Missing Melania’s crucial role in husband Donald Trump’s trial
She has been absent from her husband’s courtroom – but Melania Trump could be all that’s between freedom for Donald Trump or jail.
World
Don't miss out on the headlines from World. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Donald Trump has had a cavalcade of cheerleaders at his New York trial.
His son Eric has been a regular resident of the hard wooden benches behind his dad in the small Manhattan courtroom. Politicians have also taken the lift to the 15th floor to see Mr Trump such as House Speaker Mike Johnson, one of the most powerful men in the US.
But one person has been conspicuous by her absence: Mrs Trump.
Melania has not been seen at the imposing judicial building on Centre Street in Downtown.
Yet how she reacted to the multiple accusations from women about her husband – or at least how Mr Trump thought she might react – is vital.
It could be the difference between the former, and maybe next, president avoiding jail.
“If his motive was to hide the truth from Melania, it’s still a misdemeanour,” Professor Stephen Gillers of New York University’s School of Law told news.com.au.
“However, if his motive was to influence the election in violation of state and federal campaign finance laws, then the charges become a felony.”
And felonies are bad. Prison bad.
Trump’s ‘fixer’
The past week has been one of the most blockbuster in the Trump hush money trial.
The only witness has been Michael Cohen, a former lawyer for the Trump Organisation.
But he said his job was bigger than that – he was Mr Trump’s “fixer”. If something wasn’t going Mr Trump’s way – like a woman threatening to go to the press over an alleged affair for instance – Mr Cohen claimed he was the man Donald Trump turned too.
He told the jury that he had been “knee deep in the cult of Trump”.
So much so that he initially paid porn star Stormy Daniels, 45, $200,000 ($US130,000) from his own pocket to keep allegations she had sex with the “boss” quiet in the weeks before the 2016 presidential election.
He claimed he did this because the Trump Organisation wasn’t coming up with the funds quickly enough and he was concerned she would go to the newspapers.
Ms Daniels memorably told the court that she had a “brief” sexual encounter with Mr Trump during a 2006 golf tournament.
It’s the payment to her which is at the heart of the trial.
A payment isn’t illegal. But Mr Trump, 77, is accused of falsifying business records to cover it up.
Mr Trump has denied an affair took place and denied the charges against him
Mr Cohen has said that he received $627,000 ($US420,000) to serve as the, by now, President’s personal lawyer in 2017, the first year Mr Trump was in the White House.
“Trump must first argue that payments (he made to Mr Cohen) were for legal services, so far as he knew,” Prof Gillers told news.com.au.
“If so, there’s no crime.”
But Mr Cohen has told the court the money he was paid was really a sneaky way to reimburse him for the money he paid to Ms Daniels and other costs.
Besides, he said, he only did 10 hours of legal work for the President during that year. Which means he would have been paid a very generous $63,000 an hour.
If Mr Trump can’t convince the jury Mr Cohen’s expenses were a legitimate cost for services rendered, Prof Gillers said, “he has to argue that this motive was to maintain marital harmony”.
“If so, they would be only a misdemeanour”.
But that misdemeanour would become a felony if it’s proved Mr Trump paid the cash to stop him looking bad in the eyes of voters who were about to go to the polls. That’s electoral interference.
However, Mr Trump won’t be allowed to be convicted of a misdemeanour because his lawyers never asked that the jury be allowed to consider “lesser included charges”. As such, he’s either guilty of a felony or felonies – or nothing.
‘Wasn’t thinking about Melania’
Mr Cohen has done his best to convince the jury that Mr Trump wasn’t that fussed about marital harmony.
“He wasn’t thinking about Melania,” Mr Cohen claimed about the alleged porn star pay-off.
“This was all about the campaign”.
He further claimed that when he asked Mr Trump about how the claims might affect his marriage, he replied: “Don’t worry. How long do you think I will be on the market for? Not long”.
Mr Cohen also mentioned the now infamous Access Hollywood recording which emerged weeks before Ms Daniels threatened to go the press.
On the tape, Mr Trump bragged about how he could “do anything” to seduce women, such as “grab ‘em by the p***y”.
It’s not known if Mrs Trump was appalled or not by her husband’s comments, but Mr Cohen said she was fully involved in countering it and advised a “locker room talk” defence.
Days later she went on CNN and said it was all “boys talk” and bragging.
Mr Cohen’s implication was that Mrs Trump was not that shocked by her husband’s alleged peccadillos.
‘Transactional marriage’
Stephanie Wolkoff, who used to be a senior adviser to the former first lady, said the Trump’s relationship was “transactional”.
“I do believe it is a transactional marriage,” she told CNN last week.
“By marrying Donald, Melania really did get to the Vogue cover model that she’s always wanted to be, that supermodel.
“And by marrying Melania, Donald was legitimatised as trying to get away from that whole Playboy mentality that everyone wanted to characterise him as.
“She has said to me over and over, I know who I married. And she accepted what that role was”.
Yet, Mr Cohen’s testimony about Mrs Trump has not been the only one heard in court.
Hope Hicks, Donald Trump’s former communications manager, has helped – and hindered – the prosecution.
Earlier in the trial, she rejected a defence line that Mr Cohen might have selflessly paid $200,000 to Ms Daniels without Mr Trump knowing.
“That would be out of character for Michael.
“I didn’t know him to be an especially selfless person. He was the kind of person to seek credit.”
That bolstered the misdemeanour part of the prosecution’s case.
Family could be ‘hurt’
But, Ms Hicks said that Mr Trump did indeed worry about his wife and salacious allegations.
“He was concerned about how it would be viewed by his wife,” she told the court.
The claims were “absolutely” very personal, she added.
“I don’t think he wanted anyone in his family to be hurt or embarrassed by what’s happening on the campaign”.
On Thursday, under cross examination, Mr Cohen conceded that in 2021, Mr Trump did tell him that his family wouldn’t like a story that was due to emerge about him and Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal.
But Mr Cohen insisted that Mr Trump’s “brand” was his major concern.
Mr Cohen is a convicted felon and has admitted to lying on the stand before. Although he contends those lies were to protect Mr Trump.
Last week, the defence did all they could to remind the jury of this, to discredit the prosecution’s star witness.
One star unlikely to go anywhere near the courtroom is Mrs Trump.
“I don’t think we’re going to see Melania Trump accompany Donald to court,” Ms Wolkoff said.
“I do not see her supporting him in this way because… you can feel that humiliation without having to put yourself in front of the cameras.”
Melania may be missing, but her presence hangs heavy over the courtroom and what a jury can be persuaded about her feelings could be crucial for her husband.
Originally published as Missing Melania’s crucial role in husband Donald Trump’s trial
‘They knew of the harm’: Social media crackdown approved
As families of online abuse victims lobby for justice, the US Senate is actioning the most significant online safety overhaul in decades that would change the way kids use social media.
Shock prediction from US election expert
A US election soothsayer, who correctly predicted the outcome of the last two elections, has said who he believes will win in November.