Republicans Are Furious Over This Very Normal Thing in Trump’s Trial

Donald Trump’s MAGA disciples were left fuming after the first day of his hush money criminal trial… but all their heat boiled down to one detail: that the GOP presidential nominee was being held to the same legal standards as every other private citizen.

The weeks-long proceeding will require Trump to be in court for every session—something Trump himself has challenged as “election interference” on the basis that it will keep him away from the campaign trail—even though he’ll be permitted to campaign every weekend, evening, and Wednesday during the process. If he fails to appear in court, he could face an arrest warrant.

But that standard expectation for a criminal trial was, apparently, all too much for his allies, with the campaign’s official spokesperson Karoline Leavitt condemning the procedure on Monday as “banana republic tactics.”

New York Representative Elise Stefanik—who has been vying to become Trump’s vice presidential pick—undercut the expectations of New York law, similarly suggesting in a post that Trump was being unfairly treated, when in actuality the judge was just going through the usual motions.

“Corrupt Judge Merchan, a Biden donor whose family member has profited off this case & who illegally gagged President Trump just said ‘If you do not show up, there will be an arrest,’” Stefanik posted. “A 6-8 week show trial... Total election interference.”

In her replies, one attorney reminded the New York lawmaker that Trump was being held to the same standards as any criminal defendant. The rule about presence in court is called the Parker Warning, and it is given to all defendants in New York state.

“Elise. You know that this is a standard charge given to every defendant in every criminal case pending in nys,” wrote Joshua Stein, a law partner at Greenberg & Stein. “Why, if you’re so in the right, do you have to mislead your constituents?”

And Trump’s other GOP followers, such as Florida Representative Byron Donalds, just don’t seem to care if he’s guilty anymore, according to a new report by The Daily Beast which found that just one in 20 interviewed GOP lawmakers showed concern for the possibility that their nominee for the White House might become a convicted felon.

But their perspective wasn’t shared by prospective jurors, one of whom told MSNBC contributor Adam Klasfeld that they “feel that nobody’s above the law, whether it’s a former president, a sitting president or a janitor.”

Trump is accused of using former fixer Michael Cohen to sweep an affair with adult film actress Stormy Daniels under the rug ahead of the 2016 presidential election. He faces 34 felony charges in this case for allegedly falsifying business records with the intent to further an underlying crime. Trump has pleaded not guilty on all counts.

Former Representative George Santos has raised $0 in his campaign to return to the House, and he says it’s for a good reason: to stop people from thinking he’s a grifter.

The New York Republican has a well-established reputation as a serial fabulist whose lies got him expelled from Congress. He is currently facing 23 felony counts for aggravated identity theft, credit card fraud, and illegally receiving unemployment benefits.

A report published Monday by the Daily Beast reveals that Santos hasn’t raised any money in an effort to overcome his reputation as a conman. But according to a Federal Election Commission filing, also released Monday, Santos’s campaign account has spent money without raising any, which isn’t exactly a good sign.

“I will not be raising a single dime until I’m confirmed on the ballot, unlike many in the media speculating I’m only running to ‘grift.’ I’m setting the standard that only confirmed ballot access candidates should raise money,” Santos said in a statement.

Santos is running as an independent against Nick LaLota, a Republican, in New York’s first congressional district. LaLota was one of the first members of Congress, from either party, to call for Santos’s resignation—Santos made no secret of his animosity.

“He’s not well liked. He’s an arrogant person. He’s not a nice guy. He’s cocky,” Santos said of LaLota the day before his expulsion in December. “He’s a traditional meathead, somebody who’s not nice to you for no reason.”

It’s not just LaLota, either: Santos has been on a petty, scorched-earth path since being expelled from Congress, taking shots at several of his ex-colleagues.

The former congressman faces an uphill battle running as an independent. In order to even get on the ballot, he needs to obtain enough petition signatures from district residents—which some legal experts say is unlikely. Based on Santos’s record, outside observers could think it’s another attempt for him to make a few bucks, perhaps to supplement his Cameo earnings.

Electric vehicle manufacturer Tesla announced Monday that it will be laying off more than 10 percent of its global workforce—at least 14,000 employees—following a catastrophic first quarter, in which the company missed delivery estimates and suffered a year-over-year reduction in sales.

“As part of this effort, we have done a thorough review of the organization and made the difficult decision to reduce our headcount by more than 10% globally,” Musk wrote, blaming the cuts on redundancies in a leaked memo to employees first obtained by Electrek. “There is nothing I hate more, but it must be done. This will enable us to be lean, innovative and hungry for the next growth phase cycle.”

While it’s unclear which teams will be most significantly affected by the layoffs, news of the cuts came hand in hand with resignations from some of the company’s top talent.

“I made the difficult decision to move on from Tesla after 18 years yesterday,” Andrew Baglino, Tesla’s senior vice president for energy engineering and powertrain, wrote on Monday. “I am so thankful to have worked with and learned from the countless incredibly talented people at Tesla over the years.”

Stock traders were quick to observe, however, that Baglino had been offloading millions of dollars’ worth of Tesla stock each month for the last several years.

Rohan Patel, Tesla’s vice president of public policy and business development, also put in his two weeks’ notice after the automotive giant announced the cuts, writing his thank-yous to the company’s customers, his fellow employees, his parents, former President Barack Obama, and Tesla’s CEO, Elon Musk.

“The past 8 years at Tesla have been filled with every emotion—but the feeling I have today is utmost gratitude,” Patel posted on X.

Tesla has been struggling with complaints stemming from myriad issues with its car models, as well as with its latest release, the Cybertruck. The company froze Cybertruck sales on Monday after it was reported that the vehicle’s gas pedal cover had become dislodged, pinning itself against the floor for at least one customer. In 2022, complaints related to the Tesla’s misadvertised driving range became so pervasive that the company developed a secret “Diversion Team” to suppress the noise.

Tesla will deliver its quarter one report on April 23. “Analysts estimate that Tesla will still turn a profit of around 50 cents a share, down from 85 cents a share in Q1 2023,” reported Electrek.

For all of the insults Donald Trump and his fellow Republicans like to lob at President Biden over his energy levels, perhaps he should look in the mirror.

As his hush-money trial in Manhattan started Monday, the former president seemed to be sleeping, according to New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman, who was present in the courtroom.

“Trump didn’t pay attention to a note that his lawyer Todd Blanche passed him. His jaw kept falling on his chest and his mouth kept going slack,” Hagerman told CNN.

It’s pretty ironic behavior for someone who has long mocked his presidential election opponent by calling him “Sleepy Joe.”

Before the trial began this morning, Trump characteristically took to his Truth Social account to attack presiding Judge Juan Merchan and Biden and complain about the gag order against him.

Trump is accused of paying off adult film actress Stormy Daniels to cover up an alleged affair before the 2016 presidential election. He is charged with 34 felony counts for allegedly falsifying business records with the intent to further an underlying crime.

Republicans aren’t likely to acknowledge Trump’s dozing, and plenty of them don’t have room to talk. When Biden repeatedly demonstrates his mental sharpness before national audiences, they try to explain it away with some ridiculous excuses. Meanwhile, Trump keeps making verbal gaffes and going on nonsensical rants whenever cameras are on, as recently as a Saturday rally in Pennsylvania.

The Supreme Court’s inaction has effectively abolished the right to mass protest across three states, allowing a lower court’s ruling to seemingly infringe upon the Constitution’s First Amendment.

The nation’s highest court decided Monday not to hear Mckesson v. Doe, leaving in place a decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that punishes protest organizers with extreme financial consequences if even one participant commits an illegal act. The decision, which now stands as law in Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana, makes it dangerous and practically impossible to organize mass protests.

The case questioned whether DeRay Mckesson, the leader of a 2016 Black Lives Matter protest in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, could be held liable for negligence after an unidentified member of the march threw a rock at a police officer’s face, seriously injuring him.

But the high court’s decision not to take up the case does not necessarily mean that it agrees with the constitutionality of the lower court’s ruling. In a brief opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor pointed out that even though the court denied a review, “its denial today expresses no view about the merits of Mckesson’s claim.”

Instead, Sotomayor believes that another monumental decision by the court last year in Counterman v. Colorado—which looked at whether statements could be considered free speech if they were threatening in nature—should inform a review of Mckesson v. Doe in lower courts.

“In Counterman, the Court made clear that the First Amendment bars the use of ‘an objective standard’ like negligence for punishing speech,” she wrote. “Although the Fifth Circuit did not have the benefit of this Court’s recent decision in Counterman when it issued its opinion, the lower courts now do. I expect them to give full and fair consideration to arguments regarding Counterman’s impact in any future proceedings in this case.”

Mckesson was, ultimately, unsatisfied with the decision, lamenting the need to return to district court for a renewed opinion.

“Today, the Supreme Court did not grant cert in my case. This has been going on since 2016. And now we go back to the District Court,” he wrote on X. “This has been endless.”