Connect with us

Politics

Column: Without cameras in the courtroom, Trump has already won a major victory in hush money trial

Published

on

Column: Without cameras in the courtroom, Trump has already won a major victory in hush money trial

If a former president nods off in a courtroom and no cameras are around to see it, did it really happen?

The case of the People of the State of New York vs. Donald J. Trump got underway Monday, and while the fate of the forthcoming election — and perhaps democracy itself — may teeter on the outcome, the public is locked out of witnessing a seismic moment in American history.

Video and audio feeds are banned from the courtroom, leaving folks to rely on the written and spoken word of reporters covering the trial. It’s up to them to tell us if the former president scowled and guffawed like a fearless strongman or fell asleep in his chair like a disaffected juvenile delinquent.

Any entertainment value aside, the lack of live or recorded feeds may mean that Trump won a huge victory before the first witness even took the stand.

The first criminal trial of a former U.S. president could have been the moment when the cameras didn’t embrace Trump the Showman, where his customary angry rhetoric and bluster were muted by the dictates of a controlled courtroom, allowing the public to see what happens when a bully is stripped of his power and platform.

Advertisement

But without the advantage of watching the proceedings on TikTok, Instagram, YouTube or live news outlets, the impact feels lost in translation. It’s one thing to witness the former president’s impetuous behavior firsthand; it’s another to read or hear about it in media accounts filed from the courtroom: His eyes were “closing for extended periods” during jury selection last week. He huffed and puffed during admonishments from the judge. He glared at the jurors who were chosen to serve.

The lack of courtroom filming is a dream come true for misinformation agents. Bad actors thrive in the fertile playground of media mistrust, and millions are more than willing to embrace curated narratives — no matter how absurd — as long as it allows us to believe what we want to believe. And when so many still believe that the 2020 election was stolen, how do you get people to trust the court reporting from a trial without video and audio? It’s going to be a challenge.

The opposite could also be true: Without the advantage of playing directly to the cameras, Trump’s magic hold on his base may be diminished. Much of the appeal around the former president is that he’s a winner who never folds to systems he deems corrupt, be it the media, the courts, the election process, etc.. He’s tried to grab the spotlight via cameras in the hallway outside the courtroom, using the space as a de facto podium to remark on the proceedings as he enters and leaves. But perhaps not hearing him rage in the courtroom will soften his appeal among followers.

It’s hard to say how this trial will play out in the court of public opinion because there’s been no test case. President Nixon, who resigned on the brink of impeachment, was never indicted for a crime, and the last “trial of the century” was a monolithic event largely because it was televised. The People of the State of California vs. Orenthal James Simpson, also known as the O.J. Simpson trial, certainly wouldn’t have been the premier spectacle of a generation if not for the blow-by-blow live broadcast from Los Angeles to the rest of the world.

What’s happening behind the closed doors of Justice Juan M. Merchan’s courtroom is arguably more important to the immediate future and health of the republic, but New York courts do not generally allow video in their courtrooms. It’s refreshing to know there are still standards that haven’t been pulverized under the Trump rule-wrecking machine. The Manhattan trial shows that sober lawmaking may still stand a chance against sordid spectacle. But the trial is just beginning.

Advertisement

Everything leading up to this moment in Trump’s wild, unprecedented domination of U.S. politics and news was made possible by his appearing on screen, no matter the medium. Trump the reality TV star convinced viewing audiences he was a successful business leader and decision-maker inside the scripted realm of “The Apprentice.” He played to the cameras leading up to the 2016 election, stealing the scene from candidates with actual experience in governing and lawmaking. He is a master at manipulating all news about him — good or bad — into fundraising and votes largely because he knows how to play to the spotlight.

Monday’s opening statements from the prosecution maintained “this case is about a criminal conspiracy and fraud,” in which “the defendant, Donald Trump, orchestrated a criminal scheme to corrupt the 2016 election.” Manhattan Dist. Atty. Alvin L. Bragg and his team will argue that Trump paid off adult film actor Stormy Daniels as part of a larger scheme to suppress negative stories about him leading up to the 2016 election. A $130,000 hush money payment to Daniels was part of a conspiracy to silence her as she was shopping a story about her alleged sexual encounter with Trump. He is charged with 34 felony counts of falsifying business records.

A Trump conviction still could be hugely damaging to his campaign for a second White House term, but that depends how many choose to believe the outcome without seeing the evidence unfold before their own eyes. The same stands true if he’s found not guilty.

One thing is clear: No one should be sleeping through this historic trial … least of all the defendant.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Politics

Democratic Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar indicted by DOJ on conspiracy and bribery charges

Published

on

Democratic Texas Rep. Henry Cuellar indicted by DOJ on conspiracy and bribery charges

The Department of Justice indicted Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas on conspiracy and bribery charges Friday. 

Cuellar’s wife has also been indicted in an investigation connected $600,000 in bribes they accepted from an Azerbaijan-based energy company and a bank in Mexico to advance the former Soviet republic’s interests in the U.S. 

Federal law enforcement raided Cuellar’s house and office in 2022 as part of an investigation into a group of U.S. businessmen, and their ties to the country. The representative and his office agreed to cooperate with the investigation.

FEDERAL GRAND JURY SUBPOENAS REP. CUELLAR, WIFE, AND ASSOCIATES IN AZERBAIJAN-TIED PROBE: REPORT

Rep. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, is seen outside a meeting of the House Democratic Caucus in the U.S. Capitol. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Cuellar released a statement on Friday following reports of the upcoming indictment, declaring both himself and his wife as innocent without specifying the charges.

“I want to be clear that both my wife and I are innocent of these allegations,” wrote Cuellar. “Everything I have done in Congress has been to serve the people of Texas.”

REP. CUELLAR, STAFF TOOK SPONSORED TRIPS TO AZERBAIJAN COORDINATED BY CONVICTED BUSINESSMAN

The Texas representative specifically defended his wife and her qualifications, once again without specifying the nature of the indictments.

Department of Justice logo

A podium displays the seal of the Department of Justice at the department’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)

“Imelda and I have been married 32 years. On top of being an amazing wife and mother, she’s an accomplished businesswoman with two degrees. She spent her career working with banking, tax, and consulting. The allegation that she is anything but qualified and hard working is both wrong and offensive,” he wrote.

Advertisement

Cuellar previously served as a co-chair of the Congressional Azerbaijan Caucus.

This is a developing story and will be updated.  The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Continue Reading

Politics

RFK Jr. could be a spoiler in November. But will it help Biden or Trump?

Published

on

RFK Jr. could be a spoiler in November. But will it help Biden or Trump?

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s presidential campaign was once viewed as a quixotic quest by a scion of a storied political family — an environmental warrior who sullied his family’s name most recently by aligning himself with a political party founded by a segregationist to get on the November ballot in California.

But a combination of voter apathy about President Biden and former President Trump, the two main parties’ presumptive nominees, and the Kennedy campaign’s successful targeting of ballot qualification rules across the nation has prompted growing alarm among Democrats and Republicans alike.

“When you have nail-bitingly close elections, nearly any candidate can be a spoiler,” said Thad Kousser, a political science professor at UC San Diego. “Now, the interesting thing, unlike a Jill Stein [a perennial Green Party candidate], it’s not 100% clear which major party candidate he hurts most. That uncertainty is going to lead to a lot of churning on what the parties do … to keep him off the ballot.”

Kennedy, the son of Sen. Robert F. Kennedy (D-N.Y.) and nephew of President John F. Kennedy, has no real chance of being elected to the White House in November. However, the Californian could be a spoiler in the race, tilting the vote. Two names are frequently raised: H. Ross Perot in the 1992 race and Ralph Nader in 2000, though there is debate about how much their candidacies resulted in Bill Clinton and George W. Bush winning their respective elections.

Kennedy has qualified to appear on the ballots of three states, most recently California, and his campaign claims to have collected enough signatures to appear on the ballots of seven others, including Nevada.

Advertisement

In California, the American Independent Party submitted paperwork to have Kennedy appear on the ballot as its standard-bearer, the candidate announced this week.

George Wallace, a segregationist Alabama governor who opposed federal civil rights laws, helped found the party and ran on its ticket in the 1968 presidential campaign. Kennedy’s father, a staunch supporter of such rights, was assassinated in Los Angeles during that campaign.

Leaders of the party, which currently exists only in California, say it has disavowed its segregationist roots and is focused on conservatism and the Constitution. In a video Kennedy released Tuesday, he called Wallace a “bigot” who “was antithetical to everything my father believed in.”

Mainstream Democrats are incredulous about Kennedy’s association with the party. When Wallace stood in a schoolhouse door at the University of Alabama, trying to block two Black students from registering, President Kennedy called in the Alabama National Guard at a time when his brother, Robert, was the nation’s attorney general.

Paul Mitchell, a veteran Democratic strategist, said he previously believed Kennedy had a shot of winning California based purely on his last name. That is no longer the case, based on how he has run his campaign and whom he has chosen to associate with, Mitchell said.

Advertisement

“If he was a Kennedy and acting like a Kennedy and professional, I wouldn’t put [a California victory] out of the bounds,” said Mitchell, who noted that Kennedy associated with the fringe party after gathering a paltry number of signatures for a political party he was trying to form. “Now he’s a loony anti-vaxxer conspiracy theorist and running a campaign like a loon. It’s so embarrassing.”

Biden supporters have been concerned about Kennedy for some time. The Democratic National Committee earlier this year established a team to oppose third-party candidates, chiefly Kennedy. Their first act was filing a Federal Election Commission complaint arguing that Kennedy’s campaign coordinated inappropriately with a Super PAC to qualify Kennedy for some states’ ballots.

“We know this is going to be a close election and we’re not going to take anything for granted,” said Matt Corridoni, a DNC spokesman working on the anti-third party effort, noting that the biggest donor to a pro-Kennedy PAC is a Trump mega-donor and that a New York-based campaign official pitched his candidacy by arguing that Kennedy would help Trump defeat Biden.

In April, several members of the Kennedy family endorsed Biden, including Kerry Kennedy, sister of the presidential candidate.

“We want to make crystal clear our feelings that the best way forward for America is to reelect Joe Biden and Kamala Harris for four more years,” she said at a campaign event in Philadelphia.

Advertisement

On Wednesday, Kennedy challenged Biden to agree that whichever of them did worse in a head-to-head poll in the fall would drop out of the race to prevent Trump being elected to a second term.

But Republicans including Trump have recently signaled growing concern about Kennedy eating into the former president’s support.

“RFK Jr. is a Democrat ‘Plant,’ a Radical Left Liberal who’s been put in place in order to help Crooked Joe Biden, the Worst President in the History of the United States, get Re-Elected,” Trump posted on Truth Social on April 26, arguing that the candidate opposes gun rights and the military and supports raising taxes, open borders and radical environmental policy. “A Vote for Junior would essentially be a WASTED PROTEST VOTE, that could swing either way, but would only swing against the Democrats if Republicans knew the true story about him.”

Trump posted that before a Monmouth University poll released Monday found that after voters were told about Kennedy’s skepticism of vaccines, their views changed — prior polling showed that Kennedy pulled support evenly from Biden and Trump.

In the new poll, the percentage of Republicans who said they would support Kennedy nearly doubled to almost one out of five after being told about his views about vaccines, while Democrats’ support dropped sharply to roughly 10%.

Advertisement

Kennedy has also been receiving attention on conservative media, such as Wednesday evening on “Jesse Watters Primetime” on Fox News Channel, where he argued that his campaign’s polling shows him winning in a head-to-head matchup against either Biden or Trump.

But “if I’m in the race, in a three-way race, I lose because people are voting out of fear, because they think the other guy — a vote for me is going to put somebody they hate in office,” he said. “But if I go head to head with either of them, I win.”

Trump’s advisors are piqued by Kennedy receiving attention from such outlets.

“For the life of me, I can’t understand why anyone on a conservative platform would feature the likes of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who believes the NRA is a terrorist organization, whose positions on the environment are more radical than [Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez], and who believes in a 70% tax bracket,” said Chris LaCivita, a lead strategist for Trump’s campaign and the Republican National Committee’s chief of staff.

“From our standpoint, only one person is more liberal than Joe Biden and that’s Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,” LaCivita said, adding that Kennedy “is a blank canvas and we are going to fill it with paint.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

House COVID committee calling for criminal probe into gain-of-function virus research in Wuhan

Published

on

House COVID committee calling for criminal probe into gain-of-function virus research in Wuhan

The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic is calling for a criminal probe into the origins of the COVID-19 virus.

The demands for an investigation come after the release of an interim staff report accusing EcoHealth Alliance President Dr. Peter Daszak of funding “dangerous gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China, without sufficient oversight.”

“Overwhelming primary source documents and credible firsthand testimony gathered throughout the Select Subcommittee’s investigation provide significant evidence that Dr. Daszak repeatedly violated the terms of the NIH grant awarded to EcoHealth,” a Wednesday statement from the Committee on Oversight and Accountability reads.

ECOHEALTH ALLIANCE PRESIDENT TO TESTIFY ON COVID ORIGINS, WUHAN LAB TAXPAYER-FUNDED RESEARCH

Peter Daszak (R), Thea Fischer (L) and other members of the World Health Organization (WHO) team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 coronavirus, arrive at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province. (HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via Getty Images)

Advertisement

It continues, “Given Dr. Daszak’s apparent contempt for the American people and disregard for legal reporting requirements the Select Subcommittee recommends the formal debarment of and a criminal investigation into EcoHealth and its President.”

EcoHealth Alliance is a non-governmental organization based in the United States and focused on researching pandemic prevention.

According to congressional lawmakers, EcoHealth used taxpayer dollars “to fund dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)” in China. 

The NGO disputes that claim.

FBI DIRECTOR SAYS COVID PANDEMIC ‘MOST LIKELY’ ORIGINATED FROM CHINESE LAB

Advertisement
The façade of the Wuhan Institute of Virology

Security personnel stand guard outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan as members of the World Health Organization (WHO) team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 coronavirus make a visit to the institute in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province on February 3, 2021. (Hector Retamal/ AFP)

“EcoHealth Alliance did not support ‘gain-of-function’ research at WIV, nor were any policies violated. Any assertions to the contrary are based either on misinterpretation, or willful misrepresentation of the actual research conducted,” EcoHealth Alliance told Fox News Digital in a statement.

The NGO added, “Despite the SSCP’s contention that EHA did gain-of-function research, the NIH itself disagrees, as confirmed by NIH on July 7, 2016, in a letter to EcoHealth Alliance made public via Freedom of Information Act requests stating “NIAID is in agreement that the work proposed … is not subject to the [gain-of-function] research funding pause.”

Daszak publicly testified Wednesday before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic.

“The public nature of our work and our long standing collaborations with Chinese scientists have made us a target for misinformation about the origins of COVID,” Daszak told committee members at the Wednesday hearing. “Beginning in early 2020 and continuing to this day, we have repeatedly and refuted the many myths and false allegations about EcoHealth Alliance research.” 

Advertisement
Wuhan Institute of Virology

This aerial view shows the P4 laboratory on the campus of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province. (HECTOR RETAMAL/AFP via Getty Images)

“However, at a time when the COVID-19 pandemic seemed out of control and emotions were running high, our organization and our staff and even my own family were targeted with false allegations, death threats, break-ins, media harassment and other damaging acts,” he continued. “Our organization has gone to great lengths to address any allegations head on, checking our records and stating the facts publicly.”

Fox News Digital previously reported that EcoHealth Alliance received millions of dollars in grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH). U.S. taxpayer funds flowed to Chinese entities conducting coronavirus research through EcoHealth Alliance.

Fox News Digital’s Brooke Singman contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending