So far, the evidence seems quite damning.
My name is Jonathan Alter, and I am covering the Trump trial for New York Times opinion.
It's been a historic opportunity and one of the most historic events I've ever covered.
I have a seat in the courtroom itself, which is helpful because I can use binoculars to get a better view of the defendant and the other people in the courtroom.
The 34 counts in the indictment all relate to falsification of business documents.
And we've heard the narrative that the prosecution has, which is that the illegal payments to stormy Daniel was just the latest of the efforts that Donald Trump and Michael Cohen, Trumps former personal attorney, were making to shut up people who might tell stories related to sex and Donald Trump before the election.
What those who want to see Donald Trump convicted have been worrying about this whole time is that Michael Cohen is a liar.
He went to jail for perjury, and that if the whole case rested on Michael Cohen, that he would be acquitted or get off with a hung jury.
But I think over the last couple of weeks, the odds of conviction have gone up because of all of this pre corroboration of Michael Cohen's testimony.
The most important part of an otherwise dull day came early, when the prosecution provided a lot of documentary evidence to back up the testimony of Michael Cohen.
That is coming.
The documents at issue, the invoices, checks, ledger entries, these were all validated by Trump's own employees at the Trump Organization.
There is no doubt that these documents are authentic.
And the $130,000 that the chief financial officer of the Trump Organization scrawled in his own hand on a bank document is very incriminating.
And, you know, the old tv show, everyone loves Raymond, the testimony we've heard is everyone hates Michael.
But what these witnesses have done is that they have given the jury a permission slip to say, look, we don't like this guy, Michael Cohen, but we believe him on these matters because there's so much other evidence backing him up.
And I think it's important for people to keep in mind that every day in New York and around the country, people are convicted based on testimony from some very unsavory characters who are liars.
In some cases, they're murderers.
But their testimony on the specific facts of the case convinces a jury to convict.
And I believe that will be the pattern in this case as well.