Omarosa Manigault Newman Discusses Hope Hicks’ Role in Trump Hush Money Trial on CNN
File Photo by Jim Ruymen/UPI
Former White House adviser and “Apprentice” contestant Omarosa Manigault Newman recently made an appearance on CNN to discuss the ongoing criminal hush money trial involving former President Donald Trump. The trial has gripped the nation with its allegations that seek to unravel a scheme aimed at influencing the 2016 election outcome by suppressing information about an alleged affair Trump had with a porn star, Stormy Daniels.
During her interview, Manigault Newman expressed her bewilderment at the evasive responses given by Hope Hicks, Trump’s long-time confidante and former communications director. Hicks has been under scrutiny for her knowledge about the payments made to Daniels during the critical weeks leading up to the 2016 presidential election.
“Well, there’s no question that she knew every single aspect of it,” Newman said. “In fact, it was her job to know and it was also her job to manage it and then manage the messaging around it.” It’s for this reason that Newman was puzzled by Hicks’ initial coy response when pressed about how much she knew about the six-figure sums paid to porn star Stormy Daniels in the run-up to when Americans were going to cast their vote for president.
“So I was really surprised when [Hicks] initially asserted that she knew nothing about it,” Newman noted. “But now all of the information that’s coming out and the evidence shows that she knew more than she admitted.” “Ms. Hicks stands by her truthful testimony that she first became aware of this issue in early November 2016, as the result of press inquiries,” Robert Trout said at the time.
These payments were purportedly made to prevent Daniels from disclosing her affair with Trump, thus potentially swaying public opinion and voter behavior. In 2019, Hicks, through her attorney, asserted that she was not involved in discussions regarding the hush money payments, stating that any claims suggesting her awareness of such dealings were “simply wrong.”
This statement came despite mounting evidence and testimonies that suggested high-level involvement within Trump’s campaign circle regarding these transactions. The legal entanglements stem from actions taken by Michael Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, who in 2018 pleaded guilty to federal charges including campaign finance violations.
Cohen admitted to orchestrating a payment of $130,000 through a shell company to Daniels, aiming to keep the affair under wraps during the election period. This admission has added layers of complexity to the case, implicating several close to Trump, including Hicks. Trump has consistently pleaded not guilty to the charges against him, denying both the affairs and any wrongdoing associated with the campaign finance allegations, as per the Washington Post.
His defense has framed the charges as politically motivated, attempting to disentangle his personal actions from his campaign’s legal responsibilities. The implications of these proceedings are far-reaching, highlighting the murky intersection of personal indiscretions and political maneuvering. As the trial progresses, the roles of those within Trump’s inner circle, like Hope Hicks, are becoming increasingly scrutinized, raising questions about the extent of their involvement and knowledge of the measures taken to protect Trump’s candidacy.
Manigault Newman’s comments on CNN underline a significant aspect of the trial— the internal dynamics and possible conflicts within Trump’s team. Her perspective sheds light on the potential discrepancies in public statements made by Trump’s associates compared to their actual roles and knowledge about the campaign’s strategies to handle damaging allegations. As the legal battles unfold, the case continues to expose the intricate web of loyalty, power, and secrecy that could define not only the legacy of those involved but also the ethical boundaries of modern political campaigns.
