Former President Donald Trump faces serious legal challenges in multiple cases related to his attempts to overturn the results of the 2020 election and remain in power. However, it is a New York case involving payments made to silence adult film actress Stormy Daniels that might provide the only legal reckoning this year on whether he attempted to undermine American democracy. Trump is charged with trying to falsify business records in connection to the payments, which prosecutors argue were part of a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 presidential election.
The outcome of the New York trial will be pivotal for Trump’s fate, as the charges related to falsifying business records are typically misdemeanors unless they can be tied to another crime. In this case, prosecutors allege that the falsification of records was part of an effort to cover up state and federal election law violations, although it is not the direct election interference that Trump is charged with in other cases. Trump has referred to the trial and other criminal cases against him as a form of election interference, claiming without evidence that they are part of a Democratic plan to undermine his campaign to return to the White House.
While the New York case is seen as the least consequential against the former president, the other cases against him involve more direct involvement in trying to overturn the election results. Trump faces a federal indictment in Washington, D.C., for his actions leading up to the Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, as well as charges in Georgia for violating the state’s anti-racketeering law by scheming to overturn his loss to Joe Biden. All charges against him are being appealed, which may delay trials until after the November election, making the New York case the only legal test during the campaign of whether Trump attempted to manipulate an election.
Trump’s attorney has argued that there is nothing wrong with trying to influence an election, leading to skepticism among legal experts about connecting the New York case to election interference. Some experts believe that characterizing the case in this way may diminish the seriousness of the other charges Trump faces. However, prosecutors have positioned the case as election interference to increase its visibility and ensure it is heard before the election. The trial centers around a $130,000 payment made to Daniels to prevent her claims of a sexual encounter with Trump from becoming public in the final days of the 2016 race.
The key question in the prosecution’s argument is why the business records were falsified, with allegations that Trump was preventing voters from making an informed decision in the election. Legal experts believe that prosecutors can make this argument to the jury, emphasizing the difference between trying to limit information about a candidate and breaking the law to keep it hidden. The outcome of the New York trial will likely impact public perception of Trump’s actions and could influence his political future. Ultimately, the case will hinge on whether the jury believes Trump’s actions were a criminal effort to corrupt the election process.
