Things quickly went south during a speech by federal Judge Kyle Duncan to law students at Stanford University this week when the associate dean of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) slammed him to his face after hecklers interrupted his presentation.

Duncan, who was appointed by former President Donald Trump, started getting heckled by student protestors who made it impossible for him to continue his speech. 

According to video footage from the Thursday event, Dean Tirien Steinbach did nothing to stop the heckling and instead launched a minutes-long emotional speech during his presentation accusing him of causing ‘harm’ through his work on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and suggesting the school needed to reconsider its policies on free speech.

‘I had to write something down because I am so uncomfortable up here. And I don’t say that for sympathy, I just say that I am deeply, deeply uncomfortable,’ Steinbach said, standing just feet from Duncan in the lecture hall. ‘I’m uncomfortable because this event is tearing at the fabric of this community that I care about, and I’m here to support.’

‘I have to ask myself … is the juice worth the squeeze? Is this worth it?’ she said at the event hosted by the Stanford Federalist Society.

Duncan, appearing frustrated, suggested the event was a ‘setup’ before Steinbach interrupted him and continued. 

‘It isn’t a setup. For many people in this law school who work here, who study here and live here, your advocacy, your opinions from the bench, land as absolute disenfranchisement of their rights,’ Steinbach said. 

Duncan attempted to speak again, but the room erupted with jeers and Steinbach stopped him, saying, ‘Please let me finish.’

‘It’s uncomfortable to say this to you as a person. It’s uncomfortable to say that for many people here, your work has caused harm … and I know that must be uncomfortable to hear. It must be,’ she said. ‘I’m also uncomfortable because many of the people in the room here I have come to care for.’

Steinbach, who previously served as the chief program officer at the ACLU of Northern California, went on to describe how her job as associate DEI dean was to create ‘a space of belonging for all people in this institution,’ despite not stopping some of the students’ continued aggression towards Duncan.

She told Duncan that she ‘wholeheartedly’ welcomed him because she believed in the necessity of free speech, but also went on to suggest his speech was ‘abhorrent,’ ‘harmful,’ and ‘literally denies the humanity of people.’

She added that she didn’t want to censor Duncan and that she found the university’s policy of free speech ‘worthy of defending even at this time.’ She then, however, asked again if Duncan’s speech was worth it.

‘And, again, I ask is the juice worth the squeeze? Is this worth the pain that this causes and the division that this causes?’ she asked. ‘You have something so incredibly important to say about Twitter and guns and COVID, then that is worth this impact and the division … When I say is the juice worth the squeeze, that’s what I’m asking. Is this worth it?’

Steinbach went on to say she would stay for Duncan’s presentation, and to hear his perspective, but that she understood that students who felt the harm by his views was ‘so great’ that the university ‘might need to reconsider’ its free speech policy.

‘Luckily they’re in a school where they can learn the advocacy skills to advocate for those changes,’ she said.

She then thanked the protestors for ‘protecting the free speech that we value here.’ Before giving those who chose not to stay to listen to Duncan an opportunity to leave. 

‘I look out, and I don’t ask what is going on here. I look out, and I say I’m glad this is going on here,’ she added before turning the event back over to Duncan as a throng of students walked out of the room.

Fox News Digital reached out to Stanford University for comment but did not immediately receive a response.

A former Indiana congressman and Persian Gulf War veteran was convicted Friday of insider trading charges after a two-week jury trial.

The verdict against Steve Buyer, a Republican lawyer who served in Congress from 1993 to 2011, was returned after a jury heard evidence about stock purchases he made after he became a consultant and lobbyist.

Buyer once chaired the House Veterans’ Affairs committee and served for a time as a House prosecutor during former President Bill Clinton’s 1998 impeachment trial.

The jury returned guilty verdicts on four securities fraud charges. Judge Richard M. Berman set sentencing for July 11.

Prosecutors said at trial that Buyer took information from clients and used it to make illegal stock trades.

His lawyers, though, argued that he was a stock market buff who did research that led to legal profitable trades. They said it was a coincidence that his clients purchased two companies that he had invested in.

Authorities said Buyer made over $320,000 illegally for himself, relatives and a woman with whom he’d had an affair.

Buyer, 64, was an Army reservist with a solo law practice in Monticello, Indiana, when he was called for active duty during the 1990-91 Gulf War. He served as a legal adviser in a prisoner of war camp.

On returning home, he ran for Congress and unseated three-term Democrat Jim Jontz in 1992.

While in Washington, Buyer helped draw attention to Gulf War-related illnesses, and he worked on other issues relating to the military, veterans, prescription drugs and tobacco.

A Democratic state lawmaker said Thursday he is running for Pennsylvania auditor general in next year’s election, getting an early start on the campaign to lead the state’s fiscal watchdog agency.

Rep. Malcolm Kenyatta of Philadelphia, in announcing his candidacy, promised to overhaul how the agency tracks state and local government spending.

‘I think that it is time that we have an underdog to be the watchdog for working Pennsylvanians,’ Kenyatta told reporters at a news conference outside the state Capitol.

The post is currently held by incumbent Republican Tim DeFoor, who has not publicly announced whether he will seek reelection to another four-year term.

The auditor general generally serves as the state’s fiscal watchdog, auditing how money is spent and getting a say in approving general obligation bond issues and tax-anticipation notes.

However, people serving in the office have been able to use it to advance public policy goals, and it often serves as a springboard to other offices.

On Wednesday, Kenyatta said he would reestablish school audits that DeFoor had discontinued and focus on issues related to working people, such as wage theft and union rights.

Kenyatta is the first to announce his candidacy for the office in 2024 and is already familiar to many Democrats.

Kenyatta, 32, came in third in the three-way Democratic primary for U.S. Senate last year, raising $2 million for the campaign before losing to then-Lt. Gov. John Fetterman.

Kenyatta is serving his third term in the state House of Representatives and, in his relatively short time in office, has become one of the most visible speakers during House floor debates.

He is the grandson of the late civil rights activist Muhammad I. Kenyatta and became the first openly gay person of color to serve in the state House after he was first elected in 2018.

He campaigned across the country for Joe Biden in the 2020 presidential race, before becoming one of 17 people to deliver the keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee.

After losing the U.S. Senate primary, he hit the campaign trail to help his fellow Democrats around Pennsylvania in last year’s election, including Fetterman.

DeFoor, 61, was relatively unknown in state politics before he ran for auditor general in 2020, beating Democrat Nina Ahmad for the open seat.

DeFoor was previously the elected controller in Dauphin County, which includes Harrisburg, and touted his three decades of experience conducting governmental audits and fraud investigations for the state inspector general, the state attorney general and a hospital system.

Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and former state Republican Party Chair Matt Borges were convicted Thursday in a $60 million bribery scheme that federal prosecutors have called the largest corruption case in state history.

A jury in Cincinnati found the two guilty of conspiracy to participate in a racketeering enterprise involving bribery and money laundering. Each faces up to 20 years in prison.

The government’s prosecution team was able to show that ‘Householder sold the Statehouse’ and betrayed the people he was elected to serve, and that Borges was ‘a willing co-conspirator,’ U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Ohio Kenneth Parker said in a statement.

‘Through its verdict today, the jury reaffirmed that the illegal acts committed by both men will not be tolerated and that they should be held accountable,’ Parker said.

The man who brought the case, Parker’s predecessor David DeVillers, tweeted: ‘The line between influence peddling and bribery will now be drawn by the rule of law and not by politicians, lobbyists and corporations.’

‘We are incredibly disappointed in the verdict,’ Householder’s attorney Steven Bradley said in an email. ‘We will take some time to evaluate all of our legal options and will most certainly pursue an appeal. Our client is looking forward to going home to be with his wife and family during this very difficult time.’

The attorney representing Borges, 50, did not immediately respond to messages left by The Associated Press on Thursday. The verdict comes two-and-a-half years after Borges, Householder and three others were arrested.

Prosecutors alleged that Householder, 63, orchestrated a scheme secretly funded by FirstEnergy Corp. to secure his power in the Legislature, elect his allies — and then to pass and defend legislation that delivered a $1 billion nuclear power plant bailout to the Akron-based electric utility. They alleged that Borges, then a lobbyist, sought to bribe Tyler Fehrman, an operative, for inside information on the referendum to overturn the bailout law.

‘Justice,’ Fehrman, tweeted after the verdicts came down.

In a phone interview, Fehrman said that the outcome proved the risk he took wearing a wire for the FBI as part of the government’s investigation was worth it.

‘For them to come back and find both of them guilty, and after not too long, is just such a relief,’ he said. ‘It is a good day for Ohioans. This stuff just can’t continue to happen.’

Householder had been one of Ohio’s most powerful politicians — an historically twice-elected speaker before his indictment. After his arrest, the Republican-controlled House ousted him from his leadership post, but he refused to resign for months on grounds he was innocent until proven guilty. In a bipartisan vote, representatives ultimately ousted him from the chamber, the first such expulsion in Ohio in 150 years.

In a move that may have been pivotal in the trial’s outcome, Householder took the stand in his own defense. Appearing confident and relaxed, he spent a day contradicting FBI testimony, defending his support for the bailout bill — known as House Bill 6 — and denying that he attended swanky Washington dinners where prosecutors alleged he and FirstEnergy executives hatched the scheme in 2017. But prosecutors eviscerated his claims on cross-examination the next day.

Rachael Belz, CEO of the government watchdog group Ohio Citizen Action, said she hopes that the trial and guilty verdicts turn the tide in Ohio politics.

‘We don’t believe that utilities funneling millions of dollars through shell corporations to drive state policy is how our state government should work, nor do Ohio voters,’ she said in a statement. Belz held the decision up as evidence that Ohioans expect and deserve better.

‘After so many years of utility-controlled energy policy that favored fossil fuels, Ohio must now move toward equitable, forward-looking solutions that will protect our air and water, the health of Ohioans, and provide clean energy jobs to keep Ohio competitive in the 21st-century economy,’ Belz said.

Borges did not testify at trial but has insisted that he’s innocent. His attorneys argued that he was entirely uninvolved with the pay-to-play scheme, while Householder’s team portrayed his actions as nothing more than hardball politics.

‘The bottom line is that Larry Householder was engaged in political activity, not criminal activity,’ his attorney Steven Bradley told jurors during closing statements. He said the government’s investigation was flimsy and full of holes, calling it ‘a nothing burger.’

But over the previous six weeks, jurors had been presented with firsthand accounts of the alleged scheme, as well as reams of financial documents, emails, texts and wire-tap audio.

The prosecution called two of the people arrested — Juan Cespedes and Jeff Longstreth — to testify about political contributions that they said are not ordinary, but bribes intended to secure passage of the bailout legislation.

Householder’s attorneys pushed back on arguments about their recollections, as well as their motivations. Both have pleaded guilty and are cooperating in hopes of a deal with the government.

Jurors also heard taped phone calls in which Householder and another co-defendant, the late Statehouse superlobbyist Neil Clark, plotted a nasty attack ad — and, in expletive-laced fashion, contemplated revenge against lawmakers who had crossed Householder.

Clark, who died by suicide in March 2021, was also heard describing to undercover FBI agents posing as developers how he was directing cash through Generation Now, a dark money group that has also pleaded guilty, to keep it secret.

Householder testified that he never retaliated against those who voted counter to his wishes or who donated to his rivals. He told jurors that the set-up advanced his interests, which were the same as Ohio’s interests, because they involved good policy.

Under a deal to avoid prosecution, FirstEnergy admitted using a network of dark money groups to fund the bribery scheme and even bribing the state’s top utility regulator, Sam Randazzo.

Randazzo resigned as chair of the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio after an FBI search of his home, but he has not been charged and denies wrongdoing. The government has asked the PUCO to delay its own internal investigation into FirstEnergy while their probe continues.

President Biden on Thursday blasted ‘MAGA Republicans,’ asserting that they want to defund the police and the FBI, flipping the GOP’s continual claims that the Democrats were the anti-police party.

‘MAGA Republicans are calling for defunding the police department and defunding the FBI now,’ Biden said during an event at the Finishing Trades Institute in Philadelphia. ‘That’s a good one. I like that.’

Biden, who has previously said that he doesn’t want to strip police departments of funding, included in his budget proposal hiring 100,000 additional police on the streets, plus money for crime prevention strategies and community violence intervention.

‘My budget invests in public safety. It includes funding for more training, more support for law enforcement at a time they are expected to play many roles. We expect our cops to be social workers, psychologists, and mental health counselors.’ he shared. ‘You know, more cops are killed, responding to domestic violence calls, than anything else.’

During the summer of 2020, ‘defund the police’ became the battle cry among more progressive Democrats from coast to coast who demanded police reform following George Floyd’s death.

But in a twist, Democrats are attempting to turn the tables and accuse Republicans of being anti-police. 

Democrats’ accusations started after Republicans failed to back a Jan. 6 independent commission and opposed spending $1.9 billion to boost Capitol security and fund the police officers in the aftermath of the Jan. 6 riots.

Following the FBI’s unprecedented decision to execute a search warrant at former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago home, some in the Republican Party called to defund and destroy the federal agency. 

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., was one of the first to share her disapproval of the search, writing on Twitter: ‘Defund the FBI.’

‘The FBI raid on Trump’s home tells us one thing. Failure is not an option,’ Rep. Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., tweeted. ‘We must destroy the FBI. We must save America.’

The president laid out his budget proposal on Thursday, unveiling a slew of tax hikes on corporations and high-income individuals. The proposals are unlikely to garner support in a deeply divided Congress, and face almost certain rejection from Republicans, who won control of the House last year.

In total, Biden’s budget proposals calls for more than $4.5 trillion in tax increases, including higher tax rates on corporations and high-income individuals, expanded Medicare taxes on top earners and higher taxes on U.S. companies’ foreign income.

Fox Business’ Megan Henney contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Residents of the nation’s capital told Fox News their locally elected officials and community members should get to decide the city’s laws as the U.S. Senate prepared to block the district’s overhaul of its criminal code.

‘D.C., like any city, has some problems,’ Karen told Fox News. ‘But let us decide how best to solve the problems.’

WASHINGTON, D.C., RESIDENTS PROTEST AS CONGRESS STEPS IN TO OVERTURN DC LAW. WATCH: 

The city council had overrode the mayor’s veto of local legislation it passed that would have reduced penalties for certain crimes, like burglaries, robberies and carjackings. Washington residents rallied Wednesday to support statehood for the district ahead of the Senate vote, which ultimately passed 81-14 to block the city’s new criminal code. 

‘There’s crime here like there’s everywhere,’ Judith said. ‘The citizens of the district … collectively with our elected officials would keep the city safe.’

The nation’s capital, like many U.S. cities, has grappled with a crime surge in recent years. Homicides are up 32% year-to-date, and motor vehicle thefts have more than doubled, according to Metropolitan Police Department data. While overall crime decreased between 2021 and 2022, certain offenses remained high around the district. 

‘We know the solutions and we can implement them,’ Pranav said. ‘Our local officials in D.C. who we actually voted for have listened to that.’ 

Pranav, who supported the legislation, said locally elected officials spent years crafting the criminal code and escalated some gun-related charges. He added that harsher sentences doesn’t always deter crime. 

‘People who have been community leaders, community members have been talking about what keeps D.C. safe for decades,’ he said. ‘So we should be able to keep ourselves safe.’

Karen told Fox News that D.C. residents were ‘outraged’ at Congress for getting involved in the city’s home-rule. The district doesn’t have any representatives in either chamber that can vote.

Under the Constitution, Congress holds jurisdiction over the District of Columbia. But Congress hasn’t overruled a district law in decades. 

‘You got people from other states voting on what goes on in D.C. and they’re not from D.C.,’ a lifelong resident told Fox News. ‘They don’t know the fabric of D.C. and they’re making decisions that are going to affect D.C. residents.’

Additionally, Biden said he would not veto the measure if it reached his desk. Biden has supported D.C. statehood and generally objected to Congress overturning local laws but he tweeted that he couldn’t endorse parts of the crime bill. 

‘There are things that President Biden disagrees with in probably every single state,’ Pranav said. ‘But they get to govern themselves. They get to have their elected officials speak for them, and they get to make changes if they desire to.’

‘D.C. should be treated exactly the same,’ he told Fox News. ‘Supporting D.C. statehood means supporting the residents to govern how we see fit.’

To hear more from D.C. residents, click here. 

Fox News’ Bradford Betz and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Missouri voters could decide on whether to restore abortion rights in the state if constitutional amendments made public Thursday make it to the 2024 ballot.

The proposals would amend Missouri’s Constitution to protect abortion rights and pregnant women, as well as access to birth control.

Currently, most abortions are outlawed in the state. There are exceptions for medical emergencies, but not for cases of rape or incest.

The Missouri proposals are backed by a new group called Missourians for Constitutional Freedom, which has hired at least one Missouri Democratic strategist. The group and its treasurer did not immediately respond to a request for comment Thursday.

Missouri’s Republican-led Legislature crafted a law, signed by Republican Gov. Mike Parson in 2019, to ban most abortions, in case the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. The law took effect last year, following the court’s decision to end constitutional protections for abortion.

Several coalitions of lawmakers, including a top Republican donor, tried to put the law to a public vote in 2019. But Republican Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft, widely considered a top candidate for Missouri governor in 2024, initially rejected the petitions until a court forced him to approve them.

Advocates ultimately gave up on efforts to put the law to a public vote, accusing Ashcroft of dragging his feet in handling the proposals and leaving them with the impossible task of collecting the roughly 100,000 voter signatures needed in just two weeks.

Ashcroft also will play a role in the fate of Missouri’s pending constitutional amendments. His office is in charge of writing summaries of the proposals, which are used as voter guides.

Once Ashcroft and other elected officials finish the summary and a fiscal analysis, advocates can start collecting the voter signatures required to get the proposal on the ballot.

Abortion-rights supporters in Missouri are the latest to go directly to voters in hopes of restoring rights that were lost after Roe fell.

Kansas voters in August sent a resounding message about their desire to protect abortion rights by rejecting a ballot measure to add language to the Kansas Constitution stating that it does not grant the right to abortion.

Abortion-rights supporters won in the four states where access was on the ballot in November, as voters enshrined it into the state constitution in battleground Michigan as well as blue California and Vermont — and dealt a defeat to an anti-abortion measure in deep-red Kentucky.

Ohio advocates submitted ballot proposals in February to establish ‘a fundamental right to reproductive freedom’ with ‘reasonable limits.’

Missouri’s proposed constitutional amendments would allow the Republican-led Legislature and state agencies to put some restrictions on abortion.

But limits on abortion would only be allowed ‘if it is for the limited purpose and has the limited effect of improving or maintaining the health of a person seeking care, is consistent with widely accepted clinical standards of practice and evidence-based medicine, and does not infringe on that person’s autonomous decision-making,’ the amendment states.

Penalties for both patients seeking reproductive-related care and medical providers would be outlawed.

Meanwhile, Republican state lawmakers this year are focused on raising the bar to amend the state Constitution from a simple majority vote to at least 60%, which could make it harder to pass the abortion-rights proposals.

Republican lawmakers have been trying for years to crack down on initiative petitions, which have been used to enact policies that the Republican-led Legislature either avoided dealing with or opposed. For example, a 2020 citizen-led ballot initiative forced the state to expand Medicaid coverage, despite years of resistance from Republicans.

Other efforts by abortion-rights advocates to lift Missouri’s ban on the procedure include a lawsuit filed in January by religious leaders who support abortion rights. They argue that lawmakers openly invoked their religious beliefs while drafting the measure and thereby imposed those beliefs on others who don’t share them. The lawsuit is pending.

When discussing his newly unveiled budget blueprint, President Biden referred to his predecessor, former President Donald Trump, as the ‘maybe future president’ of the United States while recalling a ‘big fight’ the two men had during the 2020 campaign.

‘I was running for office at the time, and you may remember that I had a big fight with the former president and maybe future president.’ Biden recalled at the Finishing Trades Institute in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

‘Bless be Father.’ Biden added, while making the sign of the cross.

Following resounding boo’s from audience members, Biden forged ahead remembering the ‘big fight’ he had with Trump.

‘The big fight you may remember going on was with our good friend, the former president, who decided to fire all the inspector generals.’

‘I said, ‘You shouldn’t do that.’ Well, guess what? Now we’re finding out there are billions of [COVID-19 relief] dollars were stolen.’ Biden stated. 

The White House has emphasized Biden’s ‘intentions’ to run for re-election, but the President has not formally announced his bid for reelection. Biden, who is 80-years-old, is the oldest president in U.S. history. 

In November, Trump announced that he is running for the 2024 Republican nomination for president. 

Trump announced his third presidential bid during a speech at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida, home after having teased a bid since leaving office in 2021.

A handful of 2024 presidential hopefuls have also announced their candidacies. 

Democrat contender, Marianne Williamson, announced her bid in a challenge to President Biden in February. The self-help author, who has written 14 books, previously ran in the 2020 presidential race but struggled to gain traction in a crowded field. 

While only one Democrat contender has thrown their hat into the ring, a handful of Republican have announced their official candidacy. 

Former two-term South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, who later served as ambassador to the United Nations in the Trump administration, also launched her presidential campaign in Feb. in her hometown of Charleston before heading straight out onto the campaign trail in New Hampshire and Iowa.

‘I’m not afraid to call BS on all the bailouts and handouts that are bankrupting America. And I’m not afraid to call out my fellow Republicans,’ the 51-year-old Haley said.

Vivek Ramaswamy, a health care and tech sector entrepreneur, best-selling author, conservative commentator, and crusader in the culture wars, also declared his candidacy in late February.

The 37-year-old Ramaswamy, author of ‘Woke, Inc.: Inside Corporate America’s Social Justice Scam,’ says his vision centers on restoring the ‘national identity in America.’

Just last week, businessman Perry Johnson declared his candidacy. Earlier this year the 75-year-old Johnson signaled his White House ambitions by spending big bucks to run an ad during the Super Bowl targeting Iowa voters and showcasing his pledge to cut federal spending by 2% per year.

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

The South Carolina House on Thursday approved a $1.3 billion package to help attract a new electric vehicle plant backed by the Volkswagen Group to a site near Columbia.

The plan would borrow nothing, instead paying the entire amount through surpluses the state has managed to save over the past few years as the COVID-19 pandemic didn’t hurt the amount of tax revenue South Carolina collects as much as feared.

Scout Motors Inc. and South Carolina officials announced plans Monday to start building new Scout vehicles, powered this time by electricity, for the first time since 1980. They hope to hire 4,000 workers for its $2 billion plant.

They are reviving the name and style of the original Scout SUVs made by International Harvester in the 1970s and 1980s.

After one more routine vote, the proposal will go to the Senate. Members approved the package on a 96-12 vote Thursday.

The state’s $1.3 billion will build a new exchange on Interstate 77 and a railroad bridge over the highway for the plant.

The state is giving Scout a $200 million loan to stabilize the soil at the site and a $400 million grant for the company to use how it wishes during construction.

Former President Donald Trump was recently offered the chance to appear before a Manhattan grand jury about the hush money scandal with porn star Stormy Daniels — a sign that criminal charges may follow.

According to the New York Times, the Manhattan district attorney’s office communicated the offer to Trump’s lawyers. The office, led by DA Alvin Bragg, has been investigating the hush money scandal — which took place in 2016 — for the past five years.

In New York, the chance to appear before a grand jury strongly signals an incoming indictment. This would mark the first time a former American president was criminally indicted.

New York defendants are entitled to the chance to answer questions in the grand jury, but Trump will likely not testify, as many defendants waive this right. 

Hush money is not criminal, but prosecutors may argue that the $130,000 payment to Daniels was an improper donation to the Trump campaign, as Daniels’ NDA helped his candidacy.

According to the Times, the case against Trump hinges on an ‘untested and therefore risky legal theory involving a complex interplay of laws.’

Towards the end of the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump’s lawyer Michael Cohen sent $130,000 to porn star Stormy Daniels to prevent her from disclosing her 2006 affair with Trump. Trump reimbursed Cohen through installments.

Daniels’ representatives had reached out to the National Enquirer to offer exclusive rights to the story. The publisher, a Trump ally, instead connected Daniels’ team with Cohen to arrange a deal.

During Cohen’s criminal investigation, prosecutors argued that Trump’s company falsely filed the Stormy Daniels payments as legal expenses. Because the reimbursement was done under the table, this could count as falsifying business records.

Falsifying business records is a misdemeanor offense. It could be elevated to a felony charge if Trump had intent to defraud or conceal.

The New York investigation takes place as Trump is also under scrutiny by the Fulton County District Attorney in Georgia for allegedly interfering in the 2020 election. A federal special counsel is also investigating Trump’s handling of classified documents and his relationship to the Jan. 6 Capitol riots.

Whether Trump could be sent to prison is unknown at this stage. The former president could face four years in prison if convicted, but there is no mandatory sentence.