Should Trump Testify? Insights on His Potential Testimony and the Risks Involved

Sign up for CNN’s What Matters newsletter to receive a version of this story in your inbox for free.

The New York criminal trial for former President Donald Trump began on Monday with prosecutors and defense lawyers presenting their contrasting arguments.

It is evident that a key point of disagreement revolves around what transpired during a crucial August 2015 meeting involving Trump, his former fixer Michael Cohen, and the former publisher of the National Enquirer David Pecker. Reports suggest that they reached an agreement to uncover and suppress negative stories that could impact Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Following the meeting, Cohen and Pecker were involved in making secret payments that benefited Trump. The alleged crime committed by Trump involves the falsification of documents to conceal these payments after assuming the presidency. Cohen was sentenced to prison for violating campaign finance laws, while Pecker has cooperated with authorities.

Cohen and Pecker, who have both distanced themselves from Trump, are set to be important witnesses for the prosecution. They are likely to provide specific information about a meeting where they allegedly planned to suppress negative stories about Trump, possibly even resorting to extreme measures.

Video Ad Feedback

Smerconish: Will Trump testify?

05:29

• Source:

CNN

An open question will be whether the third person in that meeting, Trump, will take the stand in his own defense to give his side of the story.

Trump has promised to testify, although he is not required to do so. When asked by a reporter at Mar-a-Lago earlier this month if it would be risky for him to take the stand before the start of jury selection, here’s what he said:

“I don’t know, I’m testifying. I tell the truth. I mean, all I can do is tell the truth. And the truth is that there’s no case, they have no case,” Trump said.

Last week, Trump told reporters outside the courtroom that he wants to testify.

But taking the stand could lead to Trump, under oath, being asked some very uncomfortable questions.

Judge Juan Merchan recently ruled on what questions can be asked to President Trump if he decides to testify. CNN reporters Kara Scannell, Lauren del Valle, and Jeremy Herb were present in the courtroom to cover the ruling.

In their real-time courtroom updates, they mention that prosecutors will have the opportunity to question Trump about various legal defeats he has faced recently. One of these setbacks includes a $464 million civil fraud verdict, where Trump was determined to have artificially inflated the worth of his properties.

Gag order violations occurred during Trump's civil fraud trial, resulting in a $15,000 fine. In federal courts, juries ruled that Trump defamed E. Jean Carroll and was ordered to pay $83.3 million for denying her rape allegations.

► Trump's foundation, which failed, reached a settlement with the New York attorney general that resulted in its dissolution.

► In a ruling, Merchan stated that prosecutors would not be allowed to question Trump about his frivolous lawsuit against Hillary Clinton or the 2022 tax fraud conviction of his company, if he testifies.

In a CNN Opinion piece, Joey Jackson, a CNN legal analyst and criminal defense attorney, discussed the potential defense strategy that Trump's team may use during the trial. Jackson suggested that Trump's decision to testify will probably be made at the last minute.

During an interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, Trump's attorney Will Scharf also mentioned that the decision for Trump to testify should depend on how the trial progresses.

Scharf believes that President Trump would be a strong witness if he decides to testify, as he maintains that Trump did not commit any wrongdoing. However, when juries and judges have heard Trump testify in the past, he has not been successful.

During the first Carroll trial jury in 2023, lawyers showed a videotape of Trump’s deposition. In one instance, Trump mistakenly identified Carroll as his ex-wife Marla Maples. Learn more about important moments from the video.

In January 2024, Trump made a brief appearance in a different defamation case.

Video Ad Feedback

Trump, in sworn deposition, discusses business losses

03:17

• Source:

CNN

During his civil fraud trial in 2023, Trump did not face a jury but did testify in court. His aggressive and confrontational approach led to criticism from the judge, Arthur Engoron, who eventually ruled that Trump must pay a $355 million fine.

Trump has openly discussed the case and its outcome.

Even though Trump may not testify under oath in the New York criminal trial, he has already made statements about the case that could potentially be used as evidence. Last week, outside the courtroom, he discussed the payments made to Michael Cohen for the payment to Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress.

Trump explained, "I was paying a lawyer and we recorded it as a legal expense. Some accountant I didn't know recorded it as a legal expense. That's exactly what it was, and you get indicted for that?"

In a series of tweets in May 2018, before Cohen’s ultimate guilty plea, Trump admitted to paying Cohen and said that money was a “reimbursement.”

Here are those Trump tweets all together:

Mr. Cohen, who is an attorney, received a monthly retainer that was not linked to the campaign. This retainer had nothing to do with the campaign. He used this retainer to enter into a private contract between two parties, which is known as a non-disclosure agreement (NDA).

These types of agreements, NDAs, are very common among celebrities and wealthy individuals. In this particular case, the NDA is fully enforceable and will be utilized in Arbitration to claim damages against Ms. Clifford (Daniels). The agreement was put in place to prevent false and extortionate accusations made by her regarding an affair.

Despite previously signing a detailed letter acknowledging that there was no affair, the agreement between them was violated by Ms. Clifford and her attorney. Originally a private agreement, campaign funds or contributions were not involved in this transaction.

Prosecutors informed jurors that they will be listening to recordings made by Cohen of conversations where he and Trump talk about the payments.

This is not a hush money case, but rather an election interference case. Another important point from the prosecution's opening statement is their effort to present this case as one of election interference, not just about hush money.

Prosecutors are looking at this differently," CNN's Paula Reid mentioned. They are not just viewing it as a simple paperwork violation to conceal the hush money payment by altering business records. Instead, they see it as an attempt to meddle in the 2016 election.

Editor's P/S:

The New York criminal trial against former President Donald Trump has commenced, bringing forth a captivating legal battle that promises to delve into the depths of alleged election interference. The key point of contention centers around a crucial meeting in 2015, where Trump, his former fixer Michael Cohen, and the former publisher of the National Enquirer David Pecker reportedly conspired to suppress negative stories about Trump's presidential campaign.

As the trial unfolds, it will be crucial to assess the credibility and reliability of Cohen and Pecker, who have both turned against Trump and are expected to provide damaging testimony against him. The prosecution's strategy of framing the case as an instance of election interference rather than merely a hush money payment violation is a significant angle that could potentially shape the jury's perception of the matter. The possibility of Trump taking the stand to defend himself adds an unpredictable element to the proceedings, as his past testimony in other cases has not always been met with favor. The outcome of this trial carries significant weight, not only for Trump himself but also for the broader political landscape and the integrity of the electoral process in the United States.