As of: January 30, 2024, 10:11 a.m
Comments
Press
Split
Former President Donald Trump and Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) at a campaign rally in Nashua, NH, last week.
© Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post
Donald Trump received a harsh verdict in the libel trial.
But the Republicans continue to look for excuses - including his challenger Haley.
Washington – A week ago, voters in the Republican primary elections in New Hampshire paved the way for Donald Trump to run for president in 2024.
Senior Republicans immediately declared the race for the White House over.
But just three days later, these officials got a taste of what they will be responsible for over the next nine months.
And it became clear how difficult that would be.
Clear verdict in the trial: E. Jean Carroll wins against Donald Trump
The reason: A jury ruled that Trump must pay writer E. Jean Carroll $83.3 million for defaming her following her public claim that he sexually harassed her in the mid-1990s.
The ruling follows an earlier ruling in May that found Trump responsible for the sexual abuse and defamation of Carroll and had already handed him a $5 million fine.
In contrast to the judge's ruling in May, the latest ruling referred to statements Trump made as president.
Read The Washington Post for free for four weeks
Your quality ticket from washingtonpost.com: Get exclusive research and 200+ stories free for four weeks.
The Republicans are now confronted with the many legal questions and problems surrounding Trump.
And if the early signs are any indication, they'll try to distract a whole lot.
Despite the verdict: Nikki Haley remains silent about the current Trump trial
The few notable Republicans who spoke out over the weekend — even his only remaining opponent in the 2024 primary, Nikki Haley — typically declined to comment on the specific legal dispute or pass a moral judgment on Trump.
Senator James Lankford was asked on the
CBS
news show "Face the Nation" whether he was bothered by the ruling regarding Trump's return to office.
“It doesn’t,” he said.
“It’s interesting how many legal cases against President Trump have emerged and then failed or been thrown out by the courts,” Lankford said.
“This case... actually went through.
He has already announced that he will contest it.
So let the courts make their decisions, and let the American people make their decisions.”
Noteworthy: Lankford has not yet officially spoken out in support of Trump, but Senator Tim Scott has.
On
ABC's
"This Week" news program, Scott was asked a similar question twice and avoided a direct answer.
Instead, he pointed out that other issues were more important.
On the show he had a war of words with the presenter Martha Raddatz.
Here is the overview:
My news
Russia reacts to major NATO maneuvers – and threatens “tragic consequences” read
Putin's T-90 is defeated in a duel - a steel colossus full of weak points
“The enemy is gathering troops”: According to Ukraine soldiers, Putin is preparing a major attack read
Failed attack: Russian tank pilot films the destruction of his own unit
Erdogan tricks the SPD and the Greens: first a double pass, then new party readings
Two in one fell swoop: Ukrainian drones take out Russian tanks read
Republicans before US election: Trump protégé defends ex-president before US election
Scott: “You know, I and all voters who support Donald Trump support a return to normality when it comes to their kitchen table.
The average citizen in our country does not talk about court cases.
In fact, I have found that the perception that the legal system is being used as a weapon against Donald Trump actually increases his poll numbers.
Martha Raddatz: “I understand that, but those were jury trials.
They were jury trials.
They started when Donald Trump was president.
Doesn’t that give you any cause for concern?”
Scott: “I don’t have – Democrats don’t pause when they think about Hunter Biden and the challenges he poses to his father.
I think what voters think most often about is how the next president will affect my quality of life.
How will America regain its standing in the world?
They were better off under Trump and are hoping for four more years of low inflation, low crime, low unemployment and high enthusiasm for our country.
We haven’t had that in the last four years.”
What's striking about these two answers is that neither of them really wants to vouch for Trump's actions or his claims of persecution.
Lankford mentions that Trump faces many lawsuits, but says we should wait for an appeal to make a judgment;
Scott simply cites “the perception that the legal system is being used as a weapon,” without saying that is what happened in this case.
Despite the primaries: Nikki Haley publicly avoids questions about Trump's verdict
The only Republican who embraced the idea that Trump did something wrong was challenger Haley.
But even for her, it was a dance in the face of the primaries for the 2024 US election. She focused largely on the idea that it was a distraction that showed why the party should nominate her instead of Trump.
In a tweet on Friday, Haley mentioned the amount of the sentence, but not the content of the case.
"Donald Trump wants to be the presumptive Republican nominee and we're talking about $83 million in damages," she said.
“We’re not talking about fixing the border.
We’re not talking about fighting inflation.”
On Sunday's
NBC
News show "Meet the Press," anchor Kristen Welker repeatedly asked Haley about the verdict.
Haley was closest to the matter when she said, "I have complete confidence in the jury and I believe they made their decision based on the evidence."
As Semafor's Benjy Sarlin notes, this was telling in itself, since Republicans so rarely allow the premise that Trump may have actually done something wrong.
But Haley also repeatedly dodged the question of whether being blamed for sexual abuse was disqualifying.
She answered the question three times as if it were about whether Trump should be excluded from the election.
When she was asked whether this was personally disqualifying for her, she went back to other topics.
The fighting was a reminder of what might await the party.
It's easy to insinuate that Trump is being targeted, as Lankford and Scott were;
It's more difficult when you're responsible for an actual jury verdict - especially when it comes to something like sexual abuse.
Not just defamation and sexual abuse: Trump faces further judgments
Whatever you think about the contents of the Carroll cases, they are an example of Trump creating problems for himself and his party.
Even after he was convicted of libel and sexual abuse in May, he continued to repeat the kinds of statements that had been deemed defamatory - over and over again.
Trump could soon face another major verdict - in his financial fraud civil trial, in which he has already been found liable.
He has also been indicted on 91 counts in four cases, although the dates for the start of these proceedings have not yet been set.
Republicans have so far consistently avoided discussing the merits of these cases, but that could become much more difficult as the cases progress and Trump's position in the 2024 Republican presidential nomination is solidified.
Republicans have experience standing with Trump without actually vouching for him and his claims, but that will become more difficult when the cases against him are actually decided by our legal system.
Then if you really go for Trump, you have to tear down our law and order system in the process.
And this past weekend offered a taste of the rhetorical gymnastics that lies ahead.
To the author
Aaron Blake
is a senior political reporter writing for The Fix.
A Minnesota native, he has also written about politics for the Minneapolis Star Tribune and The Hill newspaper.
We are currently testing machine translations. This article was automatically translated from English into German.
This article was first published in English on January 29, 2024 at the “Washingtonpost.com” - as part of a cooperation, it is now also available in translation to readers of the IPPEN.MEDIA portals.