Analysis: Unveiling the True Narrative Behind Trump's Initial Legal Proceedings

Norman Eisen, a CNN legal analyst and editor of "Trying Trump: A Guide to His First Election Interference Criminal Trial," served as counsel to the House Judiciary Committee for the first impeachment and trial of Donald Trump. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. Read more opinion at CNN.

Judge Juan Merchan kicked off the much-anticipated Manhattan criminal trial of former President Donald Trump on Monday by questioning potential jurors. There has been a lot of discussion surrounding every aspect of this historic trial – even what to name it. This trial marks the first of four expected criminal trials involving Trump, and it is the only one in American history to have a former president as the defendant.

Norman Eisen

Norman Eisen

CNN

The case has often been called the “hush money” case, but the judge clarified to the jury that this is not accurate. Moving forward, we will refer to it as an “election interference” trial.

When the judge explained the case to potential jurors, he mentioned that the accusations involve Donald Trump allegedly falsifying business records to hide an arrangement with others to illegally influence the 2016 presidential election. (Trump maintains his innocence and denies any wrongdoing in the cases against him.)

Merchan's perspective: The main focus of the trial that commenced on Monday is not the payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels in October 2016 to conceal her alleged affair with Trump (which he refutes). The key issue at hand is the reason behind Trump's decision to make those payments.

Paying hush money by itself is not a crime. 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.

Former US President Donald Trump and attorney Susan Necheles attend a hearing to determine the date of his trial for allegedly covering up hush money payments linked to extramarital affairs, at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City on March 25, 2024.

Former US President Donald Trump and attorney Susan Necheles were present at a hearing in Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City on March 25, 2024. The purpose of the hearing was to determine the trial date for allegations of covering up hush money payments related to extramarital affairs.

Mary Altaffer/Pool/AFP/Getty Images

Related article

Opinion: Can there be impartial jurors when it comes to Trump?

During the first half of Monday's proceedings, the focus was on resolving legal disputes before the trial could start. The main issue was determining what evidence could be presented. Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass effectively presented the election interference theory by organizing his evidentiary points in chronological order within that context.

Steinglass began by addressing the alleged August 2015 Trump Tower meeting. This meeting involved Trump, his former fixer Michael Cohen, and David Pecker, former chairman and CEO of American Media. It was alleged that they agreed to help Trump's campaign through a "catch and kill" scheme. This scheme involved buying scandalous stories and then burying them to prevent them from damaging Trump's presidential campaign.

Steinglass then highlighted legal concerns that were significant during the unfolding of the alleged scheme in 2015 and 2016, ultimately focusing on the key individuals involved: Daniels and Cohen. This provided a comprehensive overview of what can be anticipated during the trial.

The District Attorney made allegations, as the judge pointed out, but proving them is a different matter. It is now up to District Attorney Alvin Bragg to substantiate the claims. It is important to remember that Trump is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and the case against him must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Trump maintains his innocence and appears ready to vigorously defend himself during the legal proceedings.

But it's important to be clear on what exactly is being accused, which will be the focus of debate. In a recent book, I argue that labeling the situation as "hush money" can take away from the real issue at hand and downplay its significance. This viewpoint is supported by respected experts in constitutional law and other legal professionals.

Former President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland, on Saturday, February 24.

Former President Donald Trump delivers remarks at the Conservative Political Action Conference in National Harbor, Maryland, on Saturday, February 24.

Tom Brenner/The Washington Post/Getty Images

Related article

Opinion: Trump’s about to get an audience unlike any he’s had before

The significance of the charges here is just as important as the ones related to election interference in the 2020 campaign. These charges include a federal case led by special prosecutor Jack Smith and a Georgia case led by Fulton County DA Fani Willis.

Trump's alleged attempt to overthrow the government in 2020 has led to a distortion in how serious the charges from the 2016 election are perceived. We must not let the extreme nature of Trump's actions later on change the standard for what is considered a serious alleged offense. The Manhattan case not only meets this standard but exceeds it.

Skeptics of election interference argue that the charges relate to the Trump organization falsifying documents in 2017, after the 2016 election, to conceal previous actions. They question how this trial can be considered election interference when the alleged crimes occurred after the election had ended.

However, it is important to note that the payment made to Daniels was potentially illegal under federal and state laws, and was believed to have been intended to influence the outcome of the 2016 election. Cohen, limited by law to a $2,700 contribution to the campaign, reportedly transferred $130,000 to support the campaign, allegedly at the direction of Trump.

Get our free weekly newsletter

Sign up for CNN Opinion’s newsletter.

Join us on Twitter and Facebook

Cohen pleaded guilty to federal campaign finance violations, among other offenses, which led to his incarceration. It is widely believed that he and Trump conspired to hide information from voters in order to sway the outcome of a closely contested election.

The foundation of American governance is built on the integrity of our elections. When voters are not given all the information, like Bragg claims in this case, it erodes democracy. Referring to this trial as just a "hush money" issue downplays the seriousness of the situation. This is a case of election interference and we need to address it as such.

Editor's P/S:

The Manhattan criminal trial