Raw Story

Donald Trump is already sharing "fake allegations about jurors" in his criminal hush money case, a former federal prosecutor said on Wednesday.

Trump made history this week when he became the first former president to face criminal trial after jury selection began in the case accusing the ex-president of falsifying business records to hide an affair from the public ahead of the election. Before the fog has even settled on the jury selection, the former president is now coming directly for those jurors, according to MSNBC legal analyst Joyce Vance.

For his part, Trump quoted Fox News host Jess Watters.

ALSO READ: 15 worthless things Trump will give you for your money

"'They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury,' Jesse Watters," Trump wrote on his own social media network, Truth Social, Wednesday. He didn't add further context.

But Vance thought that was inappropriate behavior coming from a criminal defendant.

"Trump is now 're-truthing' fake allegations about jurors," she wrote on Wednesday. "A fully jury isn't even sworn in and he's already coming for them."

Democrat Harry Sisson called it "jury intimidation."

"This is absolutely jury intimidation," he said. "This is against the rules of the court and Donald Trump should be held accountable for it. No more playing games."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) complained that Democrats had ignored Senate procedures after they voted down two articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas.

In a vote along party lines, Democrats managed to table the two articles of impeachment. Republicans cried foul because the move circumvented a Senate trial.

"We've set a very unfortunate precedent here," McConnell said following the vote. "This means that the Senate can ignore, in effect, the House's impeachment."

"And by doing what we just did, we have, in effect, ignored the directions of the House, which were to have a trial," he added. "No evidence, no procedure, this is a day that's not a proud day in the history of the Senate."

In a move that broke Senate precedent, then-Majority Leader McConnell refused to grant a hearing to Merrick Garland, President Barack Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court in 2016. The decision marked a significant shift in the handling of Supreme Court nominations.

ALSO READ: Revealed: What government officials privately shared about Trump not disclosing finances

In August 2016, McConnell expressed pride in blocking Obama's nominee, a sentiment echoed by the 11 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who also opposed any proceedings for Garland.

"One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, 'Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy,'" McConnell said in a speech at the time.

Critics called the minority leader hypocritical after his remarks on Wednesday.

"Isn't Mitch McConnell being rather hypocritical in saying the Senate should have respected the wishes of the House for an impeachment trial?" Ben McCrory asked on X (formerly Twitter).

"McConnell can shove it on precedence and the institution. He’s done enough to break that body and this country," another commenter wrote.

Watch the video clip below or click the link.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) was confronted by CNN's Jake Tapper on Wednesday morning about how exactly he plans to fend off the motion to remove him from power being planned by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) and her allies, and whether he has looked for any votes from Democrats to save him in the midst of a critically narrow House majority.

Johnson had few answers to any of these questions.

"I'm wondering, have you talked to Democrats at all about if that happens and if some of these Republicans voted to remove you as speaker — and it's this is not a hypothetical, it looks like this actually might happen — will Democrats vote to keep you as speaker?" asked Tapper.

ALSO READ: Who will Robert F. Kennedy Jr. hurt more in Election 2024? History has an answer4

"I've not asked any Democrats to get involved in that," said Johnson. "I believe the House will do its will." He added, "We live in a very divided time and very divisive policy ticks and the age of social media, 24-hour news cycle, where everybody can express their opinions every moment of the day about things that are disgruntled about, it makes a lot of challenges. But we're going to get through this. Listen, we are the greatest nation in the history of the world, okay? We are going to show that we're going to keep the train on the tracks and not get derailed and get involved in all this at such a dangerous time on the world stage. And look ... I don't walk around thinking about the motion to vacate. It's a procedural matter here that I think has been abused in recent times. Maybe at some point we change that. But right now, I gotta do my job and so do all my colleagues and I'm confident in the end of the day, in spite of all the drama and all the palace intrigue, I think we're going to get that done."

"Well, whoever — I mean, if they bring the motion to vacate forward, there aren't enough Republicans, there aren't 218 or whatever Republicans," said Tapper. "Somebody's going to need Democrats ... if you win and keep your job, if there is a motion to vacate, it will be with Democratic support, or these people who are who rebelled against Kevin McCarthy and thought voting with Democrats was the worst thing in the world will also use Democratic votes."

"Jake, I don't know what's gonna happen," said Johnson. "I'm not focused on that. I'm focused on doing my job. Look, when you do the right thing, you let the chips fall where they may. I mean, that's that's how that's my life philosophy ... we tried to get the best possible outcome for the American people, to move the ball forward for the American people. And I've got to stay focused on that every day and not, not all the drama that's that's my answer."

Watch the video below or click here.

Jake Tapper confronts Mike Johnson about vacate motion www.youtube.com

Former President Donald Trump's biggest risk in the Manhattan hush money trial could be what he himself says if he takes the witness stand, former Trump administration White House lawyer Jim Schultz argued on CNN Monday.

This came as the trial's first day opened with the jury selection process, with Trump sitting at the defense table and some experts remarking that he appeared diminished.

"Does today matter?" asked anchor Phil Mattingly. "Does what they see from these potential jurors matter in that kind of strategy process?"

"Look, I think all of it's going to matter, right?" said Schultz, a longtime defender of the former president who has nevertheless admitted the recent string of civil and criminal trials has been rough for him.

"How he interacts, how they interact with him, how they feel — how the lawyers feel that the jurors are, how much appeal there is from the jurors as to whether they're going to put him on the stand. But I think at this — at this stage in the game, I think they're probably leaning towards putting him on the stand."

Anchor Erin Burnett then chimed in. "And what would you do?" she asked. "You know him. You've worked with him. You think that's a gamble you'd take, to put him on the stand?"

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist explains how Trump is using existential fear to win the election

Schultz replied, "I think again ... in this particular case, hearing from him is likely going to matter. I think he'd want to testify in this case. I think he's going to push his lawyers to testify in this case. And quite frankly, the problem with putting Donald Trump on the stand is that you never know what Donald Trump's gonna say, whether he could say something that's completely irrelevant to the case, he could say something that damages the case just by making a flippant remark.

"So there is a huge danger of putting him on the stand, but I think he's going to be pressing to do it."

Watch the video below or at the link here.

Jim Schultz says Trump is a "huge danger" to himself on the stand www.youtube.com

Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani's request that a jury's verdict that he defamed election workers Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman be thrown out was rejected Monday.

Just Security's Adam Klasfeld posted about the failure of his motion, stating that Judge Beryl Howell ruled that the "massive" judgment still stands.

Giuliani, who claims he is broke and has filed for bankruptcy, owes the Georgia women more than $145 million. Giuliani had accused them of committing election fraud while counting votes in Fulton County in 2020.

Meanwhile, an amendment to his bankruptcy declaration revealed his secretive defense fund is paying up to $675 an hour for bankruptcy lawyers.

"GIuliani's renewed motion urging this Court to reverse its prior findings and rulings and to override the jury's considered verdict on the basis of five threadbare arguments falls well short of persuading that 'the evidence and all reasonable interferences that can be drawn therefrom are so one-sided that reasonable men and women could not have reached a 'verdict in [plantiffs'] favor,'" Howell wrote.

"... The jury's verdict of awarding plaintiffs compensatory and punitive damages for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress caused by Giuliani and his co-conspirators, as reflected in the Final Judgment, in the amount of $145,969,000, plus post-judgment interest ... stands."

ALSO READ: A neuroscientist explains how Trump is using existential fear to win the election

The 48-page opinion also explained just how Giuliani's bankruptcy paused everything for the victims involved.

"A unanimous jury awarded plaintiffs Ruby Freeman and Wandrea’ ArShaye “Shaye” Moss, on December 15, 2023, a total of $148,169,000.00, in compensatory and punitive damages for defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress, against defendant Rudolph W. Giuliani," the filing began.

But Giuliani stopped all of it with his next move.

"This jury award was followed, in rapid succession, three days later, by entry of the final judgment against Giuliani, and two days after that, by this Court’s order dissolving the 30-day automatic stay for enforcement of judgment to permit plaintiffs to register their judgment immediately in any district," Judge Howell wrote.

"The very next day, on December 21, 2023, Giuliani filed a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition in the Southern District of New York, which filing automatically halted all proceedings in this case, including plaintiffs’ right to exercise the authority granted by this Court to seek prompt enforcement of the judgment against Giuliani."

Read the full filing here.

Donald Trump's legal team was expecting around just 40 percent of jurors to be dismissed from his New York hush money criminal case over the question of whether they can be impartial, but more than half of the 96 jurors were dismissed en masse due to their admitted inability to be unbiased.

While at least 50 of the potential jurors were let go over their inability to be impartial, others bowed out over potential conflicts.

Also read: Trump 'glares' at NYT's Maggie Haberman in courtroom after she reports he was sleeping

Speaking on CNN Monday, network legal analyst Elie Honig said that it's "remarkable" how many jurors have so far been excused.

"... More than half the people said right off the bat, knowing one paragraph of information about this case, 'I cannot be [unbiased],' and walked out the door — that's gotta be a world record," Honig said during a panel discussion.

"And I think it speaks to just how polarizing Donald Trump is," Honig continued, adding that the juror exits could also be due to "how scared people are."

"Will this qualify legally as a fair trial or fair jury? Yes, in all likelihood. But let's also be real about what we're talking about here — Manhattanites overwhelmingly dislike Trump politically and personally," Honig said, pointing out that things would be much different in a county where the population overwhelmingly supports Trump.

"So let's be real, it's a very tough jury pool for Donald Trump, but sometimes that's how it goes."

Watch the video below or at this link.

Eli Honig on CNN 4/15/24 youtu.be