413 private links
DJ Judd
@DJJudd
·
Follow
Biden's campaign is holding a press conference outside the NYC Courthouse where former President Donald Trump's defense team is opening closing arguments in his hush money trial
1:43 PM · May 28, 2024 //
Natalie Allison
@natalie_allison
Biden campaign is about to hold their first press conference outside the courthouse where Trump’s trial is ongoing. Trump’s communications team is standing by, telling reporters they’re going to speak too.
2:26 PM · May 28, 2024 //
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
Follow
LIE OF THE YEAR: A Biden campaign spokesman claims they're not holding a press conference RIGHT OUTSIDE THE COURTHOUSE where the Biden-led witch hunt is taking place "because of what's going on over there"
2:36 PM · May 28, 2024 //
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
Follow
"Do you consider Trump a threat to all these wars Biden has gotten us into?"
BIDEN SPOX: "Any media questions?"
"Is this a weaponization of the Justice Department?"
BIDEN SPOX: "Any media questions?"
"You won't answer the real questions — only the fake news?"
2:58 PM · May 28, 2024 //
RNC Research
@RNCResearch
·
Follow
REPORTER: What's your response to people who say you're running on January 6th because you can't run on Biden's record?
BIDEN CAMPAIGN SPOX: "That's absolutely absurd because we are running on a historic record of accomplishments!" 🤡
3:01 PM · May 28, 2024
This generation operates on the currency of virtue. The only way to get anything in life these days is to convince others of your noble heart. In reality, it doesn’t really matter if it’s true as long as you adequately satisfy the conscience of the audience. They are cheap dates and easy to please.
The situation with Rafah, as well as the entire Gaza conflict, should be common sense and nothing new. This isn’t the Western world’s first round of fighting terrorism. But then again, it’s always different with the Jews.
The conscience of the people is being perverted by biased news, outright lies, and careful manipulation. Hamas designed this strategy, and it’s working.
We are tired of this malice masquerading as humanity. Anyone who does not immediately call for the surrender of Hamas and the release of the hostages does not care about Palestinians or any civilians, Israeli or otherwise. Anyone who has spent time in the area of Gaza, even pre-war, should know how Hamas treats its own people. Where are the calls for freedom from the oppression of Hamas for Palestinians? Where are the calls for their leaders to value their safety above all else in their war campaign? Can anyone imagine if any Western country had put their people in harm's way the way that Hamas has? //
The only chance for this war to end is for Netanyahu and the IDF to apply strong military pressure. Israel has tried all of the things that the world has suggested — hard hand, soft hand, diplomacy, war, turning the other cheek, or standing their ground. They are tired of being everyone’s favorite guinea pig. The world has shown that the only thing Israelis can do that they like is die.
The culpability for Rafah falls on Hamas. The only way to fix an injustice is to hold the correct person accountable. Israel should do everything it can to protect civilian life. However, anyone who thinks that there is another way to end this conflict is either delusional or has malicious intent. //
Dieter Schultz > Ed in North Texas
4 hours ago edited
I don't understand why Israel held the IDF back from Rafah for so long, it gains Israel nothing on the so-called world stage and the drastically increased antisemitism around the US and Europe is proof (never mind the clowns at the East River Debating Society- aka the United Nations).
Nixon once said "We'll get into as much trouble if we send 3 planes or 100 planes to resupply the Israelis so send every plane we have!" When it comes to dealing with uncomfortable situations like opposition from your enemies, you have to loose your concerns about the amount of trouble you'll get into, doing too little or just enough, your enemies won't care about your restraint.
If your cause is just, and you believe that, then you, and Israel, need to stop caring so much that it stops you from doing what you need to do.
Negotiations don't start from a position of maximalist demands unless you are able to enforce them. Even the alleged Putin confidants who talked to Reuters for the report admit that Putin is tired of the war and wants to move on.
Let me stop here for a moment and say that anyone who thinks five members of Putin's entourage talked to Reuters about Putin's personal position on peace talks without acting under orders from Putin to do so. Those people are a danger to themselves and to others. The fact that no one in the Kremlin has acknowledged this alleged cease-fire offer on the record tells you all you need to know about its seriousness.
This means that Russia is not only demanding to keep the territory it has overrun, but it is actually requiring Ukraine to relinquish more territory as a condition of negotiations. //
If we look at this offer as anything other than a propaganda ploy aimed at bolstering the spirits and imaginations of Putin's fan club in the West, we are probably idiots who deserve whatever comes next. //
The Russians are simply advancing a narrative ahead of the international peace conference Switzerland is hosting on June 15-16.
Peace is not the absence of conflict but the presence of justice. All the Russian proposal does, to the extent it is even a serious proposal, is reward Russia for criminal behavior, return control of Russian overseas assets to Moscow, remove war-related economic sanctions, and set the stage for another Russian invasion. Nothing in the Russian scheme is even vaguely just, and no sane government would consider it. Russia knows that and they don't want it considered, they want big social media accounts and some Republican Members of Congress and Senators to have talking points to advace Putin's agenda.
It’s a dry heat
9 hours ago edited
Just to be clear, including a provision in the direction for conducting the search warrant specifically authorizing heavily armed men to use deadly force is not deemed by Smith as creating "a significant, imminent, and foreseeable danger" to a former President and his family is perfectly okay; but for Trump to recite verbatim this authorization to use deadly force against him and his family somehow creates an intolerable risk to Smith and his goons? That's the argument? Oh please, someone play some tiny violin music while Smith cowers against the possibility that the FBI threat to kill Trump might make some people mad.
Smith should include in his request that Trump not make mention of the fact the FBI staged that infamous photo of the so-called classified material that it recovered. When I read that it made me really mad.
I observed one of the most remarkable wrong-headed biases I have ever seen. The judge actually threatened to strike all of Costello’s testimony if he raised his eyebrows again.
That of course would have been unconstitutional because it would have denied the defendant his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and to raise a defense.
It would have punished the defendant for something a witness was accused of doing.
Even if what Costello did was wrong, and it was not, it would be utterly improper and unlawful to strike his testimony — testimony that undercut and contradicted the government’s star witness.
The judge’s threat was absolutely outrageous, unethical, unlawful and petty.
Moreover, his affect while issuing that unconstitutional threat revealed his utter contempt for the defense and anyone who testified for the defendant.
The public should have been able to see the judge in action, but because the case is not being televised, the public has to rely on the biased reporting of partisan journalists.
But the public was even denied the opportunity to hear from journalists who saw the judge in action because he cleared the courtroom. //
There is absolutely no good reason why a trial of this importance, or any trial, should not be televised live and in real time. Allowing the public to see their courts in action is the best guarantee of fairness. As Justice Louis Brandeis wisely said a century ago, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”
UpLateAgain Lightning47
5 hours ago
The raid should NEVER have been authorized. It was total BS. But should the language restricting the use of deadly force have been removed from the op order? Absolutely NOT. The Deadly Force Policy RESTRICTS the use of deadly force. It's not a green light to use it. It specifies the only conditions under which it can be used. Police at every level (including the FBI) are commonly reminded of the department's shooting policy before an action. To remove it would be LEGALLY seen as inviting gun play. //
GBenton Lex Naturae
4 hours ago
As in War Games, the only way to win this is not to play.
There should have been no raid. The language, per se, is not the real issue. Every raid has the language for a reason. But it IS a very big freaking reason why they never, ever should have done this. //
GBenton mikwcas
5 hours ago
yeah, we're witnessing fascism, Communism, and tyranny. And we're parsing whether the use of force order was extraordinary.
We need to make them live by their own rules. They hype up nonsense into crimes. Well, turn around is fair play. They create a scenario for an illegitimate raid that included potential for use of deadly force, they gotta own it.
Tone it down? No. Wrong answer. Shout it from the rooftops. Biden tried to kill Trump if the circumstances allowed. And Jack Smith tried to frame him and set up the hit.
Oh, it's not unique to Trump. SO WHAT?
The entire raid shouldn't have been used in the first place. And this only makes that a zillion times more true. //
GBenton bk
5 hours ago
Good people project their good nature on others. It's hard for some to see that evil is being done intentionally on our soil by our government. Conservatives want to have faith in law enforcement and the legal system. But it's all been perverted.
The bottom line is they are manufacturing fake crimes to persecute Trump and those around him, not to mention Christians, parents, etc.
We should not ever again give these filth the benefit of the doubt. When our side gets back in power, and it will happen some day, odds are, the game needs to change: They need to be prosecuted for their actual crimes and abuse of power.
The Bush/McCain/Romney doctrine of let bygones be bygones is suicide. Only one said plays by the rules so the game is rigged against us.
Or, we could keep taking the high road, not pushing every advantage, and let them basically win by default over time. //
GBenton Susie Moore
4 hours ago
Agree 100% Characterizing it as a "hit" is over stepping.
But that the order made it possible use of force could have resulted in death underscores how wildly irresponsible this raid was in the full context.
There should never have been a raid if that inherently involved a risk of loss of life over documents, etc.
The FBI was authorized to use “deadly force” against former President Donald Trump when the Biden administration agency raided Mar-a-Lago in search of classified documents, according to newly unsealed court documents shared on X by independent journalist Julie Kelly.
Attorney General Merrick Garland personally approved the unprecedented raid on Trump’s Florida home in the summer of 2022, after which special counsel Jack Smith indicted Trump for allegedly mishandling classified documents. Notably, President Joe Biden also retained classified documents following his tenure as vice president but was not charged by his own Justice Department because prosecutors said he would likely “present himself to the jury, as he did during our interview with him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
A newly unsealed operations order reveals the FBI was authorized to use deadly force against the former president if need be, Kelly reported.
Alvin Bragg's Case in Shambles After Michael Cohen Admits to Stealing From Trump and More – RedState
Jonathan Turley
·
9h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Blanche just got Cohen to say that he handed over $20,000 in a paper bag to close end a financial dispute. There is something quintessentially Cohen about the scene...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Weisselberg later paid Cohen for $60,000 rather than $20,000. Cohen admits that he stole from the Trump organization. He also told federal prosecutors about stealing the money but was never charged with larceny...
2:12 PM · May 20, 2024
Jonathan Turley
·
9h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Replying to @JonathanTurley
...These are hits below the waterline for Cohen but also the prosecutors. They had a man admitting to a major larceny but never charged Cohen. That made Cohen not only their man, but allowed him to keep stolen money...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Blanche is now going in for the kill. He was that he lied to Weisselberg and "to this day you have never fixed that" and disclosed this to the District Attorney...
2:14 PM · May 20, 2024 //
I can say with some certainty that in any normal situation, having the prosecution's star witness admit to being a dishonest thief would be a death blow to the case's credibility. Remember, everything revolves around Cohen, who is now claiming to be a patsy who was just doing the bidding of Trump in cutting the check to Stormy Daniels. //
FloridaTransplant
8 hours ago
Hey wait up. If the DA knew about the theft, didn't fix it, didn't inform the trump organization, and didn't prosecute, doesn't that make everyone involved in the DAs office and accessory to grand larceny? Arguably even conspiracy to the crime? //
FloridaTransplant DKnight
8 hours ago
Yes. Prosecutorial discretion is a thing. If for example the Trump organization discovered the fraud and reported it. Here however it seems that the DA discovered the fraud in the trial prep and DID NOT REPORT IT to the Trump organization. That is what should make them an accessory.
Jonathan Turley
·
6h
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
Replying to @JonathanTurley
...Merchan is allowing the prosecutors to repeatedly illicit a statement from Cohen that it is not true when he said that there was no campaign violation. He is overruling defense objections. So the jury is hearing over and over again on the existence of a violation...
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
Follow
...Merchan just allowed Cohen to testify on the legality of payments to Daniels. He then overruled another objection to prosecutors saying that he pleaded guilty to campaign violations...
4:23 PM · May 20, 2024 //
In case you've a hankering for whiplash, the prosecution also introduced a waiver of attorney-client privilege between Cohen and Costello, in which Cohen indicated he never considered Costello his attorney, and contradicted his previous testimony that their (multiple) communications were privileged. //
here's an explainer from CNN regarding what the prosecution is attempting to prove:
Prosecutors need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump falsified business records with the intent to commit or conceal another crime, but they don’t have to prove that Trump committed that crime. The prosecution's theory is that the second crime could be in violation of federal and state election laws or state tax laws regarding how the reimbursements to Trump's ex-fixer and attorney Michael Cohen were handled.
In other words, the prosecution doesn't need to prove that Trump actually committed an underlying crime — just that he falsified the records with the intent to commit or conceal said crime (which could be election law violations or state tax law violations). Assuming that Merchan doesn't direct a verdict on this (and there's little indication that he's inclined to do such), the jury instructions here are going to be key. //
Claudius54
an hour ago edited
... a porn star, a lying thief and an eye roller take the witness stand ...
[fill in your punchline here] //
Claudius54
2 hours ago
"While Merchan's rulings throughout the trial have largely favored the prosecution (and questions regarding his bias are understandable), that comment hints at Merchan believing the jury won't find Cohen credible."
Um ... I thought that lying under oath was considered perjury. If I read above correctly, the judge knows that Cohen lied and is willing to roll the dice and hope the jury realises that Cohen was untruthful rather than applying a remedy as a "matter of law"?? I this the gold standard in jurisprudence these days?
What exactly has the prosecution credibly proven (and provided evidence) that warrants a felony conviction? I predict that the jury will find Trump guilty ... of being Trump. //
bk
2 hours ago
Merchan: "I don't see any probative value for impeachment."
Unlike the "probative value" of all the tawdry BS testimony from Stormy Daniels. //
RSB
22 minutes ago
So this was fun.
Cohen's admission of felony grand larceny was interesting and especially as he says the prosecutor was aware of it and that they did not tell Trump of the theft. This goes outside the usual plea deal routine where someone pleads to a crime and gets immunity or other consideration for testimony. If true Bragg is open to criminal charges as is Cohen.
Merchan holding the directed verdict motion for consideration was also interesting. He has to see all the legal issues in the case. For example, contrary to CNNs thinking (which is what Susie recounted not her own thoughts) the prosecution DOES have to specify the underlying offense and must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump intended to commit that exact offense AND that he was aware it was an offense. Add in the utter lack of credibility of Cohen (which he alluded to) and he may (unlikely true) be thinking about deep sixing this whole thing. //
AdeleInTexas 41 minutes ago edited
After several weeks of trial evidence of a crime, maybe multiple felonies, has finally been uncovered — and Cohen was the perpetrator. https://x.com/bennyjohnson/...
Thank you, Your Honor. I appreciate it. Family, friends, and allies and foundationalists and honored adversaries, today we enter the next phase in the fight to protect our God-given rights from a government that wishes to take them from us and grant us mere privileges in return. To quote another patriot from another place and time, "This is not the end. This is not even the beginning of the end. This is perhaps, the end of the beginning."
And so, as we enter this new phase, there should be no question in the mind of any patriotic American as to why we fight. After all, only slaves lack the right to arm self-defense and we are no slaves, but free citizens of a great republic and we contain multitudes each of us from builder, a healer, a teacher, a statesman, a soldier, a judge, an attorney at law, a sergeant at arms, and an image of God. So, we know why we fight.
The question before us is how we must fight. What kind of discipline we must bring with us into battle and what spirit we must show to our friends and adversaries alike and by way of answering, we refer to our core doctrines.
The foundationalist's manifesto calls us to listen closely and to speak clearly. To deny the self at the same time to defend the individual. To respect tradition and also to cultivate the future. In short, as foundationalists, we are called to embrace disciplines that seem to contradict each other but nonetheless, to embrace them with all of our strength.
So, it is in our current fight because this system as dysfunctional as it often is, as unjust as it often is, it is nonetheless, our system. It is a feature not a bug of our American civilization. Like any other structure built from man's crooked timber, it is not perfect. Judges and attorneys and trial courts and juries in the light of day are not perfect. Judges and attorneys and trial courts and juries in the light of day are merely what we have instead of the blood feud and the vendetta and the dagger in the dead of night.
Knowing this, we give challenge even as we give thanks. Knowing this, we prepare ourselves for battle in a spirit of profound dissatisfaction and profound gratitude in equal measure.
...
When I was a boy my grandfather told me that fire is a great servant, but a terrible master and so it is with Government. And to the extent that our own Government attempts to be our master, we must oppose it. We must fight to the utmost limits of our strength, but in that fight, our spirit must be one of restoration, not destruction. We must confront the enemy as the firefighter confronts his enemy and for the same reasons that the structure itself may yet, be saved.
God bless and keep you all and may God bless the United States of America. Thank you, Your Honor.
KENNEDY: Well...this trial I think says more about our politics than it says about an alleged crime. Mr. Bragg, I don't know him either. My observation is that if you want to hide something from him, you put it in a law book. He's bringing a felony criminal trial, but he hasn't proved a felony. //
Bragg is charging Trump with what are essentially paperwork violations. Those wouldn't be prosecutable, though, if they didn't occur in the process of committing another felony. What is that felony? We have no idea and neither does the jury. At this point, it's not even clear the judge is going to make the prosecution define it. What we do know is that the Department of Justice, far from a friend of the former president, looked at all this and deemed there was no case.
There are also issues revolving around how Bragg managed to upgrade the misdemeanors surrounding the accounting of the "hush money payment" to felonies, which allowed the prosecution to get around the statute of limitations. In short, we have two misdemeanors that require an underlying crime, yet they've been upgraded to felonies based on a supposed crime that hasn't been defined. It's so stupid that even left-wing sources have been questioning the wisdom of it.
Bill Maher came out following the Stormy court appearance to completely dispute her contentions. He explained how he interviewed the actress in 2018, and when he gave her the chance to take the victimhood path, she sternly refused.
Daniels: "I have no idea. It is not a me too case. I wasn't assaulted. I wasn't raped. I wasn't attacked or raped, or coerced or blackmailed. They tried to shove me in to the #MeToo box to further their agenda. And first of all, I didn't want any part of that because it's not the truth, and I'm not a victim in that regard."
That is not only 180 degrees in opposition to her testimony, but on the stand, her account of the affair dropped many of the buzzwords and phrases heard from the movement. //
Steve Krakauer @SteveKrak
·
A journalism "tell" - look for what stories DON'T get covered.
On CBS' marquee Sunday show "Face the Nation," the NYC Trump trial didn't get mentioned at all. On CNN, only a passing reference. NBC relegated it to the final panel segment.
Doesn't bode well for the prosecution.
3:37 AM · May 13, 2024
Dexter Taylor, a Brooklyn-based software engineer, has been sentenced to a decade in prison for building firearms in his home using parts purchased legally. He was arrested after a SWAT raid in 2022, and a jury convicted him of 13 counts last month. Now, he is set to spend up to ten years behind bars for what many perceive as an egregious violation of his Second Amendment rights.
The sentence was handed down on Monday by Judge Abena Darkeh, who presided over Taylor’s trial. The judge’s handling of the case has been criticized, especially her decision to prohibit mention of the Second Amendment in the courtroom during the trial. //
“She told us, ‘Do not bring the Second Amendment into this courtroom. It doesn’t exist here. So you can’t argue Second Amendment. This is New York.’” //
Taylor recalled that it “seemed like we had three prosecutors in the courtroom, the two [assistant district attorneys] and the judge working in concert.”
Indeed, in a previous interview, Varghese characterized Judge Darkeh as “the most aggressive prosecutor in the room.” //
Interestingly enough, Taylor said some of the officers who escorted him into the holding cell behind the courtroom after the verdict was read began discussing politics. “Literally, they were all talking about how this is nonsense. ‘Of course, you have a God-given right to keep and bear arms,’” he recalled the officers saying. He discussed his case with another sergeant who “thought it was a travesty.” //
When asked about the possibility that Taylor could get bail pending appeal so he could fight his case from outside of prison, the lawyer said, “It’s something that Dexter and I will have to discuss further. The chances are slim to none.”
It looks like the ‘strongest’ legal case against Trump is based on yet another set of lies from corrupt federal agencies. //
Recent court disclosures give two indications that federal employees could have planted the classified documents used to mire Trump and several aides into a sprawling investigation and an election-interfering court case. The first is the explosive evidence revealed Friday: For 11 months, the special counsel’s office hid that it misplaced some — we don’t know how many or which — of the same allegedly classified documents it claims Trump criminally possessed at Mar-a-Lago. //
Second, there’s the also newly uncovered fact that a federal agency sent “two pallets” of documents to Mar-a-Lago while the National Archives and Records Administration was setting up this documents case. It’s unknown who all had access to these document boxes during their packing, temporary storage in Virginia, and transit to Trump’s home. Were those boxes a setup too? Imagine if some boxes the feds sent amid NARA’s dispute with Trump were also boxes the DOJ can’t verify as being in their original state. //
We also learned just last week that the White House and Department of Justice lawyers colluded with NARA to develop what became the special counsel’s classified documents indictment, starting an entire year before the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago, according to documents reviewed by reporter Julie Kelly. Just the News reports the collusion between NARA and the White House could have begun as early as a few weeks into the Biden presidency, according to White House visitor logs.
So of course the classified documents case didn’t arise from concern over legal improprieties, as the complete lack of prosecution for the same conduct from Joe Biden, Mike Pence, Hillary Clinton, James Comey, and DOJ leakers also proves. It was a political hit from the beginning, using federal agencies and resources to strangle Democrats’ top political opponent and override the votes of half the country. Talk about an insurrection.
Simon Ateba
@simonateba
·
Follow
Ahead of Michael Cohen’s testimony against Trump Monday, @CNN legal analyst says, “I’ve never seen a witness who’s lied to Congress, who’s lied to court, who’s lied to the IRS, who’s lied to the Southern District of New York, who lied to his banker.” WATCH
3:49 PM · May 10, 2024 //
GBenton
10 hours ago
Alvin Bragg's running the biggest bluff in history and he's got nothing. I can see why they didn't want this case to go first. Between that lying harlot and Cohen and the judges disgraceful gag order and allowing reversable errors, they're boosting Trump's cred with the voters and possibly heading for an aquittal since at least two of the jurors are lawyers and know that this is a sh1tshow from top to bottom - not to mention there is no crime and Bragg has no jurisdiction to prosecute federal crimes.
I think Bonchie's hunch might be right. Hung jury or found not guilty since this case was NEVER ready for prime time and they just wanted to bloody up Trump with salacious nonsense like the Billy Bush tapes.
Florida case, toast. GA case, not likely to happen before the election. DC case - Gonna call it now, Supremes either send it back to the lower courts and it doesn't happen before the election or they rule he's got enough immunity to void that case outright.
And Trump is vindicated -- Jack Smith gets charged for his shenanigans and Biden destroys the Dem party by proving Trump right that the system is totally corrupt.
That's what it looks like right now. Far cry from what the Dems probably thought -- I think their goose was cooked when fatass James didn't bankrupt Trump with her fake fraud case and instead he's billions richer, lol.
One would think that the media would spend days, if not weeks reporting those details if they could verify that Trump was that president. But he wasn’t. That president was the mythical King of Camelot, the icon of the Democrat Party, and an equal to Lincoln in stature. John Fitzgerald Kennedy was that adulterous cad of a chief executive. //
A washed-up porn pin cushion and her story about blacking out and not remembering what happened should never have seen the light of day or the inside of a courtroom. Her new claims that it wasn’t “about the money” and her insistence that she was an apparent unwilling victim are equal parts garbage, legally irrelevant, and clearly intended to prejudice the 12-person jury. The scandalous testimony Judge Merchan allowed has been, without doubt, utterly irrelevant to the case at bar. Merchan is sheep-dogging a kangaroo court, a political show trial that the KGB’s Lavrenty Beria would be proud of.
I got your attention by leading with a false suggestion. Misdirection. That’s what the prosecution is doing in Manhattan. Trump wasn’t “banging” interns. And this trial isn't about Daniels or her claims. It's [supposed to be] about business documents. But the prosecution got what it wanted. A false suggestion that Trump may have raped Daniels.
Orange Man bad.
Byron York explains:
Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has charged Trump with falsifying bookkeeping records of a nondisclosure payment in order to commit or conceal another crime, Bragg still hasn’t revealed what that other crime is. It’s really the key to the whole case. Without the other crime, there would be no charges against Trump in this matter. The fact that we — and that includes the defendant — still don’t know what the other crime is is one of the great injustices of a felony prosecution that never should have happened...[Bragg's] theory is that if Michael Cohen paid Daniels $130,000 in the fall of 2016 to keep her from going public with her story that she and Trump had a sexual encounter and then Trump repaid Cohen in 2017, then that was a campaign contribution and should have been reported to the FEC. The payments were made “for the purpose of influencing any election,” the theory continues, and the Trump campaign should have filed a document with the FEC listing among its campaign contributions and expenditures that it received and spent $130,000 for “hush money.”
If you think that sounds a little odd for an FEC disclosure, you’re right. That’s where one of the critical witnesses to be called by the Trump defense comes in. Bradley Smith is a former chairman of the FEC, and on many occasions, including long before Trump, he has argued that there are all sorts of things a candidate can spend money on that are not legally classifiable as “for the purpose of influencing any election.” ... Smith, having headed the FEC, has many examples from the commission’s enforcement of federal election law that illustrate his point. He knows what he is talking about, and it seems clear that his expert opinion is that paying off Daniels, no matter what one might think of it, is not a campaign expenditure or donation that FECA requires a candidate to disclose. The Trump defense plans to call Smith as a witness. Not because he has any personal knowledge of the Trump transaction but because he understands, and has enforced, the campaign law that Bragg’s prosecutors appear to be planning to use against Trump. But Merchan has forbidden Smith from testifying about most of the issues involved in the case.
Maximus Decimus Cassius writeofcenter
3 hours ago edited
For the left, the end justifies the means--any means. And the fact that the legal community writ large is not up in arms about this travesty of justice tells us all we need to know about the ethics, morals and integrity of the "legal community".
These are events that took place three and a half years ago. This indictment could have been brought three years ago, or two years ago. There is a reason why it is being brought right now. It is to freeze the Arizona Republican Party so that they cannot organize themselves to win that Senate seat. //
Proft (05:30):
So then, we should expect since Dana Nessel, the AG of Michigan, has a similar investigation ongoing. We should expect that indictment maybe right after Labor Day?
WAJ (05:40):
Oh, yeah. I mean, that’s what’s going on this year. All of these Trump indictments, with the exception of the Mar-a-Lago one, where the events took place later, all of these lawsuits, criminal prosecutions are regarding events that took place over three years ago. They are brought so that the trials will take place in this election year, including the one that’s ongoing now in Manhattan, [which] involves events six or seven years ago. //
Going to the merits of it. the claim is that there was a fraud perpetrated on the Congress and the public regarding the Arizona election. The problem with that, is that there was no deception. No one was deceived…
This took place in plain sight. It was in the media. People were on TV. //
Proft (09:35):
Well, it’s more than freezing. What they’re really going to do is now they’ve got this indictment, and now they’re going to run tens of millions of dollars of ads saying the Arizona Republican party leadership has been indicted for trying to steal the 2020 election. //
So I say that as somebody who disagreed with John Eastman at the time, on the record. But you know, they have not only criminalized politics, they have now criminalized lawyering if you’re a Republican lawyer.
So people make aggressive arguments in court all the time. People make arguments for the extension of the law. I think Eastman’s argument was wrong. I don’t think it rose to such a frivolous level that you should lose your Bar license over it. //
There is a group, I think they’re called the 65 Group or something like that, which is going around the country trying to get Republican lawyers disbarred. They have weaponized not just the Democrat prosecutorial offices, they are now weaponizing Bar counsel and they’re now weaponizing the disciplinary process. And they have said explicitly, they advertise it, that they want to make Republican lawyers toxic in their communities.
So people need to wake up. What’s going on in this country is really totalitarian, and it is an attempt to not enforce the rule of law, but to destroy the rule of law and to prevent Republicans from ever mounting an election challenge again. What Republican lawyer, if there is an alleged fraud in the next election, is going to dare to raise legal arguments against it knowing that John Eastman has now been disbarred for that? //
Subotai Bahadur | April 26, 2024 at 11:01 pm
The actual charge is, I believe, “objecting to election theft while Republican”.
Subotai Bahadur
On Monday, Judge Aileen Cannon released an unredacted version of former President Trump's motion for discovery in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case. The document appears to show collaboration between the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the Justice Department, and the Biden administration to develop the case.