first district attorney who’s had police point a gun at him,” he said during a victory speech, following his historic election to the office. “I think I’ll be the first district attorney who’s had a homicide victim on his doorstop. I think I’ll be the first district attorney in Manhattan who’s had a semi-automatic weapon pointed at him. I think I’ll be the first district attorney in Manhattan who’s had a loved one reenter from incarceration and stay with him. And I’m going to govern from that perspective.”

Bragg ran as a reformer, releasing a memo just days after taking office detailing new charging, bail, plea and sentencing policies – a plan that drew criticism from police union leaders. He said his office would not prosecute marijuana misdemeanors, fare evading and prostitution, among other crimes.

In the historic criminal indictment against former President Donald Trump, Manhattan prosecutors are accusing Trump of falsifying business records with the intent to conceal illegal conduct connected to his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges on Tuesday. Here’s a breakdown of the charges and evidence:

Prosecutors point to Trump’s "unlawful" election influence scheme as backing for felony charges

District Attorney Alvin Bragg during a news conference after Trump's arraignment said the business records were falsified in 2017 with the intent of concealing criminal conduct connected to the 2016 campaign. He referenced a New York state law that makes it a crime to conspire to promote a candidacy by unlawful means.

Bragg is not charging Trump with a violation of election law or a conspiracy related to that alleged campaign-related conduct. The indictment says for all 34 counts that Trump had the “intent to defraud and intent to commit another crime and aid and conceal the commission thereof.”

Trump and Cohen worked out repayment deal in the Oval Office, prosecutors say

In describing the alleged election influence scheme, the charging documents go into detail about how the plan to silence women accusing Trump of extramarital affairs allegedly came about.

According to the charging documents, Cohen negotiated a hush-money payment with Daniels to “secure" her "silence and prevent disclosure of the damaging information in the final weeks before the presidential election.” Trump allegedly hid the reimbursement payments to Cohen by marking monthly checks for “legal services,” according to the statement of facts, in a deal the two worked out in the Oval Office.

Some payments central to Trump’s charges came directly from his bank account

Prosecutors say checks were cut monthly – including some coming directly from Trump’s bank account – to Cohen. They allege these were disguised as attorney payments when they were not.

The way that the payments were falsely memorialized in the company’s records, according to prosecutors, is the backbone of the crime that Trump is actually being charged with.

Participants in the alleged scheme knew payoffs were unlawful, prosecutors say

According to the legal theory Bragg is pushing, what makes the falsified business records a felony is an underlying federal campaign finance crime that Trump is accused of trying to conceal. The district attorney also claims that state election law was violated with the scheme.

The statement of facts points to court filings in the federal investigation into the hush-money payments to assert that the participants in the alleged illegal scheme, including Cohen, have admitted the payoffs to the two women were unlawful.

Read the full story here.