A guilty verdict? Trump and allies brace voters for the worst | The Excerpt
On Monday’s episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY National Political Correspondent David Jackson explains how former President Donald Trump is bracing voters for a guilty verdict. Israel continues its strikes on Rafah, while U.S. officials speak out about civilian deaths in Gaza and weapons to Israel. Some student protesters held walkouts at commencement ceremonies over the weekend. USA TODAY Congress & Campaigns Reporter Riley Beggin breaks down the trial of Sen. Bob Menendez and why Senate colleagues don't want to talk about it. Child care providers on Monday plan to take part in the country's third annual “Day Without Child Care.”
Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text.
Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here
Taylor Wilson:
Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson. And today is Monday, May 13th, 2024. This is The Excerpt. Today, how Trump is bracing voters for a guilty verdict in his hush money trial. Plus the latest from Gaza as U.S. officials speak out about arms to Israel. And why Senate colleagues don't want to talk about the Bob Menendez trial.
?
The criminal hush money trial of former President Donald Trump is far from over, with key witness Michael Cohen expected to take the stand as early as today. But Trump is already bracing voters for a guilty verdict. My colleague Sara Ganim, spoke with USA Today national political correspondent David Jackson for more.
Sara Ganim:
Hi David. Thanks so much for joining The Excerpt.
David Jackson:
Yeah, thanks for having me.
Sara Ganim:
A lot of people who are following this trial have opinions about how it might end, but what is Trump himself saying?
David Jackson:
Well, when he's asked, he expresses optimism about the trial. But during his speeches and in his social media posts and in interviews, he also harps on his belief that the trial is unfair, and he is definitely suggesting that he fears that he may well be convicted.
Sara Ganim:
Why would a defendant essentially predict his own conviction and then publicly talk about that, especially in a case that's so high profile?
David Jackson:
Well, because he wants to make sure his voters are prepared for the worst. He's basically trying to preempt the guilty verdict by telling people that it really doesn't mean anything because the judge is biased against him, the jury pool is biased against him and that prosecutors are politically motivated. So it's more of a suggestion that he's planting in people's minds just to get them ready for the distinct possibility that he could be convicted.
Sara Ganim:
And this is the tactic that's kind of worked before for him, right? Can you talk about that?
David Jackson:
Yes. In the late 2022 and in early 2023 when his latest presidential campaign was just getting off the ground, he would frequently tell people that he expected to be indicted for this hush money investigation and for the January 6th investigation and for a documents investigation that was undergoing. He would constantly tell people that, "The government wants to put me in jail." And that he fully expected to be charged criminally. And here again, it's the same principle. He doesn't want his people to be taken by surprise when it happens. So he's trying to preempt the process by arguing that it's all fake.
Sara Ganim:
Is it also somewhat good for his campaign or for his image in any way? Does it work that way for him?
David Jackson:
Well, in many ways it did work for him in the indictment phase of the situation because by the time he actually was indicted, many of his supporters had already discounted it because they expected it because Trump told him it was coming. And there's also evidence that the indictments probably helped him during the primaries. He won all of them easily. And a large part of it was the Republican base rallying to him because they felt like he was under attack by the government.
Sara Ganim:
Is that happening again? Are people sending in donations based on what's been in the courtroom?
David Jackson:
Well, his hard right Republican core base of voters are still with him, and they'll basically believe everything he says. But the big question here is what will moderate voters, people in the middle, independents who might consider voting for Trump but are worried about all of these criminal charges against him, what will they do and how might they react to a guilty verdict? I don't think anybody really knows. During the primaries, there were suggestions that a lot of moderates turned away from Trump because they were concerned about these cases. And there's definitely a fear with Trump and his aides that even more voters may turn off of them if he's actually convicted. So a large part of this effort is to try to reach those voters and try to persuade them that this is all politics and they shouldn't take it seriously.
Sara Ganim:
The judge in this case has already fined Trump, warned him about violating a gag order. Is he in danger with all of this talk of violating it again?
David Jackson:
Yes, definitely in danger because the judge has threatened him by saying that if he violates the gag order one more time, he may wind up in jail, which would be the judge's right to do so. Trump, on the other hand, has used this gag order as an example of what he's talking about that all the government's interested in is putting him in jail and convicting him. They really don't have a case, so they threaten him with things like gag orders and bad rulings on the evidence. And so he's basically doing the same thing with the gag orders that he is doing with the trial itself. He's trying to preempt the situation by telling voters that this is all politics and they shouldn't pay attention to it.
Sara Ganim:
And so what happens if he is found guilty as he's suggesting he might be? Are officials prepared for that just from a logistical standpoint?
David Jackson:
They're trying, certainly thinking about it. But there wouldn't be too much that would happen. If he is convicted, he would then go to a sentencing phase of the trial and the judge and jury would decide how he should be punished. That could lead to a prison sentence. If he is convicted, all of this will be on appeal. And this is another thing that Trump talks about on the stump is that a lot of the things that have happened in the trial are what he calls reversible error, so that even if he is convicted, he will appeal the verdict and he is telling people that it'll all be reversed down the line.
Sara Ganim:
David Jackson is a USA Today national political correspondent. David, thank you so much for all of this insight.
David Jackson:
Great. Thank you.
?
Taylor Wilson:
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said yesterday, the U.S. is still collecting evidence and reviewing allegations that Israel violated U.S. policy and international humanitarian law in Gaza. The State Department said in a report Friday that it's reasonable to assess that Israel used U.S.-made arms in ways that did not sufficiently mitigate civilian harm. But it did not definitively conclude that any specific incident met the violation threshold. Blinken said yesterday on CBS, "It's reasonable to assess that in a number of instances, Israel has not acted in a manner that is consistent with international humanitarian law." President Joe Biden paused a shipment of weapons to Israel last week that he said could be used by the country to attack the densely populated city of Rafah in a way that would cause significant civilian casualties. Still, Israel continues to carry out aerial and ground attacks on the Gaza border city and Israeli tanks advanced earlier today into the Jabalia refugee camp in the northern part of Gaza. Israel today is marking its Memorial Day for fallen soldiers and victims of terrorism, months after last fall's Hamas-led attack in Israel. And Israel's Independence Day is tomorrow.
?
Dozens of students participated in a walkout during Duke University's Commencement Ceremony yesterday to protest comedian Jerry Seinfeld, a supporter of Israel, who was invited as guest speaker. Students dressed in caps and gowns, got up from their seats in Duke's football stadium and headed toward the exit. Several waved Palestinian flags and shouted, "Free, free Palestine." According to videos. Others chanted Jerry Seinfeld's name as he received an honorary degree. The comedian who has supported Israel throughout the war in Gaza otherwise gave his speech largely without interruption. The Duke walkout was one of the latest Commencement disruptions to come amid continued protests on college campuses of Israel's war in Gaza. On Saturday protesting students at Virginia Commonwealth University walked out as Governor Glenn Youngkin delivered the Commencement address. And on the same day, students at UC Berkeley interrupted Commencement with pro-Palestinian chants.
?
The Bob Menendez trial is beginning, but his Senate colleagues don't want to talk about it. Sara Ganim sat down with USA Today congress and campaigns reporter Riley Beggin to learn more.
Sara Ganim:
Riley, thanks so much for joining me today to talk about this.
Riley Beggin:
Of course. Happy to be here
Sara Ganim:
First, can you just remind us of the charges and the allegations that Bob Menendez is facing in his trial that begins today?
Riley Beggin:
Yeah. So Senator Menendez has several charges against him that he is facing here. The charges say that he allegedly took hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes over years in exchange for using his position to help New Jersey businessmen and the Egyptian and Qatari governments. So certainly something serious that he's going to be facing here.
Sara Ganim:
And he maintains his innocence. But what do his colleagues in the Senate think about this?
Riley Beggin:
Very little. I asked a lot of them to talk about what they expect from the trial and what it's been like to work with Senator Menendez over the last few months since the indictment came out. And they were not willing to say very much. A lot of them said, "No comment," in a lot of different varieties. And the ones who did say something said very little, "I'll let the justice system work its will," for example, from Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin is something that I heard a lot of.
Sara Ganim:
What does that silence say about how the Senate operates and the culture of that place?
Riley Beggin:
Yeah. This is a very Senate way to respond to this compared to the House where you've probably seen in the news people throwing jabs all the time. In the Senate, they take themselves seriously in a way where they say, "I'm not going to talk bad about my colleagues." But that also is sort of saying something behind the scenes that we're not thinking of him necessarily the way that we maybe used to. I've been witnessing and what sources in the Senate have told me have said that Senator Menendez has gotten a lot more isolated since this indictment came down. He's going to votes, but he's not talking to anybody on the floor. He is talking to very few reporters in the hallways. So his position in the Senate seems to have changed a lot.
Sara Ganim:
Yeah, I really liked how you painted a picture of how he dodges people in between doorways. Can you talk about that a little?
Riley Beggin:
I mean, there are a couple different ways to get into the Senate Chamber and if you want to slip in and out without being noticed, you definitely can. But sometimes he walks through these hallways with lots of people around him talking to other senators and reporters are letting him walk by without pulling him to chat. So it's certainly a vibe of a man set apart from the others here.
Sara Ganim:
Which is interesting because he was once a really powerful member of the Senate, right?
Riley Beggin:
Yeah. In a lot of ways, he still is. He is the senior senator from New Jersey. But to your point, he was the Chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, which is a very powerful panel that handles foreign policy. So he resigned that position after this indictment came out, but he still serves on the panel and has his same job of voting for policy. And I will add, in the very closely divided Senate, it's 51-49, his vote really does matter here.
Sara Ganim:
Riley Beggin covers congress for USA Today. Riley, thank you so much.
Riley Beggin:
Thank you.
?
Taylor Wilson:
Today, more than 1,000 U.S. child care providers plan to temporarily shut down facilities or call in sick to take part in the country's third annual Day Without Child Care. The event seeks to raise awareness about early learning professionals' critical role in the nation's economy and how little they earn in return for that work. Yessika Magdaleno has provided child care for more than two decades in Garden Grove, California, and said in a statement, "We can't make it work without more money, bottom line. I'm always told that I should close my doors and try working in a different, more lucrative industry, but I don't want to do that." For some startling numbers that show just how broken parts of the child care system are, check out a link in today's show notes.
?
And thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA Today.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: A guilty verdict? Trump braces voters for the worst | The Excerpt