Did Disney Consider Opening a Villain-Themed Park Called ‘Dark Kingdom’?

If fundraising or other means of getting cash falters, Donald Trump is close to running out of funds to pay his legal bills as his New York hush money criminal trial continues, according to a new report.

Trump is racking up significant legal bills as the trial, where he's accused of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to adult movie star Stormy Daniels, enters into its second week. He's also facing three other indictments that could result in trials beginning this year.

Newsweek reported that Trump has been paying his lawyers using the Save America PAC, which has doled out more than $62 million for legal fees since January 2023. At the end of March, the PAC had around $4 million in cash — after spending $5.4 million on legal bills in the previous month.

Also read: Judge slaps Trump with $9K in fines — and warns 'jail may be a necessary punishment'

Speaking to Newsweek, University of Nottingham political science professor Todd Landman said that while "it is not clear that he will run out of money," Trump will be paying "substantial legal fees" in the coming weeks.

"Trump is managing four legal cases at present, each of which incurs legal fees for preparation of his defense, filing motions, and in the case of the Manhattan trial, representing him at trial four days a week," he said.

"The Manhattan trial is expected to run for five to six weeks in total, which continues this week, where there will be more witnesses for the prosecution and a separate hearing on whether he has violated his gag order," Landman continued. The judge ruled Tuesday that violations had occurred, but has another meeting scheduled to look into extra accusations.

"He has retained multiple lawyers to defend him, which means that he will have to pay substantial legal fees. It is not clear that he will run out of money, as he has been successful in securing a number of large donations from supporters," Landman said.

"However, there are legal constraints on using some of his political organizations and thus [he] needs to keep campaign finance separate from personal legal defense spending. On top of his legal fees, he has outstanding civil judgments against him pending appeal."

Funneling so much cash to legal fees could also drastically effect Trump's campaign, said another University of Nottingham professor, Christopher Phelps.

"The key question is whether he can do so while also running an effective ground operation in the battleground states, which requires a lot of advertising and personnel," he said.

“Again, what you just saw is 2024, in Los Angeles, hearkening back to the 1930s in Europe. And I do not say that lightly."

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene announced Wednesday she's refusing to vote for a bill on antisemitism awareness, arguing it would see Christians arrested for their faith.

Greene made this announcement on X the same day the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act of 2023 (H.R. 6090) — crafted to combat the problem on college campuses — was slated to go to a vote in the House of Representatives.

"Antisemitism is wrong, but I will not be voting for the Antisemitism Awareness Act," Greene explained. "[It] could convict Christians of antisemitism for believing the Gospel that says Jesus was handed over to Herod to be crucified by the Jews."

Greene backs up this claim with two images; the first a screenshot of the bill's definition of antisemitism and the second a printout Greene doesn't source.

The bill uses the definition crafted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance, of which the U.S. is a member, and adopted by the State department, congressional records show.

“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews," the IHRA definition states. "Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”

The IHRA website page on which this definition appears also includes a bulleted list of 11 contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life that does not appear in the legislation's text.

But this appears to be the document Greene references in her refusal to back the bill.

"Read the bill text and contemporary examples of antisemitism like #9," Greene demands of her readers.

Number nine, in both the IHRA list and Greene's, reads as follows: "Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis."

ALSO READ: Former FBI official accuses Marjorie Taylor Greene of spreading foreign propaganda

These claims, according to the Holocaust Encyclopedia, were commonly repeated by the Nazis.

"The term blood libel refers to the false allegation that Jews used the blood of non-Jewish, usually Christian children, for ritual purposes," the definition states. "The Nazis made effective use of the blood libel to demonize Jews, with Julius Steicher's newspaper Der Stürmer making frequent use of ritual murder imagery in its antisemitic propaganda."

Greene is not alone in refusing to support the bill, but her reasons differ widely from those cited by the American Civil Liberties Union in their letter in opposition to House representatives.

"Federal law already prohibits antisemitic discrimination and harassment by federally funded entities," the ACLU argues. " H.R. 6090 is therefore not needed to protect against antisemitic discrimination; instead, it would likely chill free speech of students on college campuses by incorrectly equating criticism of the Israeli government with antisemitism."

As this important debate on a complex issue unfolded in the House of Representatives, Greene's social media followers took the opportunity to remind readers of the Georgia lawmaker's history.

"BREAKING NEWS," wrote X user Mr. Newberger. "Woman who key noted a Nazi rally won't vote for Antisemitism bill."

This likely references Greene's decision to speak at a White Nationalist event in 2022.

"This you?" asked Travis Matthew, sharing an article entitled "Republicans blast Marjorie Taylor Greene's Holocaust remarks" about her likening COVID-19 masks to the Nazi's mass murder of Jewish people.

"This is absolutely nuts," wrote Hadar Susskind. "MTG is just mad that they didn’t accept her space laser amendment."