Connect with us

Politics

Trump is having a bad week. Will it matter in the election?

Published

on

Trump is having a bad week. Will it matter in the election?

Former President Trump’s tough week showed as well as any to date why he is facing a new and unprecedented reality as a presidential candidate — as he ping-ponged among a dizzying array of court appearances, judicial rulings, competing allegations and subsequent grievances.

By Thursday, he was complaining about the overlap in his busy legal schedule, railing that Judge Juan M. Merchan, who is presiding over his hush-money case in New York, wouldn’t let him leave that trial to attend a Supreme Court hearing in Washington, D.C., over whether he can face criminal prosecution for trying to overturn the 2020 election. That decision also could affect Trump’s classified-documents case in Florida.

“I should be there!” Trump fumed about the Supreme Court. “He wouldn’t allow it to happen. He puts himself above the Supreme Court.”

Most of the week, Trump sat in Merchan’s Manhattan courtroom as former National Enquirer Publisher David Pecker testified. Pecker, a key witness in the 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, helped prosecutors outline the alleged conspiracy that involved using the tabloid to kill negative stories about Trump and covering up payments during the 2016 campaign.

Advertisement

A trial break Wednesday might have offered a reprieve for Trump. Instead, it was full of more action against the former president. Trump was identified as a co-conspirator in two states: Michigan, during a pretrial hearing involving a group of “fake electors” who were charged as part of an election subversion scheme; and Arizona, where some of Trump’s closest allies were charged in yet another plot to overturn the election using fake electors.

That indictment hit close to Trump because it included Mark Meadows, his former chief of staff, and Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who became Trump’s political fixer and confidant.

It didn’t end there. By the time Trump got back to court on Thursday, prosecutors alleged that his attempts to spin perceptions about his Manhattan case — including calling Pecker “a nice guy” — violated the gag order because he was trying to sway a potentially harmful witness.

To cap it off, a federal judge in New York rejected Trump’s attempt to throw out an $83.3-million civil defamation judgment for E. Jean Carroll, a former magazine columnist who accused Trump of raping her in a department store in the 1990s. A jury ruled Trump defamed Carroll by denying her sexual-abuse allegations.

Will it matter in the election? Trump appeared unharmed during the presidential primary, with many Republican voters either dismissing the charges as a distraction or agreeing with Trump that he was being persecuted for upending the establishment.

Advertisement

In interviews last week with voters in Arizona, a key swing state, one supporter dismissed the fury around Trump’s actions on Jan. 6, 2021, as overblown. Other supporters and potential supporters said their concerns about the economy and immigration and frustration with President Biden were more important than anything else.

But a poll released Wednesday had some data that might concern Trump’s campaign. Six in 10 voters said the charges in the Manhattan case — considered the weakest of the four indictments against the former president — were either very serious or somewhat serious, according to a Quinnipiac University poll of registered voters.

Just under half of those polled said Trump did something illegal, while more than a quarter said it was unethical but not illegal.

Most voters said a conviction would not influence their vote. But a sizable minority — including 5% of Trump voters — said they would be less likely to vote for Trump if he is found guilty.

That may not seem like much, and some of those voters could change their minds. But in an election that both sides expect to be close, even a relatively small number of lost votes could matter.

Advertisement

“Any slice of 2% to 3% of people who will be persuaded matters,” said David Paleologos, a pollster and director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center in Boston.

There’s also an opportunity cost, as Trump is losing time to get out in front of swing-state voters.

“The only way a week like this is reversed is if he has a positive outcome in one of his trials,” Paleologos said.

For Trump, a positive result could include not only an outright win but also a ruling by the Supreme Court that delays one or more of his trials until after the election, allowing him to further scuttle or quash the proceedings if he becomes president again.

“It’s one thing to be tied up in court a week and then win,” Paleologos said. “And it’s another to have lost all of that time and lose.”

Advertisement

Politics

Trump plans to meet with Venezuela opposition leader Maria Corina Machado next week

Published

on

Trump plans to meet with Venezuela opposition leader Maria Corina Machado next week

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he plans to meet with Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado in Washington next week.

During an appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity,” Trump was asked if he intends to meet with Machado after the U.S. struck Venezuela and captured its president, Nicolás Maduro.

“Well, I understand she’s coming in next week sometime, and I look forward to saying hello to her,” Trump said.

Venezuelan opposition leader Maria Corina Machado waves a national flag during a protest called by the opposition on the eve of the presidential inauguration, in Caracas on January 9, 2025. (JUAN BARRETO/AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

This will be Trump’s first meeting with Machado, who the U.S. president stated “doesn’t have the support within or the respect within the country” to lead.

According to reports, Trump’s refusal to support Machado was linked to her accepting the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize, which Trump believed he deserved.

But Trump later told NBC News that while he believed Machado should not have won the award, her acceptance of the prize had “nothing to do with my decision” about the prospect of her leading Venezuela.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

California sues Trump administration over ‘baseless and cruel’ freezing of child-care funds

Published

on

California sues Trump administration over ‘baseless and cruel’ freezing of child-care funds

California is suing the Trump administration over its “baseless and cruel” decision to freeze $10 billion in federal funding for child care and family assistance allocated to California and four other Democratic-led states, Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Thursday.

The lawsuit was filed jointly by the five states targeted by the freeze — California, New York, Minnesota, Illinois and Colorado — over the Trump administration’s allegations of widespread fraud within their welfare systems. California alone is facing a loss of about $5 billion in funding, including $1.4 billion for child-care programs.

The lawsuit alleges that the freeze is based on unfounded claims of fraud and infringes on Congress’ spending power as enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“This is just the latest example of Trump’s willingness to throw vulnerable children, vulnerable families and seniors under the bus if he thinks it will advance his vendetta against California and Democratic-led states,” Bonta said at a Thursday evening news conference.

The $10-billion funding freeze follows the administration’s decision to freeze $185 million in child-care funds to Minnesota, where federal officials allege that as much as half of the roughly $18 billion paid to 14 state-run programs since 2018 may have been fraudulent. Amid the fallout, Gov. Tim Walz has ordered a third-party audit and announced that he will not seek a third term.

Advertisement

Bonta said that letters sent by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announcing the freeze Tuesday provided no evidence to back up claims of widespread fraud and misuse of taxpayer dollars in California. The freeze applies to the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program, the Social Services Block Grant program and the Child Care and Development Fund.

“This is funding that California parents count on to get the safe and reliable child care they need so that they can go to work and provide for their families,” he said. “It’s funding that helps families on the brink of homelessness keep roofs over their heads.”

Bonta also raised concerns regarding Health and Human Services’ request that California turn over all documents associated with the state’s implementation of the three programs. This requires the state to share personally identifiable information about program participants, a move Bonta called “deeply concerning and also deeply questionable.”

“The administration doesn’t have the authority to override the established, lawful process our states have already gone through to submit plans and receive approval for these funds,” Bonta said. “It doesn’t have the authority to override the U.S. Constitution and trample Congress’ power of the purse.”

The lawsuit was filed in federal court in Manhattan and marked the 53rd suit California had filed against the Trump administration since the president’s inauguration last January. It asks the court to block the funding freeze and the administration’s sweeping demands for documents and data.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

Published

on

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

new video loaded: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

transcript

transcript

Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

“How Long do you think you’ll be running Venezuela?” “Only time will tell. Like three months. six months, a year, longer?” “I would say much longer than that.” “Much longer, and, and —” “We have to rebuild. You have to rebuild the country, and we will rebuild it in a very profitable way. We’re going to be using oil, and we’re going to be taking oil. We’re getting oil prices down, and we’re going to be giving money to Venezuela, which they desperately need. I would love to go, yeah. I think at some point, it will be safe.” “What would trigger a decision to send ground troops into Venezuela?” “I wouldn’t want to tell you that because I can’t, I can’t give up information like that to a reporter. As good as you may be, I just can’t talk about that.” “Would you do it if you couldn’t get at the oil? Would you do it —” “If they’re treating us with great respect. As you know, we’re getting along very well with the administration that is there right now.” “Have you spoken to Delcy Rodríguez?” “I don’t want to comment on that, but Marco speaks to her all the time.”

Advertisement
President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

January 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending