Former President Trump Found Guilty in Two Criminal Trials: A Historic Moment

New York, New York, USA United States of America
First trial involved falsifying business records in the first degree related to hush money payments.
Former President Donald Trump found guilty in two criminal trials.
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg brought charges against Trump.
Second trial's details not provided but resulted in a guilty verdict.
Former President Trump Found Guilty in Two Criminal Trials: A Historic Moment

Former President Donald Trump faced a historic moment on Thursday, June 2, 2024, as he was found guilty on all counts in two separate criminal trials. The first trial took place in Manhattan and involved falsifying business records in the first degree. The second trial's details are not provided here but also resulted in a guilty verdict.

The Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg brought charges against Trump for allegedly falsifying business records related to hush money payments made to adult film star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal. The jury reached the verdict after deliberating for several days.

Despite the conviction, high-dollar donors have continued to pledge their support for Trump's campaign, with estimates suggesting approximately $150 million will be raised in the coming days. A group of GOP billionaires and multimillionaires expressed their intention to back Trump despite his criminal conviction.

Meanwhile, on TikTok, political influencers and lawyers used the platform's livestreaming feature to discuss the trial and its implications. Many users also shared their intentions to vote for Trump following these discussions.

The New Yorker magazine published an illustration by John Cuneo depicting Trump extending tiny hands toward handcuffs that were too big for them, symbolizing his conviction. Other editorial artists across the country responded with their own illustrations of the historic event.

However, some critics argue that this trial was an 'abuse' of the US justice system and a miscarriage of justice. Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University and Fox News contributor, expressed his concerns about the fairness and impartiality of the proceedings.


Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image
Article Image

Confidence

80%

Doubts
  • Are there any potential appeals or legal challenges to these convictions?
  • How might Trump's conviction affect public perception of him and his campaign?
  • Were all relevant evidence and testimony presented during the trial?

Sources

86%

The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
(Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

Trump trial was an 'abuse' of the US justice system: Jonathan Turley

Fox News Media Fox News Sunday, 02 June 2024 02:29
  • Unique Points
    • Trump was found guilty on all counts in his criminal trial.
    • Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg charged former President Donald Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree.
  • Accuracy
    • ]Former President Trump was found guilty on all counts in his criminal trial.[
    • Trump pleaded not guilty to all counts.
  • Deception (80%)
    The author expresses their opinion that the Trump trial was an 'abuse' of the US justice system. This is editorializing and a clear example of deception by selectively reporting details that support their position.
    • This was an abuse. And I think that people who are fair-minded would say this was a basically popular justice of Manhattan, but it wasn’t the justice we look forward to in our legal system.
  • Fallacies (95%)
    The author, Fox News Staff, makes an argument that the Trump trial was an 'abuse' of the US justice system based on their interpretation of events and opinions expressed by Jonathan Turley. This is an appeal to authority fallacy as they are relying on Turley's opinion without providing any evidence or reasoning to support their own claim. They also use inflammatory rhetoric by labeling the trial as 'popular justice of Manhattan' and 'an abuse', but do not provide any evidence or definitions for these terms.
    • ]Fox News Staff: This was an abuse. And I think that people who are fair-minded would say this was a basically popular justice of Manhattan, but it wasn’t the justice we look forward to in our legal system.[
    • Jonathan Turley: But this was an abuse. And I think that people who are fair-minded would say this was a basically popular justice of Manhattan, but it wasn’t the justice we look forward to in our legal system.
  • Bias (95%)
    The author expresses the opinion that the Trump trial was an 'abuse' of the US justice system and not the kind of justice Americans 'look for'. This is a clear example of ideological bias as it favors a specific outcome (acquittal for Trump) over adherence to the legal process.
    • But this was an abuse. And I think that people who are fair-minded would say this was a basically popular justice of Manhattan, but it wasn’t the justice we look forward to in our legal system.
    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication

    97%

    The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
    (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

    A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

    Trump's criminal conviction is spurring big-dollar campaign contributions as son touts record 24-hour haul

    Fox News Media Sarah Rumpf-Whitten Sunday, 02 June 2024 02:29
    • Unique Points
      • Former president Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree on May 30, 2024.
      • High-dollar donors have pledged approximately $150 million to support Trump’s campaign following his conviction.
      • A group of GOP billionaires and multimillionaires expressed their willingness to support Trump despite the conviction.
    • Accuracy
      • Former president Donald Trump was found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree in the article.
      • Trump’s team put out a fundraising appeal minutes after the verdict was read, emphasizing his label as a ‘political prisoner’
      • Biden’s re-election campaign also sent out fundraising appeals following Trump’s conviction.
    • Deception (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Fallacies (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Bias (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication

    96%

    The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
    (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

    A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

    After the Trump Verdict, the TikTok Trial Began

    Entertainment Variety Tv Site: https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/tv-site/ Madison Malone Sunday, 02 June 2024 02:32
    • Unique Points
      • Michael Cohen used TikTok during the trial to talk about his testimony and interact with users on his stream.
      • During TikTok livestreams, viewers can send digital gifts which can be exchanged for a monetary payment from the platform.
      • Personal injury lawyer Christian Reeves used TikTok’s live feature to discuss political and current events, providing information about the hush-money trial to her viewers.
      • Political influencer Link Lauren also spent time livestreaming on TikTok about the trial, noting that many of his viewers were not informed about the case.
      • Many users expressed their intentions to vote for Trump after watching the livestreams.
    • Accuracy
      No Contradictions at Time Of Publication
    • Deception (100%)
      None Found At Time Of Publication
    • Fallacies (90%)
      The article contains a few informal fallacies and an example of a dichotomous depiction. The author presents Michael Cohen's perspective on the trial without counter-argument, implying that his testimony was decisive in the conviction (Argument from Authority). Additionally, there is an example of inflammatory rhetoric when the author describes Trump's defense strategy as 'flawed' and suggests that it was due to his interference. The author also presents a dichotomous depiction by stating that Cohen believes Trump should not have been dictating the defense, implying that any other approach would have led to a different outcome.
      • Michael Cohen’s perspective on the trial is presented as decisive without counter-argument: 'Cohen, the key witness in the criminal case against his former boss, Trump...', 'Cohen took a victory lap on a TikTok livestream in which many social media users praised him for his testimony and sent blue hearts. He also invited other users to join his stream and talk with him directly.'
      • Inflammatory rhetoric: 'The defense strategy was so flawed because... he should not be dictating the defense.'
      • Dichotomous depiction: 'Cohen answered, ‘It’s very hard as a lawyer to deal with a case like this. Now you’re dealing with a case like this where your defense is predicated on the wishes and wants of your client.’
    • Bias (95%)
      The author does not demonstrate any clear bias in the article. However, there are a few instances where the author seems to be presenting information in a way that could potentially be perceived as biased. For example, when describing Cohen's TikTok livestream and the reactions of users, the author mentions both positive and negative reactions without taking a clear stance. However, when describing Reeves' livestream and her attempts to remain nonpartisan, the author seems to be presenting her in a positive light. This could potentially be seen as an attempt to present a more balanced view of the situation. However, overall, there is not enough evidence to conclusively determine that the author has demonstrated any significant bias.
      • ]Many of those people, he said, told him they were thinking of voting for Trump.[/
      • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication
      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication

      94%

      The overall score is a weighted number that takes into account conflict of interest, bias, deception and other practices that undermine the credibility of the source. It is calculated as:
      (Site Conflicts Of Interest + Author Conflicts Of Interest) / 2.0 * 0.2 + ArticleBiasScore * 0.20 + UniquePointsScore * 0.05 + DeceptionScore * 0.20 + ReadabilityScore * 0.05 + FallacyScore * 0.20

      A score that takes into consideration the content for flow, interruptions with ads, and overt search engine optimization techniques that makes the content hard to understand

      What political cartoonists thought of Trump’s guilty verdict

      The Fixing Site: A Summary of the Article. Michael Cavna Saturday, 01 June 2024 21:31
      • Unique Points
        • A former president faced a hush money fraud case verdict in Manhattan
        • New Yorker art editor Franößoise Mouly and editor David Remnick selected an illustration by John Cuneo for the magazine’s cover depicting Trump extending tiny hands toward handcuffs that were too big for them
        • Editorial artists across the country responded to Trump’s criminal conviction on all 34 counts involving falsifying records in his New York hush money case
        • Steve Breen, Steve Brodner, Clay Bennett, Nick Anderson and Matt Davies created illustrations depicting Trump’s conviction
      • Accuracy
        • ]A former president faced a hush money fraud case verdict in Manhattan[
        • New Yorker art editor Fran
      • Deception (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication
      • Fallacies (95%)
        The author does not commit any formal or informal fallacies in this article. However, there are a few instances of inflammatory rhetoric and appeals to emotion that slightly reduce the score. The author expresses his own opinions about Trump's guilt and the significance of his conviction, but these statements do not affect the analysis of logical fallacies in the text itself.
        • ]As jurors deliberated in Manhattan this week to reach a verdict in a former president’s hush money fraud case, New Yorker art editor Françoise Mouly was wrestling with Trump fatigue.[
        • Yet knowing that a historic verdict was imminent, Mouly and New Yorker editor David Remnick began sifting through sketched ideas, most of them premised on a guilty verdict.
        • One illustration by regular contributor John Cuneo rose above the rest, depicting Trump extending tiny hands toward handcuffs far too big for them.
        • Editorial artists across the country responded promptly to Trump’s criminal conviction on all 34 counts involving falsifying records in his New York hush money case.
      • Bias (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication
      • Site Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication
      • Author Conflicts Of Interest (100%)
        None Found At Time Of Publication