Washington
CNN
—
Former President Donald Trump has uttered a number of false or deceptive claims about his Manhattan prison trial this week because the trial has neared a conclusion. Here’s a reality examine of a number of the statements Trump has made on social media and to reporters from Tuesday to Thursday morning.
Merchan and the ‘recommendation of counsel’
After closing arguments Tuesday, Trump posted on social media to repeat his deceptive grievance that Choose Juan Merchan has prevented him from using a sure protection.
Trump wrote on his platform Reality Social: “THE GREATEST CASE I’VE EVER SEEN FOR RELIANCE ON COUNSEL, AND JUDGE MERCHAN WILL NOT, FOR WHATEVER REASON, LET ME USE THAT AS A DEFENSE IN THIS RIGGED TRIAL. ANOTHER TERM, ADVICE OF COUNSEL DEFENSE!” He added in one other publish on Wednesday morning: “RELIANCE ON COUNSEL (ADVISE OF COUNSEL) NOT ALLOWED BY MERCHAN, A FIRST.”
Details First: Trump’s declare stays deceptive. He didn’t point out, again, that the explanation Merchan is not going to enable Trump’s authorized group to invoke “recommendation of counsel” through the trial is that, when Trump was requested earlier than the trial whether or not he can be utilizing an “recommendation of counsel” protection, his lawyers told Merchan he would not.
An “recommendation of counsel” protection typically requires the defendant to waive attorney-client privilege. Trump’s legal professionals advised Merchan earlier than the trial that as a substitute of a “formal” protection of “recommendation of counsel,” Trump wished to make use of a special protection by which he wouldn’t waive attorney-client privilege however would still “elicit proof in regards to the presence, involvement and recommendation of legal professionals in related occasions giving rise to the fees within the Indictment.”
Merchan rejected this proposal. He wrote in March: “To permit stated protection on this matter would successfully allow Defendant to invoke the very protection he has declared he is not going to depend upon, with out the concomitant obligations that include it. The consequence would undoubtedly be to confuse and mislead the jury. This Court docket cannot endorse such a tactic.” Due to this fact, Merchan dominated, Trump couldn’t invoke and even counsel a “presence of counsel” protection within the trial.
Final week, throughout courtroom discussions about Merchan’s directions to the jury, Merchan rejected an try by Trump’s protection to invoke the “involvement of counsel.” Merchan famous he had already made his stance on the proposal clear.
Merchan stated: “That is an argument that you just’ve been advancing for a lot of, many, many, months. That is one thing you’ve been making an attempt to get by means of to the jury for a lot of, many, many months. It’s denied, it’s not going to occur, please don’t increase it once more.”
Merchan and jury unanimity
Trump claimed Wednesday that Merchan “isn’t requiring a unanimous determination on the faux costs in opposition to me.”
Trump made the declare in a social media post by which he described Merchan’s supposed place as “RIDICULOUS, UNCONSTITUTIONAL, AND UNAMERICAN.” He was echoing assertions that had been circulating among conservatives after Fox Information anchor John Roberts wrote on social media earlier on Wednesday that “Choose Merchan simply advised the jury that they don’t want unanimity to convict.”
Details First: Trump’s declare inaccurately depicts what Merchan stated.
Merchan told the jury in his instructions on Wednesday that their verdict “have to be unanimous” on every of the 34 counts that Trump faces and that, to convict Trump of felony falsification of enterprise data, they should unanimously agree that he falsified enterprise data with the intent to commit, support or conceal one other crime – that different crime being a violation of a New York election regulation. However Merchan defined that whereas this New York election law prohibits folks from conspiring to make use of “illegal means” to advertise a candidate’s election, jurors don’t should unanimously agree on which specific “illegal means” Trump might have used; they will discover him responsible so long as they unanimously agree that Trump used some illegal means. Prosecutors supplied three theories of what illegal means Trump used.
Merchan advised the jury: “Though you could conclude unanimously that the defendant conspired to advertise or forestall the election of any individual to a public workplace by illegal means, you needn’t be unanimous as to what these illegal means have been. In figuring out whether or not the defendant conspired to advertise or forestall the election of any individual to a public workplace by illegal means, you could contemplate the next: one, violations of the Federal Election Marketing campaign Act in any other case referred to as FECA; two, the falsification of different enterprise data; or three, violation of tax legal guidelines.”
Lee Kovarsky, a College of Texas regulation professor who has been following the trial, put it this way on social media on Wednesday: “If a regulation says NO VEHICLES IN THE PARK & listing of automobiles consists of mopeds and bikes, all of the instruction means is that you just want unanimous conclusion of auto however not unanimous on whether or not automobile was moped or harley.”
– CNN’s Jeremy Herb contributed to this merchandise.
The fees in opposition to Trump
After Merchan recited his directions to the jury on Wednesday, Trump wrote on social media: “I DON’T EVEN KNOW WHAT THE CHARGES ARE IN THIS RIGGED CASE—I AM ENTITLED TO SPECIFICITY JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE.
THERE IS NO CRIME!”
Details First: This wants context. Lower than two hours earlier than Trump made this publish claiming he doesn’t even know what the fees are, Merchan had explained each of the 34 charges during his jury instructions within the courtroom – with Trump current.
We are able to’t definitively fact-check what Trump truly is aware of in regards to the costs, and even some authorized analysts have stated this case generally is a troublesome one to know. However there isn’t a foundation for any suggestion that the fees haven’t been specified.
Merchan had advised the jury, “I’ll now instruct you on the regulation relevant to the charged offenses. That offense is Falsifying Enterprise Information within the First Diploma – 34 Counts.” He then defined how the crime of first-degree falsifying enterprise data is outlined in New York regulation, additional defined the definitions of specific phrases in that regulation, after which, one after the other, recognized every of the 34 enterprise data that make up the 34 counts.
The 34 counts have been additionally laid out in Trump’s indictment in the case greater than a yr in the past.
The choose and a potential witness
Trump claimed to reporters on Wednesday that Merchan had refused to permit Trump’s protection to name a number one election-law professional to testify.
“This choose didn’t even allow us to use the number-one election legal professional,” Trump stated. He continued moments later, “We had the main election professional within the nation, Brad Smith, able to testify. Wouldn’t let him do it.”
Details First: Trump’s declare is fake. Merchan didn’t prohibit this potential witness, former Federal Election Fee chairman Bradley Smith, from testifying. Relatively, Merchan restricted what Smith was allowed to testify about. He decided in March that Smith might present background details about the FEC and outline sure phrases related to this case however couldn’t opine on whether or not Trump broke federal election legal guidelines or supply opinions about the right way to interpret or apply these legal guidelines. After Merchan refused last week to change his mind, Trump’s protection determined to not name Smith as a witness.
Smith wrote on social media final week: “Choose Merchan has so restricted my testimony that protection has determined to not name me.”
Trump might argue that Merchan’s determination to limit Smith’s testimony rendered Smith ineffective as a witness. However his assertion that Merchan flat-out banned Smith from testifying isn’t true.
Biden and the case
After the jury started deliberations on Wednesday, Trump spoke repeated his frequent declare that this case was “all performed by Joe Biden.” And on Thursday morning, he claimed that Manhattan District Legal professional Alvin Bragg had revived the case throughout Trump’s marketing campaign “on the request of Biden.”
Details First: There isn’t a foundation for Trump’s declare. There isn’t a proof that Biden had any position in launching or working Bragg’s prosecution – and Bragg is a regionally elected official who doesn’t report back to the federal authorities. The indictment within the case was accepted by a grand jury of abnormal residents.
Trump has repeatedly invoked a lawyer on Bragg’s group, Matthew Colangelo, whereas making such claims; Colangelo left the Justice Division in 2022 to join the district attorney’s office as senior counsel to Bragg.
However there isn’t a proof that Biden had something to do with Colangelo’s employment determination. Colangelo and Bragg had been colleagues earlier than Bragg was elected Manhattan district legal professional in 2021.
Earlier than Colangelo labored on the Justice Division, he and Bragg labored on the similar time within the workplace of New York’s state legal professional basic, the place Colangelo investigated Trump’s charity and Trump’s monetary practices and was involved in bringing various lawsuits in opposition to the Trump administration.