Donald Trump’s hush money trial | CNN Politics (2024)

The court will be dark for a week, a scheduling decision Judge Juan Merchan chose so the final stages of the trial weren’t broken up by a four-day Memorial Day weekend.

Merchan told jurors they will return next Tuesday for closing arguments, which are expected to take the whole day. Once the jury gets its instructions, Trump’s fate will be in its hands.

Here’s a look atwhat happens next in the trial:

Closing arguments:Attorneys for the prosecution and defense each give a closing argument appealing to the jury that will soon consider the case. Because they have the burden of proof, prosecutors address the jury first but they also get the last word, so the prosecution will give a rebuttal argument after the defense closing argument.

Jury instruction or jury charge:The judge instructs the jury as to the charges they must consider against the defendant and the laws governing their deliberations.

Jury deliberation:Apanel of 12 jurorsconsiders the evidence presented at trial and charges against the defendant. The jury must be unanimous in its decision. The jury can communicate with the court and ask questions about the case with the court through handwritten notes.

Verdict:The jury will notify the court that they’ve reached a verdict. The verdict will then be read in court and jurors will be polled to confirm the verdict read in court reflects their own vote.

Sentencing:If the jury reaches a guilty verdict, the judge sentences the defendant, typically after a sentencing hearing at a later date.

CNN’s Jeremy Herb and Kara Scannell contributed reporting to this post.

When CNNasked for your questionsabout former President Donald Trump’s first criminal trial for his role in hush money payments made before the 2016 election to women who said they had affairs with him, we got a flood of input.

Here are the answers to some of the questions:

Could Trump actually go to jail? I went to CNN’s chief legal analyst Laura Coates for the single, most-asked question.

If Trump were sent to prison, would he still have his presidential Secret Service protecting him in jail?

I reached out to the Secret Service to ask if they had planned for the potential that Trump could be imprisoned. Not surprisingly, I was told by a spokesman that this is “something we can not comment on at this time.” But note that as a matter of US law, former presidents and their spouses are afforded lifetime Secret Service protection unless they decline it.

Is a unanimous guilty verdict required for Trump to be convicted in this case, or could he be convicted by a majority of seven jurors voting “guilty”?

A unanimous vote is required for either conviction or acquittal. Anything short of a unanimous verdict would be a hung jury. The judge will try very hard to get the jury to reach a unanimous verdict. A hung jury might be perceived as a net win for Trump since prosecutors would have to ponder whether to try him again on the same charges and there’s little chance it would happen before Election Day.

Get answers to other frequently asked questions as the trial nears a close.

Robert Costello, an attorney connected with Michael Cohen, finished his testimony on Tuesday before the defense rested its case, teeing up the jury to start deliberations soon in the criminal hush money trial of Donald Trump.

Costello was called to the stand by the defense on Monday where he got into a contentious exchangewith the judge.

Trump is chargedwith 34 counts of falsifying business recordsto cover up a payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election.Closing arguments are expected next Tuesday, the day after Memorial Day weekend.

In the morning:

In the afternoon:

Closing arguments next:Attorneys for the prosecution and defense will each give a closing argument on Tuesday. Because they have the burden of proof, prosecutors address the jury first but they also get to give a rebuttal argument after the defense. The judge will then instruct the jury on the charges and the laws governing their deliberations. The jury is expected to start deliberating on Wednesday next week, according to the judge.

Former President Donald Trump accused Judge Juan Merchan, who is overseeing the hush money trial, of being “corrupt” and “conflicted.”

“The judge is so biased, so corrupt,” Trump said outside the courtroom after today’s proceedings. “And he is so conflicted.”

“When you have a corrupt judge, lots of bad things happen,” he added.

Merchan’sgag orderdoes not prohibit Trump from talking about the judge.

Trump also repeated his false claim that President Joe Biden’s administration has played a role in this trial. There is no basis for this claim. There is no evidence that Biden has had any role in launching or running Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s prosecution—and Bragg is a locally elected official who does not report to the federal government. Theindictmentin the case was approved by a grand jury of ordinary citizens.

The defense and prosecution finished debating jury instructions during the charge conference on Tuesday, discussing the language around intent, an alleged conspiracy and more.

Here are the key points:

Alleged conspiracy: The parties debated language about the jury’s requirement to find the prosecutors proved that Donald Trump participated in an alleged conspiracy to undermine the 2016 election. The prosecution argued that Trump’s meeting with former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker at Trump Tower in 2015 went toward Trump’s participation in the conspiracy, while the defense called the meeting a “series of pretty standard campaign activities that were not criminal.”

Intent: Originally, the defense proposed a second line about intent, which meant people must establish beyond a reasonable doubt two separate intents, the intent to defraud and the intent to commit or conceal the aid of another crime. Due to concerns with this section, Judge Juan Merchan opted to keep the standard, criminal jury instructions language around the issue of intent.

Here are some other topics discussed around jury instructions:

Asking for another deviation: Defense attorney Emil Bove requested another deviation from the standard criminal jury instructions language when he asked the judge to be as specific as possible when describing the statutes as they are applied in this case, noting there wasn’t much of a precedent.

How the jury will hear its instructions before going to deliberate is very important in this case, CNN commentators and former prosecutors say.

Donald Trump is facing 34 counts of falsifying business records related to the payment to Stormy Daniels. Prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt thatTrump falsified business records with the intent to commit or conceal another crime — but they don’t have to prove that Trump committed that crime.

“I’vealways thought the mostdifficult part of this case forthe prosecution to prove isthat connection to anyunderlying crime that they haveto show that Donald Trump wasintending to violate by falsifying records,” said Carrie Cordero, the former counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for National Security.

The presence of an underlying crime is what makes these charges felonies, instead of misdemeanors, she said.

Shan Wu, a former federal prosecutor, also emphasized the importance of jury instruction in this trial.

Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett of Texas attended the criminal trial of former President Donald Trump in New York on Tuesday on the heels of herviralrebukeofGOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greenelast week.

Crockett’s decision to attend the trial marks a rare appearance by a Democratic lawmaker at the proceedings — and comes as a multitude of GOP lawmakers have made the trek to the courtroom in an effort to defend the former president.

“I was in New York to raise some money and I decided I must see what’s going on,” Crockett, a former criminal defense attorney and public defender, told CNN.

“I was curious as a lawyer and just wanted to get my own firsthand take on what was going on” Crockett said, adding she wanted to have information to push back against her Republican colleagues who have tirelessly defended the former president and have evendelayeddoing their jobs in order to appear at Trump’s side throughout the trial.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass citing New York legal precedent asks that Judge Juan Merchan clarify for the jury in a curative instruction to combat the defense’s notion that there’s “nothing improper about not having a retainer agreement.”

Steinglass said, “It is in fact the law.”

“We don’t think that’s right, judge,” Bove says in response, pointing to different New York case law.

Bove says he appreciates that Steinglass didn’t suggest there was bad intention on the defense’s part, but said the prosecutors are trying to place weight on their argument that a written retainer agreement is required between an attorney and a client.

Bove cited law, saying that a retainer might be required to collect fees from a client when there’s a dispute over the fees but a retainer is not ethically required to provide services.

“I’ll read the rules, I’ll read the decisions and I’ll get back to you on that,” Merchan says.

If he determines there is a requirement for a curative instruction, he adds there will have to be a follow-up.

“This is the government seeking to put weight on their argument,” Bove argues with regards to the proposed curative instruction.

Trump’s legal team wants to instruct the jury about Michael Cohen’s phones being factory reset.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says he’s never seen anything like this charge and says that Trump’s team wants the jury be instructed as those their arguments are facts in the record. He quips that he’d prefer the facts not be based in the “imaginary record” rather than the real one.

Trump attorney Emil Bove argues that Cohen loaded something onto his phone in 2016 after resetting it and they don’t know what it was. And he also points to apps that delete messages like Signal and Dust to support the proposed instruction.

Judge Juan Merchan says Bove effectively questioned the district attorney’s technical records custodian who testified about Cohen’s phones and says Trump’s defense is free to argue about it in summations but he will not instruct the jury about it.

Trump attorney Emil Bove wants to be able to argue that because Michael Cohen testified that ex-National Enquirer publisher David Pecker told him the agreement was “bulletproof” and Cohen communicated that to Trump, that they should be able to argue it goes to Trump’s state of mind and intent to defraud.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says it was a “retread” of previous arguments the judge had rejected about a presence of counsel of defense.

Judge Juan Merchan agrees. He says he never heard of presence of counsel and now the terms has “morphed” to “involvement of counsel.”

Merchan tells Bove to sit down.

“My answer hasn’t changed, and honestly I find it disingenuous to make it at this point,” Merchan says before Bove tries to speak.

Colangelo also says Pecker did not give adequate testimony to show that a lawyer adequately vetted the agreement with Karen McDougal, because he testified the lawyer who looked at the McDougal agreement didn’t know all the facts surrounding the situation.

“I’m telling you my ruling is the jury will not hear that instruction from the bench nor are you permitted to make that argument. Period,” Merchan says.

“I understand. I just want to complete the record,” Bove says.

“Go ahead,” Merchan says.

Trump muttered something, shaking his head and looking down, as Merchan said it’s not going to happen.

Defense attorney Emil Bove is now asking for a limiting instruction as it relates to Michael Cohen’s guilty plea, American Media Inc.’s non-prosecution agreement and the Federal Election Commission settlement.

Judge Juan Merchan said he thinks his limiting instructions throughout the trial “were appropriate.”

The defense proposed an instruction that AMI did not admit to any violations of the law in the agreements.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass called it “outrageous.” Bove said, “I wasn’t trying to be outrageous.”

Bove went on to say that he wants to make it clear to the jury that the non-prosecution agreement is in evidence to go to former National Enquirer boss David Pecker’s credibility not to go to Trump’s guilt — like Cohen’s guilty plea that’s also in evidence.

Steinglass said AMI’s non-prosecution agreement and Cohen’s guilty plea are also meant to offer context to the facts in the case, not just Pecker and Cohen’s credibility.

Merchan said that his intention is to give “substantially the same instruction I gave during the trial” related to AMI’s non-prosecution agreement.

The parties are now talking about an instruction the defense wants to told to the jury as to how they should consider testimony about reactions from outsiders to moments like the “Access Hollywood” tape.

Specifically referencing testimony from Hope Hicks, Trump attorney Emil Bove says they need a curative instruction becauseevidence of the reactions of others is not coming in for the fact of the matter, it’s meant for the impact on Trump’s state of mind which Bove says might not be clear to the jury.

Merchan says he’d think about it, but was inclined to side with prosecutors who said there was no prejudicial effect and the evidence’s purpose was clear enough to the jury.

Trump has been leaning back in his chair with his eyes closed through much of the session since coming back from the break.

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that he wanted the judge to instruct the jury that hush money is not illegal.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass opposed Bove’s request and went on to say the defense was asking the judge to make their legal arguments for them.

Shortly after, Judge Juan Merchan weighed in and said he would not include it because it came out several times in testimony that hush money is not illegal.

Merchan said that he suspects the defense will make that argument during summations and the prosecution won’t dispute that. He said giving an instruction to that effect is taking it too far.

Judge Juan Merchan says he’s gone over the issues he wanted to review and now he’s asking the two sides if they have anything else they want to raise.

Trump attorney Emil Bove raises an instruction related to bias and Trump that he says was modified from the Trump Org. trial.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says its not necessary in this case because it was rooted out in voir dire. This was the portion earlier in the trial when the judge and the attorneys questioned potential jurors about their backgrounds and beliefs to determine whether they can be fair and impartial jurors.

Steinglass also argues that the point of the instruction in the Trump Org. trial was to remind the jury that Trump was not a party to the case.

The judge says he doesn’t normally give this instruction but that he will include the government’s modified version.

Merchan says he will have an instruction on bias while also saying the questionnaire had 42 or 43 questions and the voir dire was pretty extensive.

The court is taking a break.

Judge Juan Merchan and lawyers for the prosecution and defense have been hashing out instructions on the law that the judge will eventually read to the jury as he charges them to begin deliberations, which could start next week.

The jury is not present for these proceedings. The defense rested its case Tuesday morning, just one day after the prosecution rested its case.

It’s unclear how long the charging conference will last.

CNN’s Katherine Sullivan contributed reporting to this post.

The defense and prosecution have moved onto an instruction about tax law.

Defense attorney Emil Bove again reiterates that tax crimes should not be permitted to go to the jury as one of the underlying crimes Trump sought to conceal when he falsified business records.

He goes on to quote Michael Cohen’s testimony when asked about Allen Weisselberg’s “grossing up” of the money he was paid. Cohen said, “I didn’t really even think of that I just wanted to get my money back.” Bove said that prosecutors are trying to say Cohen was trying to intentionally evade taxes by disguising the reimbursem*nt as income and gross it up to cover his tax obligations.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argues that the language on tax crimes should be read to the jury because the money that was paid to Cohen was grossed up for tax purposes, which was written on notes from Weisselberg and Jeffrey McConney in evidence.

Colangelo notes that they were falsely identified corporate payments rather than reimbursem*nts and they were then submitted to the Internal RevenueService as income through 1099s.

Defense attorney Bove says, “An agreement after the election to do these things is not an agreement to promote Trump’s candidacy in the 2016 election.”

Bove now argues they weren’t allowed to ask Cohen about his own tax handling of the money and that there’s no evidence of Trump or Trump Organization’s tax handling of the payments.

Arguing for another deviation from the standard criminal jury instructions language, defense attorney EmilBove asked that Judge Juan Merchan be as specific as possible when describing the statutes as they are applied in this case, noting the importance of the case and that there’s not much of a precedent for the way the statutes are being used in this case.

Merchan said he understands what Bove is saying about the importance of the case but said, “What you’re asking me to do is change the law and I’m not going to do that.”

Trump shook his head as Merchan said this.

The parties are debating over language about the jury’s requirement to find the prosecutors proved that Donald Trump participated in the alleged conspiracy.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo said that there’s “extensive corroboration” for example that Trump was at the Trump Tower 2015 meeting with David Pecker that goes to his participation in the conspiracy.

Trump attorney Emil Bove says, “Our perspective, what was discussed in that meeting — if you credit the people’s witnesses — were a series of pretty standard campaign activities that were not criminal and were being practiced by candidates across the country for decades.”

Bove continued, “the defense’s position is there’s nothing criminal at all” about what was discussed at that meeting.

Judge Juan Merchan asked, “If there’s nothing criminal about it what difference does it make if he’s present or not?”

Colangelo pushed back on this, in a preview of what’s to come at closing arguments next week. He said that Bove’s argument that the 2015 meeting was “benign” and a “high-minded” discussion about democracy did not match the trial record, pointing to evidence that Pecker told just a few people about the meeting and told them to keep it secret, and then “proceeded to do all the steps of the conspiracy” that prosecutors argue was unlawful.

Remember: Trump was first indicted in March 2023 by the Manhattan district attorney on state charges related to a hush-money payment to an adult film star in 2016. Prosecutors allege Trump was a part of an illegal conspiracy tounderminethe integrity of the 2016 election. Further, they allege he was part of an unlawful plan to suppress negative information, including the $130,000 payment.Trump has pleaded not guilty.

Trump’s attorney Emil Bove says the defense doesn’t think the underlying tax crime predicate should go to the jury.

But if it does, it should include language that says the jury must find prosecutors proved Donald Trump acted willfully with the intent to conceal a tax crime.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says the alleged grossing-up agreement and intent to conceal the reimbursem*nt to Michael Cohen that was income clearly goes to that underlying tax crime.

They’re moving onto another submission that Judge Juan Merchan says he received at 1:05 p.m. today from the parties.

As they debate the law and the language to use to instruct the jury, the lawyers are often referencing “yellow” and “blue” edits on the document.

When they disagree, each side can use a color to propose disputed language that is then submitted to the judge to hash out at this conference.

Judge Juan Merchan and lawyers for the defense and prosecution are meeting to work on jury instructions for the 12-person panel. During the charge conference, both sides are hashing out instructions on the law, which the judge will eventually read to the jury before deliberations begin.

Here are some key disputes:

Candidate status: The prosecutors asked to tell jurors that status of the presidential candidate doesn’t have to be the sole or only motivation for the third-party, hush money payment. The defense argued if the payment was made without candidacy, it shouldn’t be treated as a “contribution.” The judge is reserving his decision.

Campaign finance violations: The defense and prosecutors went back and forth on specific language around campaign finance violations for the jury instructions. Merchan decided not to include specific election-related language related to the Federal Election Campaign Act, saying that some of the issues around it are confusing enough for the jury. The judge also also declined to jury instructions on the lack of limitations to candidates’ personal contributions to their campaign.

The word too hard to pronounce: In a lighter moment, Merchan said the word “eleemosynary,” which means charitable, can be struck from definitions both sides proposed reading to the jury.

Both sides agreed.

Judge Juan Merchan is now moving onto the final issue in the section, which he says he has particular concerns about. The section reads that the defendant did so with the intent to defraud that included an intent to commit or conceal another crime.

Merchan says that the defense proposes an additional line: Thus, for this second element the people must establish beyond a reasonable doubt two separate intents, the intent to defraud and the intent to commit or conceal the aid of another crime.

The judge says he’s specifically concerned about this section. Defense attorney Emil Bove said he understands that their proposed language is not the official criminal jury instructions.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangeloargued the defense version is inconsistent with the text of the statute and “there’s nothing in the statute about two separate intents.”

Merchan said he’d keep the standard language on the issue.

Judge Juan Merchan is addressing language related to intent to conceal or commit another crime.

Trump attorney Emil Bove is objecting to language proposed by prosecutors that he says calls the jury’s attention to things that the government does not have to prove.

“What we perceive here is a risk of burden-shifting,” Bove says.

Merchan says he’s not going to rule immediately on Bove’s objection.

Donald Trump’s team wants the judge to read an expanded jury instruction on intent and also an instruction onintent to defraud.

Judge Juan Merchan asks why they need the “intent to defraud” charge in addition to the intent charge.

Trump attorney Emil Bove argues there’s a “significant issue with instructing to the jury that intent to defraud could include defrauding the government and the voting public, based on the facts of this case.”

Merchan says prosecutors have to prove there was “intent to deprive another, they don’t have to prove that it’s property or money, they have to prove that it was something.”

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says the wording they are seeking is “the controlling definition of intent to defraud and given the facts of this case it’s important the jury be instructed on it.”

Merchan said earlier he was inclined to use a line the prosecutors suggested to explain “intent to defraud can extend beyond economic concerns.” Bove contended that they have to tell the jury what it is, not what it is not.

He asked that if they include it, that the judge use the defense language that includes the language “lead another into error or disadvantage.”

Colangelo said that language is not a part of the official language in the standard legal definition.

Now there’s a discussion about how they will instruct the jury on how a person causes a false entry in business records and what that means.

Trump attorney Emil Bove objected to prosecutors’ language, saying they want to strike the phrase “a person causes a false entry when…”

Bove argues:

Judge Juan Merchan agrees with the defense but then hears prosecutor Matthew Colangelo.

Colangelo says it is “an extremely important concept” because Trump’s lawyers argued in openings that Trump did not deal directly with the business records. Colangelo says Trump could have acted in concert with Weisselberg to cause the false entry.

Merchan responds, “Isn’t this already covered in the definition of accomplice liability?”

Merchan is reserving decision but says his inclination is to strike the line as Trump’s team requested.

Judge Juan Merchan is now reviewing some instructions jointly submitted by the parties earlier today.

In a moment of levity he says the word “eleemosynary” can be struck from definitions they proposed reading to the jury.

Merchan joked that he tried to pronounce it several times but cannot and so spelled it for the court reporter. He also said it means “charitable.” Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo laughing said they’re fine with that.

Judge Juan Merchan is now discussing another language dispute that appears to be related to Michael Cohen’s crimes.

The defense wants a sentence in the jury instructions to read “participated in a crime.”

The prosecution wants “participated in and was convicted of two crimes.”

Merchan agrees with the defense to tweak it to say “participated in crimes” (plural) and remove the language about being convicted.

They also are debating including “accomplice” versus “culprit” in the sentence.

“You should know going forward for the rest of this conference and beyond where there is standard pattern jury instructions I don’t deviate,” Merchan said.

Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass said that the defense’s suggestion of culprit had deviated from standard jury instructions.

The prosecution and defense are discussing a definition involving legitimate press function, a broad concept of normal tasks such as solicitation letters or seeking new subscribers to a publication.

In this case, it’s about AMI, the publisher of the National Enquirer.

Trump’s attorney Emil Bove argues that the defense wants to make clear that AMI did publish articles and do things for Karen McDougal, pursuant to the agreement within normal legitimate press function.

Judge Juan Merchan says:

“Why can’t we just strike the phrase legitimate press function is a broad concept. I can keep what you have before that and what you have after that.”

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says he thinks some of the other language is “unnecessary.”

Merchan says there’s no harm in including the line.

Trump is leaning back in his chair, his eyes sometimes open and sometimes closed, as the lawyers go back and forth on the language that will be used during jury instructions.

He’s reviewing sheets of paper from the multiple stacks in front of him on the defense table.

Robert Costello’s disastrous testimony may not have a serious impact since the jury will have a week to think and reset before deliberating, Robert Hirschhorn, a jury consultant and attorney, said on CNN.

He continued, “So, it normally be a really big problem for the defense but here’s the difference this one week is going to work as a reset.”

Hirschhorn added, however, that he believes this one week off might actually help the defense instead of the prosecution.

Judge Juan Merchan is now moving on to a request from prosecutors to tell jurors that candidate status does not have to be the sole or only motivation for the third-party payment, “so long as the payment would not have been made but for the candidate status” of the candidate for federal office.

Merchan is reading part of the Trump team’s proposed language that he said sums it up very well:

Trump’s team wants to include some examples.

“This is an area that’s technical and somewhat confusing,” Trump attorney Emil Bove argues.

Bove again says this is something they would have asked former Federal Election CommissionerBrad Smith about if they had been allowed to.

Merchan is reserving decision but said he’s inclined to use Trump’s last sentence and a line from the prosecution.

The defense wants the jury instructions to include a line: “for the purpose of influencing any election requires proof that the activity clearly and unambiguously related to President Trump’s campaign.”

Defense attorney Emil Bove says they were seeking to provide this type of content through the testimony of campaign finance expert Brad Smith had they been allowed to, so they are asking Judge Juan Merchan to include it.

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo disputes Bove’s claim that the phrase is a fact of law.

Colangelo says the jury probably needs less — not more when it comes to the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) terms.

What Merchan ruled: He says he won’t include it, noting that some of these issues related to FECA are confusing enough for the jury.

He says other portions of the instructions will accomplish what Trump’s attorneys are looking to do with that phrase.

Judge Juan Merchan says he’s reserving his decision on the willful issue.

The defense argued that any violation of federal campaign finance laws had to be willful and that the word needed to be included in the jury instruction.

The prosecution said there was no need to add the word “willful.”

Both sides are now discussing the language the defense wants to include in jury instructions.

The defense wants the jury to be told that in 2015 and 2016, there was no limit on a candidate’s ability to contribute personal funds to his or her campaign.

“It has nothing to do with the case and is extraneous and would probably be confusing to the jury,” Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo argues with regards to the language on candidates’ personal contributions.

Merchan said he will not give the jury instruction on the issue.

He tells the defense they can say in closing arguments that “if your client has certain wealth he could have paid for this himself.”

Judge Juan Merchan says falsifying business records in the first degree “requires that there be an intent to defraud that includes the intent to commit another crime.”

Prosecutor Matthew Colangelo says the other crime is the election law violation that is created through the alleged conspiracy.

But the prosecutor says the object crime doesn’t need to be completed. There just needs to be intent to commit the underlying crime.

Matthew Colangelo is arguing about the language regarding federal election law on behalf of the prosecution.

“The other crime here is the election law violation which becomes a criminal violation when two or more persons conspire to promote” a candidate for election by unlawful means, Colangelo added.

Remember: Prosecutors allege Trump was a part of an illegal conspiracy tounderminethe integrity of the 2016 election. They allege he was part of an unlawful plan to suppress negative information, including the $130,000 hush money payment to Stormy Daniels.

Donald Trump’s attorney Emil Bove is up and they’re discussing campaign finance violations.

Bove says the defense wants Judge Juan Merchan to instruct the jury about the federal election law that there needs to be a willful violation.

Otherwise, “it would allow the jury to think about the predicate offense in civil terms.”

Trump has moved into the third chair at the defense table. Bove and fellow Trump attorney Todd Blanche are sitting next to each other for the charging conference.

Judge Juan Merchan and lawyers for the defense and prosecution are meeting now in the Manhattan courtroom to work on jury instructions.

During the charge conference, the parties will hash out instructions on the law that the judge will eventually read to the jury as he charges them to begin deliberations, which could start next week.

The jury is not present for these proceedings. The defense rested its case Tuesday morning, just one day after the prosecution rested its case.

Trump is back in the courtroom with a group of supporters behind him including his son Don Jr. It’s unclear how long the charging conference will last.

What happens next: Attorneys for the prosecution and defense are expected to deliver closing arguments Tuesday as they appeal to the jury.

Because they have the burden of proof, prosecutors address the jury first but they also get the last word, so the prosecution will give a rebuttal argument after the defense closing argument.

Read up on the steps of the trial.

CNN’s Katherine Sullivan contributed reporting to this post.

Heading back into the courtroom Tuesday afternoon, former President Donald Trump called for the hush money case against him to be dismissed.

Both sides have rested their case and closing arguments are expected to start next Tuesday, according to Judge Juan Merchan.

Trump, speaking to reporters, called Merchan “complicated and conflicted,” echoing language he has been repeating throughout the trial. He also continued to claim there is “no crime.”

The former president also said the next few hours will be important. The lawyers and Merchan will work through the instructions that will be given to the jury.

The defense rested its case inDonald Trump’s criminal hush money trial on Tuesday after roughly 90 minutes of testimony – and without the former president taking the stand.

Trump’s attorneys called two witnesses: a paralegal who entered phone records into evidence and Robert Costello, an attorney who was in talks with Michael Cohen to represent him after the FBI raided his home and office in 2018.

Here are key takeaways from the final day of testimony:

Read more about the takeaways from Trump’s defense.

Ahead of the hush money trial, Judge Juan Merchan imposed a gag order on Donald Trump which blocks him from speaking out about potential witnesses and most people in or associated with the court or the New York district attorney’s office.

In that initial order — imposed in March — Merchan also said thatTrump can’t make statements about attorneys, court staff or the family members of prosecutors or lawyers intended to interfere with the case. Trump is also barred from making statements about any potential or actual juror.

The ruling also prevents Trump from criticizing his former attorney, Michael Cohen, or adult film star Stormy Daniels, both witnesses in the trial.

The former president, Merchan said in his order, has a history of making “threatening, inflammatory, denigrating” statements against people at all levels of the justice system, including jurors.

The order does not prevent Trump from talking about New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who is a public figure, or Merchan himself.

The gag order was imposed after Trump repeatedly attacked the district attorney’s case and those involved with it ahead of what would be the first criminal trial of a former president. Trump criticized Merchan, his daughter and one of Bragg’s prosecutors in the hours before Merchan issued his order in March.

Since then, Trump has been fined for violating the order 10 times and the judge warned on May 6 that “this court will have to consider a jail sanction” if the former president violates it again.

Merchan fined Trump $1,000 for the violation ruling on May 6. A week prior, thejudge fined Trump $9,000for nine previous violations of the judge’s gag order. Violations of the gag order are punishable by a fine of up to $1,000, by jail time of up to 30 days, or both.

During remarks before entering the courtroom for the trial’s proceedings, Trump has repeatedly railed against the gag order and the case. He has also relied on allies to deliver attacks outside the court.

Jury instructions are the last thing the jury hears before they go into the room to deliberate. In them, the judge outlines how they should reach their decision and what they need to do to reach a verdict.

The time before the charging instructions are given is an opportunity for the lawyers of both sides to argue about things they think should be told to the jury before they go into deliberations, CNN’s senior legal analyst Elie Honig said.

This afternoon when the court reconvenes, the judge will go through with both the prosecution and defense what can be included in the charging instructions, and what the judge will tell the jury about issues raised throughout the case, the former federal and state prosecutor said.

Read more about the steps of a trial.

No cameras are allowed inside the Manhattan courtroom where Donald Trump’s hush money trial is underway, but sketch artists are capturing the scenes.

The final defense witness in Trump hush money case, Robert Costello, questioned by prosecutor Susan Hoffinger.

A total of 22 witnesses testified in Donald Trump’s criminal hush money trial. Prosecutors called 20 witnesses over 19 days in court, totaling over 50 hours of testimony.

Defense attorneys called two witnesses over two days, with around two hours of testimony.

Trump’s ex-attorney and fixer Michael Cohen, adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former White House aide Hope Hicks were among the high-profile witnesses who took the stand.

Here’s who the jury heard from throughout the trial:

David Pecker — the former CEO of American Media Inc., the National Enquirer’s parent company — was the first witness called to testify. After more than 10 hours of testimony across four days, he offered illuminating details into how the infamous tabloid operated and conducted so-called “catch and kill” operations.Rhona Graff, Trump’s longtime assistant at the Trump Organization, was called to testify briefly on April 26. Gary Farro, the former banker of Cohen, walked the jury through Cohen’s bank activity around the payment to Daniels.Dr. Robert Browning, the executive director of C-SPAN archives, was called so prosecutors could use his testimony to get records into evidence.Phillip Thompson, a director at a court reporting company, testified about how depositions work. Keith Davidson, the former lawyer for model and actress Karen McDougal as well as for Daniels, was on the stand fornearly six hoursover two days.Douglas Daus works for the Manhattan District Attorney’s High Technology Analysis Unit, and was assigned to analyze two iPhones thatbelonged to Cohenin the investigation related to Trump. They were obtained via a search warrant.Daus testified about the“unusual” amount of contactsand other things he found on Cohen’s phone. Hope Hicks, Trump’s longtime former aide, testified for a little less than three hours about her role as Trump’s 2016 campaign press secretary, the aftermath ofthe “Access Hollywood” tape releaseand Cohen’s payment toDaniels.Jeffrey McConney, a former Trump Organization controller, testified abouthow Cohen’s payments were listedin Trump’s financial documents.Deborah Tarasoff, the accounts payable supervisor in the accounting department at the Trump Organization, explained how checks were cut to Cohenin 2017 and testified thatinvoices over $10,000had to be approved by Trump or one of his sons.Sally Franklin, the senior vice president and executive managing editor for Penguin Random House publishing group, testified for46 minutes. Prosecutors used her testimony to enterexcerpts from Trump’s booksinto evidence.Stormy Daniels, who’s at the center of the hush money case, was on the stand for six hours and 10 minutes over two days of testimony. Daniels walked the jury through details about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 and the $130,000 hush money payment from Trump’s ex-attorney Michael Cohen shortlybefore the 2016 election. Trump attorney Susan Necheles hammered down on Daniels in cross-examination to establish some of the ways she gained publicity and money from her story going public.Rebecca Manochio, a junior bookkeeper at the Trump Organization, testified for about 35 minutes. The prosecution used Manochio to submit invoices, documents and emails as evidence.Tracey Menzies, the senior vice president of production and creative operations at Harper Collins, spoke about one of the books Donald Trump co-authored, “Think Big: Make It Happen in Business and Life,” by Trump and Bill Zanker and read excerpts from the book. Madeleine Westerhout, a former personal assistant to Trump at the White House, detailed how the president preferred to work, his attention to detail and the reaction to the “Access Hollywood” tape. Daniel Dixon, an AT&T lead compliance analyst. He was used to enter phone records into evidence.Jennie Tomalin, Verizon senior analyst in executive relations, was also called to the stand to enter evidence into the records.Georgia Longstreet, who testified on May 3 and May 10, gave evidence about social media posts and text messages.Jaden Jarmel-Schneider, another paralegal from the Manhattan district attorney’s office, testified about analyzing phone records entered into evidence on May 10.Michael Cohen, Trump’s personal attorney, is at the center of the hush money payment, and hence, was a key witness for the prosecution. Daniel Sitko, a paralegal in Trump attorney Todd Blanche’s law firm, was the defense’s first witness and submitted a phone chart into evidence.Robert Costello, an attorney connected with Michael Cohen, was the second defense witness and testified about the alleged pressure campaign against Cohen.

Jim Trusty, Donald Trump’s former attorney, said it was a good move from the defense for Trump to not testify.

“There’s a number of reasons not to do it,” he told CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, including that other elements from Trump’s life, including the E. Jean Carroll case, where Trump was found guilty of sexually abusing Carroll in a civil trial, could be raised.

Trusty said instead, the defense focused on making the case all about Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen.

“And I think if you put President Trump on the stand, you’re just inviting a comparison game. You’re actually watering down the effectiveness of your cross against Cohen so right decision whether or not the president fought it behind scenes,” he said.

Remember: Trumphad repeatedlysaid that he wouldbe willing totestifyin his own defense. The former president did testify in his New York civil fraud trial last year.

Through witness testimony and exhibits, prosecutors tried to prove that Donald Trump falsified business records to cover up hush money payments made to prevent adult film star Stormy Daniel’s claim of an affair with Trump from becoming public before the 2016 presidential election.

Through their main witness, Trump’s ex-attorney and fixer Michael Cohen, and other high-profile witnesses, prosecutors aimed to tie together key dates at the heart of the case.

Soon the decision of whether to convict Trump will be in the hands of the 12-panel jury.

Here’s a timeline CNN compiled of key events in the hush money case:

See a full timelineon the case.

Donald Trump has been accused of taking part in an illegal conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election and an unlawful plan to suppress negative information, which included a hush money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels to hide an affair.

Prosecutors allege that Trump disguised the transaction as a legal payment and falsified business records numerous times to “promote his candidacy.” Trump faces 34 counts of falsifying business records. He has pleaded not guilty and denied the affair with Daniels.

Theprosecutionand defense have rested their case. Prosecutors called20witnesses to the stand over several weeks, including high-profile witnesses that included Daniels, Trump’s ex-attorney Michael Cohen and former White House aide Hope Hicks in an effort to convince jurors of their case. Defense attorneys called two witnesses over two days.

Read up on the key players in the trial:

Robert Costello, a lawyer who advised Michael Cohen, testified for over an hour today. He discussed his connection with former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and the difficulty he had working with Cohen.

Here are the highlights of his testimony:

Relationship with Giuliani: Prosecutors presented evidence to show Costello’s connection with Giuliani and how Costello said that could prove useful to Cohen. Here are some highlights:

Did he backchannel to Trump? Costello repeatedly denied he was pushing Cohen to retain him because he could provide a backchannel to Trump.

The comment elicited laughs in the courtroom.

Later on, defense attorney Emil Bove asked who first used the word “backchannel,” to which Costello responded, “Rudy Giuliani, in response to my telling him we couldn’t make this public because that’s what Michael Cohen said to me.”

Costello said they’d let Trump’s inner circle know through the backchannel that Costello would represent Cohen, but Cohen expressed concern, saying, “We don’t want to go public with this, it would cause a press uproar.”

Working with Cohen: Costello’s emails outlined some of the difficulty he encountered while working with Cohen. Here are the key points:

“That’s ridiculous”: Costello said he doesn’t have animosity toward Cohen, but that he believes Cohen is not telling the truth. The defense asked Costello about his testimony before a House committee last week and if that was an effort to intimidate Cohen. “That’s ridiculous, no,” Costello responded.

Correction: An earlier version of this post misstated who testified before a House committee. It was Robert Costello.

A total of 22 witnesses testified in Donald Trump’s criminal hush money trial.

Prosecutors called 20 witnesses over 19 days in court, totaling over 50 hours of testimony.

Defense attorneys called two witnesses over two days, with around two hours of testimony.

Robert Costello’s testimony seemed to backfire for the defense, several legal experts said on CNN.

Costello’s demeanor toward Judge Juan Merchan caused the courtroom to be cleared on Monday and his back and forth with prosecutors may not be working in the defense’s favor.

“It’s just terrible the way it went down and the weird thing is is that Costello knows better, right?” David Oscar Markus, a criminal defense attorney, said. “He’s a lawyer, he’s been in that courtroom, that courthouse. He knows better so just an awful, awful day. And you know the defense took a big risk here and struck out very badly.”

“The prosecutor is undermining through this,” Coates said, “and not allowing him, frankly, on this very tight leash, to try to talk his way out of what the documents say. Now the idea, the color we had in the courtroom before about him telling her to ‘speak up, talk louder’ not going over maybe well with the juror,” Coates said.

“He is now not able to explain away what the documents say. That’s where you want your witness to be if you want to undermine them,” she added.

The district attorney is “gradually but surely turning Bob Costello into a prosecution witness,” CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig said, “because Costello is talking about a crucial moment in time” in April 2018 when the emails indicate Costello was trying to keep Cohen in the fold and not flip. “This shady effort to keep Michael Cohen from not flipping is coming back to the floor. It’s bad for the defense and good for the prosecution.”

William J. Brennan, former Trump Payroll Corp. attorney, also said that Costello’s testimony is not in favor of the defense. “It’s just really sad for the defense that this is what we’re focused on now when you had a couple of days that don’t often happen in a criminal trial. You know Cohen was just, you know, a gift.”

Brennan continued, now they put Costello on, “he’s imploded, he fought with the judge, he’s dancing with her (Susan Hoffinger), it’s just not a great way to end.”

Donald Trump is leaving the courtroom.

He walks by cameras in the hallway and throws up a fist pump, giving no comments.

The jury has left the courtroom, and Judge Juan Merchan is off the bench.

“Thank you, I’ll see you in a week,” Merchan tells the jury as they depart.

Merchan says they would be back at 2:15 p.m. to discuss the charging instructions.

Robert Costello, a lawyer who advised Michael Cohen, testified for 1 hour and 14 minutes.

He was the final witness in Donald Trump’s historic criminal hush money trial.

Judge Juan Merchan is now instructing the jury on timing.

He says he expectsthe summations will take at least a day and he prefers not to break them up if possible.

There’s no way to do this in a cohesive manner this week, Merchan says.

He says the best thing to do is adjourn now and hear summations on Tuesday.

“It might be tempting to think now that both sides have rested you can kind of let up a bit, but in fact these instructions take on even greater significance,” Merchan tells the jury of his instructions not to talk about or research the case.

He also asks them to think about if they can work late next Tuesday, since he’s “not 100% sure we’re going to get both summations done by 4:30 (p.m. ET).”

Prosecutors have no rebuttal witnesses.

“Nothing further judge,” Prosecutor Joshua Steinglass says.

Trump attorney Todd Blanche has rested the defense’s case.

The defense’s case lasted just over two hours compared to weeks for the prosecution.

While the prosecution called 20 witnesses to testify, the defense decided to call a paralegal from Blanche’s law firm for brief testimony before calling Cohen’s former legal advisor Robert Costello to rebuff some of Cohen’s testimony.

Despite repeatedly saying that he would be willing to testify in his own defense, Trump ultimately did not take the stand.

He is charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election.

Closing arguments are expected to take place next Tuesday, the day after Memorial Day weekend.

CNN’s Laura Dolan contributed reporting to this post.

In a June 13, 2018, email that Trump attorney Emil Bove is reviewing, Robert Costello wrote: “You have the ability to make that communication when you want to. Whether you exercise that ability is totally up to you.”

More context: Trump’s attorneys called Costello to the stand as a way to try to rebut Cohen’s testimony about the pressure he was receiving in 2018 when theFBI searched his home and office.

Costello advised Cohen in the weeks after the search, though Cohen did not sign a retainer agreement and did not pay Costello, who touted in email communications his close connections withRudy Giuliani. The former New York mayor also joined Trump’s legal team in 2018.

Trump attorney Emil Bove is now asking Robert Costello about the “backchannel” email.

Bove asks, “Who first used the word backchannel?”

Costello says, “Rudy Giuliani, in response to my telling him we couldn’t make this public because that’s what Michael Cohen said to me.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger a bit earlier asked Costello if he was pushing Michael Cohen to retain him because he could provide a backchannel to Trump, which Costello denied.

Costello says they’d let Trump’s inner circle know through the backchannel that Costello would represent Cohen, but Cohen expressed concern, saying, “We don’t want to go public with this, it would cause a press uproar.”

Bove confirms with Costello that the first mention about a backchannel was sent in an email the day after Costello told his son he’d be representing Cohen, showing him the statement Cohen was set to release.

Trump attorney Emil Bove asks Robert Costello to explain what he meant when he wrote to Michael Cohen he thought they had been played in that June 13, 2018, email.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger objects, but Judge Juan Merchan allows him to explain.

Costello says that he was referring to Cohen not signing the retainer agreement that his partner Jeff Citron had given Cohen after their initial meeting.

“Every time Jeff asked him about the retainer, ‘Michael did you sign the retainer yet?’ he gave us an excuse,” Costello said.

Bove asks, “Were you concerned you were representing Michael Cohen when he wouldn’t sign the retainer agreement?”

“Yeah, sure,” Costello said.

Trump attorney Emil Bove pulled up the August 2018 email to Robert Costello and his partner Jeff Citronin which Michael Cohen said:

“Please cease contacting me as you do not and have never represented me in this or any other matter.”

Bove asks Costello, “From your perspective, was that true or false?”

“False,” Costello says.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger is asking Robert Costello if he has animosity toward Michael Cohen.

Costello is also asked about his testimony before a House committee last week and if that was an effort to intimidate Cohen.

While reviewing Robert Costello’s emails, prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asked Costello if he was upset that Michael Cohen was playing him.

Costello said “That’s the wrong word”and“No, I was informed.”

A 2018 email suggested that Costello was complaining that Cohen was not working with him.

The email reads in part, “Jeff. This is the response I received from Michael after sending him a detailed text followed by a voicemail one hour later at 4 pm. Turn into CNN and see how they are playing this up. Cohen has to know this yet he continues to slow play us and the president – is he totally nuts???”

“What should I say to this a**hole? He is playing with the most powerful man on the planet,” the email says.

The email “speaks for itself, does it not Mr. Costello?” Hoffinger asks.

“Yes it does,” Costello says.

“You lost control of Michael Cohen?” Hoffinger said.

“Absolutely not,” Costello says.

Hoffinger continued to press him asking if he lost control of Cohen when he pleaded guilty in federal court in 2018.

Costello said, “I certainly didn’t have any control when he plead guilty.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asks Robert Costello to look at an email.

She asks, “in this email aren’t you encouraging him not to cooperate, yes or no?”

“No,” Costello says

She showed a June 14, 2018, email the jury has already seen.

“If you really believe you are not being supported properly by your former boss, then you should make your position known. If you really want certain things to happen, you should make that known,” the email continues.

Hoffinger pressed Costello, saying: “You also were asked by Bove (Trump’s attorney), ‘did you care about President Trump’s interest while you were dealing with Cohen?’ Your answer was, ‘no my obligation was to Michael Cohen.’”

“Yes and that’s correct,” Costello said in response to that question.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger turns to another email from Robert Costello on June 13, 2018, which we’ve seen previously:

Costello says of that email: “I was encouraging Michael Cohen, as I just explained to you in my previous answer, to express any of his complaints, and he had several, so that I could bring them to (Rudy) Giuliani, and get them worked out, whatever they were.”

Former Federal Election Commissioner Brad Smith has posted a lengthy thread on X, detailing his objection to not being allowed to testify at the hush money trial.

In one post, Smith said that he had planned to testify to the “reporting schedules, showing that even if they thought it was a campaign expenditure to be reported, expenditure made on October 27 (when $$ sent to Daniels atty) would not, under law, be reported until Dec. 8, a full 30 days after election,” he wrote.

Smith also complained that the judge allowed Michael Cohen to discuss whether he violated the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA).

“While judge wouldn’t let me testify on meaning of law, he allowed Michael Cohen to go on at length about whether and how his activity violated FECA. So effectively, the jury got its instructions on FECA from Michael Cohen!” he wrote.

In summarizing his thread, Smith claimed that Merchan’s “bias is very evident.”

The prosecution is now showing a May 15, 2018, email between Robert Costello and his partner about Michael Cohen.

Asked about the email Costello says, “No, not to follow instructions but to get everybody on the same page because Michael Cohen had been complaining incessantly that Rudy Giuliani was making statements in the press.”

Another portion of the email reads, “We must reverse the Avenatti effect and restore this to a far more simple investigation of things that while they might not look good politically and nevertheless legal.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger then asked Costello, parroting what he said yesterday on the stand, “the emails speak for themselves.”

Costello responded, “sometimes.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger continues to walk through Robert Costello’s emails to Michael Cohen, including an email in which Cohen said he could rest easy because he had “friends in high places.”

Costello confirms that “definitely refers to President Trump, yes.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger has asked Robert Costello if he was pushing Michael Cohen to retain him because he could provide a backchannel to Trump. Costello again denied it.

Hoffinger then showed Costello and the jury an email he sent to Cohen mentioning a backchannel.

The comment elicited laughs in the courtroom.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger shows the jury an email from Robert Costello to Michael Cohen on April 19, 2018, indicating that Rudy Giuliani was joining Trump’s team.

“I am sure you saw the news that Rudy is joining the Trump legal team. I told you my relationship with Rudy which could be very very useful for you,” Costello emailed Cohen.

Hoffinger went on to show Costello another email he sent to Jeff Citron on April 19, 2018: “All the more reason for Cohen to hire me because of my connection to Giuliani, which I mentioned to him in our meeting.”

“That was your email, correct?” Hoffinger asks.

“Correct,” Costello says.

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger asks Robert Costello whether he discussed with Michael Cohen how connected he was to Rudy Giuliani at their first meeting at the Regency Hotel.

“That’s not true,” Costello says.

Costello says that he did not say that at the first meeting, but mentioned Giuliani later.

Hoffinger confirms with Costello that Giuliani was at his wedding.

The jury is being shown an email dated August 8, 2018.

Michael Cohen emailed Robert Costello and Jeff Citron stating, “Gentleman

Please cease contacting me as you do not and have never represented me in this or any other matter.”

The email continues: “Your interest and offers to become part of the team and to serve as a contact was subject to existing counsel, Guy Petrillo (cc’d) approval, which was denied.”

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger has resumed her cross-examination of Robert Costello.

Hoffinger begins by asking Costello about the fact that Michael Cohen ultimately hired another firm to represent him, and not Costello’s firm.

More context: Trump’s attorneys called Costello to the stand as a way to try to rebut Cohen’s testimony about the pressure he was receiving in 2018 when theFBI searched his home and office.

Costello advised Cohen in the weeks after the search, though Cohen did not sign a retainer agreement and did not pay Costello, who touted in email communications his close connections withRudy Giuliani. The former New York mayor also joined Trump’s legal team in 2018.

The jury is entering the courtroom.

While waiting for the jury, prosecutor Joshua Steinglass asks Judge Juan Merchan whether he wants to ask them about their availability for next Wednesday. Merchan says he will ask before they go home for the day.

Robert Costello has entered the courtroom and walked to the witness stand without looking at Trump’s table.

“Good morning Mr Costello. Welcome back. I remind you that you’re still under oath,” Judge Juan Merchan says to him.

Costello just spoke with Merchan, but it was off mic.

Judge Juan Merchan has returned to the bench this morning and court is in session.

Merchan has called for the defense’s witness, Robert Costello.

In comments before entering the courtroom, former President Donald Trump described the hush money case as a “witch hunt” and took aim at the court, calling it a “kangaroo court.”

He is in court on the 20th day of the criminal hush money trial against him.

Repeatedly, ahead of his court appearances, Trump has claimed that he should instead be spending his time campaigning, and said that there is no case against him.

“They have no case and there’s no crime,” Trump said again Tuesday morning.

Former President Donald Trump is in the Manhattan courtroom as Robert Costello, a lawyer who advised Michael Cohen, is set to resume his testimony soon.

Trump walked down the center aisle and turned to acknowledge journalist Andrea Mitchell who is in the galley today.

Donald Trump Jr. is seated in the first row behind the defense table.

Trump attorney Emil Bove said Monday that the defense doesn’t expect to call any more witnesses after Robert Costello is off the the stand. Donald Trump is not required to testify at the trial, as all criminal defendants have a right to remain silent and decline to testify in their own defense.

Judge Juan Merchan indicated that he expects closing arguments to take place next Tuesday. Here’s a look at what happens in the trial after the defense rests its case:

Prosecution’s rebuttal case: Prosecutors can present additional evidence specifically tailored to respond to the defense’s case. The prosecution is not required to present any rebuttal evidence.

Closing arguments: Attorneys for the prosecution and defense each give a closing argument appealing to the jury that will soon consider the case. Because they have the burden of proof, prosecutors address the jury first but they also get the last word, so the prosecution will give a rebuttal argument after the defense closing argument.

Jury instruction or jury charge: The judge instructs the jury as to the charges they must consider against the defendant and the laws governing their deliberations.

Jury deliberation: A panel of 12 jurors considers the evidence presented at trial and charges against the defendant. The jury must be unanimous in its decision. The jury can communicate with the court and ask questions about the case with the court through handwritten notes.

Verdict: The jury will notify the court that they’ve reached a verdict. The verdict will then be read in court and jurors will be polled to confirm the verdict read in court reflects their own vote.

Sentencing: If the jury reaches a guilty verdict, the judge sentences the defendant, typically after a sentencing hearing at a later date.

Donald Trump departed Trump Tower moments ago and is headed to the Manhattan criminal court, where all eyes will be on Robert Costello, the theatrical witness and lawyer who advised Michael Cohen.

Costello is expected to resume his testimony after a testy exchange Monday with the judge Monday.

Court starts at 9:30 a.m. ET Tuesday with prosecutor Susan Hoffinger continuing her questioning of Costello in cross-examination. Both parties have said they do not expect to go too much longer.

According to former President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, the following people will join Trump in court today for his criminal hush money trial:

Several ofTrump’s allies have been flocking to the Manhattan court throughout the trial to display their support for the former president.

Robert Costello, an attorney connected with Michael Cohen, will resume his testimony today on the witness stand after yesterday’s contentious exchange with the judge.

Costello, who is a witness for the defense, was admonished by Judge Juan Merchan after he audibly complained when the judge sustained objections to the questions he was being asked.

Costello has been brought up numerous times during the trial, including Monday, when Donald Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche asked Cohen to confirm instances in which the two communicated and met.

Costello testified on May 15 in front of a House Judiciary subcommittee and consistently criticized Cohen, saying “virtually every statement” Cohen made on the stand about Costello was a lie. Following the testimony, Trump’s team reached out to Costello.

Costello previously appeared as the only defense witness before the grand jury investigating the case in March 2023.

Trump’s attorneys called Costello as a way to try to rebut Cohen’s testimony about the pressure he was receiving in 2018 when theFBI searched his home and office.

Costello advised Cohen in the weeks after the search, though Cohen did not sign a retainer agreement and did not pay Costello, who touted in email communications his close connections withRudy Giuliani. The former New York mayor also joined Trump’s legal team in 2018.

Read more about Costello’s testimony yesterday in the Trump trial.

CNN’s Jeremy Herb, Lauren del Valle and Kara Scannell contributed reporting to this post.

Twelve New Yorkers are on deck.

As Donald Trump’s first criminal trial races toward its climax, his attorneys are previewing how they will beseech a jury next week to spare their client the shame of being the first ex-president to be convicted of a crime.

On awild day in court Monday, Judge Juan Merchan accused one disrespectful defense witness of trying to stare him down, while the ex-president’s former fixer, Michael Cohen, sensationally admitted to stealing thousands of dollars from his old boss’ firm.

But beneath the uproar, there is also a clear sense that this trial – which is intertwined with the country’s future, given Trump’s bid to reclaim the White House – is now in its fateful endgame.

The presumptive Republican nominee’s lawyers made a long-shot bid for the dismissal of his first criminal trial before the jury has even been asked to deliberate. The gambit is a familiar one for defense teams that rarely works, but it offered a glimpse into the narrative Trump’s lawyers will place before the jury, likely next Tuesday, after the Memorial Day holiday.

Read the full analysis.

The prosecution rested its case Monday in theDonald Trump hush money trial, which is barreling toward a conclusion. Michael Cohen’s testimony wrapped up after four days on the witness stand.

It wasn’t long after the defense began its case for things to get heated. Judge Juan Merchan admonished a witness for the defense, Robert Costello, after he audibly complained when the judge sustained objections to the questions he was being asked.

Here are the key takeaways:

We are in the sixth week of court proceedings in Donald Trump’s historic hush money criminal trial.

To refresh your memory, here arethe key moments and witnessesfrom the trial so far:

April 15:Trial began with jury selection.

April 19:A panel of12 jurors and six alternateswas selected.

April 22:The prosecution and defense made their opening statements. Former tabloid boss David Pecker was called to testify.

April 23:Judge Juan Merchan held aSandoval hearingfor Trump’s alleged gag order violations, but reserved his decision. Pecker continued his testimony.

April 25:While Trump sat in the Manhattan courtroom listening to Pecker’s testimony, theSupreme Court in Washington, D.C., heard argumentson the matter of his immunity in special counsel Jack Smith’s election subversion case against him.

April 26:Pecker’s direct questioning and cross-examination concluded. Trump’s former longtime assistant Rhona Graff was called to testify briefly. Michael Cohen’s former banker Gary Farro was then called to the stand.

April 30:Farro’s testimony concluded. Prosecutors then called Dr. Robert Browning, the executive director of C-SPAN archives, and Philip Thompson who works for a court reporting company.Then,Keith Davidson, the former attorney for Daniels and McDougal, took the stand. Also, Merchan fined Trump $9,000 for violating a gag order.

May 2:Davidson’s testimony concluded. Digital evidence analystDouglas Dauswas called to testify.

May 3:After Daus finished testifying, Georgia Longstreet, a paralegal at the district attorney’s office, spoke about reviewing Trump’s social media posts for this case. She was followed by Hope Hicks, once a longtime Trump aide. Herhighly-anticipated testimonywas a little less than three hours.

May 6:Prosecutors calledtwo witnesseswho worked in accounting in the Trump Organization:Jeffrey McConney, a former Trump Org. controller, andDeborah Tarasoff, an accounts payable supervisor.

May 7:Prosecutors calledSally Franklin, the senior vice president and executive managing editor for Penguin Random House publishing group.After her testimony,Stormy Danielswas called to the stand.

May 9: Stormy Daniels finished her testimony, with the defense trying to undermine her credibility by pointing out inconsistencies in her story on cross-examination.

May 10: Former White House aide Madeleine Westerhout’s testimony concluded. Then prosecution called several custodial witnesses to the stand.

May 13: Former Trump attorney and the prosecution’s key witness, Michael Cohen, started testifying.

May 14: The prosecution completed direct questioning of Cohen and Trump’s defense began cross-examination.

May 16: Trump’s defense grilled Cohen, putting into question a key 2016 October call and asking him about the times he lied under oath.

May 20: Cohen wrapped up his testimony and the prosecution rested its case. The defense called its first witness, Daniel Sitko, a paralegal for defense attorney Todd Blanche. After a short round of questioning, the defense called up Robert Costello, a lawyer with a connection to Cohen. He may be the final witness, according to the prosecution.

Read a full timeline of key momentshere.

Donald Trump’s legal team is led by Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, two former federal prosecutors from New York, and Susan Necheles, a veteran criminal defense lawyer with deep experience in New York and with appearing before Judge Juan Merchan.

Here are the key things to know about Trump’s legal team:

The prosecution rested its case in the hush money trial against Donald Trump on Monday.

The day started with Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, back on the stand as the defense finished its cross-examination and the prosecution worked to patch up doubts on redirect. Cohenadmitted to stealingfrom the Trump Organization and was grilled about his financial interest in the trial.

The defense then called its first witness, Daniel Sitko, a paralegal for defense attorney Todd Blanche, to submit a phone chart into evidence. The calls in the chart were between Cohen and his former legal adviser, Bob Costello.

Costello was then called to the stand as the defense’s second witness.

Here’s a recap of what happened in court today:

Michael Cohen:

Bob Costello called for the defense:

What happens next: The prosecution will continue its cross-examination of Costello today. Hoffinger said she has up to 45 minutes left of questioning and then the defense will have the opportunity to conduct re-direct. Bove said the defense doesn’t expect to call any more witnesses, which suggests Trump will not testify in his defense. Merchan said he expects closing arguments will be next Tuesday.

Prosecutors and the defense have been zeroing in on the hush money payment at the center of the case, with Donald Trump’s lawyers trying to poke holes in Michael Cohen’s testimony.

According to prosecutors, on October 27, 2016, Cohenpaid Stormy Daniels $130,000 to her attorneythrough a shell company in exchange for her silence about an affair she allegedly had with Trump in 2006.

Trump has publicly denied having an affair with Daniels and denied making the payments.

Prosecutors say Daniels first brought her story to American Media Inc., whose executives brought the story to Cohen on Trump’s behalf.

According to prosecutors, Trump directed Cohen to delay making the payment as long as possible, telling him if they delayed paying until after the election they could avoid paying it at all.

The former president has been accused of taking part in an illegal conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 election and an unlawful plan to suppress negative information, which included the payment to Daniels.

Prosecutors allege that Trump allegedly disguised the transaction as a legal payment and falsified business records numerous times to “promote his candidacy.”

Read a full timelineof the hush money case.

The hush money criminal case against former President Donald Trump is just one offour criminal caseshe faces while juggling his presidential campaign.

The former president faces at least88 chargesover the four criminal indictments in Georgia, New York, Washington, DC, and Florida. Trump has pleaded not guilty to every charge in these cases.

Here’s a recap of each case:

Read more aboutthe four criminal casesTrump faces.