the rules of reported speech pdf

• English Grammar
• Clause structure and verb patterns

Reported speech

Level: intermediate

Reporting and summarising

When we want to report what people say, we don't usually try to report their exact words. We usually give a  summary , for example:

Direct speech (exact words) :

Mary :  Oh dear. We've been walking for hours! I'm exhausted. I don't think I can go any further. I really need to stop for a rest. Peter :  Don't worry. I'm not surprised you're tired. I'm tired too. I'll tell you what, let's see if we can find a place to sit down, and then we can stop and have our picnic.

Reported speech (summary) :

When Mary complained that she was tired out after walking so far, Peter said they could stop for a picnic.

Reporting verbs

When we want to report what people say, we use reporting verbs . Different reporting verbs have different patterns, for example:

Mary complained (that) she was tired . (verb + that clause) She asked if they could stop for a rest . (verb + if clause) Peter told her not to worry . (verb + to -infinitive) He suggested stopping and having a picnic . (verb + - ing form) 

See reporting verbs with that , wh-  and if clauses , verbs followed by the infinitive , verbs followed by the -ing form .

GapFillDragAndDrop_MTY1NTE=

GapFillTyping_MTY1NTI=

Tenses in reported speech

When reporting what people say or think in English, we need to remember that the rules for tense forms in reported speech are exactly the same as in the rest of the language.

This is a letter that Andrew wrote ten years ago:

If we wanted to report what Andrew said in his letter, we might say something like this: 

Andrew said that when he  was  22, he was an engineering student in his last month at university. He wanted  to travel abroad after he  had finished  his course at the university, but he would need to earn some money while he was abroad so he wanted  to learn to teach English as a foreign language. A friend  had recommended  a course but Andrew needed more information, so he wrote to the school and asked them when their courses started  and how much they were . He also wanted to know if there was  an examination at the end of the course.

We would naturally use past tense forms to talk about things which happened ten years ago. So, tenses in reports and summaries in English are the same as in the rest of the language.

Sometimes we can choose between a past tense form and a  present tense  form. If we're talking about the past but we mention something that's still true , we can use the present tense:

John said he'd stayed at the Shangri-la because it' s the best hotel in town. Mary said she enjoyed the film because Robert de Niro is her favourite actor. Helen said she  loves visiting New York.

or the past tense:

John said he'd stayed at the Shangri-la because it was the best hotel in town. Mary said she enjoyed the film because Robert de Niro was her favourite actor. Helen said she  loved visiting New York.

If we're talking about something that  everybody knows is true , we normally use the present tense :

Michael said he'd always wanted to climb Everest because it' s the highest mountain in the world. Mary said she loved visiting New York because it' s such an exciting city.

Hi! I found the following paragraph from a grammar site while I was studying the reported speech. Can you help me? It says; --> We can use a perfect form with have + -ed form after modal verbs, especially where the report looks back to a hypothetical event in the past: He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters. (original statement: ‘The noise might be the postman delivering letters.’)

And my question is: How do we understand if it is a hypothetical event in the past or not? We normally don't change 'might' in reported speech. (e.g. ‘It might snow tonight,’ he warned. --> He warned that it might snow that night.) But why do we say 'He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters.' instead of 'He said that the noise might be the postman delivering letters.’ What's the difference between these two indirect reported speeches? Could you please explain the difference? And I also found this example which is about the same rule above: --> He said he would have helped us if we’d needed a volunteer. (original statement: a) ‘I’ll help you if you need a volunteer’ or b) ‘I’d help you if you needed a volunteer.’) Can you also explain why we report this sentence like that. How can we both change a) and b) into the same indirect reported speech? Thank you very much!

• Log in or register to post comments

Hello Melis_06,

1. He said the noise might have been the postman delivering letters. 2. He said that the noise might be the postman delivering letters.

In sentence 1 it is clear that the noise has ended; it is a noise that 'he' could hear but it is not a noise that you can hear now. In sentence 2 the noise could have ended or it could be a noise that you can still hear now. For example, if the noise is one which is constant, such as a noise that comes from your car engine that you are still trying to identify, then you would use sentence 2. In other words, sentence 2 allows for a wider range of time possibilities - both past (ended) and present (still current).

Your second question is similar:

He said he would have helped us if we needed a volunteer - you no longer need a volunteer

He said he would help us if we needed a volunteer - this could still be relevant; you may still need a volunteer.

The LearnEnglish Team

Hello my friend : what are you doing now? me : I'm eating an apple now and My friend repeated his question now

my question

Can I repeat the sentence in the past ( I was eating an apple) and mean( I'm eating an apple now) ?

You can but it is unusual. If you say  I was eating an apple  (past continuous), it means that it was in the past. You already finished eating the apple and you are not eating it now. But if your friend asked you just a moment ago, I guess you are still eating the apple when she/he asks the second question, so I would say  I'm eating an apple  (because you are still doing it).

Alternatively, you can use a past tense reporting verb e.g. I said I was eating an apple  (referring to the time of the first question), or  I said I 'm eating an apple  (to show that you are still eating it now, at the moment of speaking).

LearnEnglish team

Am I correct then? When someone wants us to repeat the sentence we have just said a moment ago we say 'I said I am doing...' if we are still doing that action. But if we are done with that action, then we say 'I said I was doing...' Did I get it right? Thanks!

Hello Meldo,

Yes, that's correct. Well done!

Hi. I wish to enquire if the verb tense used after a conjunction also changes in complex sentences as per tense transition rules, especially if it is already in simple past tense. In order to explain, could you please solve the following for me: 1. It has been quite a while since I last saw you. 2. Nevertheless, she has been quite desensitized to such perverse actions to the extent that it seldom ever seems obnoxious to her. 3. Let me keep this in my cupboard lest I misplace this. 4. I had arrived at the station before you even left your house. 5. I met my grandfather before he died.

Hi Aamna bluemoon,

The verb may or may not be backshifted, depending on whether the original speaker's point of view and the reporter's point of view are the same or not. For example:

• She said it had been quite a while since she last saw me . (it seems relatively recent, for both the original speaker and the reporter)
• She said it had been quite a while since she had last seen us . (a lot of time has passed between speaking and reporting this, or the situation has changed a lot since then e.g. they have met frequently since then)
• She said she had met her grandfather before he died . (seems quite recent)
• She said she had met her grandfather before he'd died . (a lot of time has passed between speaking and reporting this)

I hope that helps.

Hi, can you help me, please? How could I report this famous quotation: 'There's no such things as good news in America'.

Hi bri.q630,

First of all, the sentence is not grammatically correct. The phrase is 'no such thing' (singular), not 'things'.

How you report it depends. Using 'said' as the reporting verb we have two possibilities:

1. They said (that) there's no such thing as good news in America. 2. They said (that) there was no such thing as good news in America.

Sentence 2 tells that only about the time when 'they' said it. It does not tell us if it is still true or not.

Sentence 1 tells us that what 'they' said is still relevant today. In other words there was no good news (in their opinion) when they spoke, and there is still no good news now.

Thank you Peter,

All things are getting clear to me.

So, you mean, I can use both sentences depending on what I want to indicate, can't I?

then the possible indications are bellow, are those correct?

1-a I remembered the World War 2 ended in 1945. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.)

1-b I remembered the World War 2 had ended in 1945. (This would be indicated I might missunderstand.)

2-a I felt time is money. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.)

2-b I felf time was money. (This would be indicated I might not feel any more.)

3-a I knew the sun rises in the east. (This would be indicated the statement is still true.)

3-b I knew the sun rase in the east. (This would be indicated I might misunderstand or forget.)

4-a I guessed* that Darth Vader is Luke's father. (This would be indicated I still believe he is.*sorry for the typo)

4-2 I guessed that Darth Vader was Luke's father. (This would be indicated I might know he is not.)

Thank you in advance.

Hello again Nobori,

1-a I remembered the World War 2 ended in 1945. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.) 1-b I remembered the World War 2 had ended in 1945. (This would be indicated I might missunderstand.)

Both forms are possible here. The 'ending' is a moment in the past; after this there is no war. By the way, we treat 'World War 2' as a name so there is no article before it.

2-a I felt time is money. (This would be indicated the statement is still ture.) 2-b I felf time was money. (This would be indicated I might not feel any more.)

That's correct. Remember that backshifting the verb does not mean something is no longer true; it simply does not tell us anything about the present. Here, it tells the reader how you felt at a given moment in time; you may 

3-a I knew the sun rises in the east. (This would be indicated the statement is still true.) 3-b I knew the sun rase in the east. (This would be indicated I might misunderstand or forget.)

That's also correct. Again, remember that backshifting the verb does not mean something is no longer true; it simply does not tell us anything about the present.

4-a I guessed* that Darth Vader is Luke's father. (This would be indicated I still believe he is.*sorry for the typo) 4-2 I guessed that Darth Vader was Luke's father. (This would be indicated I might know he is not.)

Again, correct. In the second example it might still be true that he is Luke's father, or it might have turned out to be not true. The sentence does not tell us.

Hi Peter, Thank you for your thoughtful answer. Allthing is now very clear to me. Best

Hi, I am translating a fiction novel into English and need your help regarding the reporting speech as for few things I am not getting any clear understanding over the internet. As you know in fiction, we need to write in non-ordinary way to create unique impressions of the word and academic writing is different than speaking. Will be grateful if you could give your insight below, especially considering in the context of fiction/academic writing.

1) Let’s say If someone is giving a speech or presentation, I want to mix their speech, indirect-direct and past tense- present tense. Below are three examples:

-He said, their company makes excellent profit every year OR their company made excellent profit every year ( can both be correct? As the sentence)

- Roger had given his speech yesterday. He said, their company makes excellent profit every year and your company will sustain for next hundred years.(Can YOUR be used in the sentence)

- Roger said people wants to feel important OR Roger said people wanted to feel important (which will be correct as this is a trait which is true in past and present)

2) He thought why he is talking to her OR He thought why he was talking to her (are both write? As usually I see in novels the second example with WAS)

3) Gia was sitting with Jake and she told him she had met with her last year. Her mother had taken her to the dinner. Her mother had told her about her future plans. Her mother also had paid the bill for the dinner. (Do I need to use every time past perfect in this example though it doesn’t feel natural? As a rule of thumb I think past perfect needs to be used when we talk about another past event in the past )

Hello Alamgir3,

We're happy to help with a few specific grammar questions, but I'm afraid we can't help you with your translation -- I'd suggest you find an editor for that.

1) In the second clause, you can use present or past. We often use the present when it's still true now, but the past is not wrong. FYI we don't normally use a comma after 'said' in reported speech.

2) 'Why was he talking to her?' he thought.

3) This is really more of a question of style than grammar. Here I would suggest doing something like combining the four sentences into two and then leaving out 'had' in the second verb in each sentence. Even if it isn't written, it's understood to be past perfect.

All the best, Kirk LearnEnglish team

Hello teachers, I'm sorry, I could not find where to new post. Could you tell me about the back-sifting of thoughts bellow? Which forms are correct?

1-a I remembered the World War 2 ended in 1945. 1-b I remembered the World War 2 had ended in 1945.

2-a I felt time is money. 2-b I felf time was money.

3-a I knew the sun rises in the east. 3-b I knew the sun rase in the east.

4-a I guess that Darth Vader is Luke's father. 4-2 I guessed that Darth Vader was Luke's father.

Do those questions have the same conclusion as indirect speech, such as say and tell?

Hello Nobori,

The verb form remains the same when we want to make it clear that the situation described by the verb is still true, and this works in the same way as indirect speech. For example:

She said she loves me. [she loved me then and she loves me still] She said she loved me. [she loved me then; no information on how she feels now]

Other than this rule, the choice is really contextual and stylistic (up to the speaker). Sometimes a choice implies something. For example, the saying 'time is money' is a general statement, so if you choose to backshift here the listener will know it is an intentional choice and suspect that something has changed (you no longer believe it).

Hi teachers, I've read almost the section of comments below and my summarize is the present tense only can be used if the statement is still true now and past simple only tells the statement was true in the past and doesn't tell the statement is true or not now. Just to make sure, I wanna ask, If I'm not sure whether the statement is still true or not now, can I choose backshift instead (this is still apply to past tense become past perfect)? Thank you

Hello rahmanagustiansyah,

It sounds to me as if you've got the right general idea. Could you please give a couple of example sentences that illustrate your question?

Thanks in advance, Kirk The LearnEnglish Team

For example, Steve said "Anna hates you." Then I wanna tell about that to my friend, but I'm not sure whether Anna still hates me or not now. What should I choose between these two options. Answer 1:Steve said Anna hates me or Answer 2 : Steve said Anna hated me. Thank you

Hi rahmanagustiansyah,

In that case, I would choose answer 2. I might even add "... but I don't know if she still does" to the sentence to clarify, if that is the key point you want to communicate.

Jonathan The LearnEnglish Team

Hello Natasa Tanasa,

Both sentences are grammatically possible.

The first sentence is only possible if when the person asks the original question the woman is no longer there (she has already gone). The second sentence can be used in this situation too, or in a situation in which the woman was still there when the original question was asked. As the past tense is used in the original question ( Who was... ), both sentences are possible.

Hello Ahmed Imam,

When the situation is still true at the time of reporting, we can leave the verb form unchanged. For example:

1. She told me she loved me.

2. She told me she loves me.

In sentence 1 we know she loved me when she told me but we don't know whether or not she loves me now. In sentence 2, we know she loved me when she told me and we know that she loves me now.

In your example, if the supermarket is still in the same place then we can use either form. If the supermarket has been closed down or moved to another location then we need to use was .

As for which is 'safer', you'll need to make your own mind up! Keeping the verb in the same form carries more specific information and that may be appropriate or even important.

Hello eugelatina87,

I'll give you a hint: a verb is missing from the question.

Does that help you complete it?

All the best,

The first two sentences are possible and they can both mean that he is still Mary's boyfriend now. The first one makes this more clear, but the second one doesn't only refer to the past.

Hello magnuslin

Regarding your first question, the most common way of saying it is the second one. In some very specific situation, perhaps the first option would be possible.

This also answers your second question. It is not necessary to always backshift using the tenses you mention.

As for your third question, no, it is not necessary. In fact, it is probably more common to use the past simple in the reported speech as well. 

All the best

Hello manu,

Both forms are possible. If you use  had been  then we understand that he was there earlier but not when he said it - in other words, when he said it he had already left. If you use was then he may have left at the time of speaking, or he may have still been there.

Hello _princess_

I would recommend using answer a) because this is the general pattern used in reported speech. Sometimes the verb in the reported clause can be in the present tense when we are speaking about a situation that is still true, but the reported verb in the past tense can also have the same meaning. Since here the time referred to could be either past or present, I'd recommend using the past form.

Hello mwright,

This is an example of an indirect question. An indirect question reports a question, but is not a question itself, which is why we do not use a question mark at the end. Since it is not a question, we use the normal word order without inversion or auxiliary verbs. For example:

Indicative: He lives in Rome. Interrogative: Does he live in Rome? (Where does he live?) Reported: She asked if he lives in Rome. (She asked where he lives.)  

Hello ahlinthit

There are different styles of punctuating direct speech -- in other words, you might find other sources that will disagree with me -- but what I would use here is something different: "The boss is dead!" said the doctor.

Hope this helps.

Best wishes

Hello Timmosky,

The form that comes after the auxiliary verb 'do' (or 'does' or 'did') is not the plural present simple verb, but rather the bare infinitive (also known as 'base form' or 'first form') of the verb. Does that make sense?

All the best, Kirk The LearnEnglish Team

Hello sky-high,

This is very formal language. The phrase 'to the effect that' means 'with the meaning that'. In this context it can be understood to mean 'with the result that'.

Best wishes,

The difference is quite logical. If we use 'said' then we are talking about a claim by Peter in the past which he may or may not still maintain. If we use 'says' then we are talking about an opinion expressed by Peter which he still holds.

The reported information (whether or not Rooney is in good shape) can refer to only the past or to the present as well and the statement (what Peter thinks) can separately refer to only the past or the present as well. Of course, all of this is from the point of view of the person reporting Peter's opinion, and whether or not they think that Peter still thinks now what he thought then.

Both are possible. If you use the present tense then it is clear that the statement is still true (i.e. the business was not growing when Mary spoke and is still not growing now). If you use the past tense then no information is given regarding the present (i.e. the business was growing when Mary spoke and may or may not be growing now).

Hello aseel aftab,

It should be 'if they had'. This is not from this page, is it? I don't see it anywhere here, but if I've missed it please let me know.

Online courses

Group and one-to-one classes with expert teachers.

Learn English in your own time, at your own pace.

One-to-one sessions focused on a personal plan.

Get the score you need with private and group classes.  

Reported speech - 1

Reported speech - 2

Reported speech - 3

Worksheets - handouts

Reported speech

Worksheets - pdf exercises.

• Reported statements - worksheet
• Worksheet - reported questions
• Reported yes/no questions
• Worksheet - reported speech
• Reported speech - exercises pdf
• Indirect speech - exercises
• Reported speech - exercises
• Mixed reported speech 1
• Mixed reported speech 2
• Reported speech 1 
• Reported speech 2  
• Reported speech 3 
• Reported speech 4
• Reported speech 5
• Reported wh- questions
• Reported speech - worksheet 
• Reported commands
• Reported questions
• Reported speech 1
• Reported speech 2
• Reported requests and orders
• Reported speech exercise
• Reported questions - worksheet
• Indirect speech - worksheet
• Worksheets pdf - print
• Grammar worksheets - handouts

Grammar - lessons

• Reported speech - grammar notes
• How to use reported speech - lesson
• Tense changes - grammar

Reported Speech with Examples and Test (PDF)

Reported speech is used when we want to convey what someone else has said to us or to another person. It involves paraphrasing or summarising what has been said , often changing verb tenses , pronouns and other elements to suit the context of the report.

*doesn’t change

Formula of Reported Speech

The formula for reported speech involves transforming direct speech into an indirect form while maintaining the meaning of the original statement. In general, the formula includes:

• Choosing an appropriate reporting verb (e.g., say, tell, mention, explain).
• Changing pronouns and time expressions if necessary.
• Shifting the tense of the verb back if the reporting verb is in the past tense.
• Using reporting clauses like “that” or appropriate conjunctions.
• Adjusting word order and punctuation to fit the structure of the reported speech.

Here’s a simplified formula:

Reporting Verb + Indirect Object + Conjunction + Reported Clause

For example:

• She said (reporting verb) to me (indirect object) that (conjunction) she liked ice cream (reported clause).

Here’s how we use reported speech:

Reporting Verbs: We use verbs like ‘say’ or ‘tell’ to introduce reported speech. If the reporting verb is in the present tense, the tense of the reported speech generally remains the same.

If the reporting verb is in the past tense , the tense of the reported speech often shifts back in time.

Tense Changes: Tense changes are common in reported speech. For example, present simple may change to past simple, present continuous to past continuous, etc. However, some verbs like ‘would’, ‘could’, ‘should’, ‘might’, ‘must’, and ‘ought to’ generally don’t change.

Reported Questions: When reporting questions, we often change them into statements while preserving the meaning. Question words are retained, and the tense of the verbs may change.

Reported Requests and Orders: Requests and orders are reported similarly to statements. Reported requests often use ‘asked me to’ + infinitive, while reported orders use ‘told me to’ + infinitive.

Time Expressions: Time expressions may need to change depending on when the reported speech occurred in relation to the reporting moment. For instance, ‘today’ may become ‘that day’ or ‘yesterday’, ‘yesterday’ might become ‘the day before’, and so forth.

Reported Speech with Examples PDF

  Reported Speech PDF – download

Reported Speech Test

  Reported Speech A2 – B1 Test – download

You May Also Like

Conditionals and Mixed Conditionals in English (PDF)

Other Ways to Say SAID + PDF ✔

English Time Expressions Quiz

• I would like books for studying.

English Practice Downloadable PDF Grammar and Vocabulary Worksheets

Reported speech (b1).

• RS013 - Reported Speech
• RS012 - Reported Questions and Commands
• RS011 - Reported Speech
• RS010 - Reported Speech
• RS009 - Reported Commands
• RS008 - Reported Questions
• RS007 - Reported Speech
• RS006 - Reported Speech
• RS005 - Reported Speech
• RS004 - Reported Speech
• RS003 - Reported Speech
• RS002 - Reported Speech - Mixed Exercises
• RS001 - Reported Speech - Mixed Exercises
• Adjective - Adverb
• Gerund and Infinitive
• Modal Verbs
• Reported Speech
• Passive Voice
• Definite and Indefinite Articles
• Quantifiers
• Relative Clauses
• Prepositions
• Questions and Negations
• Question Tags
• Language in Use
• Word Formation
• General Vocabulary
• Topical Vocabulary
• Key Word Transformation

News Articles

• Letters and Emails
• Blog Posts and Comments
• Connectives and Linking Phrases
• Phrasal Verbs
• Collocations and Phrases

Listening Comprehension

Privacy policy.

https://first-english.org

Reported speech - English online exercises

• English year 1
• English year 2
• English year 3
• English year 4
• You are learning...

Reported Speech

• 01 Reported Speech rules
• 02 Pronouns change
• 03 Pronouns change
• 04 Change place and time
• 05 Simple Present
• 06 Introduction Simple Pres.
• 07 Backshift
• 08 Backshift Tenses
• 09 Simple Past negative
• 10 Simple Past negative
• 11 Questions
• 12 Questions
• 13 Past - Past Perfect
• 14 Past - Past Perfect
• 15 Past Perfect negative
• 16 Past Perfect negative
• 17 with-out question word
• 18 with-out question word
• 19 Perfect Past Perfect
• 20 Perfect - Past Perfect
• 21 Perfect - Past Perfect
• 22 Perfect - Past Perfect
• 23 Questions without qw.
• 24 Questions with qw.
• 25 will - would
• 26 Will-Future
• 27 Will-Future negative
• 28 Will-Future negatives
• 29 Will-Future Questions
• 30 Will-Future will - would
• 31 Commands
• 32 Commands Reported
• 33 Commands negative
• 34 Commands negative
• 35 Mixed exercises
• 37 Questions all tenses
• 38 Questions all tenses
• 39 Commands all tenses
• 40 Commands all tenses
• 41 all forms all tenses
• 42 all forms all tenses
• 43 Change place and time
• 44 Change place and time
• 45 Test Reported Speech
• English Tenses
• Simple Present Tense
• Simple past Tense
• Present perfect
• Past Perfect
• Simple Future
• Future Perfect
• Going-to-Future
• Continuous Tenses
• Present Continuous
• Past Continuous
• Present perfect Progr.
• Past Perfect Continuous
• Simple Future Continuous
• Future 2 Continuous
• Comparison of Tenses
• Passive exercises
• If clauses - Conditional

Reported speech rules, examples

Use Direct speech Reported speech Simple present Simple past Change of tenses Questions Commands Negatives Change of pronouns Change of date and time

When you report someone ' s words you can do it in 2 ways:

Direct speech

1. You can use direct speech with quotation marks. Example: He said: I work in a bank.

Reported speech

2. You can use reported speech. Example: He said he worked in a bank. The tenses, word-order, pronouns may be different from those in the direct speech sentence.

Direct speech: Jake said: I bought some DVDs. Reported speech: Jake said that he bought some DVDs .

Simple Present

Simple present tense usually changes to the simple past in reported speech.

Examples: Direct speech      Reported speech / Indirect speech

He says, " We are in London for the first time ." Direct speech He says (that) they are in London for the first time . Reported speech - Indirect speech He says, " We were in London for the first time ." Direct speech He says (that) they were in London for the first time . Reported speech - Indirect speech

Simple Past

The simple past tense usually changes to the past perfect in reported speech.

Change of tenses

The tenses , word-order, pronouns may be different from those in the direct speech sentence. The Past Perfect Tense does not change in the Reported Speech.

Questions - reported speech

"Do you like Jake?" She asked me if/whether I liked Jake.

Questions with question words

Who is your friend? She asked me who my friend was .

Commands - reported speech

Sit down! - The teacher told them to sit down. Drink a lot of tea! - He told us to drink a lot of tea.

Ann said that she wanted coke. Ann said that she did n`t want coke. Tom said that he was ill. Tom said that he was n't ill.

Change of pronouns, date and place words

the change of tenses the change of pronouns the change of time and place words

Tests reported speech and exercises

41 Reported speech all tenses   all tenses 42 Mixed exercises all forms tenses 43 All tenses place, time 44 Reported speech place, time 45 All tenses place, time

Reported speech rules

Reported speech with explanations, examples and exercises. Change the following sentences into Reported speech and learn with English online exercises.

Free tutorial Reported speech. English Reported speech exercises. English grammar easy to learn. Ejercicios en linea ingles. Exercicios das aulas de Ingles gratis online, exercicios de vocabularios, gramatica inglesa.

Oscar Lessons

Get your free TEFL and ESL lesson plans here!

• Adv. / Advanced / Full Lessons / Grammar

Reported Speech – Advanced Grammar Lesson – 1 Hour

Reported speech is a rule heavy grammar topic, so one of the best ways to introduce the topic is through guided discovery and speaking practice !

Guided discovery is when you allow students to discover rules on their own rather than telling them the rules. Use the following worksheet to allow students to discover the rules for reported speech on their own before putting it into action.

1. Allow students to answer the first three pages of the worksheet on their own or in small groups.

Do not do the practice page until you have checked their answers for the guided discovery .

2. Check their answers together as a class using the PDF or PPTX presentation.

When students have answered all the guided discovery questions, you can show them the rules/answers using the following presentation.

3. Give students a chance to practice reported speech using the fourth page of the worksheet.

When you have finished learning all of the rules, try answering the practice questions. (You can find this practice on the last page of the PDF worksheet.)

Directions: Change the sentences from direct speech to reported speech.

• He asked her, “Do you like pizza?”
• “I am going,” she said.
• “Where is he?” they asked.
• “I ate at the shopping mall,” Tim said.
• “We can read a book,” he said.
• “I will visit you next week,” Anita told George.
• “That dinosaur is so cute,” said the child.
• “What are we waiting for?” she asked.
• “Did they finish their homework?” asked the teacher.
• She asked her, “Have you ever tried sushi?”

4. Let students use the discussion question to practice reported speech.

After students have had some practice, try answering these discussion questions , which are also in the reported speech PPTX/PDF.

And it’s as simple as that!

By allowing the students to discover the rules slowly on their own, it’ll make it easier to remember and head off a lot of the confusion that comes with harder topics like reported speech.

I hope this lesson helped you and your students!

If you want more advanced lessons, try this one hour lesson that encourages students to discuss radical work ideas.

Share this lesson.

• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
• Click to print (Opens in new window)

Tags: advanced conversation ESL free grammar guided discovery Lesson Questions reported speech tefl Worksheet

You may also like...

So and Such – Intermediate Grammar Lesson – 40 minutes

February 12, 2024

 by Oscar · Published February 12, 2024 · Last modified February 15, 2024

5 Low-Prep Fun Conversation Classes for Adults (1 hour each)

February 1, 2024

 by Oscar · Published February 1, 2024 · Last modified February 24, 2024

Grammar Lesson – Past Perfect – Bad Day – 40 min

August 13, 2020

 by Oscar · Published August 13, 2020 · Last modified February 18, 2023

Leave a comment and tell us what you think! Cancel reply

Search for more

Most Popular

Subscribe to our newsletter.

Never miss a lesson plan!

Subscribe and get notified of new lessons.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• The Attorney General
• Organizational Chart
• Budget & Performance
• Privacy Program
• Press Releases
• Photo Galleries
• Guidance Documents
• Publications
• Information for Victims in Large Cases
• Justice Manual
• Business and Contracts
• Why Justice ?
• DOJ Vacancies
• Legal Careers at DOJ
• Our Offices

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Delivers Remarks on Lawsuit Against Apple for Monopolizing Smartphone Markets

Washington , DC United States

Remarks as Delivered

Good morning. Earlier today, the Department of Justice, joined by 15 states and the District of Columbia sue Apple in the U.S. District Count for the District of New Jersey for violating Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Over the last two decades, Apple has become one of the most valuable public companies in the world. Today, its net income exceeds the individual Gross Domestic Product of more than 100 countries. That is in large part due to the success of the iPhone, Apple’s signature smartphone product.

For over a decade, iPhone sales have made up a majority of Apple's annual revenue. Today, Apple's share of the U.S. performance smartphone market exceeds 70%, and its share of the entire U.S. smartphone market exceeds 65%. Apple charges as much as nearly $1,600 for an iPhone.

But as our complaint alleges, Apple has maintained monopoly power in the smartphone market not simply by staying ahead of the competition on the merits, but by violating federal antitrust law.

Consumers should not have to pay higher prices because companies break the law.

We allege that Apple has employed a strategy that relies on exclusionary, anticompetitive conduct that hurts both consumers and developers.

For consumers, that has meant fewer choices; higher prices and fees; lower quality smartphones, apps, and accessories; and less innovation from Apple and its competitors.

For developers, that has meant being forced to play by rules that insulate Apple from competition.

And as outlined in our complaint, we allege that Apple has consolidated its monopoly power not by making its own products better — but by making other products worse.

Apple carries out its exclusionary, anticompetitive conduct in two principal ways: 

First, Apple imposes contractual restrictions and fees that limit the features and functionality that developers can offer iPhone users.

Second, Apple selectively restricts access to the points of connection between third-party apps and the iPhone’s operating system, degrading the functionality of non-Apple apps and accessories.

As a result, for most of the past 15 years, Apple has collected a tax in the form of a 30% commission on the price of any app downloaded from the App Store as well as on in-app purchases. Apple is able to command these fees from companies of all sizes.

Apple has also suppressed the emergence of programs like cloud streaming apps — including gaming apps — as well as super apps that could reduce user dependence on Apple's own operating system and expensive hardware. 

And, as any iPhone user who has ever seen a green text message, or received a tiny, grainy video can attest — Apple's anticompetitive conduct also includes making it more difficult for iPhone users to message with users of non-Apple products.

It does this by diminishing the functionality of its own messaging app and by diminishing the functionality of third-party messaging apps.

By doing so, Apple knowingly and deliberately degrades quality, privacy, and security for its users.

For example, if an iPhone user messages a non-iPhone user in Apple Messages, the text appears not only as a green bubble, but incorporates limited functionality:

• The conversation is not encrypted;
• Videos are pixelated and grainy; and
• Users cannot edit messages or see typing indicators.

As a result, iPhone users perceive rival smartphones as being lower quality because the experience of messaging friends and family who do not own iPhones is worse — even though Apple is the one responsible for breaking cross-platform messaging.

And it does so intentionally.

For example, in 2013, a senior executive at Apple explained that supporting cross-platform messaging in Apple Messages, “would simply serve to remove [an] obstacle to iPhone families giving their kids Android phones.”

In 2022, Apple’s CEO was asked whether Apple would fix iPhone-to-Android messaging. The questioner added: “not to make it personal but I can’t send my mom certain videos.”

Apple's CEO responded, “Buy your mom an iPhone.”

In addition to selectively controlling app distribution and creation, we allege that Apple is violating the law by conditionally restricting developers’ access to the interface needed to make an app functional on the Apple operating system.

For a product like a smartwatch or a digital wallet to be useful to an iPhone user, it must be able to communicate with the iPhone’s operating system. But Apple creates barriers that make it extremely difficult and expensive for both users and developers to venture outside the Apple ecosystem.

When it comes to smartwatches, Apple not only drives users to purchase an Apple Watch — which is only compatible with an iPhone — it also uses its technical and contractual controls to make it harder for someone with an iPhone to use a non-Apple smartwatch.

And when it comes to digital wallets, Apple’s exclusionary conduct goes a step further. Digital wallets allow users to store and use passes and credentials in a single app — including credit cards, personal identification, movie tickets, and car keys. Apple Wallet is Apple’s proprietary digital wallet on the iPhone.

Apple actively encourages banks, merchants, and other parties to participate in Apple Wallet. But it simultaneously exerts its monopoly power to block these same partners from developing alternative payment products and services for iPhone users.

For example, Apple has blocked third-party developers from creating competing digital wallets on the iPhone that use what is known as tap-to-pay functionality. That is the function that makes a digital wallet — well, a wallet.

Instead, Apple forces those who want to use the wallet function to share personal information with Apple — even if they would prefer to share that information solely with their bank, medical provider, or other trusted third party.

When an iPhone user puts a credit or debit card into Apple Wallet, Apple inserts itself in a process that could otherwise occur directly between the user and card issuer. This introduces an additional potential point of failure for the privacy and security of Apple users.

And that is just one way in which Apple is willing to make the iPhone less secure and less private in order to maintain its monopoly power.

The Supreme Court defines monopoly power as “the power to control prices or exclude competition.”

As set out in our complaint, Apple has that power in the smartphone market.

Now, having monopoly power does not itself violate the antitrust laws.

But it does when a firm acquires or maintains monopoly power — not because it has a superior product or superior business acumen — but by engaging in exclusionary conduct.

As set out in our complaint, Apple has maintained its power not because of its superiority, but because of its unlawful exclusionary behavior.

Monopolies like Apple's threaten the free and fair markets upon which our economy is based. They stifle innovation; they hurt producers and workers; and they increase costs for consumers. 

If left unchallenged, Apple will only continue to strengthen its smartphone monopoly.

But there’s a law for that.

The Justice Department will vigorously enforce antitrust law.

Enforcing the law protects consumers from higher prices and fewer choices. 

That is the Justice Department’s legal obligation.  That is what the American people expect. That is what they deserve.

I am grateful to the attorneys and staff of the Department’s Antitrust Division for their tireless work on this case on behalf of the American people. I will now turn the podium over to the Deputy Attorney General.

Related Content

The Justice Department joined by the Federal Trade Commission (collectively the “Agencies”), filed a statement of interest with the District of New Jersey in the case of Cornish-Adebiyi v. Caesars ...

The Justice Department, U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Georgia and the Procurement Collusion Strike Force (PCSF) hosted a summit today where procurement officials and law enforcement partners...

Today, Fresh Express Acquisition LLC’s, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Chiquita Holdings Limited (Chiquita), announced its decision to abandon its proposed $308 million acquisition of Dole plc’s Fresh Vegetables division. The...

Trump wins partial stay of fraud judgment, allowed to post $175 million

Trump previously faced a requirement that he post a half-billion dollar bond to stop the n.y. attorney general from taking his assets.

An appeals court panel in New York said Monday that former president Donald Trump would be allowed to post a $175 million bond to stave off enforcement of a nearly half-billion-dollar civil judgment against him and his business.

The order was a significant win for Trump, who was otherwise facing a massive cash crunch and the prospect of New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) moving to seize some of his assets as soon as this week .

However, while the five state judges on the panel eased the financial strain on Trump, they did not erase it entirely. They gave Trump 10 days to come up with the reduced bond of $175 million, saying they would only delay enforcement of the full amount if he put up that lower figure within this window — and it is not immediately clear how he will come up with the money.

“We’ll put up the cash or a bond very quickly,” Trump told reporters Monday, but provided no specifics. Trump’s attorneys had previously sought to post a $100 million bond, rather than the full amount.

The panel’s order came at a precarious moment for Trump, who is contending with significant financial pressure and legal peril. The appeals panel’s order came down while he was in a New York court in a bid to delay the start of his criminal case related to hush money payments made to an adult film actress. The justice rejected that effort and said the case will go to trial April 15 .

The ruling put the first-ever criminal trial of a former president back on track, after the judge had ordered a brief delay to consider a claim from Trump that prosecutors had engaged in misconduct. Trump faces 34 charges of falsifying business records as he sought to hide payments to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels.

Separately, Trump has also been ordered by two civil juries to pay nearly $90 million to the writer E. Jean Carroll. He also faces charges in four criminal cases , including the hush money case in New York.

The civil fraud judgment against Trump, meanwhile, stems from a lawsuit that James brought against him and his company, as well as his two eldest sons and two former executives. James’s lawsuit said Trump misstated the value of his properties and other assets by up to $2.2 billion a year from 2011 to 2021.

New York Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron, who heard the case, in February issued a written decision that assailed Trump and the other defendants, saying they showed a staggering “lack of contrition and remorse.” He ordered that Trump pay the hefty judgment, which with interest comes out to more than $450 million.

The former president immediately vowed to appeal that ruling, but to stop James from collecting in the meantime, he was required to put up a bond in the full amount.

Trump’s attorneys have said he could not finance an appeal bond of more than $450 million. They said his team had contacted 30 companies , none of which would take real estate — which accounts for most of Trump’s wealth — as collateral. Instead they required he put up cash or investment accounts. Securing such a large bond in cash is a “practical impossibility,” Trump’s lawyers argued.

The appeals court panel on Monday did not reduce the initial judgment, only the amount Trump needs to put up for a bond while appealing. His deadline for securing the bond is next Thursday, April 4. The extra 10 days may not be enough of an extension for Trump to turn his real estate into cash, as it typically takes weeks or months to sell properties such as golf courses or hotels.

Asked Monday by reporters how he would pay or secure the $175 million bond, Trump replied, “I have a lot of cash” before adding that he would “like to be able to use some of my cash to get elected.”

Exactly how much Trump has in cash and securities is difficult to determine. In April of last year, he claimed to have “400-plus” million dollars during a deposition in the fraud case. In an August financial disclosure filed with the Office of Government Ethics, he listed hundreds of bank and investment accounts with a total value of between $252 million and $924 million, according to a Washington Post analysis of the form.

Since then, there have been some meaningful changes to his finances. Earlier this month, he posted a $91 million bond to delay enforcement of a judgment in one of the defamation cases he lost to Carroll, eating into his wealth. But when shareholders voted last week to take the parent company of his Truth Social platform public, they handed him a windfall — at least on paper. At Monday afternoon’s stock price, which had risen more than 35 percent over the course of the day, Trump’s 60 percent share in the company was worth more than $3 billion. But he cannot sell or borrow against his ownership stake for six months unless the company’s board grants him a waiver.

Asked Monday whether he would accept assistance from a foreign government, Trump said, “I don’t do that.” He then added, “I think you’d be allowed to possibly, I don’t know. ...The biggest banks, frankly, are outside of our country. So you could do that. But I don’t need to borrow money.”

Foreign governments spent millions of dollars at Trump properties while he was president, according to a January report from House Democrats. Trump’s company donated some of the revenue to the U.S. Treasury and has said the transactions were for market rates.

Trump has long used his legal jeopardy to rally supporters, arguing that he is being politically targeted. Polling showed that after he was indicted last year, his support among Republicans increased. And even though Monday’s appeals court ruling boiled down to an order that he must find $175 million to stop state authorities from taking his assets, he hailed it as a victory over Engoron and James, claiming in a social media post that the ruling “shattered” their credibility.

James’s office had argued against Trump’s attempts to stay the entire judgment or let him post a lower amount. On Monday, after the panel released its order, James’s office said the ruling did nothing to change Engoron’s finding that Trump committed wrongdoing.

“Donald Trump is still facing accountability for his staggering fraud,” a spokesperson for her office said. “The court has already found that he engaged in years of fraud to falsely inflate his net worth and unjustly enrich himself, his family, and his organization. The $464 million judgment — plus interest — against Donald Trump and the other defendants still stands.”

Although the appeals court gave no reasoning for its decision, Adam Pollock, an attorney who formerly served as assistant attorney general in New York, said the decision could indicate that it might consider permanently reducing the judgment against Trump on appeal.

“It’s extraordinary because the law is clear that you have to post a bond in the full amount, and it additionally suggests that there may be concern that the underlying judgment is itself excessive,” said Pollock.

The appellate court did indicate that it wants to keep the case moving based on the schedule it laid out, legal experts said. The order requires Trump to appeal in time for the court’s September term. That requires that his appeal be prepared by July 8, according to Pollock. “Here what they’re saying is, ‘You’re not going to get to drag this out,’” Pollock said.

In addition to reducing the amount Trump must put up for his appeal bond, the panel also said it would stay other parts of Engoron’s decision.

Among other things, the panel said it would block Engoron’s decree that Trump and his company be prohibited from getting loans from any New York financial institution for three years. The panel also said it would block Engoron’s orders barring Trump from serving in a top position at a New York corporation for three years or his sons — Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump — for two years. An appeals court judge had granted temporary stays on those measures last month, though it remained unclear whether the full panel would maintain or change that.

The panel said some of Engoron’s other moves, including his directive installing an independent director of compliance for the Trump Organization, should stand.

Jacobs reported from New York. Azi Paybarah, Drew Harwell and Clara Ence Morse contributed to this report.

Netanyahu tells Republicans Gaza war will continue, days after Schumer speech

The Reuters Daily Briefing newsletter provides all the news you need to start your day. Sign up here.

Reporting by Patricia Zengerle, additional reporting by Katharine Jackson; Editing by Gareth Jones and Cynthia Osterman

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. , opens new tab

Thomson Reuters

Patricia Zengerle has reported from more than 20 countries, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and China. An award-winning Washington-based national security and foreign policy reporter who also has worked as an editor, Patricia has appeared on NPR, C-Span and other programs, spoken at the National Press Club and attended the Hoover Institution Media Roundtable. She is a recipient of the Edwin M. Hood Award for Diplomatic Correspondence.

US and Israel to hold meeting on Rafah on Monday, Axios reports

The United States and Israel are expected to hold a virtual meeting on Monday to discuss the Biden administration's alternative proposals to an Israeli military invasion of Rafah, Axios reported on Sunday citing three Israeli and U.S. officials.

Russian shelling killed at least three people in different regions of eastern Ukraine on the front of the more than two-year-old war against Russia, local officials said, and two more in Lviv region, far from the front lines.

Advertisement

Supported by

Judge Imposes Gag Order on Trump in Manhattan Criminal Trial

The order limiting the former president’s speech came after Justice Juan M. Merchan set an April 15 trial date for the case, which involves a sex scandal cover-up.

• Share full article

By Ben Protess and William K. Rashbaum

The New York judge presiding over one of Donald J. Trump’s criminal trials imposed a gag order on Tuesday that prohibits him from attacking witnesses, prosecutors and jurors, the latest effort to rein in the former president’s wrathful rhetoric about his legal opponents.

The judge, Juan M. Merchan, imposed the order at the request of the Manhattan district attorney’s office, which brought the case against Mr. Trump. The district attorney, Alvin L. Bragg, has accused Mr. Trump of covering up a potential sex scandal during and after his 2016 campaign.

The ruling comes on the heels of Justice Merchan’s setting an April 15 trial date, rejecting Mr. Trump’s latest effort to delay the proceeding while he seeks to reclaim the White House. It will mark the first prosecution of a former American president, and it might be the only one of Mr. Trump’s criminal cases to go to trial before voters head to the polls in November.

Under the judge’s order, Mr. Trump cannot make, or direct others to make, statements about witnesses’ roles in the case. Mr. Trump is also barred from commenting on prosecutors, court staff and their relatives if he intends to interfere with their work on the case. Any comments whatsoever about jurors are banned as well, the judge ruled, citing an array of hostile remarks Mr. Trump has made about grand jurors, prosecutors and others.

“His statements were threatening, inflammatory, denigrating,” Justice Merchan wrote in the Tuesday order.

There is one notable exception to the gag order: Mr. Trump is not prohibited from attacking Mr. Bragg, who has received numerous death threats in recent months. Mr. Bragg voluntarily carved himself out of the order; in other Trump cases, prosecutors are also left out of the gag orders.

Although Justice Merchan did not specify how he might enforce the narrowly tailored order, judges typically impose fines. In extraordinary circumstances, they can send someone to jail, though that seems unlikely in this case.

The gag order, along with Justice Merchan’s other recent ruling protecting the identities of potential jurors in the case, reflects the volatile atmosphere that has swirled around Mr. Trump’s four criminal cases and several civil trials.

The order hewed closely to the terms of one in another of Mr. Trump’s criminal cases that was upheld by a federal appeals court in Washington, which wrote that “Mr. Trump’s documented pattern of speech and its demonstrated real-time, real-world consequences pose a significant and imminent threat.”

And in seeking the order last month, Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors highlighted Mr. Trump’s “longstanding history of attacking witnesses, investigators, prosecutors, judges, and others involved in legal proceedings against him” — comments that the judge seized on in his ruling.

Mr. Trump, for example, has taken aim at Michael D. Cohen, his onetime fixer and one of Mr. Bragg’s central witnesses, calling him a “liar” and a “rat.” And in a rambling and angry post on his social media site on Tuesday, Mr. Trump made an ominous reference to Mr. Cohen, claiming without explanation that his former fixer was “death.” He also referred to one of Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors in pejorative terms.

Both comments would now arguably violate the gag order. On Tuesday, Mr. Cohen issued a statement thanking the judge for issuing the order.

In another post, Mr. Trump took aim at Justice Merchan and his family, claiming that the judge “hates me,” though those comments do not appear to cross the line the judge has now set.

In Mr. Trump’s other cases, the heated rhetoric has preceded violent threats. After Mr. Trump recently lost his civil fraud case in New York, which was brought by the state attorney general, envelopes of white powder were sent to both the attorney general’s office and the judge who had overseen the case. The judge, Arthur F. Engoron, was also the victim of a hoax bomb threat at his home.

Mr. Trump, who called Justice Engoron a “nut job,” has also targeted the prosecutors in all his criminal cases, falsely accusing them of working in concert with President Biden. He called Mr. Bragg, a Democrat who is Black, a “racist.”

Mr. Trump’s lawyers had opposed the order in the Manhattan case, arguing that it “would be unconstitutional and unlawful to impose a prior restraint on President Trump’s First Amendment speech.”

A spokesman for Mr. Trump’s campaign, Steven Cheung, echoed that claim on Tuesday, calling the order unconstitutional and saying that it prevents the former president “from engaging in core political speech, which is entitled to the highest level of protection under the First Amendment.”

Mr. Cheung also said that “American voters have a fundamental right to hear the uncensored voice of the leading candidate for the highest office in the land.”

Justice Merchan is just the latest judge to impose a gag order on the former president.

In addition to the order in the Washington criminal case, which involves accusations that Mr. Trump plotted to overturn the 2020 election, Mr. Trump was ordered not to comment on court staff members in the civil fraud case after he attacked Justice Engoron’s principal law clerk. Justice Engoron imposed $15,000 in fines on the former president when he ran afoul of that order.

Ultimately, the judge ruled in favor of the attorney general, inflicting a more than $450 million judgment on Mr. Trump.

In the Manhattan criminal case, Mr. Trump faces up to four years in prison. The case stems from a hush-money payment that Mr. Cohen made — to a porn star looking to sell her story of a sexual encounter with Mr. Trump — during the 2016 campaign. After he was elected, Mr. Trump helped falsify business records related to his reimbursement of Mr. Cohen, according to prosecutors, further covering up the scandal from voters.

After Mr. Bragg filed the case last year, Justice Merchan initially stopped short of adopting a gag order, while instructing Mr. Trump to refrain from making statements “likely to incite violence or civil unrest.” But since then, Mr. Trump has continued to attack witnesses and prosecutors, prompting Mr. Bragg to seek a more formal order.

Separately, the judge’s recent order protecting prospective jurors in the case effectively barred Mr. Trump from exposing their identities, emphasizing a need to protect those who might decide the highly sensitive case.

The judge also ordered that their addresses be kept secret from everyone except the lawyers in the case, a measure that Mr. Trump’s legal team did not oppose.

In an unrelated order Tuesday, Justice Merchan issued a stern warning to Mr. Trump’s lawyers as well. He reminded them to behave professionally, or risk being held in contempt.

“This court emphasizes that it hopes for and fully expects zealous advocacy from counsel as well as spirited contribution from witnesses and parties alike,” Justice Merchan wrote. “Nonetheless, the court expects that the line between zealous advocacy and willful disregard of its orders will not be crossed.”

Jesse McKinley , Maggie Haberman and Kate Christobek contributed reporting.

Ben Protess is an investigative reporter at The Times, writing about public corruption. He has been covering the various criminal investigations into former President Trump and his allies. More about Ben Protess

William K. Rashbaum is a senior writer on the Metro desk, where he covers political and municipal corruption, courts, terrorism and law enforcement. He was a part of the team awarded the 2009 Pulitzer Prize for Breaking News. More about William K. Rashbaum

Our Coverage of the Trump Hush-Money Case

The manhattan district attorney has filed charges against former president donald trump over a hush-money payment to a porn star on the eve of the 2016 election..

Taking the Case to Trial: Trump is all but certain to become the first former U.S. president to stand trial on criminal charges after a judge denied his effort to delay the proceeding and confirmed it will begin on April 15 .

Implications for Trump: As the case goes to trial, the former president’s inner circle sees a silver lining in the timing. But Trump wouldn’t be able to pardon himself  should he become president again as he could if found guilty in the federal cases against him.

Michael Cohen: Trump’s former fixer was not an essential witness in the former president’s civil fraud trial in New York  that concluded in January. But he will be when he takes the stand in the hush-money case .

Stormy Daniels: The chain of events flowing from a 2006 encounter that the adult film star said she had with Trump has led to the brink of a historic trial. Here's a look inside the hush-money payout .