Democrats and Republicans Agreed On One Thing During Donald Trump’s Hush Money Trial, But They Were Both Wrong

Last Thursday, the former President of the United States of America, Donald Trump, was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records in the state of New York. Trump was found guilty of violating New York Penal Law, Section 17-152, “Conspiracy to promote or prevent election. Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.” 

Let that sit with you for a moment. For the first time in the history of this country, a former President has been charged, prosecuted and convicted. No matter what your politics are, the weight of that, is to say the least…heavy. Trump was charged with 34 counts of falsification of business records in the first degree, which happens to be a felony in the state of New York. Last year, former President Trump pleaded not guilty when he was arraigned. 

The details of the 34 counts can be time-consuming to understand, but I will try to sum up some of it in a few paragraphs. In 2006, prior to becoming president, Trump met a porn star Stormy Daniels, who’s real name is Stephanie Clifford. Trump, who is married to the stunningly gorgeous ex model Melania Trump, had a one-time sexual encounter with Daniels the same year they met.

Fast forward to 2018, after Trump became President Trump in 2016, the Wall Street Journal published an article about the affair. The Wall Street Journal reported that then-President Trump’s then-lawyer, Michael Cohen, secretly paid Stormy Daniels $130,000 to “keep quiet” about the affair.

According to the WSJ, Cohen paid Daniels using a company he formed, named Essential Consultants. He wired the money to Daniels on October 27, 2016, to buy her silence, as this information would surely interfere with Trump’s chances of becoming the 45th President of the United States that November. 

However, in 2017, Cohen and Allen Weisselberg, a retired Trump Organization executive, agreed on the details of how Cohen would be repaid for the $130,000 he paid Daniels to keep her affair with Trump quiet. Weisselberg detailed the calculations in hand-written notes that were shown to the jury during the trial. 

According to CBS News, Cohen would receive $130,000 for the Daniels payment and $50,000 for a technology company that did unrelated work for then-President Trump. That amount was doubled so that Cohen would have the money to pay the taxes he incurred on the income. In addition, to appease Cohen, who was angry because his regular year-end bonus was cut, Weisselberg added another $60,000. This totaled $420,000 to be paid to Cohen. 

Cohen would be paid monthly in increments of $35,000 during 2017. The first check was $70,000 for two months’ reimbursement to Mr. Cohen. Michael Cohen sent an invoice to the Trump Organization for each check. The invoice stated that it was for Michael Cohen’s fees.

For each payment, a bookkeeper generated a voucher labeled as a legal expense. Copies were made for the company files. Three payments were made from Trump’s trust, and the remaining payments were made from Trump’s personal account. 

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, in August of 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to tax evasion charges, making false statements to a federally insured bank, and campaign finance violations. The plea was entered following the filing of an eight-count criminal information, which alleged that Cohen concealed more than $4 million in personal income from the IRS.

Another allegation in the court document was that Cohen made false statements to a federally insured financial institution in connection with a $500,000 home equity loan, and, in 2016, caused $280,000 in payments to be made to silence two women who otherwise planned to speak publicly about their alleged affairs with a presidential candidate, thereby intending to influence the 2016 presidential election. 

Trump stated on many occasions that Cohen is a liar. Cohen, who has served his prison sentence, was the prosecution’s primary witness. In 2024, prior to the start of the hush money trial, Trump posted on his social media app Truth Social “Why didn’t they bring this totally discredited lawsuit 7 years ago??? Election Interference!” Fair question. 

Now, this is where it becomes time-consuming to understand all of the nuances of this case. The original investigation was started by Federal Prosecutors, who report to the Attorney General of the Department of Justice. The DOJ reports to the President. The DOJ passed on charging then-President Trump.

Republican lawmakers and media pundits argue that this proves that this whole situation, although messy, was not a crime. If it was, the DOJ would have charged Donald Trump. Democrats and Democratic media pundits argue that the reason the DOJ didn’t charge Donald Trump is that the DOJ reported to then-President Trump. 

New York County District Attorney Alvin L. Bragg was the first district attorney to prosecute Trump in a series of criminal cases that will be brought against the former President in future months in other jurisdictions. This case has been widely criticized not only by Republicans but also Democrats.

Trump and Republican lawmakers and pundits argued that, among other things, Bragg, who is a Harvard Graduate and the first African American to hold that office, was overreaching, out of his jurisdiction, underqualified, and racist. Democrat pundits argued largely that this case was, for the most part, hard to understand, and the jury would be confused, and thus, the verdict would probably, at best, be a hung jury.

This is one of few and almost non-existent times, especially these days, that Democrats and Republicans agree on a first-time nonviolent felony offense. We, as a nation, are in uncharted territory. I am concerned that this may open up, as the old saying goes, “a can of worms” when it comes to prosecuting future former presidents for non-violent and low-level criminal acts prior to being in office.

The argument is that the Rule of Law must always be followed. But where does that start and begin when it comes to our Presidents? If not careful, our future may involve future Presidents charging former Presidents for anything they think of, because they do not like them for whatever reason. Whether they are of the same party or not. Think about where that would leave us as a country. We are now in unchartered waters. May GOD be with us.