The Legal and Public Battles of Donald Trump's Presidency

Imagine stepping into the role of President of the United States without any prior political experience.

by Faruk Imamovic
The Legal and Public Battles of Donald Trump's Presidency
© Getty Images/Michael M. Santiago

Imagine stepping into the role of President of the United States without any prior political experience. This was the reality for Donald Trump, a billionaire real estate mogul, as he found himself sitting behind the Resolute Desk in early 2017. Known for decades as a business titan leading a small team, Trump was suddenly tasked with governing a nation and managing international crises, including tensions with North Korea and an uneasy relationship with the FBI. Amidst this monumental transition, Trump also faced ongoing obligations to his business empire.

One significant issue Trump encountered was handling routine financial transactions for his company even while serving as president. In a scenario described by his lawyers during his hush-money trial, Trump was still signing checks for the Trump Organization—decisions about trivial-seeming expenses coexisting with national security matters.

The Checks and Balances of Power and Responsibility

Trump's presidency was immediately marked by controversy and legal challenges. One of the most notable was the hush-money trial, where Trump was accused of illegally falsifying business records to cover up a payment made by his former personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, to Stormy Daniels. This payment was allegedly made to prevent Daniels from disclosing an affair during the tumultuous final days of the 2016 election campaign, particularly as Trump's image was already tarnished by the "Access Hollywood" tape revelations.

According to prosecutors, Cohen used a shell company to make the $130,000 payment in October 2016, which Trump later reimbursed through a series of checks from both his personal and company accounts. These checks, some personally signed by Trump, were central to the case, highlighting the dual life he led—part businessman, part president.

During the trial, Trump’s defense argued that while he did sign checks, he was heavily engaged in his presidential duties and not focused on the specifics of every financial transaction. His former aides testified to his ability to multitask, suggesting that signing checks was often just one of many tasks handled in a flurry of activity that could include meeting foreign leaders or making critical policy decisions.

Donald Trump Holds Campaign Rally At The Jersey Shore
Donald Trump Holds Campaign Rally At The Jersey Shore© Getty Images/Michael M. Santiago

Legal Entanglements and Presidential Duties

Despite the defense’s portrayal of Trump as a distant executive only tangentially aware of the specifics of the payments to Cohen, prosecutors aimed to prove that Trump was intimately involved in the decision to reimburse Cohen, framing it as a deliberate attempt to influence the election outcome by concealing information from voters.

Trump’s legal team pointed to his history of careful financial oversight as evidence of his business acumen, not criminal intent. They cited excerpts from Trump's books where he discussed the importance of signing checks personally to ensure financial control. However, this narrative conflicted with the portrayal of Trump as too preoccupied with presidential duties to focus on the details of his company’s financial dealings.

The trial unearthed various strategies employed by Trump’s team to manage his ongoing business responsibilities from the White House. Documents were shipped back and forth between New York and Washington, D.C., handled by trusted personnel to ensure that Trump could still approve payments and manage his business affairs remotely.

The revelations at trial painted a complex picture of a president struggling to manage the sprawling demands of his business empire alongside the colossal responsibilities of leading a nation. The checks signed by Trump, whether for mundane expenses or covert reimbursements, became symbols of the tangled web of personal, business, and political interests that defined his presidency.

Navigating a New Reality

As the trial progressed, details emerged that showcased not just a president overwhelmed by the sudden shift from business to politics but also a man ensnared by his own legacy of sharp practices and financial scrutiny. Trump's own words about fiscal prudence and personal oversight in his books were wielded by prosecutors as proof of his meticulous attention to where his money was going, challenging his defense team's portrayal of an executive too busy with state affairs to notice details.

The courtroom drama underscored the broader implications of Trump’s dual roles and the inherent challenges they presented. It brought to light the difficulties of transitioning from private business to the highest public office, especially under the bright scrutiny of legal and public examination. As the trial unfolded, it was clear that Trump’s presidency was not just about political leadership but also about managing perceptions and legal challenges stemming from his past life as a businessman.

The Legal Strategy: Defense and Prosecution Clash

In the hush-money trial, both the defense and prosecution laid out competing narratives about Donald Trump's role and attentiveness to the financial maneuvers made during his campaign and early presidency. The defense argued that Trump, overwhelmed by the responsibilities of his new role and his commitment to national issues, delegated the minutiae of financial operations to his subordinates. They emphasized his practice of multitasking and managing multiple critical tasks concurrently as proof of his limited bandwidth for overseeing every financial detail.

Witnesses like Hope Hicks and Madeleine Westerhout testified to Trump's ability to handle diverse responsibilities simultaneously, describing a president who was perennially surrounded by staff and paperwork, yet still managed to engage with each item that required his attention. This portrayal aimed to bolster Trump’s claim that he was too preoccupied with running the country to focus on the specifics of payments made to Cohen.

On the other hand, prosecutors challenged this depiction, arguing that Trump’s history as a business mogul contradicted the idea that he was unaware of the details of significant transactions. They presented evidence suggesting that Trump had a longstanding habit of scrutinizing financial dealings closely, a trait that they argued extended into his presidency. The checks to Cohen, they posited, were part of a calculated effort to suppress damaging information during the election, implying that Trump was not only aware of but directed these transactions.

Public Perception and Political Repercussions

The trial unfolded under the intense scrutiny of the public and media, serving as a battleground not just for legal arguments but for public opinion. Trump's presidency had already polarized the nation, and the trial further complicated his public image. Supporters often viewed the prosecution's efforts as politically motivated attempts to undermine his presidency and future political prospects. In contrast, critics saw the trial as a necessary examination of alleged corruption and misuse of power.

The intersection of legal challenges and political implications became a crucial theme throughout the trial. The proceedings were not just about the legality of the payments but also about how presidential power could be perceived and used to influence personal and political outcomes. This intersection raised questions about the adequacy of existing laws and protocols to manage and monitor the actions of a president, particularly one with sprawling business interests.

Donald Trump United States