Abstract
The months prolonged trial of America’s 45th president has garnered worldwide media attention and rightfully so. This particular trial is one of its kind and has a significant impact on campaign finance laws and accountability of the executive.The Manhattan grand jury on May 30 found the former commander-in-chief guilty of multiple felonies in his infamous hush money trial case1. This verdict has damaging consequences not only for the person in the limelight but also reflects the uncertainty of the people of America. It sheds light on the possible legal implications as well as questions the integrity of the political system as an entity. In a global scale legal experts are analyzing the verdict and how it may set the precedent. Furthermore, it also has the power to forever change how presidential candidates run for the highest office in the country. It questions and challenges the power of the judiciary in the midst of any executive wrongdoings.
Keywords
Hush money trial, Trump, Presidential misconduct, Political integrity, Executive power, Public perception, Media coverage.
Introduction
Donald J Trump was the 45th president of the United States of America who is no stranger to controversy in his political career. The Trump hush money trial represents an epic legal chronicle initiating from actions taken during Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016. Fundamentally the trial is based on the allegations that Trump and his associates were involved in endeavors to suppress individuals who alleged extramarital relationships with him2. It was seen as an effort to whitewash his image as the Republican presidential candidate. One in particular which garnered a lot of media attention is the payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels (Stephanie Clifford)3 and Karen McDougal to essentially ‘hush’ them from going on record about their alleged relationship with Trump. Critics emphasized that the payments constituted illegal campaign contributions and violated federal election laws by concealing the true sources of the funds. Moreover, the case raised concerns about potential efforts to conceal damaging information that could influence the outcome of a presidential election.
The legal proceedings seemingly took a dramatic turn when the Manhattan District Attorney’s office launched an investigation into such claims. After months of legal proceedings and deliberations, a grand jury in Manhattan issued indictments against Trump, finding him guilty with 34 felonies including the hush money payments. Additionally he was charged with financial fraud, campaign finance laws violation et al4.
The Role of Michael Cohen
Once, Michael Cohen played a critical role in various legal and political controversies, particularly, when he was Trump’s lawyer and fixer. He was an integral part of Trump’s political career, and a close confidant.
Personal Attorney to Donald Trump: A personal attorney and close ally, Cohen enjoyed a long professional association with Donald Trump and the Trump Organization, being his closest personal lawyer for over ten years, in fact, who was responsible for handling confidential lawsuits and other critical legal issues on Trump’s behalf and the Trump Organization. Cohen, as a result of the conflict, was involved in the legal events in which the payments to these ladies were the central issues of the matters. Namely, Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal alleged they had been involved with Donald Trump and, in this regard, payments were made to them. He was looked into for believed campaign finance violations linked to these payments, which are said to have been for manipulation of the 2016 general election.
In February 2019, Michael Cohen came before the House Oversight Committee and he stated his testimony. In the course of his testimony, Cohen admitted to aiding Donald Trump in various probably criminal acts such as campaign finance violations, tax evasion, and insurance fraud. He gave evidence and the required documents as a support to these charges, declaring that Trump had ordered him to pay women off during the campaign. He showed interest in cooperating with the prosecutors and negotiating a plea deal. The first of the guilty pleas was in August 2018, when Cohen admitted to eight felony charges: tax evasion, bank fraud, and campaign finance violations to name a few. As early as November 2018, he admitted to another lie to Congress in the earlier testimony when he was supposed to tell them about the time and volume of the negotiations involving a proposed Trump Tower project in Moscow.
Cooperation with Mueller Investigation
Cohen was highly cooperative with Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into the 2016 presidential election that was marred with allegations of the Russian involvement in it. His close support of the Trump Organization followed by the cover of business transactions, news about his contacts with Russian officials, and Trump’s economic possession were the details of his cooperation. Cohen was given three years in prison in federal court in December 2018 though he gave invaluable information to the prosecutors in the Russia probe that was key to the uncovering of the whole situation. This contributed to the ongoing legal examination of Donald Trump and his associates. His declaration and help in the legal case supported the impact of the issue the public had and the further inquiries into the possibilities of illegal activities. Recognized for his role in the investigations around Donald Trump and his declaration, Michael Cohen was the main figure who revealed the alleged illegality. His acknowledgment of guilt and assist of prosecutors made clear the depth of the legal difficulties faced by Trump and his inner group. So, the issue of leaders’ moral commitments is raised besides legal boundaries in political powers at the top.
Campaign Finance Laws
A campaign watchdog group filed a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission, accusing Donald J. Trump’s presidential campaign and related political committees of violating campaign finance laws. The complaint included concealment of payments of $7.2 million in legal fees through an unrelated shell company.5
Before delving further into the accusations made against, let us understand the Campaign Finance Laws and what are its significance:
- These are a set of regulations that promote a transparent political campaign regardless of the political parties. Although each country has their specific set of regulations catering to its own political needs, at its core they are all based on the same principles. In this paper we will be emphasizing only on the United States.
- The Regulatory body behind CFL is known as the Federal Election Commission (FEC) it is responsible with overseeing the fair election process in USA. It was enacted in 1971 and requires disclosure of property, net worth and assets of the candidates as well as the amount and sources of funding.
- The authority has placed certain restrictions on the spending limits of the campaigns especially in case of public campaign funding.
- Another entity which plays a crucial role are the Super PACs6 short for political action committees with the liberty to raise unlimited funds from any corporations, unions, and even individuals without any curb. The only catch being they cannot meddle with the campaigns in any way shape or form.
However in the Trump case in discussion, he was found guilty of manipulating campaign funds and making unauthorized payments out of such funds. The payments were made by Michael Cohen on behalf of Trump. It was also revealed that Trump often concealed such transactions as ‘Attorney fees’ to avoid suspicion.
Legal Challenges and Defenses
The trial has proved to be a litmus test as to the far reaching powers of the executive. It has brought forth serious questions about the transparency of election campaigns, including but not restricted to the United States. Trump apart from being a former President is also the Republican candidate for the upcoming elections. In a historic first the laws are not clear as to the way forward. Despite the conviction Trump is still eligible to run his campaign for the crucial election. In a surprising turn of events, Michael Cohen once a close confidant of Trump plead guilty to Campaign Finance law violations7. However, Trump’s defense relentlessly argued that the payments were not in the ambit of election campaign rather it was more of a personal expenditure of Trump and hence do not fall under the purview of FEC.
The Trump trial raises a far more broader and pertinent question, something more serious than the conviction of a former President. The executive accountability requires strong and disciplined approach by its custodians. When one such custodian in question is accused and later convicted of something as serious as campaign funds violations, it definitely casts a doubt as to how effective the political mechanism really is. A three tier system of Legislature, Executive and Judiciary renders counterproductive if one of its branches render incompetent. This delicate balance is essentially for the smooth operation of any government.
Ethical Considerations
The hush money case involving Michael Cohen and Donald Trump is considered to be one of the most relevant ethical dilemmas with the use of the hush money payments in politics. In its core, it forced the discussion if there was transparency and accountability within the political operations. The hush money, which the president’s office-paid for fixing the cries of the ladies of extramarital relationships during the 2016 election, was seen by civilians from different sides as just another maneuver to “influence the electorate or at least to create an image that would have never emerged publicly.” The fact that it was done through non-transparent channels only aggravated it.
From an ethical point of view, hush money payments are a form of deceit and manipulation of the electoral process. Some candidates may bypass their obligation to be honest with the public but will rather prefer to keep the voters in the dark by letting them know only flattering and less than accurate things about them. It just ousted out election trustworthiness and political system justice.
Furthermore, a criticism of Trump hush money trial showed up the oversight issues that were of wider scale. As a requirement of the position, leaders are to strictly adhere to the principles that require them to stay open in their actions and financial operations. Unless the case of discoloration of these payments or their mismanagement is hidden, it goes without saying that campaign finance laws are not only violated but also trust in democratic institutions is spoilt. It shows a lack of moral standards and principles that are necessary to keep the politicians accountable and elections legitimate.
The dispute made citizens even the more persistent to talk about the urgency for more strict laws and the enforcement that will warrant the supply of information about the origins and spending of political funds. It also brought to the front line those parts of the regulations which in an easy manner allows this type of transactions to go unreported or false reported. The measures are intensified after the hush-money trial. The new standards among them are more strict disclosure rules and an increase of accountability devices helping to avoid the recurrence of these challenging ethical situations in the future.
Summarizing, the Trump hush money trial was a crucial moment for pondering the moral side of financial operations that are, in reality, set up to hide possibly dangerous information in political campaigns. It created a wider discussion about the significance of the transparency, honesty, and responsibility of democratic procedures in guaranteeing trust in elected officials.
Political Landscape Post-Trial Verdict
This trial arguably has one of the most media coverage. But at what cost? People are now more divided than ever. Conservatives argue that the jury was biased, considering Manhattan is Democratic voter dominated. Trump has been explosive post the verdict, and called it out to be ‘rigged trial’8. Although jail time is unlikely in the cards for Trump, his conviction has gained him a wave of sympathy among a group of conservative voters. Despite the charges Trump is free to run his campaign leading many to believe that Trump is arguably in a better position to win in the upcoming elections. America is going through a political turmoil and people are more polarized than ever on issues such as the Russian-Ukraine war, Israel-Palestine conflict, abortion laws. The trial has been a topic of discussion in the highest offices of the country.While US President Joe Biden wrote on X wrote: “There’s only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: At the ballot box.”9 US House Speaker Mike Johnson called out the verdict to be “a shameful day for America”10.
Comparative Analysis
Whereas the Watergate scandal and the Monica Lewinsky affair have become the best to compare the Trump hush money trial to other high-profile political scandals, these only group corruption classically, but the Trump hush money trial is more complicated due to the fact that it not only incorporates personal misconduct of a politician in his or her fundraising activities but also deals with the dis-enrollment of democracy due to such misconduct. Watergate, which spotlighted the president’s abuse of power and the subsequent attempts to cover it up, was the last time a similar situation was seen.
Besides transparency and accountability in political campaigns, this Trump money hush scandal has brought unseen issues into light. Both the ranks underscore the absolute necessity of moral integrity, democracy, and the rule of law that used to be the good side of the scales and at the same time showed the ugly face of the president having too much power without a check and attempts to rig polls in his favor. In contrast, Bill Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky was concerned mainly with personal moral failings and the legal consequences of perjury and obstruction of justice. This, in other words, meant not only the enduring fascination with the public sphere that private malfeasance raises but also a reaffirmation of the differences between private indiscretion and public accountability.
Trump hush money trial, unlike many other political events, can learn some useful things from its aftermath. To first, it uncovered the ease with which campaign finance laws could be bypassed to cover up morally and politically harmful acts of the government. This has pushed for reforms in the process of making rules to make them more binding and expose all electoral data to the public. Second, the trial has affirmed the significance of ethical leadership and sincerity among the dignitaries. It was a jaw dropping discovery as to the list of moral values that public officials are expected to possess and the impact of lost ethics on public trust and decision making that can really question the legitimacy of a government. Also, it showed the public how various media may encourage or discourage people through their diverse news coverage on a particular events which may, at the same time, influence political debates. With regards to development, this investigation has led the public to start talks about how to protect our democratic institutions by ending the undue influence and enabling the electoral process to be the fair, transparent, and free expression of the public’s will.
International Perspective
The Trump hush money case and its progression in the media was recognized globally, thus people cared whether other countries acted the same way when it comes to political misbehavior and/or campaign finance laws. Frequently in several democratic countries across Europe and the rest of the world, where such scandals, or concerning other forms of financial corruption or strategies in a bid to sway the polls in non-entirely unfamiliar methods are met with legal evidence and societal condemnation. Some nations such as France and Germany have well developed legal infrastructures which focus on the issues of political finance and tally, stringent measures are taken against anyone that is found to have violated these laws.
The Michael Cohen trial, where the hush money revelation attract new opinions. Referring to the regulation in Europe, for instance, where the laws on campaign finance are pretty strictly managed and enforced, people have been astonishing in the impacts that these payments to the integrity of the US electoral process may bring. Most viewers considered the scandal in question as the manifestation of various issues related to the role of the dollar in American politics and the possible erosion of the democratic values. Such comparisons have been drawn with the cases that entail similar scandals in Europe which led to or forced heads of state, prime ministers and other leaders to resign or other political faces to undergo criminal investigations or to change the political funding laws to prevent future abuse.
The Trump hush money trial was an instance that went beyond legal and political realms in a way. The trial was conclusive of the fact that the world is concerned about the correct ethical benchmarks in the democratic fashion of governance and the clear revelation of the tallying of the votes. On the international level, reporters considered it as regard to the attitude of the American leadership, also the process of democracy was invaded.
Conclusion
One of the most talked about and televised trials in the history, this one was more than just the conviction of a former President. It felt like a struggle between the rule of law and the accountability of the executive. It served as a reminder that no one is above the law, even if they once graced the highest office in the land.
Regardless of the verdict the trial has proved to be a testament of the power of judiciary in protecting the laws and safeguarding its citizens from any misdemeanors.The verdict established that holding those in power accountable is not just a myth, but the very foundation of good governance.
Ritisha Das
West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata.
- New York Times. (2024, May 31). “Former President Trump Found Guilty in Hush Money Trial.”
- Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. (2024, May 30). Press Release: “Indictments Issued in Trump Hush Money Trial.”
- Daniels, Stormy. (2022). Full Disclosure. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
- Trump Trial, https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c199vrln1z2o
- Federal Election Commission. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.fec.gov/
- Jones, Sarah. (2023). “The Role of Super PACs in Modern American Politics.” Journal of Political Economy, 78(4), 589-605.
- “Campaign Finance Laws.” Ballotpedia. Retrieved from https://ballotpedia.org/Campaign_finance_laws.
- Rigged Trial: https://apnews.com/article/trump-2024-campaign-trial-4629840240cb308c5eae335532ad17ed
- Biden, J. (2024, June 2). “There’s only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: At the ballot box.” Twitter.
- Johnson, M. (2024, June 1). “A shameful day for America.” Twitter.