Raw Story

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.

New York Judge Juan Merchan slapped former President Donald Trump with a $9,000 contempt of court fine on Tuesday for repeatedly violating the gag order in his Manhattan hush money trial to publicly attack witnesses and jurors — and warned him that a stay on Rikers Island could be in his future if he continues on his current path.

This led some commenters on social media to praise the judge — but many others urged him to stop showing so much restraint on Trump, who has already been fined multiple times for similar violations in his civil trials.

"BREAKING: Judge Merchan fines Trump for violating gag order 9 times," wrote political influencer Ed Krassenstein on X. "Trump has officially been held in contempt of court. But I'm sure that MAGA will claim that it's because the judge is biased and because Trump is being politically targeted, right? When will Republicans ever just say, 'Trump made a mistake?'"

"The $9,000 Trump has to pay for violating his gag order is good but isn’t going to stop him," wrote political podcaster "JoJoFromJerz." "I don’t see how he makes it through this trial without spending some time in the pokey."

ALSO READ: ‘Clear indication’: Dems accuse GOP congressional candidate of illegal super PAC ties

MSNBC political analyst Tim O'Brien had a sober assessment. "Trump will see Justice Merchan’s $9,000 fine for violating the gag order as a reasonable cost for the ability to continue attacking the judge, court and rule of law," he wrote. "It won’t stop him."

"If any of us violated a gag order so many times, we would be in custody," wrote legal expert and commentator John Collins.

Georgia State University constitutional law professor Anthony Michael Kreis thinks this is an ominous sign for the former president.

"Judge Merchan makes plain by holding Donald Trump in contempt that the New York gag order is a blanket one covering any statements about witnesses, jurors, (or potential jurors earlier in the process)," he wrote.

"He has little room to run to the media: a danger zone for undisciplined Trump."

U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) has tried to build bridges between himself and Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) since she first raised the threat to oust him as Speaker. However, Sunday, Greene renewed her vow to take him down.

After initially threatening to bounce Johnson from his gig as the leader of House Republicans, Greene backed off and insisted that Republican lawmakers go home and listen to their constituents about it. This was also after Donald Trump publicly backed the Speaker.

Now, it appears she is back on the warpath against the Louisiana conservative.

ALSO READ: ‘Fraudulent’: Trump tormentor Lincoln Project loses big money in cybertheft scheme

Greene on Sunday shared a report suggesting that Ukrainian leader Zelensky had announced "that Ukraine is working on a security agreement with the U.S. that will fix levels of support for the next 10 years."

"The $61 billion was just the beginning. The next two U.S. presidents won’t be able to switch it off," the individual stated.

In response, Greene claimed "Permanent funding for Ukraine is exactly what they want and Mike Johnson will give it to them."

"Peace is not an option for them because it doesn’t fit the government appropriations war business and economic model, which is vile and disgusting," she added. "They’re plan is keep funding the proxy war with Russia in Ukraine and when that doesn’t work, after all the Ukrainian men have been slaughtered, next they will put American troops on the ground."

Then, she went off on Johnson.

"Johnson will do whatever Biden/Schumer want in order to keep the Speaker’s gavel in his hand, but he has completely sold out the Republican voters who gave us the majority," she said. "His days as Speaker are numbered."

Kentucky representative Thomas Massie also shared Greene's post on his own social media account Sunday.

South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) took another stab at defending her decision to shoot and kill a 14-month old puppy years ago that attacked some chickens, by citing a South Dakota law that allows animals that kill "livestock" to be put down.

Taking to X, formerly known as Twitter, the embattled Republican attempted to put out the firestorm she created by writing in her new book that she "hated" the puppy named Cricket and after an incident took it to a gravel pit and shot it while also claiming it was "worthless" as a hunting dog despite its young age.

On Sunday, she wrote, "I can understand why some people are upset about a 20 year old story of Cricket, one of the working dogs at our ranch, in my upcoming book — No Going Back. The book is filled with many honest stories of my life, good and bad days, challenges, painful decisions, and lessons learned."

ALSO READ: ‘Fraudulent’: Trump tormentor Lincoln Project loses big money in cybertheft scheme

She then continued:

"What I learned from my years of public service, especially leading South Dakota through COVID, is people are looking for leaders who are authentic, willing to learn from the past, and don’t shy away from tough challenges. My hope is anyone reading this book will have an understanding that I always work to make the best decisions I can for the people in my life. The fact is, South Dakota law states that dogs who attack and kill livestock can be put down. Given that Cricket had shown aggressive behavior toward people by biting them, I decided what I did. Whether running the ranch or in politics, I have never passed on my responsibilities to anyone else to handle. Even if it’s hard and painful. I followed the law and was being a responsible parent, dog owner, and neighbor. As I explained in the book, it wasn't easy. But often the easy way isn't the right way."

That did not satisfy Noem's many internet critics.

As one put it, she seemed more invested in selling her book, writing, "Stop using you murdering your dog in cold blood to try to sell copies of your book you sicko."

That was one of the nicer responses she received.

Former FBI special agent Asha Rangappa said, "It sounds like out of at least three options 1) train the dog; 2) drive any distance to a shelter; or 3) shoot it on the spot, you literally took the easiest one."

Former Trump campaign aide A.J. Delgado called Noem a "liar."

"BTW, liar, he never 'killed' livestock -- only attacked, which every dog does (i.e., runs after them). Quit changing your story. Your career is OVER."

@OurShallowState said, "The dog frustrated you. You killed it. That wasn't a tough decision by an empathetic person. That was a weak and lazy decision by a sociopathic person. Leading in government is making the right choices. You are insensitive and impatient. Your choices suck."

Democrat Harry Sisson also weighed in.

"There is no justifying your actions. What you did was disgusting and unforgivable. Also, nobody is going to buy your damn book," he said.

Noem even lost the support of some commenting users.

@colin_fendley said, "I have been a farm owner, I have been a K9 Handler, and I have trained thousands of dogs; you can not justify this, my dear. I'm a conservative, and you lost my support."

Donald Trump is likely going to be convicted in the hush money cover-up case he's currently facing, but the real punishment is being forced to be a criminal defendant, a former prosecutor said Sunday.

Legal analyst and former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti appeared on MSNBC's Alex Witt Reports, where he was asked about whether or not Trump will be held accountable for any potential wrongdoing.

"Big picture, Renato, do you think some sense of accountability is near for Donald Trump, given everything in his legal sphere that is going on?" the host asked.

ALSO READ: ‘Fraudulent’: Trump tormentor Lincoln Project loses big money in cybertheft scheme

"I personally think some measure of accountability is here for Donald Trump," he responded, noting that the New York trial is likely the only one to take place before the upcoming election. "I do not think he wants to be sitting in a cold courtroom. I do not think he is enjoying this experience. I think he feels humiliated. He is being ordered around by a judge referring to him as Mr. Trump and telling him what to do. I think there is already some measure of accountability."

That being said, however, Mariotti also made a prediction about the case's conclusion.

"Do I think there is likely a conviction here? Yes, I do. Obviously that is not the only piece of this that I think has an impact on Donald trump."

Watch below or click here.

Donald Trump's legal team has been working overtime to force Special Counsel Jack Smith to make public his prosecution team's evidence against the former president in the criminal documents case, and they just had a victory... sort of.

Recently, Judge Aileen Cannon unsealed several documents in the Florida criminal case, resulting in a trove of new revelations. One of those newly disclosed details was that Walt Nauta, Trump's valet and co-defendant in the case, previously told a grand jury that his boss would throw papers "on the floor" when he "would leave for the evening."

But those filings also showed some information that "undercuts" Trump's claims in the case, according to a report from ABC.

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

"A coat hanger or 'very tiny screwdriver' could be used to unlock the Mar-a-Lago storage room where former President Donald Trump stored highly classified documents for more than a year, according to a witness in Special Counsel Jack Smith's investigation," it states. "The account was relayed to FBI agents by an unidentified aide to Trump in January 2023, according to newly released exhibits, and further undercuts claims by Trump that the highly-classified materials he's accused of taking with him after leaving office were secured at all times."

The report further notes the origin of the crucial release.

"The transcript of the interview was released as part of an ongoing effort by Trump and his co-defendants to make additional evidence gathered by Special Counsel Smith public," it reads.

ABC notes that the reported detail "further bolsters concerns raised by Smith about the lack of security surrounding the documents while they were stored in Mar-a-Lago."

"In his indictment of Trump, he included photos showing boxes believed to have contained classified documents in a ballroom at the club as well as a bathroom," it reported.

Read the full article here.