As ex-President Donald Trump’s first criminal trial kicks off, two battles are simultaneously unfolding. One is in a Manhattan courtroom, where he is charged with 34 felonies for allegedly falsifying business records. The other fight rages in the realm of public opinion, debating the true nature of the trial.
Several media agencies, including The New York Times, often use the term "hush-money trial" to describe the court proceedings. This references the accusation that Trump authorized a payoff, and falsified business records to conceal a potential sex scandal involving an adult film star.
However, Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan district attorney, contends that the case holds greater significance. He suggests that the payment to Stormy Daniels was an attempt to withhold information from the public before the 2016 presidential election. "It’s an election interference case," he stated in a January interview on NY1.
Trump, leveraging his knack for resonant phrases, is pushing to brand the case as the “Biden trial.” He falsely alleges that the charges are a ploy by the current president to sway the 2024 election. As is typical with Trump, he is trying to reframe his trial as an interference in the 2024 election, even utilizing it to gain media traction in New York and solicit contributions nationwide.
Importantly, the presiding judge, Juan Merchan, appears to align with Bragg’s interpretation of the case. His perception might ultimately prove to be the most consequential.
