Trump trial: 1st week of testimony ends with testimony from Michael Cohen's former banker

Banker Gary Farro testified in Donald Trump's hush money trial in New York.

Former President Donald Trump is on trial in New York City, where he is facing felony charges related to a 2016 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels. It marks the first time in history that a former U.S. president has been tried on criminal charges.

Trump last April pleaded not guilty to a 34-count indictment charging him with falsifying business records to hide the reimbursement of a hush money payment his then-attorney Michael Cohen made to Daniels in order to boost his electoral prospects in the 2016 presidential election.


What to know about the hush money case

READ MORE: Here's what you need to know about the historic case.


0

Jury selection to continue on Day 2 of proceedings

Jury selection will continue today on Day 2 of former President Trump's hush money trial.

Attorneys on Monday began the process of narrowing down the first group of 96 juror prospects, but none were seated by the end of the day.

Attorneys today will continue their questioning of the remaining juror prospects from that group, with a new group of prospective jurors scheduled to arrive in court this morning.


Trump, exiting court, criticizes scheduling conflicts

Exiting court after a lengthy day of proceedings, former President Trump complained about the scheduling conflicts created by his criminal trial, including conflicts with his presidential campaign, his plans to attend Supreme Court oral arguments, and potentially his son Barron's high school graduation.

"Now I can't go to my son's graduation," Trump said. "I can't go to the United States Supreme Court. I'm not in Georgia or Florida or North Carolina campaigning like I should be," Trump told reporters outside court.

Trump repeated his past complaints about the fairness of the trial, saying he has a "real problem" with Judge Merchan.

"It's a scam, it's a political witch hunt," Trump said. "We're not going to be given a fair trial."


Judge won't excuse Trump to attend Supreme Court arguments

At the end of the court day, Judge Juan Merchan denied a request from defense attorney Todd Blanche to excuse Trump from the proceedings in New York next Thursday, when the U.S. Supreme Court hears Trump's bid for presidential immunity in his 2020 federal election interference case.

"It's an incredibly unusual case," Blanche said.

"Arguing before the Supreme Court is a big deal; I can understand why your client wants to be there," Merchan said -- adding that standing trial in New York is also a big deal.

"Your client is a criminal defendant in New York County Supreme Court. He's required to be here," the judge said.


Several more jurors dismissed during questioning

After the parties questioned a total of 11 witnesses, two of them were struck for cause, including a man who cited a conflict with the trial due to his child's wedding.

One potential juror disclosed that he worked for the Bronx district attorney's office, and other jurors listed professions including sales, oncology nursing and social media marketing.

Another potential juror, who lives on the Upper West Side and works at a bookstore, made a brief remark about the fairness of the justice system while answering the questionnaire.

"I believe that nobody is above the law, whether it be a former president or a sitting president or a janitor," he said.

The remaining jurors are due to return to court tomorrow to complete the questions. Merchan said another panel of prospective jurors will arrive at court tomorrow morning.


Pecker says McDougal's story could have 'hurt the campaign'

Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker testified that he believed Donald Trump had knowledge about the $150,000 contract to buy Karen McDougal's silence regarding an alleged year-long affair.

"Do you know if anyone else besides Michael Cohen had any knowledge of this contract?" prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asked.

"Yes, I believe Donald Trump did," Pecker responded.

"Was your principal purpose to suppress the story to prevent it from influencing the election?" Steinglass asked.

"Yes," Pecker said.

"Were you aware that expenditures by corporations made for the purpose of influencing an election made in coordination with or at the request of a candidate or campaign were unlawful?" Steinglass asked.

Pecker said he was aware and confirmed that the Enquirer's parent company, AMI, never reported the payment to the Federal Election Commission.

"We purchased the story so it wouldn't be published by any other organization," Pecker said.

"Why did you not want it to be published by any other organization?" Steinglass asked.

"We didn't want the story to embarrass Mr. Trump or embarrass or hurt the campaign," Pecker said.

"Who is we?" Steinglass followed up.

"Myself and Michael Cohen," Pecker said.

According to Pecker, AMI agreed to the $150,000 payment on the promise that Donald Trump or the Trump Organization would reimburse AMI for the payment. He frequently followed up with Cohen about the reimbursement and got a similar answer from Cohen.

"Why are you worried? I am your friend. The boss will take care of it," Pecker said about Cohen's response.