Trump Found Guilty in New York: Megyn Kelly Gives Her Instant Reaction and Analysis

This episode delves into the conviction of Donald Trump in New York, as Megyn Kelly offers her perspective on the implications of this verdict.

1. Megyn Kelly views the conviction as a politically motivated action designed to prevent Trump from running for president again.
2. She criticizes the legal process, suggesting that the charges were overblown and the trial unfairly conducted.
3. Kelly forecasts that this conviction will energize Trump's supporters and have electoral ramifications.
4. The episode discusses potential retaliatory legal actions against Democratic political figures as a consequence.
5. Kelly predicts that despite the conviction, the case will be overturned on appeal.

1. Initial Reaction

Megyn Kelly opens by expressing shock and disapproval of Trump's conviction, framing it as a disgrace to the country. She alleges political motives behind the trial.

• Megyn Kelly: "What a sad day. The country's been disgraced."

2. Analysis of the Legal Proceedings

Kelly discusses the specifics of the charges and the trial process, accusing the prosecution and the judge of bias and procedural unfairness.

• Megyn Kelly: "The whole case boils down to the same alleged scheme, but they stretched it into 34 counts."

3. Political Implications

The implications of Trump's conviction on future elections and political strategies are analyzed, predicting a backlash against Democrats.

• Megyn Kelly: "It's a before and after moment for America."

4. Broader Consequences

Discussion on the broader consequences of using legal systems for political warfare, suggesting a potential escalation in future political conflicts.

• Megyn Kelly: "Turnabout is fair play."

1. Stay Informed: Regularly follow legal and political news to understand the impact of high-profile cases.
2. Engage in Dialogue: Discuss these issues in community forums to foster a broader understanding of the judicial and political systems.
3. Advocate for Fair Trials: Support movements that advocate for unbiased legal proceedings regardless of political affiliation.
4. Participate in Elections: Engage in the electoral process to influence the direction of political and judicial landscapes.
5. Educate Others: Share insights from episodes like this to inform others about potential misuses of the legal system.

Megyn Kelly gives her instant reaction and analysis to the breaking news that former President Donald Trump has been found guilty of all charges in the New York business records trial. She discusses why the entire sham case and trial was ridiculous, why the convictions will likely be overturned, why DA Alvin Bragg should be disbarred, the media response ahead, the outrageous sentencing date of July 11 just days before the Republican National Convention, the mistake the Trump defense team may have made in the trial, and more.

People

Donald Trump, Alvin Bragg, Letitia James, Eugene Carroll, Fannie Willis, Jack Smith, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama

Content Warnings:

None

Megyn Kelly
Welcome to the Megyn Kelly show live on SiriusXM channel 111 every weekday at noon east.

This is ridiculous.

What a sad day.

The country's been disgraced.

That's what's happened.

Alvin Bragg and this judge have, have disgraced the country.

We made it, what, almost 250 years without doing this. And now because of falsified business records, we've convicted as a felon a former president of the United States. You don't think we could have done something like this to Bill Clinton or Hillary Clinton or others?

We had a standard. We didn't do this in America.

We aren't a banana republic, or at least we didn't used to be.

And don't forget what's happened in this Trump case in which he's now been found guilty of all 34 counts against him, which was overcharged to begin with. It shouldn't have been a case at all. And once charged, it should have been one count.

The whole case boils down to the same alleged scheme, but they stretched it into 34 counts by saying, and that check and that check and that check and that invoice and that invoice, it was all part of your scheme. So now he looks like Al Capone, convicted on these 34 counts.

But the idea all along was to stop him from becoming president again. That's the idea behind this prosecution.

That is the idea behind Letitia James bankrupting his company that he built and along with his dad from the ground up in New York, the city that just turned on him.

That was the idea behind Eugene Carroll and her sexual assault case, brought 30 years after the fact, alleging a sexual assault slash rape in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room, a case she couldn't even remember the year of the alleged rape in.

And that's the idea behind Fannie Willis and Jack Smith times two. Stop it. Stop him.

Stop Trump. Why did they wait?

Why didn't these cases come until right before the presidential election? The Democrats have been wringing their hands.

Wasn't in time.

We're not going to be able to call him a convicted felon unless you speed these things up.

The judge in the DC January 6 case saying, I'll rush back, I'll come back from my european vacation, don't you worry. If we get Supreme Court opinions allowing my case to go forward with Jack Smith, I'll be there.

We've heard about the concern that Fannie Willis, her case is going up an appeal, but she's going to try to find some way to pedal to the medal. It we've heard even in that January 6 case before Judge Chitkin.

There may be a plan to try to get him tried even after he wins. If he wins in November, we could have a trial of the president elect in an effort to get him another conviction so they could convince electors to be unfaithful on January 6 of 2025. And that's where this whole scheme, and here it is, the proper word is corrupt.

It's a before and after moment for America.

What just happened today is a line we can't uncross.

And these Democrats will rue the day they decided to use lawfare to stop a presidential candidate.

I'm not talking about violence. I'm talking about tit for tat.

You just wait. And it won't be Hunter Biden the next time.

It's going to be Joe Biden. It could potentially still be Barack Obama.

It could still potentially be Hillary Clinton. We're going to have to look at what the statutes of limitations are on the various crimes they surely committed. We're going to have to look at passing laws to revive those dead crimes, felonies or misdemeanors so that those cases can be brought out of time. That what, that's what may be in the interests of justice. Just like they did for Eugene Carroll with a New York state law that was passed so that she could sue him.

That's what happened.

Turnabout is fair play. And John Yoo, an amazing lawyer who worked in the Bush administration, Department of justice, has a great piece out today talking about how that's the only way they'll learn.

The only way to save the Republic now is to give them a taste of their own medicine. That's it.

That's it.

They tasted blood today.

They're the wolves with the bloody piece of meat in their mouths. That doesn't stop the wolf from coming back for more.

The only thing that will stop him is if he loses a limb of his own.

And I'm sorry, but the Democrats started this game. And the same way the Republicans upped the ante when it came to, for example, the filibuster fight, the Democrats got rid of it for lower court judges. Mitch McConnell said, you will rue the day because we're going to be in control of this chamber one day and you're going to lose the filibuster at the higher level court and you'll be sorry. That's what needs to happen here. Who's getting indicted next? Joe Biden? Maybe Jill Biden. How low can we go?

You may not want to see it.

That that ship has already left port.

That horse has left the barn.

That's where we're going. So before you celebrate too much over at MSNBC and CNN, who are positively gleeful, gleeful over this absurd conviction, you wait and ask yourself, ask yourself what kind of pandoras box has been opened here?

Here was President Trump moments after the guilty verdict today.

Donald Trump
This was a disgrace.

This was a rigged trial by a conflicted judge who was corrupt.

This a rigged trial of disgrace.

They wouldn't give us a venue change. We were at 5% or 6% in this district, in this area.

This was a rigged, disgraceful trial.

The real verdict is going to be November 5 by the people, and they know what happened here, and everybody knows what happened here.

You have a Soros backed Da and the whole thing. We didn't do a thing wrong.

I'm a very innocent man and it's okay. I'm fighting for our country, I'm fighting for our constitution.

Our whole country is being rigged right now. This was done by the Biden administration in order to wound or hurt an opponent, a political opponent. And I think it's just a disgrace. And we'll keep fighting, we'll fight till the end in will win, because our country has gone to hell. We don't have the same country anymore. We have a divided mess where nation is declined, serious decline. Millions and millions of people pouring into our country right now from prisons and from mental institutions, terrorists, and they're taking over our country. We have a country that's in big trouble. But this was a rigged decision right from this day one, with a conflicted judge who should have never been allowed to try this case. Never.

And we will fight for our constitution. This is long from over. Thank you very much.

Megyn Kelly
Good for him.

Long from over is absolutely right. This will be reversed. It will be reversed. This will not stand. Mark my words. Even in a New York appellate court system that is weighted with Democrats on the bench, the highest court in New York is called the Court of Appeals. It's not completely corrupt. It just overturned the conviction of Harvey Weinstein because he wasn't given a fair trial. They are capable of reaching a rational decision, and if they're not, this could be appealed up higher still to the US Supreme Court. There were state constitutional violations here, and there were federal constitutional violations here. Let me ask you a question. For those of you sitting at home who listened to this show, what was the underlying crime?

What did the jury find Trump was trying to cover up with this falsified business record? Was it federal election campaign law violations?

Was it tax law violations? Was it additional business records violations? Do you know?

No, you don't. Neither do I. No one knows. Neither does Donald Trump. Good luck.

Good luck filing your appeal. He's in the same position he was in when he had to stand up first and argue the closing argument before he had even heard the prosecution's theory of the case.

Now he's got to go up to the appellate court and try to guess. Gee, I don't really know what I've been found guilty of. I guess falsifying business records through unlawful means and the unlawful means war.

I don't know.

I don't know. We're not sure if the jurors took door number one, door number two, or door number three. That's the position he's in. Alvin Bragg ran for office on a promise to get Trump, a Soros backed Da who doesn't want to enforce the criminal law against anyone. That's why we were all leaving New York in droves, because of his policies and the policies of his old boss, the old mayor in New York. And this guy promised, if you elect me, I'll get him. Remember this?

Alvin Bragg
When I was at the AG's office, I sued Trump over 100 times for his administration's misconduct and brought a case against the Trump foundation and held him accountable. I'm the candidate in the race who has the experience with Donald Trump. I was the chief deputy in the attorney general's office. We sued the Trump administration over 100 times. I know how to litigate with him. I also led the team that did the Trump foundation case. So I'm ready to go wherever the facts take me. It'd be hard to argue with the fact that that'd be the most important, most high profile case. And I've seen him up front and seen the lawlessness that he can do. So I do have a lot of experience with the former president. I think it's important to elect someone who is well prepared to pick up wherever the sitting district attorney leaves off.

If brought, would be one of the most consequential cases in the history of local enforcement, and we need someone who's ready on day one.

Megyn Kelly
He should be disbarred.

He should be disbarred. That's how much damage he's done to the justice system, that guy. Moments after the verdict was read, tweeting out today, a jury found Donald J. Trump guilty in all caps. He's so excited on all, all caps again, 34 felony counts.

You go, guy.

You must be so happy you lived up to your campaign promises, I'll give you that. One hell of a politician, one shitty prosecutor whose obligation is to uphold the rule of law and to seek justice.

Justice. Not just convictions. That's what you're after. Just convictions. In the case of Donald Trump, that's all I want. Just give me the big c so I can get him like I promised. He's so proud today. Just like the AG in New York is so proud of bankrupting Trump's business or doing her level best.

And we could go on.

FYI, at this hour, Trump's donation website has crashed.

You can feel, you can feel the number of people going there to pony up dough they didn't think they had.

They thought they had given their last donation. People are hurting right now. Tons of inflation, thanks to Joe Biden and other problems that we're all suffering.

They're donating, and I'm sure it's by the tens of million.

This will be a financial windfall for the Trump campaign and arguably for America.

This jury, the jury of the american voters, will be heard on November 5.

They will have the final word.

And in the meantime, Donald Trump will hear the term convicted felon every day, everywhere he goes.

The sentencing will not take place until July 11.

That is four days before the republican national Convention.

That's the big event.

They have the balloon drop.

The candidate's family shows up.

It gets the party excited for their nominee. Like, what's his vision of the country versus the other guys? How could he help my life?

What might he do that could make things better for my kids versus what the other guy's promising?

Let me hear the platform. Let me hear your surrogates. Let me hear you and what you stand for.

And instead, they've decided to corrupt it. This judge, of course. Of course he has.

By saddling Trump with his sentencing four days before it starts, one week before he accepts the republican nomination for president of the United States.

He'll be sitting in a New York courtroom, and there is a decent chance he's gonna be wearing an ankle bracelet.

I don't think Trump's gonna get jail time.

I've said that from the beginnings. Garagos took me hot on that. He said anybody not named Trump would.

I don't think he's going to get jail time, but it's not outside the realm of possibility, not with this judge, not with this DA.

Both sides have to submit their recommendations.

What they believe should happen, that's going to happen by, I think, June 13.

And what do you think this DA is going to seek do you think the DA is going to say, released on his own recognizance, community service.

What do you think he's going to recommend? And this Judge Mershon has done everything Alvin Bragg has asked him to, everything Alvin Bragg won't 99.99% of the motion practice in front of this judge.

I mean, I, I don't think Trump is getting jail time, but I am not so certain I can predict it sitting here tonight.

So the sentencing July 11. In the meantime, reporting here from CNBC, Trump will be free to speak to the press, travel and continue hitting, continue his presidential campaign. He will no longer be bound by the gag order. Oh, that's sweet.

That just, that barred him from discussing witnesses, jurors and the judge's family members. She must be so thrilled. The judge's daughter, who's making tens of millions of dollars off of her own get Trump campaign for people like Adam Schiff. She must be absolutely joyous tonight. Can you imagine the dinner they're having in the Merchant household? Judge Mershon and his rich daughter, who's getting even richer by the second thanks to this verdict.

He should have been disqualified.

He should not have presided over this case.

The appeal will be filed, of course, and it will take months, if not years.

I mean, months, if not years. You know how they rushed this case? They rushed the January 6 case. Once he filed it, once Jack Smith actually filed it. Now everybody's in a rush. You're not going to be in a rush to resolve that appeal.

Not the one that's going to take away that. The convicted felon label. Oh, no.

The Biden campaign has responded to the verdict by encouraging people to vote.

The Biden White House so far has released only the following statement through a spokesman. Quote, we respect the rule of law and have no additional comment. No, you don't. It's a lie.

You don't.

It's your Department of Justice that's brought the two most serious cases against Donald Trump, the ones that actually could land him in jail. That's because of you.

And by the way, we know that you coordinated with Fannie Willis in her case against him, too.

We know that you were putting pressure on Merrick Garland. You were upset that he took so long to actually indict the cases.

We know that you're not, you don't respect the rule of law. You've shat all over it. That's what you did and we know it. Now.

The, I'm just, I'm just looking back at my notes here as I go on Trump said it was rigged. And the people over on MSNBC freaked out that he said that word because they associate it now with Trump's electoral claims that he denied.

Joe Biden actually won.

This case was rigged.

It was rigged against Donald Trump. And there was ruling after ruling after ruling. That would show you that. I'll just give you a couple. All right. This judge allowed in the fact that David Pecker of AMi, the National Enquirer, had a non prosecution agreement with the feds around election fraud claims. Election, you know, campaign donation claims he allowed David Pecker to testify to. That never should have happened. Total, totally unfairly prejudicial to the defendant. The jury was left with the impression that he was guilty of this scheme. So Donald Trump must be, too. Michael Cohen, same thing. Was allowed to testify that he pleaded guilty and served time, wasn't really for this crime, but that he did plead guilty to same thing, violating federal election campaign finance law.

The jury never should have been allowed to hear that.

The prosecutor argued it over and over and over. He mentioned it so many times in his closing and elsewhere, to the point where finally the judge had to issue a limiting instruction to the jury, saying, you're not really allowed to consider that those agreements and those plea deals to decide whether Trump is guilty. It's technically just to assess the credibility of these witnesses. But let me just tell you how bass ackwards that is. The way those agreements, a guilty plea would typically come in against a testifying witness is by the defense attorney. The defense attorney who wants to poke holes in the story would get up there and say, you're a damn criminal, Michael Cohen, you pleaded guilty to this, or you, David Pecker, you'd be in jail right now if you hadn't signed this prosecution agreement. The defense would normally do that to attack somebody's credibility here. The prosecution brought it in on direct of their own witnesses. Why? Because they knew the defense would never do that. They had enough ways to poke holes in the testimony of those two men, and it would have been far too prejudicial to Trump to bring it up. So the prosecution brought it up on its own and it never should have been allowed. At the same time, the judge barred Brad Smith, Trump's campaign finance expert. The former commissioner of the FEC, which has exclusive jurisdiction to pursue claims for violations of federal campaign finance law, barred his testimony as unnecessary, reduced Donald Trump, if you're going to put him on at all, to letting him define a couple of terms, rendering him totally useless and pointless.

So they didn't call him, the jury would have been confused. Why did he get up there to find four terms and get down?

So he sent the jury into that room with Michael Cohens and David Peckers and the prosecutors understanding of federal election law. That's it. Are you shocked, you shocked that they, when they got in there with no counterbalance, said, yeah, it sounds like he did it. Look at those other guys. They're guilty of it time and time again.

Stormy Daniels, wait, we did it without a condom. Yeah, I'm suddenly a me too victim. He allowed it all. Go on.

He, they try to stop it at the front. He said, no, she can do it. She can testify. Then in the middle she gets salacious and disgusting and he calls a sidebar saying, why didn't you object more to the Trump team? Okay, fine, she should have objected more. You just told them they could do all of this, right? It's like you, you allowed it all, you greenlit it, it happened, and then you blame the defense for not being more vocal while it was happening. That's on you, Judge Mershon. You did that.

There wasn't an objection that the prosecution raised that he didn't sustain. I mean, if you watch the, if you read the jury transcripts, it's just ridiculous. The number of times he seeded the floor to the prosecution and dumped all over the defense what he did to Costello. I know he was angry. Costello wasn't a good witness. Trump insisted on calling him. That was clear. He only called two witnesses. He was the only substantive one. And Costello didn't like the judge and behaved kind of badly. And the judge chose to humiliate him and throw a temper tantrum and clear the courtroom and basically telegraph to the jury that he didn't like him and didn't believe him. And guess what happened then. He wasn't even mentioned in the defense's closing argument.

Right. It didn't go well and the judge saw to it that it wouldn't go well because he couldn't man up. When Costello behaved poorly as a witness with the side eye and some mumbling under his breath in response to the judge's comments, Trump's team made mistakes. And that's without question.

Without question, he should have not admitted the affair with stormy. That wasn't necessary.

But he should have stipulated for the purposes of trial, let's assume something did take place. The defendant denies it but doesn't see it as relevant to this case.

We agree. I think the prosecution would have taken that the whole argument is not over whether he had the one nighter with her. The argument's over whether he entered into a scheme to shut these women up who are threatening him.

He had denied that he had an affair with her from the beginning, and he felt the need to continue denying it, even in the legal case.

This is one time where Trump, the guru of, like, seeing things and, like, landing it, even though everybody criticizes him for the decision making, then after the fact, you're like, oh, my God, he was right. He wasn't right here. This is one time he wasn't right.

He shouldn't have done that. It was not necessary to open the door to her testimony.

They didn't object to half of those jury instructions. They didn't object to the definition in there of campaign finance violations. My God.

What?

They let the jury go back there thinking that what was in Donald Trump is the governing standard. What, what was in Donald's head? Is it the governing standard on figuring out whether somebody violated election law? Was it, was it mostly for the campaign? Okay, well, then it might have been. No, that's not the standard. The standard is what's the nature of the payment? Is it the kind of payment that could ever be made for anything other than to advance a campaign? And if the answer is sure it is, it could be used in a number of different circumstances, like a hush money payment, then it's not a campaign finance situation.

Brad Smith would have said that had he been given the chance.

The judge did not understand the law, and his jury instructions reflect that.

The days to come will include over the top reactions by the media.

Already we're getting things like Elie most, who writes for the nation, who's on Joy Reid show every night, absolute racist, this man. Convicted felons don't get to vote.

Aha.

Okay.

He may not be able to vote, but his supporters sure can.

And if I know the country, and I think I do, I don't think there's anything you can do to stop the Trump voters now.

I mean, I think as much as MAGA was prepared to vote for Trump before, and even disaffected Republicans who might not love Trump, they're going to run to the polls now. They're going to run to the polls now.

The question that we have in the coming days and weeks is, what about those groups of republican voters who voted for Joe Biden the last time, who were starting to come home, who were going to overlook some of Trump's personality ticks that make him less than appealing to a lot, a large number of, in particular, women who are starting to give him another look.

And that, folks, I don't know the answer to independents.

If you believe the polling, large numbers of them said convicted felon could change it for me. Even some 20% to 30% of the republican base when polled said convicted felon might change it for me. I don't believe it.

I don't believe it. Not here, not off this B's.

But you can underestimate the media and their constant drumbeat that we're gonna get. We're gonna get over and over and over again. Convicted felon, convicted felon, convicted felon. How is Trump gonna get any oxygen, you know, for his message?

I don't know where this lands.

If I have to predict, I say Trump gets no jail time and gets a reversal on appeal. But it comes too late. Well past the presidential election, you've got Tish James of New York, the AG, tweeting out, no one is above the law.

Really?

He was treated as beneath the law, as beneath scorn.

What you've done to him. I went through the cases for criminal Eugene Carroll. Tish James.

This Fannie Willis debacle down in Atlanta, what a farce. What a joke she is. Does anyone take her seriously? You saw now, like, seeing her through that whole disqualification thing shows you. Shows you. Look what he's up against.

Look at this partisan, rabid person down there.

So you think that's a fair prosecutor who's gonna give him a fair trial if she's given the chance?

She's not even smart. At least Jack Smith seems kind of smart.

Not very good, and obviously not honest, but, like, not a dumbass.

It's amazing. Joy Reid was out there the other night talking about how fun it was gonna be to see all of her. This is how she put it. Her dei hires all her dei. My deis, taking Trump down.

Well, she's not wrong that Soros backed Das hand placed in these positions to not prosecute real crime.

Like Alvin Bragg, Fannie Willis and others have seen a crime for the first time and gotten excited and salivated over the prospect of pursuing it because the defendant's name was Donald Trump.

In this country, we're supposed to pursue crimes, not people in the criminal justice system. It's a before and after moment for the law and for us.

So what I think is going to happen is, I think electorally, it's going to help Trump more than it hurts him. That's my bet. I don't know. We'll see the polling over the next few weeks. I don't believe the soccer moms are going to be so disgusted by this business records nonsense that they're going to say, I can't vote for him.

But I don't know because the media is just going to be nonstop and I don't know that the increased enthusiasm on the GOP side will be enough. You, you can't win with just Republicans. You need independence, too.

Net. Net, though, you couldn't ask for something better to stimulate enthusiasm on the GOP side.

You couldn't ask for better. This doesn't stimulate Democrats. They're not like, yeah, now I'm really going to vote for Joe.

I mean, if anything, they're going to watch how Trump handles this. They might feel a little sorry for the guy. What are we doing?

Right? Who are we?

You'll find out.

Read the John Yoo please piece on National Review. You'll find out when the shoe is on the other foot. And all your favorites. Let's find, let's take a look into Michelle Obama. Does she do anything? Let's find out. Let's kick the dyers a little on their foundation and figure out whether there's a crime to be had. If that's how we're going to do it now, we're going to pursue the person, not the crime. Then let's do that. Great.

Why not, Doctor Jill, what the hell? How about Joe? You know what? We already had a special counsel say that he was guilty of a felony, but he couldn't pursue him because well meaning elderly man who a jury wouldn't convict. Well, that's not always going to be the case when Trump takes over. If Trump takes over, we might need a new fresh look at the Joe Biden case. I'm sorry we didn't make these rules, but we're going to have to learn how to play by them.

We'll have more for you on this program tomorrow with full coverage with all of our legal eagles, our superpower lawyers, all of our cast of favorites will be here with reaction, and there'll be plenty between now and then. Thanks for listening.

Thanks for listening to the Megyn Kelly show. No B's, no agenda and no fear.