Donald Trump verdicts may be most significant ever delivered by US jury

Published

1 year ago

May 30, 2024

admin

There’s guilty and there’s not guilty.

Then there’s ‘whatever’, the verdict that Donald Trump had already bagged long before a New York court delivered its judgement.

Beyond the breakdown of a 12-member jury panel, the portion of America that will shrug its shoulders at this case’s conclusion means Donald Trump has numbers he can work with, politically. For now, at least.

Time will tell how the status change to “criminal” affects his bid to return to the White House. Notably, polls indicate it will go down badly with independent voters.

For his opponents, it will need to – because, in six weeks of a criminal trial, it didn’t.

Trump guilty latest: Ex-US president says he is a ‘very innocent man’

For all the talk of due process having due impact on a presidential campaign, of evidence laid bare to land a political death warrant, the Trump campaign remains alive and kicking.

Head-to-head polls with Joe Biden still show a tight contest, with Trump ahead in key swing states. The trial has also boosted his campaign war chest – his fund-raising was greater than Joe Biden in the month of April, a 2024 first.

Whilst this trial has been a thunderous legal watershed for the United States, there are reasons why it hasn’t reverberated as it might, and as Trump’s opponents would have hoped.

Of the four criminal trials he faces, it was the least serious. Placed against the heavyweight charges around the mishandling of classified government documents and efforts to subvert democracy, the New York crimes had a featherweight feel.

It was rather more than the “bookkeeping error” that Trump would have had us believe but there are factors beyond his characterisation that minimise impact.

The prosecutors’ witness list was populated by unsympathetic characters to whom you wouldn’t hand your house keys.

Michael Cohen, aka star witness, presented his own story of theft, dishonesty and tax evasion. Then there was David Pecker, the slippery tabloid rascal who brought us headlines like “Bungling Surgeon Ben Carson Left Sponge in Patient’s Brain”.

They were central to a prosecution case wrapped in a parcel of rogues and it weakened the ‘good versus evil’ narrative that sharpens a public’s response.

There was also the matter of trial fatigue, before it even got underway. The charges, the witness evidence and the response of the accused had all been aired loudly and often over months leading up to the trial itself.

As much as five weeks of evidence provided a gripping insight, we had heard the headlines before. The cases for the prosecution and defence were pre-cast in the public consciousness and so, largely, were conclusions around guilt and innocence.

Then there were the noises off. Time spent in the vicinity of courtroom number 1530 in Lower Manhattan was time spent listening to Donald Trump campaigning in the corridors of the court building, with a supporting cast addressing the media outside.

Suburban vehicles and Secret Service transported the modern Republican Party’s great & good from Capitol Hill in daily convoys to loudhailer a backing chorus of ‘sham trial, weaponised justice department and political witch hunt.’

It was a political wall of sound designed to drown out the business of the court on a given day, every day. They weren’t the headline act in this corner of Lower Manhattan but they were headline enough to influence the story in its telling.

So, what story will America be telling when the dust settles on this, the only criminal trial Donald Trump is likely to face before the November election?

Will voters be discussing Donald Trump? Definitely.

Will they be poring over the detail and significance of a felony conviction? Probably.

Will there be a lingering sense of shock and awe at court’s evidence and jury’s verdict? Almost certainly not.

He’s already been convicted in civil court of fraud and been found liable for sexual assault. The judge in the sexual assault case called it “rape”.

If Donald Trump was in prison, he’d be segregated for his own safety, and yet, in the general population he’s positioned well for a return to the presidency.

It is the curious context for this court case and its aftermath. Whatever the difference a criminal conviction makes, the sense of ‘whatever’ might mean it makes no difference at all.

US

Donald Trump praises Liberian president’s English – the country’s official language

Published

1 hour ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Donald Trump praises Liberian president's English - the country's official language

Donald Trump has praised the Liberian president’s command of English – the West African country’s official language.

The US president reacted with visible surprise to Joseph Boakai’s English-speaking skills during a White House meeting with leaders from the region on Wednesday.

After the Liberian president finished his brief remarks, Mr Trump told him he speaks “such good English” and asked: “Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?”

Mr Trump seemed surprised when Mr Boakai laughed and responded he learned in Liberia.

The US president said: “It’s beautiful English.

“I have people at this table who can’t speak nearly as well.”

Mr Boakai did not tell Mr Trump that English is the official language of Liberia.

The country was founded in 1822 with the aim of relocating freed African slaves and freeborn black citizens from the US.

👉 Follow Trump100 on your podcast app 👈

Mr Trump promised the leaders of Liberia, Senegal, Gabon, Mauritania and Guinea-Bissau a pivot from aid to trade at the surprise meeting.

He described the countries as “all very vibrant places with very valuable land, great minerals, and great oil deposits, and wonderful people”.

Later asked by a reporter if he’ll visit the continent, Mr Trump said, “At some point, I would like to go to Africa.”

But he added that he’d “have to see what the schedule looks like”.

Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, promised to go to Africa in 2023, but only fulfilled the commitment by visiting Angola in December 2024, just weeks before he left office.

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says Israeli government

Published

1 hour ago

July 10, 2025

admin

Gaza permanent ceasefire 'questionable', says Israeli government

The Israeli government believes the chances of achieving a permanent ceasefire in Gaza are “questionable”.

The pessimistic assessment, in a top-level Israeli government briefing given to Sky News, comes as the Israeli Prime Minister prepares to leave Washington DC after a four-day visit which had begun with the expectation of a ceasefire announcement.

Benjamin Netanyahu will leave the US later today with the prospect of even a temporary 60-day ceasefire looking extremely unlikely this week.

Within “a week, two weeks – not a day” is how it was framed in the background briefing late on Wednesday.

Crucially, though, on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the framing from the briefing was even less optimistic: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement. But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Sky News has spoken to several Israeli officials at the top level of the government. None will be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

But I have been given a very clear understanding of Mr Netanyahu’s thinking.

The Israeli position is that a permanent ceasefire (beyond the initial 60 days, which itself is yet to be agreed) is only possible if Hamas lays down its arms. “If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war],” said a source.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

This was rejected by Hamas and by Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, who reportedly told the Israelis that the redeployment map “looks like a Smotrich plan”, a reference to the extreme-right Israeli finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich.

My briefing of Mr Netanyahu’s position is that he has not shifted in terms of Israel’s central stated war aims. The return of the hostages and eliminating Hamas are the key objectives.

But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, it was clear from my briefing that no permanent ceasefire is possible in the Israeli government’s view without the complete removal of Hamas as a political and military entity.

Hamas is not likely to negotiate its way to oblivion.

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, a senior Israeli official told Sky News: “We would want IDF in every square metre of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone.”

It was clear to me that Mr Netanyahu wants his stated position to be that his government has no territorial ambition for Gaza.

One quote to come from my briefing, which I am only able to attribute to a senior Israeli official, says: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas.”

Another clear indication of Mr Netanyahu’s position – a quote from the briefing, attributable only to a senior Israeli official: “You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, it’s clear from my briefings that Mr Netanyahu continues to rule out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

The Israeli government assessment is that the Palestinians are not going to have a state “as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state”.

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the briefing revealed that Mr Netanyahu’s view is that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave” but that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated.

“It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction,” a senior Israeli official said.

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary”, is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.

Reacting to Israeli Defence Minister Katz’s recent statement revealing a plan to move Palestinians into a “humanitarian city” in southern Gaza, and not let them out of that area, the official wouldn’t be drawn, except to say: “As a permanent arrangement? Of course not.”

US

Gaza permanent ceasefire ‘questionable’, says senior Israeli official

Published

4 hours ago

July 10, 2025

admin

A senior Israeli official has issued a less-than-optimistic assessment of the permanency of any ceasefire in Gaza.

Speaking in Washington on condition of anonymity, the senior official said that a 60-day ceasefire “might” be possible within “a week, two weeks – not a day”.

But on the chances of the ceasefire lasting beyond 60 days, the official said: “We will begin negotiations on a permanent settlement.

“But we achieve it? It’s questionable, but Hamas will not be there.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is due to conclude a four-day visit to Washington later today.

There had been hope that a ceasefire could be announced during the trip. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly stated that it’s close.

Speaking at a briefing for a number of reporters, the Israeli official would not be drawn on any of the details of the negotiations over concerns that public disclosure could jeopardise their chances of success.

The major sticking point in the talks between Hamas and Israel is the status of the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) inside Gaza during the 60-day ceasefire and beyond, should it last longer.

The latest Israeli proposal, passed to Hamas last week, included a map showing the proposed IDF presence inside Gaza during the ceasefire.

The official repeated Israel’s central stated war aims of getting the hostages back and eliminating Hamas. But in a hint of how hard it will be to reconcile the differences, the official was clear that no permanent ceasefire would be possible without the complete removal of Hamas.

“We will offer them a permanent ceasefire,” he told Sky News. “If they agree. Fine. It’s over.

“They lay down their arms, and we proceed [with the ceasefire]. If they don’t, we’ll proceed [with the war].”

On the status of the Israeli military inside Gaza, the official said: “We would want IDF in every square meter of Gaza, and then hand it over to someone…”

He added: “[We] don’t want to govern Gaza… don’t want to govern, but the first thing is, you have to defeat Hamas…”

The official said the Israeli government had “no territorial designs for Gaza”.

“But [we] don’t want Hamas there,” he continued. “You have to finish the job… victory over Hamas. You cannot have victory if you don’t clear out all the fighting forces.

“You have to go into every square inch unless you are not serious about victory. I am. We are going to defeat them. Those who do not disarm will die. Those who disarm will have a life.”

On the future of Gaza, the official ruled out the possibility of a two-state solution “for the foreseeable future”.

“They are not going to have a state in the foreseeable future as long as they cling to that idea of destroying our state. It doesn’t make a difference if they are the Palestinian Authority or Hamas, it’s just a difference of tactics.”

On the most controversial aspect of the Gaza conflict – the movement of the population – the official predicted that 60% of Palestinians would “choose to leave”.

But he claimed that Israel would allow them to return once Hamas had been eliminated, adding: “It’s not forcible eviction, it’s not permanent eviction.”

Critics of Israel’s war in Gaza say that any removal of Palestinians from Gaza, even if given the appearance of being “voluntary,” is in fact anything but, because the strip has been so comprehensively flattened.