Cleared 'Trump Train' defendants liken their case to 'lawfare' campaign against former president

Defendants in the so-called "Trump Train" case in Texas say they have been fully vindicated after they were cleared of voter intimidation allegations in relation to a highway interaction nearly four years ago when a convoy of Trump supporters in pickup trucks and SUVs surrounded a Biden-Harris campaign bus on a busy highway.

Three of the defendants – Steve and Randi Ceh, along with Joeylynn Mesaros – spoke to Fox News Digital, detailing the hellish years they endured fighting back against what they say was an attempt to stifle their political speech and attack their First Amendment rights.

They say the case was a "lawfare" campaign against them and likened it to recent court cases brought against former President Trump. The trio, along with two others, had their charges dismissed by a federal jury.

'TRUMP TRAIN' TRIAL KICKS OFF WITH FORMER DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKER TESTIFYING SHE FELT LIKE A 'HOSTAGE'

Eliazar Cisneros, whose pickup collided with a white SUV in a caught-on-camera incident, was ordered to pay the bus driver $10,000 and an additional $30,000 in punitive damages. The collision, and the alleged aggressive behavior from the convoy, occurred on Oct. 30, 2020, when the bus passed through San Marcos, about 30 miles southwest of Austin.

The trio tell Fox News Digital that the incident was largely uneventful and that the bus and the SUV were swerving in and out of traffic. They say the collision was minor and that it was blown up by the media and taken out of context to paint Trump supporters as extremists.

"It was very friendly. I actually have tons of video of friendly encounters where we're waving on the side of the road, smiling, the bus is just driving, and the trucks are driving behind it," Mesaros recalled. "Through the lawsuit, we did identify there were maybe one or two vehicles that were driving in a way that we wouldn't have driven. I think at worst, it's maybe a traffic citation, not anything major or extreme, certainly not a conspiracy under the Ku Klux Klan law to intimidate voters. But those people weren't sued, it was just intentionally us [and] I think that we were targeted as what they perceived maybe to be easy targets, but they couldn't have imagined that God would sustain us in this fight and we would prevail."

The plaintiffs accused the Trump supporters of assault and political intimidation tactics, violating state law and the federal Enforcement Act of 1871 – also known as the Ku Klux Klan Act – which aims to stop political violence and intimidation tactics. The law was enacted by Congress during the Reconstruction era to protect the rights of Black men to vote by prohibiting political violence. No criminal charges were filed against the six Trump supporters.

The driver of the Biden-Harris campaign bus told jurors during the trial that he felt "under attack" and feared for his life when the bus was swarmed by the convoy. He said the actions of the group forced him to slow the bus to a 15 mph crawl on the busy highway.

The driver, along with former Texas state Sen. Wendy Davis, a campaign volunteer and a staffer, sued the six defendants, with Davis testifying that she felt like she was being "taken hostage in a way."

The plaintiffs say the group drove recklessly and attempted to run the bus off the road and forced them to cancel the campaign event they were headed to. Davis also described the verdict as vindicating and a relief.

'TRUMP TRAIN' TRIAL: DEFENDANT SAYS CONVOY USING 'FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT' DURING HIGHWAY CLASH

In terms of the on-road collision, Cisneros’ attorney says he will appeal. In the incident, Cisneros’ pickup and a Biden campaign SUV collided while trailing the bus, although nobody was hurt. 

Cisneros denied driving recklessly and argued that a campaign staff member in the white SUV initiated the collision along the highway. Video leading up to the collision shows the SUV repeatedly driving in between lanes. Cisneros testified that a social media post by him afterward bragging about "slamming" the other vehicle had been taken out of context.

The Cehs say they were dragged into the lawsuit because they ran a Facebook page that helped organize Trump parades in the New Braunfels area, which Mesaros would also take part in. 

They say they were aware the bus was going to be around that day, but they were on their way back from work when they came across it. 

"I was in a company truck, so I did see it go by, and we weren't pulled into this lawsuit until a year and a half after it was filed," Steve said. "And that is because we organized a Trump train here in New Braunfels that got pretty big, it was all grassroots. And also, I am a pastor, so the mainstream regime that we see wants to shut down all the truth. Anybody that opposes them, they want to shut it down, or they want to instill fear in all of us, so we do not speak up against them. And we just can't do that."

He added, "I don't want my grandkids to grow up in a Marxist society and right now it's leaning that way."

Randi says the prosecution painted her as being "mission control" for organizing the event when she notified the Facebook group ahead of time. The group had as many as 5,000 followers, she says.

"I was asked… to make a post that the Biden bus was coming through and if anybody wanted to peacefully follow it, they could. And so I put the post out, went to work and found out later that I was going to be sued for being mission control," Randi Ceh said.

Joeylynn Mesaros says the case was more than political persecution and that the prosecution tried to circumvent the Constitution to make its case. She says her family owed about $75,000 in legal fees, which they now intend to sue to recoup. The Cehs' legal fees were covered by the nonprofit Citizens Defending Freedom. 

"We’re getting the same treatment that President Trump does. We've got the gag order, we have the unfair jurisdiction, the biased Obama-appointed judge. We've got the motions in limine that prevent us from speaking the whole truth. They're not allowing us to reference the Constitution, they're watering down the definition of free speech," Mesaros said. "So by the time the jury gets its instructions, it's such a rigged sham trial. It's a complete joke and a mockery of the judicial system to leverage for their own political gain."

Mesaros says the case was even referenced in Trump’s impeachment trial and his 14th Amendment hearing to label his followers as political extremists or having extremist tendencies.

"So not only are they interfering with the Constitution, interfering with the election, they're creating lies, hiring experts to substantiate it and then cross cross-hatching them in all of their lawsuits to substantiate their own claims while we're collateral damage."