ConWebWatch home
ConWebBlog: the weblog of ConWebWatch
Search and browse through the ConWebWatch archive
About ConWebWatch
Who's behind the news sites that ConWebWatch watches?
Letters to and from ConWebWatch
ConWebWatch Links
Buy books and more through ConWebWatch

The Trump Stenographers At Newsmax: Indictment Edition

Newsmax hyped Donald Trump's unsupported claims of his imminent "arrest." When an indictment actually happened (well past Trump's declared date), Newsmax cranked out dozens of attack-and-defense pieces -- and plugged a Newsmax author.

By Terry Krepel
Posted 6/16/2023

When Donald Trump proclaimed on March 18 (without evidence, of course) that he would be "arrested" the following Tuesday, the Trump stenographers at Newsmax sprung into action. Eric Mack wrote:
Former President Donald Trump expects to be arrested Tuesday in a case brought by the Manhattan district attorney's office and called on his supporters to protest in a Truth Social post Saturday.

"Illegal leaks from a corrupt & highly political Manhattan district attorney's office, which has allowed records to be set in violent crime & whose leader is funded by George Soros, indicate that, with no crime being able to be proven, and based on an old and fully debunked (by numerous other prosecutors) fairytale, the far & away leading Republican candidate & former president of the United States of America, will be arrested on Tuesday of next week," Trump wrote.

"Protest, take our nation back!" Trump said.

Mack made no effort to try and fact-check Trump's claim beyond noting that the New York Times called it speculation. Nevertheless, Newsmax called on its usual torrent of right-wingers to profess horror over a development they couldn't prove was actually happening -- a total of at least 38 articles over the next four days (listed here). Newsmax did slip in the occasional dose of reality; an unbylined March 20 article claimed that "A law enforcement source told Fox News Monday that authorities do not expect former President Donald Trump to face arraignment until next week as a Manhattan grand jury — which has been meeting secretly over allegations of hush money paid to a porn start to silence claims of an affair with Trump years ago — apparently has another witness on Wednesday." But a March 20 column by Jeff Crouere helped Trump play victim:

The vicious political persecution of Trump is akin to what occurs in “banana republics.” No longer is our country too advanced for such shenanigans to occur here. With partisan Democrats prosecuting in “blue states” and in the Department of Justice, there is an ongoing, ruthless campaign to obliterate Trump politically.

Their goals are not only to destroy Trump, but also to destroy what he represents, the “America First” agenda. The political establishment and Deep State do not want the needs of Americans at the forefront. Instead, their priorities include international affairs, global wars, and funding for the military industrial complex.


His “America First” agenda threatens very powerful interests. Thus, he has become the first American president to endure government surveillance, two impeachments, an FBI raid, and a presumed arrest. The banana republic has arrived.

Um, wouldn't a banana republic actually keep a leader who committed crimes from being held accountable for them?

In order to keep the outrage going, Newsmax had to move the goalposts, publishing an article on March 21 -- the day of Trump's original declared arrest -- that Trump "is likely to be indicted Wednesday, with his surrender and arraignment coming next week." And, yes, the manufactured outrage and the attacks on DA Alvin Bragg from its retinue of pro-Trump talking heads (and Trump himself) kept going, publishing an additional 32 outrage articles March 22-23 (listed here). By contrast, Newsmax published a single wire article noting that "A federal appeals court on Wednesday directed a lawyer for Donald Trump to turn over to prosecutors documents in the investigation into the former president's retention of classified documents at his Florida estate." Then, because another prediction had failed, it was goalpost-moving time in the form of another article by Mack:

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's grand jury hearing evidence about former President Donald Trump's alleged involvement with a hush-money payment to a porn star will not meet Wednesday, according to multiple reports.

"It could be anything from an illness to a logistical scheduling issue to someone basically, you know, gave [Bragg] a little tap on the head there and said, 'Are you sure you want to do this? Are you seeing the reaction out there?'" Trump attorney Joe Tacopina told Newsmax's "John Bachman Now" shortly after the news broke.

Tacopina told host Bianca de la Garza that warnings for Bragg's overreach might be coming "not from the partisan right but from all sides of the aisle" on "how horrific this would be."

Mack tried to move the goal posts again the next day:

In a surprise move, the New York grand jury probing former President Donald Trump's case has suspended its activities this week and will reconvene next week.

Multiple press sources, including ABC News, say the grand jury will meet Thursday on another case it is reviewing and is expected to resume the Trump case on Monday.

New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg is also reportedly seeking to bring one additional witness before the grand jury next week.

Harvard law professor and author Alan Dershowitz told Newsmax on Wednesday that Bragg is likely having "second thoughts" about his criminal case against Trump, and that could be the reason he gave the grand jury off time this week.

Newsmax even cranked out 15 outrage articles on the weekend of March 25-26 (listed here). But with those earlier deadlines blown and no indictment seemingly imminent, it was time to change the narrative -- on March 29, there were two articles featuring pro-Trump talking heads arguing that Bragg had no case against Trump after all.

When Bragg's grand jury announced that day a previously scheduled break for a few weeks, Newsmax seemed quite pleased. An article by Solange Reyner and Eric Mack hyped the development, which was followed by a Trump-focused article by Peter Malbin:

Former President Donald Trump took to Truth Social on Wednesday to praise a Manhattan grand jury that is examining his alleged role in a hush-money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels.

The Manhattan grand jury is not expected to hear evidence in the case for the next month largely due to a previously scheduled hiatus, Politico reported Wednesday.

"I have gained such respect for this grand jury and perhaps even the grand jury system as a whole," Trump wrote in all caps. "The evidence is so overwhelming in my favor & so ridiculously bad for the highly partisan & hateful district attorney that the grand jury is saying, Hold on, we are not a rubber stamp, which most grand juries are branded as being, we are not going to vote against a preponderance of evidence or against large numbers of legal scholars all saying, there is no case here. Drop this sick witch hunt, now!"

Mark Schulte wrote a pre-emptive March 29 column attacking Bragg, claiming that his investigation of Trump was "egregiously dishonoring a nationally prominent prosecutor's office."

The actual indictment

That newfound respect for the grand jury didn't last long. When a credible media outlet reported on March 30 that the grand jury decided to indict Trump after all, Newsmax snapped into action again to peddle new outrage. Its first story on the development was a wire story, followed by copy-and-pasting Trump's response. Newsmax then hyped Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis' declaration that he would fight Trump's extradition to New York for arraignment, but failed to report that DeSantis has no power to actually do that and is obligated by federal law to not interfere -- and anyway, that was followed by a one-paragraph wire article noting that Trump and the Manhattan district attorney have been in contact to arrange surrender. Then came another wire article claiming that some Trump adversaries "fear the first-ever prosecution of a former US president could be a loser that undermines more consequential cases."

There were a couple more news-related items:

Then the freakout started anew -- at least 27 attack articles on March 30 and 31 alone (listed here). Newsmax also published a March 31 commentary by Garrett Ventry asserting that the indictment of Trump was "un-American" and based on a "faulty legal theory; it represents the latest weaponization of the justice system — against Trump." Newsmax, however, prefaced the column with an editor's note to distance it from the opinion: "The following article has not been authored by an attorney. It does not constitute a legal opinion by Newsmax."

Newsmax posted 24 more pro-Trump or anti-indictment articles over the weekend of April 1-2 (listed here). Newsmax did slip in a couple of actual news articles as well:

There was also an April 1 column by Michael Reagan ranting about the indictment and weirdly insisting that Trump looks bad by acting like the criminal he appears to be by submitting himself to the justice system:

Tiger Trump and his claims of the "attack on our country" morphed back into Paper Tiger Trump and he announced he will meekly travel on his own dime to Manhattan and submit to the kangaroo indictment to be followed by a kangaroo court.

By knuckling under Trump gives the indictment standing it does not merit.

If the indictment is "Political Persecution and Election Interference at the highest level in history" why doesn’t he reject Bragg’s authority and stand his ground in Florida?

Just in case Trump has forgotten about the year’s long legal attack on his businesses, the pre-dawn SWAT raid on his home at Mar-a-Lago for classified documents and the leak of his tax returns by the IRS we would like to remind him the two–tiered justice system only applies to him and his supporters.

But even Reagan appears to be tiring of the Trump show, concluding: "Here’s our final prediction today. The indictment probably guarantees Trump’s nomination, followed by another Trump defeat in November 2024."

An April 3 column by Larry Bell was filled with defenses of Trump and Biden and Hillary whataboutism:

Whether a nationally initiated and orchestrated Democrat strategy or local New York act of political arson, the indictment of former President Donald Trump on transparently weak charges have ignited a raging inferno that has irreversibly blackened America’s electoral landscape.

Whichever the original agenda, all sides — liberal, conservative and in-between — are witnessing a dangerous precedent for election interference which would make Stalin’s head of secret police Lavrentiy Beria blush with pride: "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime."


And the FBI-DOJ raid on Trump’s private residence at Mar-a-Lago for classified documents with no similar invasion of Joe’s personal stashes located at five locations including his garage also used by Hunter?

Let’s keep in mind throughout this 2024 presidential campaign season that none of this ongoing clown show charade has anything whatsoever to do with assuring that no one is above the law.

That distinction of justice has come to exclude Democrat-Socialist partisans so long as they are allowed to hold power.

It’s urgently time to remove the ‘For Sale” sign on the White House lawn.

Strangely, Newsmax felt the need to preface Bell's column with this "editor's note" disclaimer: "The following article has been authored by a non-lawyer, and does not constitute a legal opinion; nor does it constitute an endorsement for any candidate, or political party, by Newsmax." That's laughable given how Newsmax has defined itself since the 2020 election as an aggressively pro-Trump outlet. What legal action does Newsmax think it's averting through this disclaimer? Or is it getting a little exhausted of the Trump show too?

Arraignment day and beyond

Trump flew to New York from Florida on March 3 for the arraignment, and Newsmax was cranking out attack and defense articles -- at least 43 on April 3 and 4 (listed here). Surprisingly, there was also an April 3 wire article featuring newly announced Republican presidential candidate Asa Hutchinson arguing that Trump should drop his 2024 candidacy over his instigating the Capitol riot.

On April 4, Newsmax also published an article on how Trump "was awarded close to $122,000 in attorney fees from Stormy Daniels, the same porn star at the center of a hush money case that led to Trump's indictment in a Manhattan courtroom just a few hours earlier." But amid all the bias, Newsmax not only published a surprisingly balanced account of the arraignment itself (written even more surprisingly by Trump stenographer Eric Mack, with wire contributions) but it also actually slipped in a few largely straightforward stories on the indictment that day:

On April 5, the day after his arraignment, Newsmax published 17 more attack-and-defend articles -- making for a total of at least 111 such articles Newsmax had published since March 19. Newsmax snuck in the occasional bit of news that wasn't aggressively pro-Trump or anti-Bragg:

Newsmax's pro-Trump columnists contributed as well. Blaine Holt ranted in an April 3 column:

President Donald J. Trump is the first president in U.S. history to be spied on, impeached twice under a hoax, betrayed by public officials, forced to divulge tax records, raided by federal law enforcement, and indicted on timed-out misdemeanor counts elevated to felonies.

The current administration that calls any whisper of a compromised 2020 election "The Big Lie," is so insecure in their apparent victory precedent and legal standing has been thrown to the wind, to take down the 45th commander in chief permanently.

"Get Trump" at any cost is now job number one.

New York District Attorney Alvin Bragg has fulfilled his campaign promise to political activist and financier, George Soros.

Hey, Manhattan -- you guys paying attention yet?

Holt providence no evidence of any "campaign promise" Bragg personally made to Soros. Mike Clancy did his own huffing in his April 5 column:

Now this weaponization of the justice system has reached an unimaginable historical crescendo: a grand jury indictment of Donald Trump, a former president and a current candidate for president.

The indictment alleges a felony of falsifying business records related to the $130,000 that former Trump associate Michael Cohen paid to quiet Stormy Daniels from publicizing her alleged affair with Mr. Trump.

All the circumstances and the anemic legal theory suggest that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s pursuit of this indictment was maliciously motivated for political purposes.

For the sake of the integrity of the judicial system, the court should dismiss the indictment.

Clancy went on to purport to explain how what Trump did was not a crime, even though all the evidence has not been released yet and, thus, he cannot possibly know for sure that no crime was committed. Then it was back to ranting:

The indictment is pathetically weak. Bragg should have followed the judgment of the FEC and the U.S. Attorney, and not pursued such a frivolous indictment.

The Trump indictment is an affront to our justice system.

Worse, it is an assault on our elections.

Democrats will go to any extreme to discredit Mr. Trump as a candidate for president.

In 2016, it was Hillary Clinton and the bogus Steele Dossier.

Today, it's Bragg with an insidious, unprecedented, unsupportable indictment.

The court should end this travesty of the judicial process and promptly dismiss the case.

Let’s instead leave the election to the voters to decide.

Newsmax's "news" coverage of the Trump indictment tapered off after that,with only a relative few articles each day. Apparently that's enough to keep the outrage machine simmering at Newsmax.

This is the kind of stenographical Trump-fluffing Newsmax had to convince DirecTV it couldn't do without.

Book promotion

Newsmax had been hyping the new book by right-wing activist David Horowitz -- without disclosing that it was published by Newsmax's publishing division, Humanix. Newsmax not only got Trump to endorse the book, it appeared to be getting him to drop the book's title as he faced escalating legal peril. The endorsement came in a March 9 article by Sandy Fitzgerald:

Former President Donald Trump is praising author David Horowitz's latest book, calling it "great" and encouraging his followers to read it.

"My great friend and author of "Dark Agenda," David Horowitz, is out with a new book, "Final Battle: The Next Election Could Be the Last," Trump posted through his social media page on Truth Social.

"It is great!" Trump wrote.

In his book, Horowitz exposes the left's plans to destroy democracy and says that the 2024 presidential election could be the nation's last, as Democrats are posing a "deadly threat" to freedom with their goal of creating a one-party state and turning America into a socialist nation.

"Final Battle" is already a No. 1 Amazon bestseller and is available at bookstores.

Four days later, Trump latched onto the words "final battle" to describe his purported political mission, as described in an article by Eric Mack:

Former President Donald Trump laid out his pitch to 2024 Iowa Caucus voters Monday night, calling it the "final battle" to defeat the "corrupt establishment" and finishing his speech with a unique Q&A with supporters.

"2024 is the final battle. That's it," Trump told his Davenport, Iowa, crowd in a speech that will be replayed in its entirety Tuesday afternoon on Newsmax. "If you put me back in the White House, the corrupt establishment will be gone and we will be back to normal.

"America will be a free nation once again. We are going to complete our mission."

Mack and Newsmax apparently didn't note the publicity potential at the time, but they up for that in a March 25 article after Trump said it again:

Former President Donald Trump returned to the campaign rally trail Saturday night in Waco, Texas, saying "2024 is the final battle."

"That's going to be the big one," Trump told his crowd at the rally, which aired live on Newsmax. "You put me back in the White House, their reign will be over, and America will be a free nation once again.

That was followed by a promotional paragraph designed to make sure nobody missed the connection (bolding and coloring in original):

Important: Trump’s ‘Final Battle’ refers to David Horowitz’s new book exposing the dangers he faces in 2024, and why he must win! Trump says “get it” – see FREE Offer for ‘Final Battle’ and save $28 – More Info Here

As Trump flew to New York from Florida to be arraigned on fraud charges on April 3, he dropped the words again, and Mack was there to do the promotional duty:

As former President Donald Trump took flight aboard Trump Force One on Monday afternoon, he issued a press release making reference to his call for a "final battle."

Trump's release simply stated: "ICYMI: 'Trump: '2024 Is Final Battle'; 'We're Only Ones Who Can Stop Them.'"

The release urged supporters to read a Newsmax article detailing Trump's use of the term "final battle" at his rally last month in Waco, Texas.

Trump returned to the campaign rally trail in Texas, saying "2024 is the final battle."

"That's going to be the big one," Trump told his crowd at the rally last month. "You put me back in the White House, their reign will be over, and America will be a free nation once again."

Newsmax's article noted that Trump was clearly referring to the new bestseller by David Horowitz, "Final Battle: The Next Election May Be the Last."

Previously Trump has praised Horowitz's "Final Battle."

Trump wrote in February: "My great friend and author of 'Dark Agenda,' David Horowitz, is out with a new book, 'Final Battle: The Next Election Could Be the Last.' It is great! Get your copy!"

In "Final Battle," Horowitz had predicted that the leftists, so fearful of Trump's return to the White House, would stop at nothing, including indictments against the former president.

The effort is apparently backfiring, as Trump's campaign says its raised $7 million since the indictment and polls show support for his candidacy growing.

The promotional paragraph plugging the book was there too.

This went full circle in a April 5 article by Fitzgerald, in which Horowitz touted Trump touting his book title:

Former President Donald Trump has dubbed his 2024 campaign as the "final battle" for the country's democracy, and bestselling author David Horowitz, whose book "Final Battle: The Next Election May Be the Last," tells Newsmax that the charges against Trump show how the Democrats are endangering the nation's democracy.

Horowitz, appearing Tuesday on "The Chris Salcedo Show" on Newsmax, noted that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, as part of his claims against Trump, accused the former president of election interference, but he has not shown that.


Horowitz said his book came out in January and Trump recently dubbed his campaign "final battle," but "he's the one who taught me…we're practically at the end of our tether in this country…we cannot survive as a constitutional democracy if the Democrats have their way."


Trump has praised Horowitz's "Final Battle," writing in February that "my great friend and author of 'Dark Agenda,' David Horowitz, is out with a new book, 'Final Battle: The Next Election Could Be the Last.' It is great! Get your copy!"

Again, the promotional paragraph plugging the book was included. None of these articles, however, disclosed the conflict of interest that Newsmax is promoting a book it also published.

One has to wonder if Newsmax is sending a little kickback Trump's way for every time he says the words "final battle."

Send this page to:

Bookmark and Share
The latest from

In Association with
Support This Site

home | letters | archive | about | primer | links | shop
This site © Copyright 2000-2023 Terry Krepel