Romney issued a statement on Saturday morning in which he said Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg committed "political malpractice" in his pursuance of former President Donald Trump:

Bragg should have settled the case against Trump, as would have been the normal procedure. But he made a political decision. Bragg may have won the battle, for now, but he may have lost the political war. //

You may disagree with this, but had I been President Biden, when the Justice Department brought on indictments, I would have immediately pardoned him.

I'd have pardoned President Trump. Why? Well, because it makes me, 'President Biden,' the big guy and the person I pardoned a little guy. //

GBenton
4 hours ago
Totally agree on the significance but I think Romney is "right" for the wrong reasons, which is not surprising.

He didn't say the conviction was wrong or unjust, which is the correct answer.

He said it was malpractice and he bemoans winning the battle and losing the war.

He said how Biden could be the Big Guy (lol) and Trump the little guy with a pardon.

All Romney is mad about here is that the Dems have made Trump stronger in November, IMO.

He has no moral qualms with the demonizing of Trump, just the means that achieve that end.

So pigs aren't flying, Romney didn't suddenly get a clue. He's just mad that his nemesis Trump is getting an advantage from this "political malpractice". //

anon-x8p1
5 hours ago
The Biden crime family committed no crimes, regardless of evidence.
The Clinton crime network committed no crimes, regardless of evidence.

Trump now faces 139 years in prison because the court claims they knew what Trump was thinking so he is guilty as charged.

This is what's so stupid about Democrats running around on Thursday shouting how "no one is above the law." People are clearly above the law, which seems largely dictated by one's political beliefs. If you're a Republican, you can bet the full force of the state will come down on your head if you so much as jaywalk.

If you're a Democrat, you can set things on fire, break down doors, discriminate, and "occupy" public spaces, and you're good to go. Be sure to collect your free meal on the way out of processing if you do happen to get temporarily detained.

That's not "law and order." It's not the justice system being blind. It's one of America's most important institutions being made a mockery of, and the left is happy to do its part. //

Fishin'withFredo
8 hours ago
Bring enough of there here, and here becomes there. NYC deserves every bit of it.

First, any civil or criminal defendant in a federal case who plausibly asserts that political or ideological factors may taint a jury pool can veto the Washington DC circuit and receive a hearing in his or her choice of another randomly chosen circuit or the circuit of his or her home dwelling.

Second, regardless of what circuit a federal case is filed in, any civil or criminal defendant who plausibly asserts that political or ideological factors may taint a jury pool shall be entitled to a jury pool that is proportionally selected from a region that did not vote more than 70 percent in favor of one party’s candidate in the most recent presidential, senatorial, or congressional election.

Third, plaintiffs or prosecutors in a federal case may elect to have the case decided in a randomly assigned circuit other than the District of Columbia. This would ensure that corrupt and criminal Democrats do not get a free pass on anything they do simply because they know a DC jury pool would never convict them of anything, no matter how egregious the offense.

Fourth, Congress should mandate that any states receiving federal funds for any legal or law enforcement purposes must abide by the same rules guaranteeing a defendant a politically fair jury pool.

Fifth, state legislators should enact similar laws ensuring political fairness for trials in their state.

In summary, all Americans are entitled to a jury of our peers, or at least a jury that is not politically biased. Unfortunately, conservative Americans are being increasingly subjected to politically weaponized lawfare. //

Indylawyer
10 hours ago
This is a badly needed reform. Excellent point. We also need to eliminate most federal criminal statutes, and make sure the ones that are left are clearly and narrowly defined. They wouldn't be able to wage most of this lawfare without these vague and overweening criminal statutes. //

anon-8gsr
12 hours ago
All this articles says to me is conservatives have been woefully neglectful in preparing to fight the opposition, and still are. We all knew that though.

GBenton anon-8gsr
12 hours ago
If Trump wins in November we have to view this as the last opportunity to right the ship. After what Biden has done, including the lawfare and threats to pack the Supreme Court and end the filibuster, the mission is to destroy the corruption and neutralize the threat should a Democrat win in 2028.

That said, I think if the American people knew the full truth about the left there might not be much of a Democrat party for a while. Trump should declassify anything and everything on the Dems and their corruption going back to JFK (and before, as relevant), since I believe they had JFK killed, they set up Nixon, and they have their fingerprints on a whole lotta bad stuff including Waco, etc, not to mention what Hillary and Obama did.

Expose all the dirt. make it public.

GBenton Arik
12 hours ago
Stealing elections needs to carry a price similar to treason since it interferes with the peaceful tranfer of power and threatens the stability and survival of the republic and invites tyranny. //

I would only note it's not really "tit for tat" — it's about adhering to the law and applying it equally. //

Dieter Schultz
14 hours ago

"I'm not talking about violence," she made clear. "I'm talking about tit for tat," she said.

I'd just be happy if the GOP just decides to fight like they're in an existential war for this country's soul and act accordingly.

That might mean something that resembles "tit for tat" but, more important than that is just playing to win rather than playing to let the Dems win.

Betterdeadthanred Dieter Schultz
9 hours ago
Indeed. Sticking to our principles has gotten us here. Its certainly not going to get us out or guarantee a place at the back of the line at the camps.

Dieter Schultz Betterdeadthanred
9 hours ago edited

Indeed. Sticking to our principles has gotten us here.

I'm pretty sure it's not principles we're sticking to that's gotten us here.I keep saying that there are two kinds, and definitions, of conservative, the ideological and the personality type.

We can't seem to grok that the personality type conservative sounds a lot like the ideological conservative but with the basic impetus of "Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change" and, because of that, they are NOT the same and, in fact, behave like RINOs.

It's not principles that are 'getting us here', it is being confused about which 'conservative' we're working with and wondering why people that 'tend to oppose change', you know, refuse to change the status quo that the left is clever enough to create for them so that they will 'refuse to act' to correct the ideological errors of the left's positions.

Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
·
I obviously disagree with this verdict as do many others. I believe that the case will be reversed eventually either in the state or federal systems. However, this was the worst expectation for a trial in Manhattan. I am saddened by the result more for the New York legal system than the former president. I had hoped that the jurors might redeem the integrity of a system that has been used for political purposes.
9:20 PM · May 30, 2024

I am sad for him and his family, but this goes far beyond Trump. I think I am mourning what it means for our legal system and our rule of law when you can do this to a political opponent and a former president. It means none of us is safe, that that great principle which has made us special as a nation—equality under the law—died more than a little on Thursday. And that's a horrible thing to ponder.

Democrats have sacrificed it all on the altar of power and holding onto control.

Yes, there are a bunch of potential appealable issues, and it may very well be overturned on appeal. And sentence is likely to be stayed pending appeal. But in the meantime, the Democrats have what they wanted: the ability to call Trump a "convicted felon" and the hope that in a close race, this will hurt Trump and hand the race to Biden. The case may be overturned in the future, and some may say then, "Oh, so sorry." But it will be too late for justice and too late for the Republic. And nothing will be the same again.

anon-055q
9 hours ago
Until today, "The Trial" by Franz Kafka, was universally understood to be fiction.

As of today, it has been transformed into prophecy.

Those who accused Trump of being a dictator and trying to undermine our country's laws now have weaponized our judicial system to take out an opponent they weren't confident could be beat in the polls. The Democrats have started a dangerous war, and the losers are the people of this country. Election interference must not be tolerated. Trump will not give up so easily. We are witnessing another historic moment in our nation's history. The next months could change everything.

Democrats have set a precedent, and you better believe they should be made to live by it. //

The genie is out of the bottle, and it's not up to Republicans to unilaterally shove it back in. Make Democrats suffer under the new rules they set until they beg for mercy, and when Joe Biden walks out of the White House, he should be immediately prosecuted for illegally retaining classified documents, among other alleged crimes.

There is no option to play nice anymore. Republicans tried to keep things within the lines. Democrats stepped over them for what they feel will be cheap political gain. Forget the crying. That's not going to help anything. Make them pay, and make them pay hard. Any Republican not willing to do that doesn't deserve to be in office. //

Right now is the time to get up off the mat and do everything possible to make Democrats regret this for the good of the country and the credibility of the judicial system. //

bpbatch 24 minutes ago
The Democrats just implemented the judicial version of separate lunch counters and drinking fountains, and it's time for conservatives to move to the front of the bus. //

Weminuche45 9 minutes ago edited

i dont think there are very many Republicans who have any clue what they are dealing with on the left, at all.

"Counterrevolution and conservatism have little in common. In the struggle against Communism the conservative is all but helpless. For that struggle cannot be fought, much less won, or even understood, except in terms of total sacrifice. And the conservative is suspicious of sacrifice; he wishes first to conserve, above all what he is, and what he has. You cannot fight against revolutions so."

• Whittaker Chambers "Witness" (Cold War Classics)

Conservatives are all but helpless. They lack the discipline, the self-sacrifice, indeed the courage. It is hard even for conservatives to even remember Chamber's admonition that they face an enemy having no moral viewpoint in common with themselves whatsoever.

This is your wakeup call.

After deliberating for 11 hours, a New York jury found former President Donald Trump guilty on all 34 charges of falsifying business records to hide “hush money” payments in 2016 to former adult film performer Stormy Daniels.

Trump faces up to four years in prison.

Trump spoke about the verdict as he came out of the courthouse. He called it a “disgrace.” //

John Roberts @johnrobertsFox
·
Judge Merchan just told the jury that they do not need unanimity to convict. 4 could agree on one crime, 4 on a different one, and the other 4 on another. He said he would treat 4-4-4 as a unanimous verdict.
2:52 PM · May 29, 2024

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.

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.