Connect with us

Politics

Opinion: The guilty verdict only makes Donald Trump stronger

Published

on

Opinion: The guilty verdict only makes Donald Trump stronger

They finally got him.

Not on Russia collusion. Ukraine phone calls. Jan. 6 riots. Classified documents. Or mean tweets.

They finally got Donald Trump, after everything, on filing the wrong financial sex-story coverup paperwork.

Who but Donald Trump could even be indicted for such a thing? As CNN’s Fareed Zakaria said a few days ago: “I doubt the New York indictment would’ve been brought against a defendant whose name was not Donald Trump.”

It was jarring to hear my CNN colleague Jake Tapper say “guilty” 34 straight times, as the verdicts rolled in Thursday afternoon. A historic moment that further divided an already divided nation.

Advertisement

And it was equally jarring to see text after text pop up on my phone from decidedly non-MAGA Republicans, but also not Never Trumpers, all sounding the same note: I don’t like this man, and now I think I have to vote for him.

Lest you think that’s just anecdotal or a sign that Scott has weird friends, the Trump campaign reported a deluge of online contributions in the minutes following the verdict crashed their system.

The polling indicates the guilty verdict won’t make much of a difference to how most Americans vote. But Republicans are madder than wet hens that the party’s nominee for president — and, according to the polls, likely the next president of the United States — was indicted for 34 felonies that few can fully explain, in a very Democratic jurisdiction.

Basically, the prosecution argued that Hillary Clinton might have won if Trump hadn’t paid Stormy Daniels for her silence, and so you must convict him for covering up what amounts to a campaign finance violation that he was never charged with or convicted of in the first place. The Department of Justice and Federal Election Commission declined to pursue this novel theory, but it found a home in the Manhattan district attorney’s office.

It sounds crazy just typing it. Having never stuck the landing on “Russia stole the election” in 2016, Democrats have moved on to this rationalization of Hillary Clinton’s loss being caused by Trump paying for the silence of a porn star he allegedly had sex with in 2006. (Trump maintains it didn’t happen; Daniels says it did.)

Advertisement

The consensus in my circle is that this will backfire massively, as Republicans get energized. Even Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, no Trump fan himself, tweeted: “These charges never should have been brought in the first place. I expect the conviction to be overturned on appeal.”

I’m watching two groups of voters in the polling aftermath — senior citizens and what we in the politics business call “low info flow” voters who consume very little news other than fleeting headlines. Seniors still remember “the before times,” when presidents weren’t spending all their time in courtrooms, and low info voters may never know much beyond that Trump is now a convicted felon.

Biden has strength with older white voters, while Trump does better with the disengaged types. If either group moves against Trump, it could cause a polling bump for Biden. I’m not betting on it, but if I were in the Trump command center, those are the folks I’d be tracking very closely for the next few weeks.

The guilty verdict kicks off a consequential June for what had become a sleepy campaign. Biden has been stuck in the mud for months, languishing at around a 38% approval rating (historically low), and trailing Trump in national and swing state polls. Voters remain angry with Biden over inflation and immigration. His job approval hasn’t been above water since August of 2021, after the disastrous, chaotic and deadly pullout of U.S. troops from Afghanistan.

At the end of June, Biden and Trump will debate in Atlanta, with perhaps an unwanted party crasher on stage in the form of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

Advertisement

Step 1 to revive his flailing campaign was for Biden to see Trump convicted. Step 2 is for Biden to win the June 27 debate.

As of June 1, Trump is winning. What will the story be on July 1? What if, after a Trump conviction and a debate, Biden hasn’t moved in the polls in a month’s time?

If you think the Democrats are in panic mode today (which Politico reported just this week), brace yourself for what comes next — prominent members of the party wondering aloud about replacing Biden on the ticket if he can’t move ahead of a convicted felon.

For Trump, the message is clear: The only verdict that matters will come from the American people on Nov. 5. And he’ll take the boost he’s sure to get in the wake of the verdict, just as he has following his previous indictments and legal milestones.

Scott Jennings is a former special assistant to President George W. Bush and a senior CNN political commentator. @ScottJenningsKY

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