NEW YORK — Attorney Keith Davidson texted the editor of the National Enquirer in shock when Donald Trump won the 2016 presidential election, fearing his work on a hush money payment for porn star Stormy Daniels might have influenced the momentous political event.
“What have we done?” Mr. Davidson wrote on election night to the editor, Dylan Howard.
“Oh my god,” Mr. Howard wrote back.
Mr. Davidson, in testimony Thursday, said the exchange was a bit of “gallows humor” about their roles in working with Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, to send hush money to Ms. Daniels, who alleged a sexual encounter with Mr. Trump in 2006. Mr. Trump denies the affair.
Mr. Davidson is an attorney who often represents people trying to sell celebrity sex tapes or other embarrassing information. He’s testifying as prosecutors try to convince a jury that Mr. Trump, through Mr. Cohen, criminally concealed hush payments to Ms. Daniels to avoid bad press near the 2016 election.
Mr. Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee for president, faces 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. He has pleaded not guilty and says the trial is an attempt to thwart his campaign.
Mr. Davidson testified Mr. Howard served as a mediator when Mr. Davidson got tired of Mr. Cohen’s excuses about a delay in paying Ms. Daniels.
“I had lost trust in what he was telling me,” Mr. Davidson said, referring to Mr. Cohen.
From the stand, Mr. Davidson walked the jury through agreement documents that facilitated the payment and emails between him and Mr. Howard that confirmed the payment.
Jurors got to see a copy of the confidential settlement that paid Ms. Daniels $130,000 in exchange for her silence about the alleged sexual encounter.
It used the monikers “David Dennison” for Mr. Trump and “Peggy Peterson” for Ms. Daniels, though supporting documents used their real names.
Mr. Davidson said he made $10,000 for himself on the Daniels deal.
Mr. Trump looked toward the prosecutor and jury, or straight ahead, during testimony. He conferred with his attorney and shuffled papers in front of him.
Jurors appeared to be attentive during the testimony and looked at evidence on monitors in front of them.