How is this not a Fifth Amendment violation to not know what charges are being alleged?
It's the prosecutor's job to choose what crime was committed, and to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it occurred. It's not up to the jury to choose "one from column A and one from column B" during deliberations.
How can one mount an effective defense when the charges aren't specified upon arraignment?
The prosecutor and the judge both knew from the beginning that any conviction would be overturned on appeal.
The entire trial was about keeping Trump off the campaign trail and if all went well giving him a political black eye.
That is why the obtuse jury instructions.
The judge wants to have a criminal conviction on the record for Trump during the campaign.
Even when the conviction is overturned Trump will forever have conviction on his record as Nancy would and will say.
If Trump is convicted the judge and prosecutor will have hit it out of the park even when the conviction is overturned. Anything less is a win. They have already won from their perspective