The jury specifically raised the “rain metaphor” in their request for the readback. That metaphor is meant to suggest that observing some facts can confirm the occurrence of other prior facts like seeing umbrellas to show that it has rained. The defense has obviously resisted the sweeping inferences from the prosecution.
The instructions state that you can draw an inference from any fact that is proven. Hence the rain metaphor. If you go to bed that it was not raining, but in the morning you see wet grounds and people carrying umbrellas. However, the inference must not be speculative but a natural conclusion from a previously established fact
https://x.com/JonathanTurley/status/1796178503584366675
Turley
The focus on the inferential instructions is better news in my view for the prosecutors in comparison to a question for the corroboration or false testimony sections. It may indicate that there was some uncertainty or division on how much of a negative inference can be drawn from these accounts in establishing intent and knowledge on the part of Trump.
So you don't know if there were other meetings.
Here's a quote from pecker's testimony
Pecker also testified Trump called him about a plan to pay of McDougal, and after Pecker urged him (Trump) to pay McDougal to cover up her allegations, Trump responded, "I don't buy any stories...Any time you do anything like this, it always gets out."
Telling me that Cohen did indeed act on his own
Read Post 7...It has a Trump quote by Pecker...