Jeanine Pirro, the Fox News pundit who is also a former judge, raised eyebrows Monday when she made a strange legal comparison between former President Donald Trump and two notorious convicted fraudsters.
Pirro complained that Trump had gotten an unfair deal in his New York City civil fraud trial — in which he was found liable for $464 million, but will be allowed to pay a $175 million bond as he pursues an appeal — in comparison to Bernie Madoff, the perpetrator of the world's largest Ponzi scheme, and Sam Bankman-Fried, a cryptocurrency "wunderkind" who could be sentenced this week to up to 100 years in prison.
"Sam Bankman-Fried...his bond was $250 million," Pirro said. "Bernie Madoff had 40,000 victims, his bond was $10 million. Donald Trump, no victims, half a billion."
Pirro also scorned other news outlets who suggested Trump should pay the entirety of the civil fraud ruling ordered by Judge Arthur Engoron last month.
"I don't know where those other people from other stations are learning the law, or what they're talking about," Pirro said. "But look there's no harm, no foul, that's the end of it."
That was not the end of it for fact-checker Juliet Jeske, the journalist who authors the substack newsletter "Decoding Fox News."
The problem, Jeske noted, is that Trump was found liable in a civil court while Bankman-Fried and Madoff were both convicted in criminal court and were therefore subject to very different laws.
ALSO READ: Here's why conservative elites are bailing on Trump now
"Trump is not being criminally charged in the civil trial case," Jeske noted on X. "The amount he had to put up is not a bond to keep him out of prison. This is embarrassing for a lawyer and former judge."
Jeske's followers agreed.
"The bar is low with Pirro," replied MSNBC anchor Katie Phang.
Added Tara Dublin, "Judge Jeanine really needs to stop licking the walls of that box of wine she lives in."
