According to Jim Schultz, a former White House ethics lawyer, he believes that the New York judge overseeing the hush money case involving former President Trump will consider his social media posts, where he quotes others, as a violation of the gag order in the case.
During an interview on “CNN News Central” with anchor Sara Sidner, Schultz, who previously worked under the Trump administration, acknowledged that the individual in question was referring to the jurors and echoing someone else’s statement. However, Schultz emphasized that ultimately the statement applies to the individual himself.
According to the speaker, it is highly likely that the judge will perceive this as a breach of the gag order. As a result, the speaker anticipates that the proceedings will persist indefinitely. The judge does have the authority to impose fines or reprimand the individual. However, the speaker believes that incarceration is an unlikely consequence in this scenario.
Schultz emphasized that the trial would proceed as planned, and assured the audience that they would still have the opportunity to hear from Donald Trump on Truth Social.
In response to Trump’s indirect criticism of potential jurors in the case, Jesse Watters from Fox News was quoted. Under the newly imposed gag order, the former president is now restricted from making public statements about any prospective or serving juror in this criminal proceeding.
In a recent post, Trump shared a quote from Watters, who stated, “They are catching undercover Liberal Activists lying to the Judge in order to get on the Trump Jury.”
Legal expert Schultz joins a line of professionals questioning the potential violation of the order. Jeffrey Toobin, another legal analyst, also raised the same concern earlier this week.
“I believe it is untrue, but more importantly, it is clearly an effort to intimidate jurors,” Toobin expressed. “Furthermore, it is clearly prohibited by the gag order in this particular case.”
According to Toobin, it appears that Donald Trump is unaware that he is now a criminal defendant. He fails to recognize that as a defendant, he possesses different and reduced rights compared to ordinary citizens. Defendants are prohibited from interfering with the trial proceedings, particularly when there is a specific gag order in place that explicitly addresses any attempts to intimidate jurors. Toobin highlights that such actions are simply not allowed.
The trial, which started on Monday, marks a historic moment as it is the first criminal trial of a sitting or former president in U.S. history. After several days of jury selection, which concluded on Friday, the trial is set to resume next week.
