Donald Trump arrested and charged

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/Cernovich/status/1792970337405284599

AG Garland and Chris Wray wanted to create a situation where they could assassinated Trump.

— Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 21, 2024


Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
Tons of new unsealed filings on classified docs case--I will try to post as much as I can (there goes the workout) but this is mind-blowing.

FBI authorized the use of deadly force at Mar-a-Lago

Post

See new posts
Conversation
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
·
2h
Tons of new unsealed filings on classified docs case--I will try to post as much as I can (there goes the workout) but this is mind-blowing.

FBI authorized the use of deadly force at Mar-a-Lago
Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
Oh my God

Armed FBI agents were preparing to confront Trump and even engage Secret Service if necessary.

They were going to go door to door to terrorize MAL guests and even pick the locks.

Gestapo

https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1792972717781586109

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
Here is the use of deadly force instructions attached to the FBI's operational instructions.

Head of Washington FBI field office when this was executed: Steven D'Antuono.

Recall who authorized the raid: Merrick Garland

The FBI risked the lives of Donald Trump, his family, his staff, and MAL guests for a publicity stunt to make it look like Trump stole national security files.

People need to be arrested for this.

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/kylenabecker/status/1792993427144970685

See new posts
Conversation
Kyle Becker
@kylenabecker
Judge Merchan is once again showing himself to be a political hack running a rigged show trial.

Merchan is making a concerted effort to defang the defense’s arguments that undercut the phony premise of the sham trial.

In today’s case, Merchan is siding with prosecutors who are arguing that “willful” violation of campaign finance law is an “excessive” standard.

The judge is also undermining the defense’s repeated points that there is no “crime” at the heart of the case.

Merchan is limiting witness testimony that points out there is no limit to the amount of personal funds one can spend on his own campaign.

Yesterday, the judge limited testimony from a former FEC commissioner who sought to explain the nuances of how the reporting timeline means there could not have been a crime committed.

Merchan also upbraided former Cohen legal adviser Robert Costello, who had compelling testimony that the alleged “hush money” payment was out of Cohen’s own funds. Cohen had motives to make the payment on his own, including hopes of being a Trump administration official, but later felt “betrayed” for being passed over.

Cohen has made millions selling his prevarications to a willing opposition media, and is now pitching a movie about his latest anti-Trump fiasco.

Judge Merchan, a Biden donor whose daughter is fundraising off the Trump show trial, has nonetheless let serial liar and convicted felon Michael Cohen go on at length, while limiting defense witnesses.

The prosecutors’ motive behind bringing the case is political. The timing of this case is political. And the judge’s decision-making during this case has been political.

Everything is political with Trump’s opponents. And if they have to burn down America’s judicial system in order to vanquish a political enemy and to cling to power, they will do it.


https://x.com/charliekirk11/status/1792917568295952754

Law professor Jonathan Turley holds nothing back in an absolutely brutal assessment of Judge Juan Merchan’s handling of the Trump trial:

“I believe there are layers of reversible error in this case.”

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/julie_kelly2/status/1793086207125020923

Julie Kelly 🇺🇸
@julie_kelly2
I want answers to this for the former feds defending authorizations of use of deadly force in MAL raid.

Did the suspect cooperate with the government for more than a year?

Including turning over "documents" to a non law enforcement agency? (NARA)

Did the suspect allow a top DOJ official and 3 FBI agents into his home voluntarily to search for incriminating evidence--two months before the raid was authorized?

Did the suspect comply with a subpoena to the best of his knowledge?

Was nearly all of the investigation conducted outside the jurisdiction of the alleged crime?

Including grand jury proceedings?

Was the suspect not accused of a violent crime?

Was the suspect a former president?

Was the suspect also protected by federal officers sworn to protect the life and interests of a former president?

And did the FBI consider how to handle perhaps dueling law enforcement agents in this scenario?

Is it normal for every individual participating in the raid to wear street clothes?

Does a usual FBI raid involve a top DOJ official and an official from FBI HQ?

Looking forward to answers...


https://x.com/staceyrae436/status/1793087646018961444

[mountain_jim]

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...it-has-verdict

Trump Found Guilty On All Counts In 'Hush Money' Case

BY TYLER DURDEN
THURSDAY, MAY 30, 2024 - 04:47 PM
Update (1710ET): Former President Donald Trump has been found guilty on all 34 counts in his New York 'hush money' trial. Trump reportedly stared ahead motionless as the verdict was read.

< more at link soon I am sure, just happened, what a travesty of the legal system >



https://x.com/seanmdav/status/1796284452126986462

Sean Davis
@seanmdav
The verdict is that Democrats would rather burn down this country, destroy the rule of law, and permanently corrupt our entire system of justice than allow anyone to vote them out of power. Stalin would blush at this level of brazen corruption.

[Inversion]

Months ago, I heard that there's no law that says Trump can't run for or be president while in prison. Instead of a business suit he'll be wearing an orange jumpsuit. So, the range is probation to 136 years in prison.

dailymail

Theoretically, Trump could face 136 years in prison if given consecutive sentences on all charges.

But even before the verdict came down, legal experts suggested Trump was unlikely to face time behind bars.

Trump at 77-years-old has no prior convictions. The charges also involve a nonviolent offense.

New York law recommends no prison sentence for non-violent felonies where the defendant lacks any prior felony conviction in the last decade.

The more likely option, according to legal experts, is the ex-president could face probation or a steep fine. Both pose their own challenges for the former president.

[thepainterdoug]

i left a post in Bojacans personal thread, Trump is not the answer. Thats what I have to say

[onawah]

Jury Finds Trump Guilty on All 34 Felony Charges in New York Trial
5/30/24
By Catherine Yang and Michael Washburn
5/30/2024

Photojournalists take pictures as former President and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump attends his criminal trial at Manhattan Criminal Court in New York City, on May 30, 2024. (Michael M. Santiago / POOL / AFP)
https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/ver...Gg%3D5/30/2024

(7 minute podcast and first video at the link about an hour long)

"NEW YORK—Former President Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 felony counts of falsifying business records, as a jury of 12 unanimously returned their verdict on May 30 after less than two days of deliberation. With this result, President Trump becomes the first ever American president to be convicted of a crime.

As the verdicts were read, President Trump sat still, didn’t show emotion, and looked straight ahead.

President Trump’s attorney has previously vowed to appeal a conviction expeditiously.

Judge Juan Merchan set the sentencing hearing for 10 a.m. on July 11. This is four days before the Republican National Convention where the former president is set to be formally designated as GOP nominee. President Trump is not barred from running for president as a convicted felon.

President Trump blasted the decision, pledging to contest the conviction.

“This was a rigged decision right from day one. And we will fight for our Constitution,” he said outside the courtroom.

The verdict comes after a six-week trial with 22 witness testimonies. Closing arguments were made on May 28, and the jury began deliberations shortly before noon the next day. Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg had charged President Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree, a class E felony.

Prosecutors alleged that President Trump fraudulently misclassified hush money payments to adult film actress Stephanie Clifford as part of an attempt to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.

President Trump has repeatedly called the criminal case political persecution and an act of election interference. He faces three other prosecutions in Washington, Georgia, and Florida over his efforts to contest the 2020 election results and handling of classified documents.

White House Defends Use of Trump Trial for Campaign

The Biden campaign responded to the conviction, saying that today “we saw that no one is above the law,”

“Donald Trump has always mistakenly believed he would never face consequences for breaking the law for his own personal gain,” Biden-Harris 2024 Communications Director Michael Tyler said in the statement.

“But today’s verdict does not change the fact that the American people face a simple reality. There is still only one way to keep Donald Trump out of the Oval Office: at the ballot box. Convicted felon or not, Trump will be the Republican nominee for president.”

The White House spokesperson Ian Sams, in a post on X, formerly Twitter, declined to comment on the verdict, other than saying, “We respect the rule of law.”

Meanwhile, Republicans were swift to condemn the decision.

“Today is a shameful day in American history. Democrats cheered as they convicted the leader of the opposing party on ridiculous charges, predicated on the testimony of a disbarred, convicted felon. This was a purely political exercise, not a legal one,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.), said in a statement posted on X.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) called it a “sad day for America,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) called the verdict a “travesty of Justice.”

Some Democrats celebrated the conviction, reiterating the message that no one is above the law.

“Donald Trump is a convicted felon. This verdict is not a win for any single person. It’s a win for an idea. The idea that we all follow the same rules. The rule of law won today,” Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) posted on X.

New York Fraud Law
Manhattan prosecutors charged President Trump with felony-level business records falsification, which requires the fraud to be carried out to commit or conceal another crime.
Prosecutors alleged that the secondary crime is a New York election law that criminalizes conspiracy “to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office by unlawful means.”

The unlawful means identified by prosecutors were violations of the Federal Election Campaign Act, the falsification of other business records, or violations of tax laws. Judge Merchan ruled that the jury did not have to unanimously agree on what the “unlawful means” was.

The prosecution also did not have to prove that the secondary crime was in fact committed.

The jury was instructed on the concept of accessorial liability, which explains that President Trump did not have to commit the crimes himself to be held criminally liable.

(Second Video about 26 minutes long at: https://www.ganjingworld.com/s/1eDko97vaR )

Competing Narratives
During closing arguments on May 28, defense attorneys spent two and a half hours trying to convince the jury the government had failed to prove its case.
Defense attorney Todd Blanche reminded jurors that key elements of the case—President Trump’s knowledge and involvement, and the method for the allegedly misclassified payments—hinged on ex-lawyer and witness Michael Cohen, who shared personal reasons for wanting to see his former boss punished.

“He lied to Congress. He lied to prosecutors. He lied to his family and business associates,” Mr. Blanche said of Mr. Cohen, calling him the “MVP of liars.” He asked jurors to question whether Mr. Cohen truly seemed the type to do work for President Trump for no pay in 2017 and 2018, after receiving a $525,000 salary during his decade at Trump Organization.

Prosecutors spent five hours, twice the time the defense took, to recap their case and try to convince the jury there was “overwhelming” evidence.

Prosecuting attorney Joshua Steinglass acknowledged their flawed witnesses, arguing the government didn’t “choose” Mr. Cohen to be their key witness, but that President Trump “chose” him to be his “fixer.” He claimed Mr. Cohen was the only alleged coconspirator to have paid for his role in a scheme to influence the election, and his animosity toward the former president was only to be expected.

“He made his bed. But you can hardly blame him for making money from the one thing he has left, which is his knowledge of the inner workings of the Trump Organization,” Mr. Steinglass argued.

He pointed to a secret recording Mr. Cohen made of his boss, capturing a truncated conversation, and the contract Mr. Cohen signed to secure a story that he believed would damage the Trump campaign, arguing this showed a “cavalier willingness to hide this payoff”—the intent to defraud.

34 Records
The 34 records in question included 11 checks issued to Michael Cohen, formerly a personal attorney to President Trump, totaling $420,000 over 11 months in 2017, along with their corresponding invoices and vouchers. The additional single record is due to a lost check that necessitated the creation of a replacement to pay Mr. Cohen.
Mr. Cohen testified that he paid $130,000 to Stephanie Clifford, better known as adult performer Stormy Daniels, in a non-disclosure settlement agreement, to prevent the publication of a story that then-candidate Trump believed would hurt his campaign.

Ms. Clifford claimed she had a story about a sexual encounter with Mr. Trump in 2006, and that media outlets were interested in this story after an Access Hollywood tape of Mr. Trump recorded via a hot mic was released. At trial, Ms. Clifford testified about this alleged sexual encounter, which President Trump has denied.

Mr. Cohen testified that he made this payment in 2016 with the understanding that his employer, then-candidate Trump, would reimburse him. The deal was closed less than a month before the election, and Mr. Cohen testified he originally intended to delay payment until after the election, after which he claimed his boss said it would not matter if the story was published and thus the $130,000 would no longer need to be paid.

On the witness stand, Mr. Cohen painted the picture of urgency in mid-October 2016, when representatives for Ms. Clifford pressed him for payment and said he only wanted to make his boss happy. He testified that, with Mr. Trump’s approval, he made the payment.

He also testified to being intensely angry later that year, when he discovered his bonus had been cut by two-thirds from what he typically received.

It prompted discussions with former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg, who purportedly drew up plans to reimburse Mr. Cohen $130,000 for the payment to Ms. Clifford and $50,000 for an earlier payment to Red Finch, which he said he still hadn’t been reimbursed for. The sum was then doubled to $360,000 to account for taxes, and Mr. Weisselberg added $60,000 to supplement Mr. Cohen’s bonus.

Prosecutors had claimed Mr. Weisselberg’s “grossing up” the figures for tax purposes was evidence he intended to “camouflage” reimbursement as income.

This $420,000 was then paid to Mr. Cohen via monthly checks throughout 2017. At trial, prosecutors sought to show that President Trump had caused false records to be entered when Mr. Weisselberg, acting as a co-conspirator, directed his comptroller Jeffrey McConney and bookkeeper Deb Tarasoff to process these payments.

President Trump was not directly charged with conspiracy, and prosecutors had no burden to prove either the goal or the state of mind behind any alleged conspiracy."

[jaybee]

.

If heaven forbid the corrupt judge(s) presiding over this case actually send Trump to prison - how would this be practically possible - I think that Presidents (like British Prime Ministers) are allowed life time security protection so Trump's body guards etc would have to be in prison with him 24/7.... what jail could cater for the unique situation -?

Those billionaires and trillionaires + their foot soldiers in the process of destroying America (the West and the rest of the World).... would probably try to get him murdered in prison - by an inmate looking for privileges and notoriety - maybe one with Trump Derangement Syndrome as well... and that would be the angle for the MSM propaganda arm... ie Trump Hater Attacks Ex President....

I'm worried for Trump... he has put everything on the line for America...but his (and the People's) enemies have control of all key institutions including the Judiciary -

Those working for the Globalist Elite know that THEIR backs are covered -

[avid]

He’ll be out on appeal with a slap on the wrist being a first offender?… such drama, such corruption, go after the dirty rotten Bidens at least!

[Frankie Pancakes]

"Even a cursory review of the evidence shows this case does not have a leg to stand on," Jonathan Turley, a Georgetown University professor and constitutional scholar, argued in a blog post. Turley pointed out that Bragg revived what could at best be an expired misdemeanor by claiming that it was done to influence the election, describing the entire argument as "so circular as to produce vertigo."

[mountain_jim]

copying here

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/...ted-300k-trump

I Just Donated $300k To Trump"

BY TYLER DURDEN
FRIDAY, MAY 31, 2024 - 08:10 AM
Authored by Shaun Maguire via X



I just donated $300k to Trump. I’m prepared to lose friends. Here’s why.

Back in 2016 I had drunk the media Kool-Aid and was scared out of my mind about Trump. As such I donated to Hilary Clinton’s campaign and voted for her.

By 2020 I was disillusioned and didn’t vote – I didn’t like either option.

Now, in 2024, I believe this is one of the most important elections of my lifetime, and I’m supporting Trump.

I know that I’ll lose friends for this. Some will refuse to do business with me. The media will probably demonize me, as they have so many others before me. But despite this, I still believe it’s the right thing to do.

I refuse to live in a society where people are afraid to speak.

The 2016 Election

I’m going to start off with something provocative, but I think it leads to a different take on the most controversial Trump issue, which is obviously January 6th. So here goes nothing.

I believe the 2016 election was manipulated to hurt Hilary Clinton and to help Donald Trump.

Hilary Clinton herself believes this, she has denied the 2016 election result dozens of times, and still does to this day. Plot twist: I agree with her! Look into Guccifer 2.0 which was the “hacker group” that strategically leaked her emails (through Wikileaks) in a drip campaign at just the right moments. Turns out it was the Russian GRU. And remember all those fake news and bot farms? These incidents are the tip of the spear -- some of the publicly known incidents. There was extreme manipulation happening during the 2016 election.

Before proceeding, please watch at least 30 seconds of this video. It’s “24 straight minutes of Democrats denying election results.”

Russia (and others) interfering in the 2016 election was nothing new, this happens in every election, everywhere in the world. Obviously.

But for me, as someone that used to work in National Security, Russia’s implicit support for Trump made me deathly afraid of him getting elected as President.

I was wrong, and Russia miscalculated. President Trump turned out to be a master of foreign policy and particularly strong towards Russia. If you’ve never seen it before, please watch this two minute clip from Trump at a NATO breakfast 5 years ago.

If you're too lazy, Trump told Germany that they're a) owned by Russia via their energy dependence b) financing Russia's war machine by buying their energy c) not investing enough in defense, investing only 1% of GDP, which was below the 2% NATO commitment, meanwhile the US was investing 4.2% of GDP. And yet the world said he's owned by Russia?

For other Trump foreign policy wins, he: a) signed the Abraham Accords b) successfully put Iran in the penalty box, which the Biden administration immediately unwound and c) he helped India see the dangers of having their comms networks controlled by China resulting in Huawei and TikTok bans there.

My “radicalization” towards the center

August 16th, 2021 was the day I knew I could never support Joe Biden or any of the senior officials in his administration. This was the day that Afghans fell to their deaths from US C-17 airplanes at the Kabul International Airport, or KAIA as ISAF forces referred to it.

Back in 2012 I deployed to Afghanistan working for DARPA. I used to fly out of KAIA at least weekly, usually taking a Blackhawk to Bagram Airfield (BAF), but sometimes jumping on a C-130 down to Kandahar (KAF).

I'm not going to go into all of the details here, but this was personal for me -- as it was for anyone that served in Afghanistan. Most have the wrong impression of what happened there. Afghanistan wasn't Iraq. And real progress had been made. It took roughly 15 years to stabilize most of Afghanistan, but the ISAF coalition had gotten it to the place that little girls were going to school in Kabul, sometimes walked there by their mothers who weren't even wearing Burkas anymore. All of this was unimaginable a decade prior.

And then there's the strategic aspect. The US's most strategic base in Afghanistan was Bagram Airfield. Unless you've been there it's impossible to imagine how strategic this base is, and how easy it is to defend. Nestled in a remote valley at the foothills of the Himalayas. Within a couple hour flight of China and Iran, and a few minute flight to Pakistan. I believe this airfield could have been held for 50+ years with 50,000 men. A similar scale to the US permanent forces stationed at Ramstein Air Base in Germany or the US bases in Okinawa, Japan.

We gave up one of the most strategic air bases in the world, and arguably stability in Kabul, for political gain -- to be able to say that President Biden ended the War in Afghanistan. And we did it in the most incompetent manner possible, literally with people falling from our airplanes. Everyone I have spoken with that served in Afghanistan knows this.

Global instability

It wasn't just Afghanistan, I believe that the Biden administration has had some of the worst foreign policy in decades. And this has manifested in two major Wars breaking out during their administration, with Russia's invasion of Ukraine and Iran's proxy attack against Israel.

Was the timing just bad luck? I don't believe so. I believe that a weak America leads to a chaotic world.

The failed Afghanistan pull-out showed the weakness of the Biden administration. They failed to adapt to changing facts on the ground, chiefly the Afghan army putting up no resistance as the Taliban drove towards Kabul. If the US can't adapt quickly in a theater where we're already active, how can it react quickly to a blitz in a new theater, Ukraine? Granted the Russian's botched their blitz, miscalculating the weather, almost certainly to keep China happy as they hosted the Olympics in Feb 2022.

The most damaging foreign policy has been the Biden administration's approach to Iran. Biden resuscitated Obama's braindead Iran doctrine. Somehow believing that the theocratic Islamic Regime could be turned towards the West.

But it's much worse than this. After Hamas' attack against Israel on October 7th, Iran took credit for planning the attack publicly. Moreover, Iran was so bold that their proxies carried out over 300 attacks against US bases and Naval ships. Many of the attacks haven't been disclosed or publicized. At least 4 US soldiers have been killed in these attacks. And yet somehow despite this, the Biden administration has been rewarding Iran by unfreezing their funds, mourning the death of President Raisi and hamstringing Israel in its proxy battle.

This level of weakness is unprecedented in my opinion. The US has been kissing the ring of its attacker, literally while attacks against our Armed Forces are carried out. If you start looking, it's hard to see anything other than Iranian foreign influence in the Biden administration, such as what Semafor reported on, and which was effectively buried by our mainstream media.

The Biden administration has been a dream come true for foreign adversaries, and a nightmare for US allies. Trusting of enemies, and fickle with friends.

Israel

To anyone that follows me on X you know that I'm a staunch Israel supporter and also Zionist. I believe that Israel is one of America's most important allies in the world. Unfortunately, in a post-Snowden world, Israel is now arguably the world's top cyber power. And it's a critical intelligence ally for any US operations in the Middle East. It's also becoming an advanced weapons partner, co-developing the hypersonic missile defense system Arrow 3 and also Iron Dome + Iron Beam.

The Islamic Regime in Iran terrorizes its own people and their proxies terrorize the entire region. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has been modernizing at an exceptional pace. Somehow the Biden administration has chosen to cuddle up to Iran while driving Saudi Arabia and Israel away. This is unforgivably disastrous policy in my opinion.

Double standards

The next topic that has boiled my blood are the double standards and lawfare that Trump has faced. Here are some examples:

• Classified documents: Hilary Clinton, Joe Biden, Mike Pence and Donald Trump were all caught with classified documents. Only Trump was indicted. Either it's a crime for all of them or none of them. All of the arguments about quantity of documents or obstruction are distractions to justify a double standard.
  
• The Border Wall: remember how Trump was villainized for promoting a border wall? Biden resumed building sections of it after pausing them, which the legacy media has been very quiet about.
  
• Election denialism: yes, Trump denied the 2020 election results. But as we linked to above, so did Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden regarding the 2016 results. As have hundreds of other politicians since 2000. Either they're all election deniers, or none of them.
• Corruption charges: every inch has been searched for Trump corruption while Joe Biden's involvement with foreign countries (through Hunter) have been swept under the rug. Here are some examples.
• Three strikes for thee but not for me: Joe Biden was the architect of the 1994 Crime Bill, which most attribute as the source of the mass incarceration we saw over the next two decades (especially amongst black communities). Crack cocaine in particular was treated harshly when combined with the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act. Watch this video. Hunter Biden would be locked up for life if the same rules were applied to him that Joe Biden imposed on thousands of others.

This is just the tip of the double standard iceberg.

Lawfare

This is too broad of a topic to go into detail here, but suffice to say I've spent hundreds of hours following the trials and researching the charges against Trump. This has been another radicalizing experience. I understand that normally when there's smoke there's fire, but in this case I think when there's smoke there's lawfare.

To anyone with a curious mind, I implore you to go deep on any of the charges against Trump, whether civil or criminal. Here's a very quick summary of some of the fishy aspects:

• Election Interference Case: Jack Smith was appointed Special Counsel to prosecute Trump. Jack Smith previously got the Governor of Virginia convicted of corruption charges... WHICH WERE THEN UNANIMOUSLY OVERTURNED BY THE SUPREME COURT. Basically Jack Smith misled the Jury. Why would you choose Jack Smith to be the Special Counsel for this case? Maybe if all you're trying to do is to get charges to stick before an election, even if you know they'll be overturned subsequently by the Supreme Court?
  
• The Classified Documents Case: once again Jack Smith is the Special Counsel.
  
• Georgia Election Interference: The Fulton County DA, Fani Willis, has a history of corruption. It turns out that the outside lawyer she selected to prosecute Trump ... is someone she was having a romantic relationship with, Nathan Wade.Wade's Law firm made about $700k after Willis appointed him. This was concealed. Wade has since resigned from the case but Willis is still involved.
• The Hush Money Case: The key witness, Michael Cohen, is a proven liar. His testimony has been filled with contradiction after contradiction.
  
• Bank Fraud: Trump was ordered by Judge Engoron to pay over $350M in civil judgment that he committed bank fraud. This whole case reeked of corruption. This was an incident where no harm had been done: the banks had already been fully repaid with interest. The most important point in the case was Judge Engoron arguing that Mar-a-Lago was worth only between $18M and $27.6M when Trump had said it's worth between $426.5M and $612M. Judge Engoron tried to compare apples to oranges, with an appraised value vs market value for a property that is very clearly worth something close to Trump's range.
  
• Sexual Assault / E Jean Carroll: the background to this case was almost unbelievable. In simple terms, a woman in 2019, E Jean Carroll, came out and said that 20+ years prior, in the late 1990s, Donald Trump had sexually assaulted her. The statute of limitations on this case had expired more than a decade prior to her claims. But the state of New York did something unprecedented and opened a one year window where people could file claims for sexual abuse going back to exactly the window when E Jean Carroll accused him. So that's point #1, there was lawfare around the statute of limitations. Point #2 is that the case was highly irregular and ultimately the Jury determined that Trump did not rape E Jean Carroll, despite her claims. But they did determine that he sexually assaulted her (a lesser charge than rape.)

All of these cases are too complicated for most to follow, almost by design. As someone that has been following the cases closely, I've had the opposite reaction of what was intended: a) every single case seems to have had impropriety and b) after going through Trump's entire life, if these are the worst things they can find, then he did less wrong then I otherwise would have assumed.

Fairness is one of my guiding principles in life and simply, these cases haven't been fair for Trump.

Where do I disagree with Republicans?

The number one area is abortion. This is obviously a lightning rod issue. As someone with libertarian leaning views, I believe the Republicans have the wrong stance around imposing their views on others. That said, I think Democrats misunderstand the constitutional argument that this should be a states issue.

Domestic policies

Other than abortion, I believe that President Trump and the Republicans have been better on most domestic issues. Look at the quality of life in Red States such as Florida and Texas vs that in Blue States like California, Oregon and New York. I used to live in San Francisco and now live in Los Angeles. The crime and homelessness is out of control.

Trump was villainized for his stance on building a border wall, but we've had about 10M illegal immigrants cross into the US already during President Biden's tenure.

The Democrats have been trying to regulate technology -- especially open source AI and crypto in ways that incentivize the best builders to build outside of America.

25 years ago I believe the Far Right was vastly more dangerous than the Far Left. But today I believe the Far Left, and especially Antifa, is more dangerous. Our attention and maintenance was on the Far Right while we ignored the Far Left.

The 2020 election and January 6th

Now onto the elephant in the room, the 2020 election. The topic so taboo that if you talk about it you're immediately cancelled. I'm willing to wade into this fire -- some of us need to be willing to.

I believe America has conflated two issues: the 2020 election itself and January 6th.

Just as Hilary Clinton and dozens of other democrats claimed the 2016 election was stolen (which I agree with). I believe there was a similar scale, or even more interference in the 2020 election. We need to be able to talk about this, so that we can fix the problems. Democracy doesn't work without secure elections. But it also doesn't work without peaceful transitions of power. Both are essential.

I believe there was extreme election interference but I don't believe January 6th was the right response. Bear with me.

So what was going on during the 2020 election?

I held a Top Secret (TS/SCI) clearance for about 7 years and used to work in information warfare, and also cybersecurity. I've seen nation-state tactics that most can't imagine. It is from this lens, and through access to lots of non-public information, through which I viewed the election.

If you go back to the 2020 election, arguably the most sophisticated cyberattack in history was taking place. This was the SolarWinds supply chain attack. This attack was so sophisticated that it's impossible to know exactly what it was used for. And much of what we do know has never been reported.

Washington has an interesting phenomenon where when something incredibly damaging is learned, people oftentimes clam up and refuse to deal with it. I've seen this first hand multiple times now.

But we also have things like the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, which the FBI was in possession of for roughly a year before the election, and despite it being easy to verify its authenticity, the FBI was actively telling Facebook and Twitter that it is fake news and they recommended banning sharing of the NY Post article about it.

But there were so many other issues. Not least of which was a global pandemic that almost certainly leaked from a Chinese lab, but we weren't allowed to talk about that. Nor the mail-in ballot issues.

Many point to the 2020 election and say "there's no smoking gun evidence so therefore there was no interference!" My retort is that there's not public evidence and in general the DoD/IC is afraid to push too far on the issue, knowing how damaging it would be to find interference. There's things I can't say.

The end result is a 2020 election where Biden and Trump combined received 155.5M votes vs the 128.8M combined for Hilary and Trump in 2016. That's 26.7M more votes in 2020 compared to 2016. That's a 20% increase in voter turnout in a period where the population only grew by a few percent. In an election where people weren't inspired by either candidate. And where there was more voting friction than ever before due to COVID-19.

Personally I don't think it's fair for Hilary Clinton to be able to claim the 2016 election was stolen, but Donald Trump to be indicted for the same thing.

Regarding the January 6th protests. I don't agree with them. Even if an election is stolen I think the correct democratic response is to accept it, have peaceful transition of power, and then to fight like hell on the backend to make sure it never happens again.

Regarding Trump's involvement in January 6th. The clearest thing he did was deny the election results, but again, so did Hilary Clinton. So if this isn't a crime in and of itself, then what else did he do?

The rest is fuzzy. There is conflicting testimony, especially around when the National Guard was requested. On the one hand you had the testimonies of General Charles Flynn and Lt. General Walter Piatt. But on the other side you have the testimonies of Colonel Earl Mathews, Trump's Chief of Staff Mark Meadows and The Head of the Capitol Police at the time, Steven Sund. The media reports on Trump's January 6th involvement in absolute terms but again, if you go deep, it's unclear. For me, if Trump actually asked for the National Guard to be ready to go during January 6th it's a major counterpoint against the allegations that he was inciting an insurrection.

Summary

In 2016 there were two primary reasons I voted for Hilary (and was deathly afraid of Trump)

#1) Russia helped him in the election by hurting Hilary. This made me susceptible to the media narrative that he's owned by Russia and will be a foreign policy disaster.

#2) Candidly the clip where he said "I grab them by their pussy" deeply bothered me.

These two things built a pattern in my mind that Trump was out of control.

But now with the benefit of hindsight, revisiting these two points:

#1) To my shock, I believe Trump was one of the best foreign policy Presidents in decades, and during the most complex period in almost a century, as the East rises, which leads to a changing set of rules.

#2) That clip still sits in the back of my mind, but I personally consider the double standards and lawfare against Trump to be 10x worse, and 10x more dangerous for our Democracy.

What's next?

Do I agree with Trump on everything? Of course not. The area where I disagree with Republicans the most is on Women's rights. And I'm sure I'll disagree with some of Trump's policies in the future.

But in general I think he was surprisingly prescient, such as with the border wall, and he was also a masterful negotiator, such as with the Abraham accords.

There's a real chance President Trump is convicted of felony charges and sentenced to prison. Bluntly, that's part of why I'm supporting him. I believe our justice system is being weaponized against him.

If abortion is your most important issue, then I get it, vote for Biden. If any other topic is your most important issue, then do your homework and investigate the manipulation I outlined above.

Given the two choices, I believe President Trump is overwhelmingly the stronger candidate. Again, this is something I couldn't have imagined saying in 2016.

Conclusion

Speak up. Don't be silenced. Freedom of speech is worth nothing if you're afraid to use it. We can't let cancel culture win.

There's no greater country in the world than America. But America has had a bad decade. America is blessed with a robust constitution, abundant natural resources and diverse people. The way out from here is by focusing on our strengths, which are liberalism and hard work. We need to start building again.

Best of luck to President Trump.


< many links within article at link not updated here >

[mountain_jim]

copying edina's comment here

Posted by edina (here)
A side note I'd like to add to the article above is that the author seems to still believe in the Guccifer narrative about the HRC emails leak to Wikileaks. He seems unaware that Seth Rich leaked those emails and was murdered for his actions.

That said, it's encouraging to see him ask questions and try to think through the morass. As long as people keep doing this, individually and en masse, there is hope.

Great share mountain_jim, thank you.

Yes I saw that, knew he was wrong there, thanks for the addition.

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1796529652472967591

Wall Street Apes
@WallStreetApes
Democrats Just Woke Up The Entire Country

“People, it doesn't matter how or what you feel about Donald Trump. But if you're a true student of the constitution, if you're a student of law, even if you have a moral standard of justice, all of America ought to be afraid right now.

For that man to be convicted without the right to adequately defend himself from charges that weren't even stated. We've lost our republic. Our constitution is dead, And everyone else in America, we ought to be afraid, afraid for ourselves. It's not a good thing.

And for those that think it is, those that's the enemy.”

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status...77680919511048

KanekoaTheGreat
@KanekoaTheGreat

CNN Senior Legal Analyst Describes How The Trump Conviction Was A Political Hit Job

1. "The judge donated money... in plain violation of a rule prohibiting New York judges from making political donations—to a pro-Biden, anti-Trump political operation."

2. Alvin Bragg boasted on the campaign trail in an overwhelmingly Democrat county, “It is a fact that I have sued Trump over 100 times.”

3. "Most importantly, the DA’s charges against Trump push the outer boundaries of the law and due process."

4. "The charges against Trump are obscure, and nearly entirely unprecedented. In fact, no state prosecutor — in New York, or Wyoming, or anywhere — has ever charged federal election laws as a direct or predicate state crime, against anyone, for anything. None. Ever."

5. The DA inflated misdemeanors past the statute of limitations and "electroshocked them back to life" by alleging the falsification of business records was committed 'with intent to commit another crime.'

6. "Inexcusably, the DA refused to specify what those unlawful means actually were — and the judge declined to force them to pony up — until right before closing arguments. So much for the constitutional obligation to provide notice to the defendant of the accusations against him in advance of trial."

7. "In these key respects, the charges against Trump aren’t just unusual. They’re bespoke, seemingly crafted individually for the former president and nobody else."

8. "The Manhattan DA’s employees reportedly have called this the “Zombie Case” because of various legal infirmities, including its bizarre charging mechanism. But it’s better characterized as the Frankenstein Case, cobbled together with ill-fitting parts into an ugly, awkward, but more-or-less functioning contraption that just might ultimately turn on its creator."

Link to full article below.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/arti...d-the-law.html

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/kylenabecker/status/1796577891745968625

Kyle Becker
@kylenabecker
"So, the whole thing is legal expense was marked down as legal expense. Think of it. This is the crime that I committed, that I'm supposed to go to jail for 187 years..."

"But I'm out there and I don't mind being out there because I'm doing something for this country and I'm doing something for our Constitution. It's very important, far beyond me, and this can't be allowed to happen to other presidents."

"It should never be allowed to happen in the future. But this is far beyond me. This is bigger than Trump. This is bigger than me. This is bigger than my presidency."

Donald Trump's statement following his unprecedented 'guilty' conviction in the Manhattan criminal trial couldn't be more powerful 🔥



https://x.com/liamrafi/status/1796528979022610814

See new posts
Conversation
Liam Rafizadeh
@liamrafi
🚨 TRUMP CASE BREAKDOWN: The crime alleged—Falsification of Business Records—is a misdemeanor, not even a severe one. It can only be elevated to a felony if it's linked to another felony.

According to legal scholars and professionals that reviewed the State of NY's records on this, 90% of cases where Falsification of Business Records was elevated to a felony involved situations where the falsification was incidental to fraud, embezzlement, or some other major financial crime. 📈

For instance, a defendant commits fraud in a business case—say, providing false revenue reports in an M&A transaction to hike the sale price.

Then, they enter the false revenue figures in the state records, mirroring the business fraud that was the basis of the crime in the first place. Only then does it make sense to bump this to a felony.

In this case, the prosecution elevated the claim to a felony based on some flimsy campaign finance violation that isn't even being prosecuted separately. 🧐

There's only one person on Earth any prosecutor would even possibly try to prosecute this as a felony against—and that's Donald Trump. This is what's called "Selective Prosecution," and it's a violation of every fundamental principle of our legal system. ⚖️

[mountain_jim]

copying here

Posted by mountain_jim (here)
https://x.com/TuckerCarlson/status/1796738483366543705

Donald Trump Jr. on his father’s conviction.

— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) June 1, 2024

[mountain_jim]

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciar...ved-on-appeal/

Bragg’s thrill kill in Manhattan could prove short-lived on appeal

BY JONATHAN TURLEY, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR - 06/01/24 10:30 AM ET

The conviction of former President Donald Trump in Manhattan of 34 felonies produced citywide celebrations. This thrill-kill environment extended to the media, where former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman told MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace that it was “majestic day” and “a day to celebrate.” When I left the courthouse after watching the verdict come in, I was floored by the celebrations outside by both the public and some of the media.

The celebrants would be wise to think twice before mounting this trophy kill on the political wall. The Trump trial is a target-rich environment for an appeal, with multiple layers of reversible error, in my view.

I am less convinced by suggestions that the case could be challenged on the inability of Trump receiving a fair trial in a district that voted roughly 90 percent against him. The problem was not the jury, but the prosecutors and the judge.

Some of the most compelling problems can be divided into four groups.

The Judge

Acting Supreme Court justice Juan Merchan was handpicked for this case rather than randomly selected. This is only the latest in a litany of Trump cases where Merchan has meted out tough rulings against Trump and his organization. With any other defendant, there would likely be outrage over his selection. Merchan donated to President Biden. Even though the state bar cleared that violation based on the small size of the contribution, it later stressed that no such contributions were appropriate for a judge. We learned later that Merchan has contributed to a group to stop the GOP and Trump. Merchan’s daughter is also a Democratic organizer who has helped raise millions against Trump and the GOP and for the Democrats.

To his credit, CNN legal analyst Elie Honig has previously said that this case was legally dubious, uniquely targeted Trump and could not succeed outside of an anti-Trump district. On the judge, he recently challenged critics on the fairness of assigning a Biden donor who has earmarked donations for “resisting the Republican Party and Donald Trump’s radical right-wing legacy.” He asked “Would folks have been just fine with the judge staying on the case if he had donated a couple bucks to “Re-elect Donald Trump, MAGA forever!”? “Absolutely not.”

What is equally disturbing is the failure of Merchan to protect the rights of the defendant and what even critics admit were distinctly pro-prosecution rulings in the trial. It is not just the appearance of a conflict with Judge Merchan but a record of highly biased decisions. In watching Merchan in the courtroom, I was shocked by his rulings as at times incomprehensible and conflicted.

The Charges

A leading threshold issue will be the decision to allow Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to effectively try Trump for violations of federal law. The Justice Department declined any criminal charges against Trump under federal election law over the alleged “hush money” payments. The Federal Election Commission likewise found no basis for a civil fine. With no federal prosecution, Bragg decided to use an unprecedented criminal theory not only to zap a dead misdemeanor into life (after the expiration of the statute of limitation) but to allow him to try violations of not only federal election law but also federal taxation violations. In other words, the Justice Department would not prosecute federal violations, so Bragg effectively did it in state court.

Even when closing arguments were given, analysts on various networks admitted that they were unclear about what Bragg was alleging. The indictment claimed a violation under New York’s election law 17-152 that the falsification of business records were committed to further another crime as an unlawful means to influence the election. However, in a maddeningly circular theory, that other crime could be the falsification of business records. It could also be violations of federal election and taxation laws, which Trump was never charged with, let alone convicted of.

The Evidence

Judge Merchan allowed a torrent of immaterial and prejudicial evidence to be introduced into the trial by the prosecution. That included testimony from porn actress Stormy Daniels that went into details about having sex with Trump. She included a clear suggestion that Trump raped her. After this utterly disgraceful testimony, Merchan expressed regret but actually blamed the defense counsel, despite their prior objections to the testimony. He had previously chastised counsel for making continued objections, but now he criticized them for not continuing to make objections.

Merchan was equally conflicted in his other orders. For example, he allowed the prosecutors to introduce the plea agreement of Michael Cohen to federal election violations as well as the non-prosecution agreement of David Pecker on such violations. However, it was allowed only for the purposes of credibility and context. He issued an instruction that the jury could not consider the plea or the agreement to establish or impute the guilt of Trump.

The prosecutors then proceeded to expressly state that it was “a fact” that federal election violations occurred in this case and that Trump ordered those violations. They also solicited such statements from witnesses like Cohen. Merchan overruled the objections that the prosecutors were eviscerating his instruction. Merchan also barred the use of a legal expert, former FEC Chair Brad Smith, who was prepared to testify that such payments cannot be viewed as federal election violations and would not affect the election even if they were considered contributions, since they would not even have had to be reported until after the election.

Merchan is likely to be upheld in denying the expert, since the court retains the authority to state what the law is to the jury. The problem is that Merchan failed to do so. Worse still, he allowed the jury to hear the opposite in the repeated false claim that these payments were campaign contributions.

The Instructions

Even with all of the reversible errors, some of us held out hope that there might be a hung jury. That hope was largely smashed by Merchan in his instructions to the jury. The court largely used standard instructions in a case that was anything but standard. However, the instruction also allowed for doubt as to what the jury would ultimately find. When the verdict came in, we were still unsure what Trump was convicted of.

Merchan allowed the jury to find that the secondary offense was any of the three vaguely defined options. Even on the jury form, they did not have to specify which of the crimes were found. Under Merchan’s instruction, the jury could have split 4-4-4 on what occurred in the case. They could have seen a conspiracy to conceal a federal election violation, falsification of business records or taxation violations. We will never know. Worse yet, Trump will never know.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that the requirement of unanimity in criminal convictions is sacrosanct in our system. While there was unanimity that the business records were falsified to hide or further a second crime, there was no express finding of what that crime may have been. In some ways, Trump may have been fortunate by Merchan’s cavalier approach. Given that the jury convicted Trump across the board, they might have found all of three secondary crimes. The verdict form never asked for such specificity.

These are just a few of the appellate issues. There are other challenges, including but not limited to due process violations on the lack of specificity in the indictment, vagueness of the underlying state law and the lack of evidentiary foundation for key defenses like “the legitimate press function.” They are the reason why many of us view this case is likely to be reversed in either the state or federal systems. None of that is likely to dampen the thrill in this kill in Manhattan.

But if Biden wins the election before this conviction is overturned, history’s judgment will be deafening.

Jonathan Turley is the J.B. and Maurice C. Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at the George Washington University Law School.

< more embedded links at link >

[mountain_jim]

https://x.com/catturd2/status/1796987886794949078

https://x.com/catturd2/status/1796913863402594336

Two-tiered banana republic joke.
Jack Poso 🇺🇸
@JackPosobiec
This is Gary Gensler

He was the Hillary official who oversaw filing payments for the fake Steele Dossier as 'legal expenses'

He is now the Chairman of the SEC

[Bill Ryan]

Chris Martenson (occasionally almost lost for words! ) takes the entire thing apart. When Martenson is at his best, he's very good at distilling and presenting the core aspects of just about any issue. Enjoy.

Can America Survive A Corrupt Court System?

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=95876N0iQoY

[ClearWater]

Up to 187 years...

187 = Murder