Connect with us

Politics

TV news ratings surged with Trump felony conviction coverage. Here's how it was covered

Published

on

TV news ratings surged with Trump felony conviction coverage. Here's how it was covered

A TV audience of more than 15 million watched Thursday as former President Donald Trump became a convicted felon.

Starting around 1:45 p.m. Pacific, viewing surged for cable news and broadcast networks as they delivered a New York jury’s verdict to convict Trump on 34 felony counts against him in the New York hush money case. Trump was found guilty of falsifying business records related to a payment made to silence adult film actor Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election.

Nielsen data showed that the plurality of viewers were tuned into Fox News, which is regularly the most-watched network in the hour, thanks to its popular panel show “The Five.” Fox News stayed with anchor Shannon Bream until about 2:43 p.m. before “The Five” co-hosts weighed in with harsh criticism of the verdict from the network’s pro-Trump commentators.

Fox News averaged 4.7 million viewers from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. Pacific, when it typically pulls in around 3 million. The verdict started rolling in at 2:06 p.m.

MSNBC, which had a large on-screen ticker that tallied the number of guilty verdicts as they came in, scored 3.7 million viewers in the hour, nearly doubling its typical turn out for anchor Nicolle Wallace’s program. CNN also saw its audience spike, with 2.6 million viewers

Advertisement

Preliminary ratings from Nielsen show that ABC had the most viewers among the broadcast networks with 3.4 million viewers for a special report that aired at 1:48 p.m. Pacific. A CBS News special report scored 2.5 million viewers. Data for NBC were not available.

Overall, the total number of people watching on TV will not be on par with such major news events as Biden’s State of the Union address, which drew 32 million viewers in March.

Like many Trump-related events, there is no precedent for viewing of a courtroom verdict on crimes committed by a former president. A verdict was not expected Thursday, and it arrived when most people were still at work or commuting home. Many news consumers were more likely to have streamed video of the outcome on their phones.

In prime time on the East Coast, from 5 to 8 p.m. Pacific, MSNBC’s analysis led by Rachel Maddow won the night with 3.4 million viewers, scoring a rare win over Fox News, which was second with 3 million. CNN averaged 1.25 million viewers. The progressive leaning MSNBC tends to pull in more viewers during times when the news is bad for Trump.

MSNBC was strongest at 8 p.m. Eastern when it featured former Trump attorney Michael Cohen as a guest. Cohen’s testimony was critical to the prosecution’s case against Trump.

Advertisement

The tone of the coverage broke down according to the tribal leanings of the cable news audience. Conservative Fox News hosts and guests expressed disgust with the verdict, calling it a form of election interference aimed at helping President Biden, who will face off again against Trump in the 2024 presidential contest in November.

“I guess we all need to shop at Banana Republic from now on, because that’s what it feels like, a Banana Republic,” said Fox News host Laura Ingraham.

The court’s work earned praise from the set at MSNBC.

“It’s exactly what America needs right now,” Cohen said in reaction to the verdict. “We need for accountability to be had by all those that break the law. Because, as we like to continuously state, no one is above the law, and today’s verdict demonstrates that.”

Maddow expressed concern over the apparent divide along partisan lines.

Advertisement

“The Republicans, Trump’s enablers, would have celebrated an acquittal and they’re only condemning a conviction because they don’t like the result,” Maddow said. “I think what is important is for us not to look away from what is broken. And what is broken is that one of the two parties does not respect the rule of law…. And that is a flashing red light for our country.”

CNN tried to get both sides, booking Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche for a sit-down with anchor Kaitlan Collins. But based on the network’s distant third place finish behind Fox News and MSNBC, the cable audience continues to gravitate to the opinion hosts who represent their own viewpoints.

Such stories can be tricky to navigate for Fox News anchors who don’t dabble in opinion. On Wednesday, Bream took fire from Trump in a post criticizing her for correcting a guest, Trump attorney Alina Habba, who said the Biden administration is behind the legal cases against his predecessor. (The hush money trial was prosecuted by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office).

Unbridled, Bream succinctly described the verdict in a political context. “The Biden-Harris campaign is free now to call President Trump a convicted felon,” Bream said.

TV news organizations will now be faced with the challenge of how much of a platform to provide candidate Trump, as he moves out of the courtroom and onto the campaign trail.

Advertisement

Trump announced Friday that he was holding a press conference in the atrium of Trump Tower in Manhattan. NBC was the only broadcast network to cut into regular programming to cover the event.

But Trump took no questions during the appearance, in which he aired a litany of grievances and attacks on President Biden, including an accusation that the Democratic administration “wants to take away your cars.”

NBC pulled away from the remarks, as did CNN and MSNBC, noting the falsehoods coming from Trump. Fox News ran the speech in full.

Trump is slated to give his first post-verdict interview to Fox News, airing on the Sunday edition of “Fox & Friends.”

Advertisement

Politics

Video: Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name

Published

on

Video: Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name

new video loaded: Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name

transcript

transcript

Kennedy Center Board Votes to Add Trump to Its Name

President Trump’s handpicked board of trustees announced that the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts would be renamed the Trump-Kennedy Center, a change that may need Congress’s approval.

Reporter: “She just posted on X, your press secretary, [Karoline Leavitt,] that the board members of the Kennedy Center voted unanimously to rename it the Trump-Kennedy Center. What is your reaction to that?” “Well, I was honored by it. The board is a very distinguished board, most distinguished people in the country, and I was surprised by it. I was honored by it.” “Thank you very much, everybody. And I’ll tell you what: the Trump-Kennedy Center, I mean —” [laughs] “Kennedy Center — I’m sorry. I’m sorry.” [cheers] “Wow, this is terribly embarrassing.” “They don’t have the power to do it. Only Congress can rename the Kennedy Center. How does that actually help the American people, who’ve already been convinced that Donald Trump is not focused on making their life better? The whole thing is extraordinary.”

Advertisement
President Trump’s handpicked board of trustees announced that the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts would be renamed the Trump-Kennedy Center, a change that may need Congress’s approval.

By Axel Boada

December 19, 2025

Continue Reading

Politics

Judge tosses Trump-linked lawsuit targeting Chief Justice Roberts, dealing setback to Trump allies

Published

on

Judge tosses Trump-linked lawsuit targeting Chief Justice Roberts, dealing setback to Trump allies

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A federal judge on Thursday dismissed a lawsuit filed by a pro-Trump legal group seeking access to a trove of federal judiciary documents, including from a body overseen by Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts – putting an end to a protracted legal fight brought by Trump allies seeking to access key judicial documents. 

U.S. District Judge Trevor McFadden, a Trump appointee assigned to the case earlier this year, dismissed the long-shot lawsuit brought by the America First Legal Foundation, the pro-Trump group founded by White House policy adviser Stephen Miller after Trump’s first term; Miller, now back in the White House, is no longer affiliated with AFL.

McFadden ultimately dismissed the case for lack of jurisdiction, saying Thursday that two groups responsible for certain regulatory and administrative functions for the federal judiciary are an extension of the judicial branch, and therefore protected by the same exemptions to federal laws granted to the judiciary.

“Nothing about either entity’s structure suggests the president must supervise their employees or otherwise keep them ‘accountable,’ as is the case for executive officers,” McFadden said.

Advertisement

TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDER ON VOTING BLOCKED BY FEDERAL JUDGES AMID FLURRY OF LEGAL SETBACKS

Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Brett M. Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are seen at the 60th inaugural ceremony on Jan. 20, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Ricky Carioti /The Washington Post via Getty Images)

The lawsuit by AFL was first reported by Fox News Digital earlier this year. It named both Chief Justice Roberts in his capacity as the official head of the U.S. Judicial Conference, and Robert J. Conrad, the director of the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, and sought access to a trove of judicial documents from both bodies under the Freedom of Information Act.

AFL accused both groups of performing regulatory actions that the lawsuit argued exceeded the scope of the “core functions” of the judiciary, and which it argued should subject the groups to the FOIA requests as a result.

AFL cited recent actions the Judicial Conference and Administrative Office had taken in 2023 to “accommodate” requests from Congress to investigate allegations of ethical improprieties by Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, and subsequently to create or adopt an “ethics code” for justices on the high court.

Advertisement

“Under our constitutional tradition, accommodations with Congress are the province of the executive branch,” AFL argued.

“The Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are therefore executive agencies,” and must therefore be overseen by the president, not the courts, they said.

GORSUCH, ROBERTS SIDE WITH LEFT-LEANING SUPREME COURT JUSTICES IN IMMIGRATION RULING

White House deputy chief of staff for policy Stephen Miller. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

McFadden disagreed, rejecting the group’s argument that “courts” under FOIA refers only to judges. He concluded that both the Judicial Conference and the Administrative Office are components of the judicial branch and therefore exempt from FOIA.

Advertisement

“Indeed, if America First were right that only judges and ‘law clerks,’ who ‘directly report to the judge,’ count as part of ‘the courts,’ numerous questions arise, and senseless line drawing ensues,” he said in a memo opinion accompanying his order. “Rather, FOIA’s exclusion reflects that courts include a full range of ‘judicial adjuncts,’ from ‘clerks’ to ‘court reporters,’ who perform ‘tasks that are an integral part of the judicial process.’” 

Plaintiffs for AFL, led by attorney Will Scolinos, had argued in their lawsuit earlier this year that the Judicial Conference’s duties are “executive functions” and functions they allege must be supervised by executive officers “who are appointed and accountable to other executive officers.” 

Courts “definitively do not create agencies to exercise functions beyond resolving cases or controversies or administratively supporting those functions,” the group had argued.

The U.S. Judicial Conference is the national policymaking body for the courts. Overseen by the chief justice, it issues policy recommendations and reports to Congress as needed.

TRUMP IS THREATENING TO ‘FEDERALIZE’ DC WITH NATIONAL GUARD AND MORE. HERE’S HOW THAT COULD PLAY OUT 

Advertisement

The U.S. Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, D.C. ((Nicolas Economou/NurPhoto via Getty))

The Administrative Office for the U.S. Courts, meanwhile, operates under the guidance and supervision of the Judicial Conference. Its role is to provide administrative support to the federal courts on certain administrative issues and for day-to-day logistics, including setting budgets and organizing data, among other things.

The news comes as President Donald Trump, in his first year back in the White House, has relied heavily on executive orders to advance his agenda — a strategy that has accelerated implementation of campaign promises but also prompted a surge of legal challenges.

 

Trump’s actions sparked hundreds of federal lawsuits this year alone, sending tensions skyrocketing between the executive branch and the courts, including federal judges who have blocked or paused some of Trump’s biggest priorities in his second term. 

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Politics

Contributor: Who can afford Trump’s economy? Americans are feeling Grinchy

Published

on

Contributor: Who can afford Trump’s economy? Americans are feeling Grinchy

The holidays have arrived once again. You know, that annual festival of goodwill, compulsory spending and the dawning realization that Santa and Satan are anagrams.

Even in the best of years, Americans stagger through this season feeling financially woozy. This year, however, the picture is bleaker. And a growing number of Americans are feeling Grinchy.

Unemployment is at a four-year high, with Heather Long, chief economist at Navy Federal Credit Union, declaring, “The U.S. economy is in a hiring recession.” And a new PBS News/NPR/Marist poll finds that 70% of Americans say “the cost of living in the area where they live is not very affordable or not affordable at all.”

Is help on the way? Not likely. Affordable Care Act subsidies are expiring, and — despite efforts to force a vote in the House — it’s highly likely that nothing will be done about this before the end of the year. This translates to ballooning health insurance bills for millions of Americans. I will be among those hit with a higher monthly premium, which gives me standing to complain.

President Trump, meanwhile, remains firmly committed to policies that will exacerbate the rising cost of getting by. Trump’s tariffs — unless blocked by the Supreme Court — will continue to raise prices. And when it comes to his immigration crackdown, Trump is apparently unmoved by the tiresome fact that when you “disappear” workers, prices tend to go up.

Advertisement

Taken together, the Trump agenda amounts to an ambitious effort to raise the cost of living without the benefit of improved living standards. But if your money comes from crypto or Wall Street investments, you’re doing better than ever!

For the rest of us, the only good news is this: Unlike every other Trump scandal, most voters actually seem to care about what’s happening to their pocketbooks.

Politico recently found that erstwhile Trump voters backed Democrats in the 2025 governor’s races in New Jersey and Virginia for the simple reason that things cost too much.

And Axios reports on a North Carolina focus group in which “11 of the 14 participants, all of whom backed Trump last November, said they now disapprove of his job performance. And 12 of the 14 say they’re more worried about the economy now than they were in January.”

Apparently, inflation is the ultimate reality check — which is horrible news for Republicans.

Advertisement

Trump’s great talent has always been the audacity to employ a “fake it ‘till you make it” con act to project just enough certainty to persuade the rest of us.

His latest (attempted) Jedi mind trick involves claiming prices are “coming down tremendously,” which is not supported by data or the lived experience of anyone who shops.

He also says inflation is “essentially gone,” which is true only if you define “gone” as “slowed its increase.”

Trump may dismiss the affordability crisis as a “hoax” and a “con job,” but voters persist in believing the grocery scanner.

In response, Trump has taken to warning us that falling prices could cause “deflation,” which he now says is even worse than inflation. He’s not wrong about the economic theory, but it hardly seems worth worrying about given that prices are not falling.

Advertisement

Apparently, economic subtlety is something you acquire only after winning the White House.

Naturally, Trump wants to blame Joe Biden, the guy who staggered out of office 11 months ago. And yes, pandemic disruptions and massive stimulus spending helped fuel inflation. But voters elected Trump to fix the problem, which he promised to do “on Day One.”

Lacking tangible results, Trump is reverting to what has always worked for him: the assumption that — if he confidently repeats it enough times — his version of reality will triumph over math.

The difficulty now is that positive thinking doesn’t swipe at the register.

You can lie about the size of your inauguration crowd — no normal person can measure it and nobody cares. But you cannot tell people standing in line at the grocery store that prices are falling when they are actively handing over more money.

Advertisement

Pretending everything is fine goes over even worse when a billionaire president throws Gatsby-themed parties, renovates the Lincoln Bedroom and builds a huge new ballroom at the White House. The optics are horrible, and there’s no doubt they are helping fuel the political backlash.

But the main problem is the main problem.

At the end of the day, the one thing voters really care about is their pocketbooks. No amount of spin or “manifesting” an alternate reality will change that.

Matt K. Lewis is the author of “Filthy Rich Politicians” and “Too Dumb to Fail.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending