1. Prosecutors are expected to wrap up their cross examination of Robert Costello. Yesterday, Susan Hoffinger estimated that she had about 30-45 minutes left on cross examination.
The defense will then have an opportunity for re-direct.
2. The defense is expected to rest its case. Trump's team considered calling another witness--a campaign finance expert, Brad Smith. But after Justice Merchan limited the scope of expert testimony, Smith says the defense will not call him to testify.
3. One wild card is whether Trump might choose to take the stand in his own defense, as is his right.
Color me skeptical.
The defense said yesterday that it expected to rest its case today, suggesting that Trump will not testify.
4. The most important aspect of today's proceedings, however, is what's called the "pre-charge" conference. That's when Justice Merchan will hear argument from the parties on proposed jury charges, meaning the instructions the judge gives the jury prior to their deliberations.
We haven't seen the proposed jury instructions yet. But here are a few issues I'm looking out for:
(1) Will the jurors consider only the felony counts for falsification of business records, or will they have an option to consider the "lesser included" misdemeanor charge?
(2) The felony charge requires that Trump caused the falsification of business records with intent to commit, aid, or conceal another crime.
But do the jurors have to unanimously agree on *which* crime Trump intended to commit, aid, or conceal?
Costello takes the stand in a light grey suit and a polka-dot tie. Shock of white hair.
Trump, meanwhile, selected a gold tie today.
The jury enters.
"Good morning jurors," Justice Merchan says.
Susan Hoffinger hops up for cross examination of Costello.
She starts where we left off yesterday: Michael Cohen's choice to select another attorney--not Costello--to represent him in the 2018 SDNY investigation.
We see an email in which Cohen informs Costello to cease contact with him.
Then we're back to Costello's relationship w/ Rudy Giuliani.
You're very close to Giuliani? Yes
He went to your wedding? Yes
Another email: It's from Costello to his law partner, with a link to a Fox News story about Giuliani joining Trump's legal team.
"All the more reason for Cohen to hire me, because of my connection to Rudy Giuliani, which I mentioned in our meeting"
Another one, from April 2018, in which Costello tells Cohen that Giuliani wanted to thank him for opening a "backchannel" of communication.
The April 2018 emails keep coming.
"Rudy said this communication channel must be maintained...sleep well tonight, you have friends in high places," Costello said to Cohen.
That means Trump, right?
"Friends in high places definitely means President Trump," Costello says.
Another 2018 email, this one from Costello to his law partner: "Our issue is to get Cohen on the right page without giving the appearance that we are following instructions from Giuliani or the President," Costello wrote.
June 13, 2018, email from Costello to Cohen: "My friend has communicated to me that he is meeting with his client this evening and he added that if there is anything you wanted to convey...my friend will bring it up for discussion this evening."
Hoffinger is displaying all of these to show that Costello was encouraging a communication backchannel with Trump/Giuliani.
She displays another email, asking if Costello was encouraging Cohen not to cooperate. Costello says no, and Hoffinger zooms in on the first paragraph.
In the email, Costello tells Cohen that there is an effort by SDNY and others to make him believe that he is alone, that Trump and Giualini are trying to discredit him. He tells Cohen it's an effort to drain him emotionally so that he sees prosecutors as his only salvation.
HOFFINGER: Yesterday, you were asked if you cared about Trump's interests when you were representing Michael Cohen. You said no, your obligation was to Cohen. You recall that? Yes.
Then Hoffinger displays an email from Costello to his law partner.
Costello says that Cohen is slow playing "us and the President...What should I say to this asshole? He's playing with the most powerful man on the planet."
This email speaks for itself?
Yes, it does.
HOFFINGER: You went and testified before Congress during Cohen's testimony here?
COSTELLO: Yes.
HOFFINGER: It was an effort to intimidate Cohen while he was testifying?
COSTELLO: Intimidate? No.
Nothing further.
Emil Bove is up for re-direct on behalf of Trump.
He displays the attorney-client privilege waiver signed by Cohen wrt communications with Cohen.
It says that Costello has "never represented [Cohen] in this or any other matter." Is that true or false? Bove asks.
False, Costello replies.
Costello talks about the email in which he tells his law partner that Cohen "played" them. He says that every time his partner, Citron, asked Cohen about signing the retainer agreement that he would delay signing it. And Costello was concerned about representing Cohen without a signed retainer.
Bove pulls up a 2018 email that Costello sent to Cohen, which he marked as "attorney client privileged."
Did Cohen write back and say hey, you're not my attorney? No.
Let's focus on the "backchannel." Who first used that term? Rudy Giuliani, in response to my saying to him that we couldn't make this public per Cohen's request. ["This" being Costello's purported representation of Cohen in the SDNY investigation.]
Bove tries to ask about Costello saying "I will not pester you.." in an email to Cohen.
Objection from Hoffinger: Beyond the scope. Sustained.
Bove, with hint of annoyance, says "this was inquired about on cross examination."
He tries to keep going, then the parties go to sidebar. Objection sustained.
Back to a June 2018 email. The one in which Costello says "you have the ability to make that communication when you want to..."
Did you ever pressure Michael Cohen? No
Did you ever have control over Cohen? Completely not.
Every document, you provided to the prosecution a year ago? I did.
What was your purpose in meeting w/ Cohen after the Regency Hotel meeting? To discuss legal problems.
Did you someone continue to discuss retainer agreement after that meeting? Yes, it was May 3 at our office.
Things you've said at this trial have been known to these people (meaning the prosecution)? Yes.
Nothing further, Hoffinger up for re-cross.
HOFFINGER: You said you gave Cohen a retainer agreement on May 3? (Yes.)
She shows him the retainer agreement.
Cohen never signed that agreement? That is correct.
And he never paid you? Correct.
Nothing further.
"Your honor, the defense rests."
Justice Merchan tells the jurors what will happen next:
We will adjourn for the rest of the week, and then have summations -- closing arguments -- on Tuesday.
The jurors exit, but the parties remain.
The plan is for the parties to take time now to continue working on the proposed jury charges. Then we'll reconvene at 2:15 pm for the pre-charge conference.
Emil Bove: Do we have the court's permission to file the request documents (presumably meaning the proposed jury instructions)?
Justice Merchan: What we can do is mark it as a court exhibit.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1. Halligan presented the original indictment with three counts against Comey. The grand jury deliberated for roughly two hours and took a vote.
2. After deliberations, the foreperson informed the EDVA grand jury coordinator that there were not enough votes to indict on Count 1 of the three-count indictment.
However, the entire document was then marked as though the GJ declined to return an indictment on all counts.
🧵 NEW: A federal judge ruled against the Trump administration.
Then the harassment began.
Six credible threats to his life.
Pizzas sent to his home in the name of Judge Esther Salas’s murdered son, Daniel.
More than 400 “vile” calls to his chambers—including this voicemail:
The voicemail was played aloud during an event hosted by Speak Up for Justice.
The recipient—Judge John McConnell—publicly detailed the threats he has endured in recent months.
“It’s the one time that actually shook my faith in the judicial system and the rule of law,” he said.
At the event, Judge McConnell was joined by several fellow members of the federal judiciary—marking a rare instance in which sitting judges publicly addressed the threats and harassment they have faced.
NEW: Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s lawyers seek permission to file an amended complaint in his civil case in Maryland.
Among other things, the amended complaint “includes Abrego Garcia's first-hand account of torture and mistreatment at CECOT…”
Here’s Abrego Garcia’s amended complaint.
It alleges that he “was subjected to severe mistreatment upon arrival at CECOT, including but not limited to severe beatings, severe sleep deprivation,
inadequate nutrition, and psychological torture..”
“In Cell 15, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia and 20 other Salvadorans were forced to kneel from approximately 9:00 PM to 6:00 AM, with guards striking anyone who fell from exhaustion. During this time, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was denied bathroom access and soiled himself…”
But I need to talk about my 4-year-old niece, Hope. She has a rare disease. A drug called elamipretide helped her survive.
But the FDA recently denied its approval.
Now her access to the medication is at risk. We're urging @FDA to reconsider🧵
This is Hope.
Hope was born with an ultra-rare genetic disorder called MLS syndrome. She is deaf and blind.
She also has a heart condition called cardiomyopathy, which makes it difficult for her heart to pump blood.
Last year, Hope’s heart function dropped so severely that doctors warned she might need a heart transplant.
As a last resort, her medical team at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia recommended elamipretide, an experimental drug developed for ultra-rare mitochondrial disorders like hers.
“It is my understanding that DOGE contacted [the Justice Management Division] this afternoon and instructed them to terminate the contract,” Sirce Owen, the acting director of the Executive Office of Immigration Review, wrote on April 3.
NEW: Fourth Circuit shoots down the Trump administration’s efforts to appeal order requiring it to facilitate the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
“We shall not micromanage the efforts of a fine district judge attempting to implement the Supreme Court’s recent decision.”
“It is difficult in some cases to get to the very heart of the matter. But in this case, it is not hard at all. The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process..”
“[The government] claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear..”