Politics
Column: Trump wins! (One way or another.) Here's why
No matter what verdict the jury delivers in Donald Trump’s trial on business fraud charges in New York, one outcome is predictable: The former president will react with defiance and denial — plus a declaration of victory if he isn’t found guilty on all counts.
A more important effect is almost as predictable: The verdict won’t have much impact on his chances of winning the presidential election.
Even a finding of guilty on tangled charges that Trump committed business fraud to hide hush money payments to an adult film actress is likely to have only a minor effect on his standing in the eyes of most voters.
A conviction, which the former president would almost certainly appeal, won’t prevent him from staying in the race. And if he wins the election, he stands a good chance of avoiding any serious penalties, at least while he’s in office.
Trump faces four possible verdicts: guilty on all counts, a split decision, a hung jury or acquittal.
GUILTY — It won’t be easy to spin a conviction on all 34 counts as a victory, but there are plenty of ways Trump can mitigate the consequences. He’ll continue to claim that the charges were flimsy and the process was rigged against him. And if he appeals the verdict, that will have two effects: It will almost certainly keep him out of jail until long after election day, and it will allow him to argue (correctly) that a conviction can’t be considered final while it’s under challenge.
SPLIT DECISION — If Trump is found guilty on some counts but not on others, he can be relied on to declare it a moral victory. He’ll almost certainly appeal any and all convictions, and argue that the muddled outcome proves that the charges against him were weak from the start.
HUNG JURY — It takes only one of 12 jurors to block a jury from delivering a verdict — a “hung jury,” normally resulting in a mistrial. If the jury can’t reach a decision, Trump will exult that even a jury of Manhattanites in one of the most liberal jurisdictions in the nation failed to find him culpable — another moral victory declaration.
ACQUITTAL — This would be total victory. The candidate would claim that it proves he’s been right all along — and that his opponents have unfairly “weaponized” the judicial system against him.
Why do I say even a guilty verdict isn’t likely to dent Trump’s electoral prospects? Because that’s what the smartest political pollsters I know, both Republicans and Democrats, say.
“A conviction in this case is unlikely to play a significant role” in the election, Democratic strategist Mark Mellman said. “It’s possible that the polls will flutter and then return to where they were. And it’s possible that there won’t be a flutter.”
“The most likely impact of a guilty verdict is negligible,” Republican pollster Whit Ayres agreed.
An ABC News/Ipsos poll last month found that that 16% of Trump’s current voters said they would reconsider supporting him if he were convicted in the New York case, and another 4% said they would definitely stop supporting him. But voters are generally bad at predicting how they would react to hypothetical future events, the pollsters warned.
In 1998, Mellman noted, plenty of Democrats told pollsters they thought then-President Clinton should resign if he were impeached for lying about a sexual relationship with a White House intern. But when the Republican-led House of Representatives actually impeached Clinton, his voters stuck with him and his popularity soared.
Trump has spent months attacking the legitimacy of the criminal cases against him — preparing his supporters, in effect, to ignore a guilty verdict.
And he has shown, over and over, that constant repetition can bend public opinion his way.
A case in point: Trump’s insistence that the 2020 presidential election was rigged. A year ago, the Monmouth University Poll found that 68% of Republicans said they believed President Biden won the election through fraud. By February, with Trump campaigning relentlessly on his bogus election claims, that number ticked up to 75%.
“We have seen, over eight years, a series of events that caused people to say, ‘Surely this time, Trump will lose support.’ But he never really does,” Ayres said.
As for undecided voters, five months of campaigning still remain. Voters who haven’t made up their minds are unlikely to decide in November on the basis of a verdict on business-fraud charges — a verdict that will be under appeal, at worst — that was delivered in May.
Trump has already scored at least one important victory. Six months ago, he was facing four serious criminal cases, any of which could have derailed his presidential campaign: a federal case stemming from his supporters’ invasion of the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021; a federal case on charges he illegally retained highly classified documents; a Georgia election interference case; and the New York business fraud case.
Now he has contrived to postpone a final reckoning in all four until long past the election.
The delays don’t make the charges go away.
But if Trump wins the election, he can order the Justice Department to halt the two federal cases. And under most legal precedent, state courts would put his prosecutions in New York and Georgia on hold while he’s serving as president. If he wins in November and completes a full term, that means he won’t face prosecution before 2029, when he’ll be 82.
In short, no matter how the New York trial concludes, Trump will survive to fight another day — and perhaps even to serve another four years as president.
It has often been noted that it is unprecedented for a former president to face criminal charges. It is equally unprecedented, and equally noteworthy, that he can go on trial, face possible conviction — and have it barely dent his political fortunes.
Read more McManus columns on Trump:
Trump has big plans for California if he wins a second term. Fasten your seatbelts
Trump wants to round up over a million undocumented migrants from California. Here’s how he might do it
Trump loves fossil fuels; California wants clean energy. Cue collision
Politics
ActBlue CEO faces June 10 grilling after fundraising powerhouse allegedly misled Congress on foreign donations
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
FIRST ON FOX: The embattled head of a Democratic fundraising behemoth is headed for a congressional grilling next month over allegations of fraudulent donations on its platform.
ActBlue’s CEO Regina Wallace-Jones will testify in a public hearing before the House Administration Committee on June 10, a committee spokesman told Fox News Digital.
Wallace-Jones’ agreement to testify comes as ActBlue faces mounting scrutiny over whether it misled Congress regarding foreign donations on its payment processing platform.
“Ms. Wallace-Jones allegedly misled our committee at the outset of our investigation into ActBlue’s fraud prevention standards,” House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., said in a statement. “It’s past time we set the record straight and got answers for the American people. I look forward to hearing her testify.”
House Administration Committee Chairman Bryan Steil, R-Wis., holds a press conference in Washington, D.C., on Oct. 10, 2025. (Anna Rose Layden/Getty Images)
DEM FUNDRAISING GIANT ACTBLUE ROCKED BY ALLEGATIONS IT MISLED CONGRESS ABOUT FOREIGN DONATIONS
The statement referenced an explosive report in The New York Times earlier this year that said ActBlue’s then-outside counsel warned Wallace-Jones in 2023 the group may have misrepresented facts to Steil’s committee about its vetting of potentially illegal foreign donations.
Under U.S. law, foreign nationals who are not lawful permanent residents are generally prohibited from donating to candidates seeking federal office or political action committees.
Steil previously requested that Wallace-Jones testify before his committee on May 19. The invitation was met with outrage from ActBlue’s lawyers, who dismissed the committee action as a “partisan attack.”
But Republicans have pointed to documents that ActBlue has allegedly withheld in response to subpoenas issued in 2025, which Steil has characterized as “deliberately incomplete.”
All five current or former ActBlue employees who appeared in depositions with the committee invoked their Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination a combined 146 times, according to an interim staff report released in April by House Republicans.
ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones, a delegate from California, wears a U.S.-flag themed outfit ahead of the Democratic National Convention at the United Center in Chicago, Ill., on Aug. 19, 2024.
TEXAS AG PAXTON SUES DEM FUNDRAISING PLATFORM ACTBLUE, ALLEGING ‘FRAUDULENT AND FOREIGN DONATIONS’
The House Administration Committee has been probing ActBlue’s fraud prevention safeguards since 2023, when Steil’s panel investigated the group’s failure to require credit card verification value (CVV) when processing payments.
“Given ActBlue’s demonstrated history of misleading Congress, there is considerable reason to believe that ActBlue may have deliberately withheld this responsive material to impede our investigation,” Steil and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., and House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, wrote in a letter to Wallace-Jones in April.
In the letter, the senior Republicans also directed ActBlue to produce a trove of documents related to its vetting of political contributions from abroad.
Wallace-Jones has denied making false statements to Congress. The group’s lawyers have previously characterized the investigation as politically motivated and contended that ActBlue has been forthright with the committee.
Amid the GOP scrutiny, ActBlue has experienced a wave of resignations from senior legal and compliance staff.
An election countdown calendar hangs at the ActBlue fundraising office in Somerville, Mass. (Jessica Rinaldi/The Boston Globe via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The June hearing notice immediately follows the House Administration Committee advancing legislation to crack down on fraudulent political donations, including illegal contributions from foreigners. The campaign finance measure cleared Steil’s panel unanimously on Thursday.
“It’s a positive sign that people are beginning to take this risk and this threat seriously,” the Wisconsin Republican told Spectrum News.
Politics
The Steyer campaign pays influencers. Their posts don’t always make that clear
WASHINGTON — In recent weeks, several social media influencers have popped up in online feeds touting the California gubernatorial campaign of billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer.
Some complain about the price of gasoline. Others mention environmental concerns. One cites her newfound sobriety as evidence that people can change — a nod to Steyer’s self-proclaimed metamorphosis from hedge fund titan to scourge of big corporations.
“I did not expect the most progressive governor candidate to be a billionaire, but look at the policies you guys,” said one content creator on TikTok with the user name Jaz R. “Hear me out. I know Tom Steyer is a billionaire, but he also is for the people.”
The posts include direct-to-the-camera appeals, with personal details interwoven into messages of support for Steyer. An influencer goes for a stroll as onscreen text touts Steyer’s policies. Some seek to convey authenticity, if occasionally ham-fistedly; one influencer mispronounces Steyer’s last name.
What they do not include is a disclosure that their creators were paid by the Steyer campaign to produce the videos, according to a complaint filed this week with California’s Fair Political Practices Commission and a Times review of the posts.
The complaint alleges that the Steyer campaign failed to notify the influencers it hired of their obligation to inform their audience when their posts have been sponsored by the campaign.
California passed a law in 2023 requiring that influencers disclose if they have been paid to create promotional content for or against a candidate or ballot measure, one of the few jurisdictions in the country with such a requirement. There is no such requirement at the federal level.
“Every time there’s a new technology, you have to create legislation that requires them to disclose,” said state Sen. Tom Umberg (D-Orange), who sponsored the bill.
Violating the law doesn’t carry criminal, civil or administrative penalties, but the FPPC can take influencers who break the law to court and ask a judge to force them to comply.
The complaint was filed by two California women — political influencers themselves — who said they noticed a number of new accounts that suddenly started posting similar-sounding videos promoting Steyer earlier this month.
“They had the exact same language, they had the same talking points,” said Beatrice Gomberg, who worked with Kaitlyn Hennessy in their digital sleuthing efforts.
The FPPC did not comment on the complaint.
Steyer’s campaign appears to have relied on paid influencers more than any candidate for governor, according to the most recent campaign finance filings.
That spending represents only a small fraction of the massive campaign war chest Steyer has seeded with nearly $180 million of his own money. But the complaint highlights the growing degree to which political candidates have come to seek out the authenticity that social media influencers seem to offer.
Steyer campaign spokesperson Kevin Liao said the campaign had properly followed the rules in hiring influencers and that the campaign is “confident” that Gomberg and Hennessy’s complaint is “baseless.”
“Creators make their living generating content. The campaign believes in compensating people for their time and work product and has paid creators to generate content,” Liao said in a statement. “Payments for creator content are disclosed in campaign finance reports, and we notify creators we directly work with of their disclosure requirements.”
While many of the new Steyer influencers have few followers, Steyer’s campaign disclosed in its most recent campaign finance report that it had paid thousands of dollars to numerous social media influencers with massive audiences, the Sacramento Bee reported.
Several of the videos produced by these popular social media personalities also failed to disclose that they had been paid by the campaign, according to the complaint and The Times’ review of the content.
But even accounts with few followers can still have a big impact if they are producing a steady stream of content supporting Steyer, said veteran California political strategist Mike Madrid.
“What they’re trying to do is trip the algorithm,” he said. “It looks like it has a bigger audience than it really does. It’s taking the concept of astroturfing into the digital age.”
Gomberg and Hennessy said they became friends after meeting at an April campaign event for Xavier Becerra, Steyer’s chief Democratic rival in the race, who holds a narrow advantage over Steyer in several recent political polls.
The pair have been prolific social media supporters of Becerra’s campaign ever since, though they insist they are not being paid for their efforts.
They said they discovered that many of the new pro-Steyer accounts seemed to be run by influencers — mostly women — who had previously created different social media accounts to hawk other products.
One of the pro-Steyer influencers had an online portfolio listing numerous clients, including the Steyer campaign and a gummy designed to boost arousal, according to the complaint and the Times review of the publicly accessible website.
The pair said they stumbled on an advertisement placed by a vendor for the campaign on a platform used by creators to find work. The advertisement indicated that creators would be paid $10 for each post, with bonuses for posts that amassed large viewership.
The vendor who posted the ad did not respond to a request for comment.
The advertisement has since been updated to say that it pays $1,000 per month and that creators will have to disclose that it is paid content.
As Gomberg and Hennessy dug deeper, they determined that some of the influencers promoting a candidate for governor weren’t even based in California.
A TikTok account using the handle jess.votes, for example, appears to be connected to a woman registered to vote in Florida. Other accounts were connected to women who indicated elsewhere that they were based in Pennsylvania, Missouri and Michigan.
Several influencers who created seemingly paid content promoting Steyer did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Times.
The brouhaha over paid social media content is just the latest instance of the growing political impact of online creators.
Eric Swalwell’s campaign for governor — and congressional career — came to an end after multiple women accused him of sexual assault. A pair of influencers had publicly raised concerns about Swalwell’s behavior and helped connect victims with journalists who produced highly detailed reports of the allegations.
The California law requires influencers to disclose in a political post’s audio or text that it was sponsored and who paid for it.
The onus is on the creators to make the disclosure, but campaigns are required to tell them that they must do so. Despite passage of the law, the issue has so far remained largely under the radar.
“I have dozens of candidates and campaigns and I have not heard this issue come up one time,” said a campaign finance lawyer who requested anonymity because they represent numerous candidates with active campaigns.
Gomberg and Hennessy said that they were driven to call attention to potential violations of the disclosure requirements because of their concern about the corrosive influence such paid content could have if left unchecked.
“You have people who have trust in these creators,” Hennessy said. “You have a responsibility to your audience.”
Politics
Video: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
new video loaded: Why Were These C.E.O.s in Beijing With Trump?
By Ana Swanson, Nour Idriss, Nikolay Nikolov and James Surdam
May 15, 2026
-
Missouri4 minutes agoMan, 20, charged in Kansas City, Missouri, road rage shooting that critically injured woman, 19
-
Montana10 minutes agoRob McManus, Jenavieve Lynch win titles for Montana State at Big Sky Conference track and field championships
-
Nebraska16 minutes agoDangerous storm threat continues through Monday in Nebraska
-
Nevada22 minutes ago‘It was special’: Bishop Gorman wins Class 5A baseball state title — PHOTOS
-
New Hampshire28 minutes agoNew Hampshire’s child mental health bill stalled by House – Valley News
-
New Jersey34 minutes agoRedesigned New Jersey golf course holes drawing rave reviews
-
New Mexico40 minutes agoLine Fire, Mimms Fire – Quay County – Update
-
North Carolina46 minutes ago
NC Uber driver rejects more trips as gas tops $4 per gallon