'What have we done?' Lawyer describes shock at possible role in Trump's 2016 victory

‘What have we done?’ Lawyer describes shock at possible role in Trump’s 2016 victory

NEW YORK (AP) — A lawyer who negotiated a pair of hush money deals at the center of Donald Trump’s criminal trial recalled Thursday his “gallows humor” reaction to Trump’s 2016 election victory and the realization that his hidden-hand efforts might have contributed to the win.

“What have we done?” the attorney Keith Davidson texted the then-editor of the National Enquirer, which had buried stories of extramarital sexual encounters to prevent them surfacing in the final days of the bitterly contested presidential race. “Oh my god,” came the response from Dylan Howard.

“There was an understanding that our efforts may have in some way — strike that — our activities may have in some way assisted the presidential campaign of Donald Trump,” Davidson told jurors.

The testimony from Davidson was designed to directly connect the hush money payments to Trump’s presidential ambitions and to bolster prosecutors’ argument that the case is about interference in the 2016 election rather than simply sex and money. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has sought to establish that link not just to secure a conviction but also to persuade the public of the significance of the case, which may be the only one of four Trump prosecutions to reach trial this year.

“This is sort of gallows humor. It was on election night as the results were coming in,” Davidson explained. “There was sort of surprise among the broadcasters and others that Mr. Trump was leading in the polls, and there was a growing sense that folks were about ready to call the election.”

Davidson is seen as a vital building block for the prosecution’s case that Trump and his allies schemed to bury unflattering stories in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. He represented both porn actor Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal in negotiations that resulted in the rights to their claims of sexual encounters with Trump being purchased and then squelched in exchange for money, a tabloid industry practice known as “catch-and-kill.”

He is one of multiple key players testifying in advance of Michael Cohen, the star prosecution witness and Trump’s former lawyer and personal fixer whom Davidson has depicted as determined to protect Trump at all costs.

Trump’s lawyers sought to blunt the potential harm of Davidson’s testimony by getting him to acknowledge that he never had any interactions with Trump — only Cohen. In fact, Davidson said, he had never been in the same room as Trump until his testimony.

He also said that he was unfamiliar with the Trump Organization’s record-keeping practices and that any impressions he had of Trump himself came through others.

“I had no personal interactions with Donald Trump. It either came from my clients, Mr. Cohen or some other source, but certainly not him,” Davidson said.

The line of questioning from Trump attorney Emil Bove appeared intended to underscore the defense’s points that Trump was removed from the negotiations — that Cohen was handling the hush-money matters on his own — and that his testimony isn’t relevant to the charges, which allege Trump falsified business records by logging reimbursement payments to Cohen as legal fees.

Earlier Thursday, jurors viewed a confidential agreement requiring Daniels to keep quiet about her claims that she had a tryst with the married Trump a decade earlier. The agreement, dated less than two weeks before the 2016 presidential election, called for her to receive $130,000 in exchange for her silence.

The money was paid by Cohen, and the agreement referred to both Trump and Daniels with pseudonyms: David Dennison and Peggy Peterson.

“It is understood and agreed that the true name and identity of the person referred to as ‘DAVID DENNISON’ in the Settlement Agreement is Donald Trump,” the document stated, with Trump’s name written in by hand.

While testifying Thursday, Davidson also recalled Cohen ranting to him about Trump in a phone conversation about a month after the 2016 election, complaining that he had been passed over for a job in the new administration and that Trump had not reimbursed him for the Daniels payment.

He also said that Cohen told him that he and Trump were “very upset” when The Wall Street Journal published an article that exposed a separate $150,000 National Enquirer arrangement with McDougal, who has said she and Trump had an affair, just days before the election.

“He wanted to know who the source of the article was, why someone would be the source of this type of article. He was upset by the timing,” Davidson said of Cohen. “He stated his boss was very upset, and he threatened to sue Karen McDougal.”

Trump has denied relationships with either woman and any wrongdoing in the case.

Before the start of testimony, prosecutors requested $1,000 fines for each of four comments by Trump that they say violated a judge’s gag order barring him from attacking witnesses, jurors and others closely connected to the case. Such a penalty would be on top of a $9,000 fine that Judge Juan M. Merchan imposed Tuesday related to nine separate violations that he found.

“The defendant is talking about witnesses and the jury in this case, one right here outside this door,” prosecutor Christopher Conroy said. “This is the most critical time, the time the proceeding has to be protected.”

“His statements are corrosive to this proceeding and the fair administration of justice,” Conroy added.

Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche countered that Trump’s candidacy and the massive media attention he receives have made it impossible for him not to be asked about, or comment on, the trial.

“He can’t just say ‘no comment’ repeatedly. He’s running for president,” Blanche said.

Merchan did not immediately rule on the request for fresh sanctions, though he indicated he was not particularly concerned about one of the four statements flagged by prosecutors.

Yet the mere prospect of further punishment underscored the challenges Trump the presidential candidate faces in adjusting to the role of criminal defendant subject to rigid courtroom protocol that he does not control. It also remains to be seen whether any rebuke from the court will lead Trump to adjust his behavior given the campaign trail benefit he believes he derives from painting the case as politically motivated.

The trial, now in its second week of testimony, has exposed the underbelly of tabloid journalism practices and the protections, for a price, afforded to Trump during his successful run for president in 2016.

After the $130,000 payment was made to Daniels, Trump’s company reimbursed Cohen and logged the payments to him as legal expenses, prosecutors have said in charging the former president with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records — a charge punishable by up to four years in prison.

Michael R. Sisak, Philip Marcelo, Eric Tucker And Jake Offenhartz, The Associated Press