More trump grift
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
In Special Prosecutor Jack Smith's case on J6, the Judge has ruled that his aides must testify before that GJ. The list includes big players like Mark Meadows, John Radcliffe...
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics ... 9680310796
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/24/politics ... 9680310796
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
House Judiciary chair Jim Jordan had written a letter demanding Manhattan DA appear before the committee to testify about why Trump would be indicted and arrested this week.
https://crooksandliars.com/2023/03/alvi ... jim-jordan
https://crooksandliars.com/2023/03/alvi ... jim-jordan
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
What sets Trump world apart from any and every other President, ex or not, much less every other politician is the sheer volume of laws broken, led by his attorneys - 31 at this count - who have compromised their integrity as well as their law licenses.
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/03/24/h ... celebrate/
'For the US political world, though, today marks crime-fraud exception day, the day that at least one of Trump’s attorneys will be obliged to testify about how Trump lied to his lawyers to try to get away with hoarding stolen classified documents.
Because Evan Corcoran (and possibly Georgia attorney Jennifer Little) will testify today, I thought it a good day to update the list of attorneys who were or have been witnesses or who may be subjects in one or more investigations into Trump.
Since the Stormy Daniels payment may lead to Trump’s first indictment, Michael Cohen gets pride of place at number one on this list, a reminder that for seven years, Trump lawyers have been exposing themselves to legal jeopardy to help him cover things up.
The following lawyers have all — at a minimum — appeared in subpoenas pertinent to one or another of the investigations into Donald Trump, and a surprising number have testified before grand juries, including at least three with (Executive Privilege) waivers. To be clear: Many have no legal exposure themselves, but are instead simply witnesses to the efforts made to keep Trump in line before they were replaced with lawyers who were willing to let Trump do whatever he wanted, legal or no. But some of these lawyers have had legal process served against them, and so may themselves be subjects of one or multiple investigations.
Michael Cohen (hush payment): convicted felon whose phones were seized April 9, 2018
Rudolph Giuliani (Ukraine, hush payment, Georgia, coup attempt): phones seized in Ukraine investigation April 28, 2021, received subpoena for billing records in fundraising investigation around December 2022
John Eastman (Georgia, coup attempt): communications deemed crime-fraud excepted March 28, 2022; phone seized June 22, 2022
Boris Epshteyn (stolen documents, coup attempt, Georgia): testified in Georgia grand jury; phone seized in September after which he retroactively claimed to have been doing lawyer stuff
Sidney Powell (fraud, coup attempt, Georgia): Subpoenas sent in fraud investigation starting in September 2021; testified before Georgia grand jury; appeared in November subpoena
Jeffrey Clark (coup attempt): May 26 warrant for cloud accounts and phone seized June 22, 2022
Ken Klukowski (coup attempt): May 26 warrant for cloud accounts
Victoria Toensing (Ukraine, coup attempt): Phone seized in Ukraine investigation April 28, 2021, on June and November subpoenas
Brad Carver (Georgia and fake elector): phone contents seized June 22
Jenna Ellis (coup attempt and Georgia): Rudy’s sidekick, censured by CO Bar for lying serial misrepresentations, on June and November subpoenas
Kenneth Cheesbro (fake elector, Georgia): included in June and November subpoenas
Evan Corcoran (stolen documents): testified before grand jury in January, testifies under crime-fraud exception on March 24
Christina Bobb (coup attempt, Georgia, stolen documents): interviewed in October 2022 and appeared before grand jury in January, belatedly asked for testimony in Georgia
Stefan Passantino (coup attempt obstruction and financial): included in November subpoenas, alleged to have discouraged full testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson
Tim Parlatore (stolen documents): appeared before grand jury in December 2022
Jennifer Little (Georgia and stolen documents): ordered to testify under crime-fraud exception
Alina Habba (stolen documents, NYS tax fraud): testified before grand jury in January
Bruce Marks (coup attempt): included in November subpoena
Cleta Mitchell (coup attempt and Georgia): included in November subpoenas
Joshua Findlay (coup attempt): included in June subpoenas
Kurt Olsen (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
William Olson (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
Lin Wood (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
Alex Cannon (coup attempt, financial, stolen documents)
Eric Herschmann (coup attempt, Georgia, financial, stolen documents)
Justin Clark (coup attempt and financial): included June and November subpoenas
Joe DiGenova (coup attempt): included in June and November subpoenas
Greg Jacob (coup attempt): grand jury appearances, including with Executive Privilege waiver
Pat Cipollone (coup attempt): grand jury appearances in summer and — with Executive Privilege waiver — December 2
Pat Philbin (coup attempt and stolen documents): grand jury appearances in summer and — with Executive Privilege waiver — December 2
Matthew Morgan (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
Tim Parlatore is the latest addition to this list, based off someone’s decision to reveal Parlatore’s testimony to the stolen documents grand jury in December. As ABC reported, Beryl Howell ordered him to testify after he belatedly revealed that investigators he hired had found four documents with classification marks in a box brought back to Mar-a-Lago after the August 2022 search (he emphasizes that he did so without a subpoena, but this was an effort to stave off a finding of contempt).
The Dec. 22 testimony from attorney Timothy Parlatore was ordered after months of wrangling between Trump’s attorneys and officials in the Justice Department, who had grown increasingly concerned that Trump still continued to hold onto classified documents after more than 100 were discovered in the August 8 search, sources said.
In fact, just days before his testimony, Parlatore revealed to the DOJ and D.C. district court Judge Beryl Howell that a search of Mar-a-Lago conducted by Trump’s legal team on Dec. 15 and 16 had discovered four additional documents with classification markings, according to sources.
[snip]
While Judge Howell declined to hold Trump or his legal team in contempt at a Dec. 9 hearing, sources said, she did order Parlatore to testify on issues surrounding a signed certification he had provided that outlined the results of his team’s searches of locations where records responsive to the DOJ’s original subpoena could be located.
Howell also suggested at the hearing that Trump’s legal team include Mar-a-Lago in their list of locations to be searched again, despite the FBI’s previous court-authorized search of the property months earlier, sources said.
On Dec. 16, following a two-day search of Mar-a-Lago, Parlatore submitted a revised certification that acknowledged the discovery of the four additional documents in a closet near Trump’s office, sources said.
This explanation makes no mention of the classified folder found — presumably during the same search of Mar-a-Lago done at Howell’s suggestion — in Trump’s bedroom. Parlatore, who was brought in to do searches to give the patina of reliability to the earlier subpoena non-compliance, did not voluntarily hand over that folder; instead, DOJ subpoenaed it. In the wake of disclosures about that, Parlatore went on TV and made the ridiculous claim that the former President has nothing better to use to cover up a light on his bedside phone than random folders that once contained classified records, random folders that were not found during the FBI’s August 8 search.
Nor does this explanation mention the laptop with the documents marked classified (now numbered as four) also turned over.
Perhaps the most important detail this Parlatore-friendly story left out, however, is the way Trump’s team fought unsuccessfully to keep the names of the people who did the searches secret. After Howell ordered them to share those names in January, they testified before the grand jury, after Parlatore had already done so.
In this story, seeded the day before Corcoran testifies before the grand jury, that belatedly reveals Parlatore’s testimony before the grand jury, he makes claims of prosecutorial misconduct.
Parlatore, when reached for comment by ABC News, said, “I voluntarily and happily chose to go into the grand jury so that I could present my client’s case to them in the context of our search efforts. During my testimony, it was clear that the government was not acting appropriately and made several improper attempts to pierce privilege and, in my opinion, made several significant misstatements to the jury which I believe constitutes prosecutorial misconduct.”
Had Parlatore really believed something amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, we would have heard about it in December — though that would have required revealing how documents marked as classified got moved back to Mar-a-Lago after the August search. Had Parlatore really believed something amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, he would have said that on TV instead of sharing his bull*** story about covering up the light on a phone.
He didn’t. He didn’t make this claim until the night before Corcoran is set to testify about the adequacy of Mar-a-Lago searches Corcoran did six months before the one Parlatore did.
In between the time Parlatore testified to the grand jury in December and today, though, Parlatore made this bizarre claim about the possibility that Boris Epshteyn, described here as the gatekeeper between Trump and the lawyers, could be a subject of the investigation. (This story, dated March 14, followed the February 12 bull*** claim about the light by the side of the bed by just over a month.)
Mr. Epshteyn’s legal role with Mr. Trump, while less often focused on gritty legal details, has been to try to serve as a gatekeeper between the lawyers on the front lines and the former president, who is said to sometimes roll his eyes at the frequency of Mr. Epshteyn’s calls but picks up the phone.
“Boris has access to information and a network that is useful to us,” said one of the team’s lawyers, Timothy Parlatore, whom Mr. Epshteyn hired. “It’s good to have someone who’s a lawyer who is also inside the palace gates.”
Mr. Parlatore suggested that he was not worried that Mr. Epshteyn, like a substantial number of other Trump lawyers, had become at least tangentially embroiled in some of the same investigations on which he was helping to defend Mr. Trump.
“Absent any solid indication that Boris is a target here, I don’t think it affects us,” Mr. Parlatore said.
As I’ve noted, DOJ almost certainly believes that Trump still has classified documents. DOJ almost certainly believes that the searches Parlatore did in November and December not only weren’t adequate, but were proven to be inadequate when his investigators found classified documents that had been moved back to Mar-a-Lago after the initial search.
They tried to obtain those documents by holding lawyers who had attested to searches in contempt back in December. Instead, Beryl Howell made them do more investigation first, culminating in what may be the last order she issued as Chief Judge ordering Corcoran to testify.
One possible outcome of today’s testimony is that someone finally gets held in contempt, someone finally risks jail time until such time as an adequate search of all of Trump’s properties is conducted. And that may be why Tim Parlatore chose this moment to announce his inclusion on the ever-growing lists of Trump lawyers who may be witnesses or may be subjects of his investigations.'
https://www.emptywheel.net/2023/03/24/h ... celebrate/
'For the US political world, though, today marks crime-fraud exception day, the day that at least one of Trump’s attorneys will be obliged to testify about how Trump lied to his lawyers to try to get away with hoarding stolen classified documents.
Because Evan Corcoran (and possibly Georgia attorney Jennifer Little) will testify today, I thought it a good day to update the list of attorneys who were or have been witnesses or who may be subjects in one or more investigations into Trump.
Since the Stormy Daniels payment may lead to Trump’s first indictment, Michael Cohen gets pride of place at number one on this list, a reminder that for seven years, Trump lawyers have been exposing themselves to legal jeopardy to help him cover things up.
The following lawyers have all — at a minimum — appeared in subpoenas pertinent to one or another of the investigations into Donald Trump, and a surprising number have testified before grand juries, including at least three with (Executive Privilege) waivers. To be clear: Many have no legal exposure themselves, but are instead simply witnesses to the efforts made to keep Trump in line before they were replaced with lawyers who were willing to let Trump do whatever he wanted, legal or no. But some of these lawyers have had legal process served against them, and so may themselves be subjects of one or multiple investigations.
Michael Cohen (hush payment): convicted felon whose phones were seized April 9, 2018
Rudolph Giuliani (Ukraine, hush payment, Georgia, coup attempt): phones seized in Ukraine investigation April 28, 2021, received subpoena for billing records in fundraising investigation around December 2022
John Eastman (Georgia, coup attempt): communications deemed crime-fraud excepted March 28, 2022; phone seized June 22, 2022
Boris Epshteyn (stolen documents, coup attempt, Georgia): testified in Georgia grand jury; phone seized in September after which he retroactively claimed to have been doing lawyer stuff
Sidney Powell (fraud, coup attempt, Georgia): Subpoenas sent in fraud investigation starting in September 2021; testified before Georgia grand jury; appeared in November subpoena
Jeffrey Clark (coup attempt): May 26 warrant for cloud accounts and phone seized June 22, 2022
Ken Klukowski (coup attempt): May 26 warrant for cloud accounts
Victoria Toensing (Ukraine, coup attempt): Phone seized in Ukraine investigation April 28, 2021, on June and November subpoenas
Brad Carver (Georgia and fake elector): phone contents seized June 22
Jenna Ellis (coup attempt and Georgia): Rudy’s sidekick, censured by CO Bar for lying serial misrepresentations, on June and November subpoenas
Kenneth Cheesbro (fake elector, Georgia): included in June and November subpoenas
Evan Corcoran (stolen documents): testified before grand jury in January, testifies under crime-fraud exception on March 24
Christina Bobb (coup attempt, Georgia, stolen documents): interviewed in October 2022 and appeared before grand jury in January, belatedly asked for testimony in Georgia
Stefan Passantino (coup attempt obstruction and financial): included in November subpoenas, alleged to have discouraged full testimony from Cassidy Hutchinson
Tim Parlatore (stolen documents): appeared before grand jury in December 2022
Jennifer Little (Georgia and stolen documents): ordered to testify under crime-fraud exception
Alina Habba (stolen documents, NYS tax fraud): testified before grand jury in January
Bruce Marks (coup attempt): included in November subpoena
Cleta Mitchell (coup attempt and Georgia): included in November subpoenas
Joshua Findlay (coup attempt): included in June subpoenas
Kurt Olsen (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
William Olson (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
Lin Wood (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
Alex Cannon (coup attempt, financial, stolen documents)
Eric Herschmann (coup attempt, Georgia, financial, stolen documents)
Justin Clark (coup attempt and financial): included June and November subpoenas
Joe DiGenova (coup attempt): included in June and November subpoenas
Greg Jacob (coup attempt): grand jury appearances, including with Executive Privilege waiver
Pat Cipollone (coup attempt): grand jury appearances in summer and — with Executive Privilege waiver — December 2
Pat Philbin (coup attempt and stolen documents): grand jury appearances in summer and — with Executive Privilege waiver — December 2
Matthew Morgan (coup attempt): included in November subpoenas
Tim Parlatore is the latest addition to this list, based off someone’s decision to reveal Parlatore’s testimony to the stolen documents grand jury in December. As ABC reported, Beryl Howell ordered him to testify after he belatedly revealed that investigators he hired had found four documents with classification marks in a box brought back to Mar-a-Lago after the August 2022 search (he emphasizes that he did so without a subpoena, but this was an effort to stave off a finding of contempt).
The Dec. 22 testimony from attorney Timothy Parlatore was ordered after months of wrangling between Trump’s attorneys and officials in the Justice Department, who had grown increasingly concerned that Trump still continued to hold onto classified documents after more than 100 were discovered in the August 8 search, sources said.
In fact, just days before his testimony, Parlatore revealed to the DOJ and D.C. district court Judge Beryl Howell that a search of Mar-a-Lago conducted by Trump’s legal team on Dec. 15 and 16 had discovered four additional documents with classification markings, according to sources.
[snip]
While Judge Howell declined to hold Trump or his legal team in contempt at a Dec. 9 hearing, sources said, she did order Parlatore to testify on issues surrounding a signed certification he had provided that outlined the results of his team’s searches of locations where records responsive to the DOJ’s original subpoena could be located.
Howell also suggested at the hearing that Trump’s legal team include Mar-a-Lago in their list of locations to be searched again, despite the FBI’s previous court-authorized search of the property months earlier, sources said.
On Dec. 16, following a two-day search of Mar-a-Lago, Parlatore submitted a revised certification that acknowledged the discovery of the four additional documents in a closet near Trump’s office, sources said.
This explanation makes no mention of the classified folder found — presumably during the same search of Mar-a-Lago done at Howell’s suggestion — in Trump’s bedroom. Parlatore, who was brought in to do searches to give the patina of reliability to the earlier subpoena non-compliance, did not voluntarily hand over that folder; instead, DOJ subpoenaed it. In the wake of disclosures about that, Parlatore went on TV and made the ridiculous claim that the former President has nothing better to use to cover up a light on his bedside phone than random folders that once contained classified records, random folders that were not found during the FBI’s August 8 search.
Nor does this explanation mention the laptop with the documents marked classified (now numbered as four) also turned over.
Perhaps the most important detail this Parlatore-friendly story left out, however, is the way Trump’s team fought unsuccessfully to keep the names of the people who did the searches secret. After Howell ordered them to share those names in January, they testified before the grand jury, after Parlatore had already done so.
In this story, seeded the day before Corcoran testifies before the grand jury, that belatedly reveals Parlatore’s testimony before the grand jury, he makes claims of prosecutorial misconduct.
Parlatore, when reached for comment by ABC News, said, “I voluntarily and happily chose to go into the grand jury so that I could present my client’s case to them in the context of our search efforts. During my testimony, it was clear that the government was not acting appropriately and made several improper attempts to pierce privilege and, in my opinion, made several significant misstatements to the jury which I believe constitutes prosecutorial misconduct.”
Had Parlatore really believed something amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, we would have heard about it in December — though that would have required revealing how documents marked as classified got moved back to Mar-a-Lago after the August search. Had Parlatore really believed something amounted to prosecutorial misconduct, he would have said that on TV instead of sharing his bull*** story about covering up the light on a phone.
He didn’t. He didn’t make this claim until the night before Corcoran is set to testify about the adequacy of Mar-a-Lago searches Corcoran did six months before the one Parlatore did.
In between the time Parlatore testified to the grand jury in December and today, though, Parlatore made this bizarre claim about the possibility that Boris Epshteyn, described here as the gatekeeper between Trump and the lawyers, could be a subject of the investigation. (This story, dated March 14, followed the February 12 bull*** claim about the light by the side of the bed by just over a month.)
Mr. Epshteyn’s legal role with Mr. Trump, while less often focused on gritty legal details, has been to try to serve as a gatekeeper between the lawyers on the front lines and the former president, who is said to sometimes roll his eyes at the frequency of Mr. Epshteyn’s calls but picks up the phone.
“Boris has access to information and a network that is useful to us,” said one of the team’s lawyers, Timothy Parlatore, whom Mr. Epshteyn hired. “It’s good to have someone who’s a lawyer who is also inside the palace gates.”
Mr. Parlatore suggested that he was not worried that Mr. Epshteyn, like a substantial number of other Trump lawyers, had become at least tangentially embroiled in some of the same investigations on which he was helping to defend Mr. Trump.
“Absent any solid indication that Boris is a target here, I don’t think it affects us,” Mr. Parlatore said.
As I’ve noted, DOJ almost certainly believes that Trump still has classified documents. DOJ almost certainly believes that the searches Parlatore did in November and December not only weren’t adequate, but were proven to be inadequate when his investigators found classified documents that had been moved back to Mar-a-Lago after the initial search.
They tried to obtain those documents by holding lawyers who had attested to searches in contempt back in December. Instead, Beryl Howell made them do more investigation first, culminating in what may be the last order she issued as Chief Judge ordering Corcoran to testify.
One possible outcome of today’s testimony is that someone finally gets held in contempt, someone finally risks jail time until such time as an adequate search of all of Trump’s properties is conducted. And that may be why Tim Parlatore chose this moment to announce his inclusion on the ever-growing lists of Trump lawyers who may be witnesses or may be subjects of his investigations.'
-
- Posts: 657
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
.
Meanwhile, keeping an eye back on guilty donnie…..he is losing it. Does this sound like a sane person to anyone?
. .
.
And….I’m sure we will see this. I just hope he gets a jail onesie that is a size too small - a permanent wedgie!
.
Meanwhile, keeping an eye back on guilty donnie…..he is losing it. Does this sound like a sane person to anyone?
. .
.
And….I’m sure we will see this. I just hope he gets a jail onesie that is a size too small - a permanent wedgie!
.
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
It's way too easy in this environment to go down rabbit holes of disinformation. It just sucks anyone in.
The current situation for Trump is 3 fold, but the 2 stories that are making headlines are the Manhattan DA and the MAL case.
In the MAL case we saw court filings from a 3 judge appeal panel that was tasked with replying to Team Trump's request for an immediate stay on Fed'l Judge Howell's ruling a week ago that the Special Counsel had made a strong enough argument that Trump and his lawyer (Corcoran) had conferred to make illegal plans which then allowed the court to pierce the near sacred rule of lawyer/client confidentiality. The exception to that rule is if the attorney and client are engaged in an illegal act. We learned these items from court filings and the Judge in this case ruled based on evidence that has been and still is redacted. The 3 judge appeal panel made the unprecedented decision this week for TeamTrump to file their reasons by midnight and then they allowed the SC until 6 am to respond. We don't know what the paperwork said from either side, they are sealed. We do know from the paperwork made public that the 3 judges agreed with the first Fed'l judge that the evidence presented was strong enough that yes Trump's attorney must appear before the grand jury and answer questions and he must bring with him any documentation that he has of his interactions with Trump. In that ruling the documentation also includes transcripts of phone call recordings, so there are tapes!
Part of the ongoing speculation of what instigated the DoJ and the judges involved to move swiftly is that Trump's record of playing a shell game with the classified documents appears to be ongoing. Any documents still unaccounted for are worrisome considering the effort that's been made to move boxes (they have video of the boxes being moved), the inexplicable account by a staffer that had documents in a box and scanned them to store in her cloud, folders sitting next to Trump's bedside and 2 more docs turned over by Trump's legal counsel that they found in December after what? 4 searches already?
Then there's the Manhattan case. The DA is set to open up the GJ on Monday to hear 1 or 2 surprise witnesses that Trump is sending in to represent him.Who knows how that will work out. We do know that Trump's cute little social media outcry last Sat that he would be arrested on Tues was a nothing burger, BUT he did manage to get over $1 million in contributions from his followers when he asked them to pony up.
The current situation for Trump is 3 fold, but the 2 stories that are making headlines are the Manhattan DA and the MAL case.
In the MAL case we saw court filings from a 3 judge appeal panel that was tasked with replying to Team Trump's request for an immediate stay on Fed'l Judge Howell's ruling a week ago that the Special Counsel had made a strong enough argument that Trump and his lawyer (Corcoran) had conferred to make illegal plans which then allowed the court to pierce the near sacred rule of lawyer/client confidentiality. The exception to that rule is if the attorney and client are engaged in an illegal act. We learned these items from court filings and the Judge in this case ruled based on evidence that has been and still is redacted. The 3 judge appeal panel made the unprecedented decision this week for TeamTrump to file their reasons by midnight and then they allowed the SC until 6 am to respond. We don't know what the paperwork said from either side, they are sealed. We do know from the paperwork made public that the 3 judges agreed with the first Fed'l judge that the evidence presented was strong enough that yes Trump's attorney must appear before the grand jury and answer questions and he must bring with him any documentation that he has of his interactions with Trump. In that ruling the documentation also includes transcripts of phone call recordings, so there are tapes!
Part of the ongoing speculation of what instigated the DoJ and the judges involved to move swiftly is that Trump's record of playing a shell game with the classified documents appears to be ongoing. Any documents still unaccounted for are worrisome considering the effort that's been made to move boxes (they have video of the boxes being moved), the inexplicable account by a staffer that had documents in a box and scanned them to store in her cloud, folders sitting next to Trump's bedside and 2 more docs turned over by Trump's legal counsel that they found in December after what? 4 searches already?
Then there's the Manhattan case. The DA is set to open up the GJ on Monday to hear 1 or 2 surprise witnesses that Trump is sending in to represent him.Who knows how that will work out. We do know that Trump's cute little social media outcry last Sat that he would be arrested on Tues was a nothing burger, BUT he did manage to get over $1 million in contributions from his followers when he asked them to pony up.
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Are those bumper sticker memes or do you know who said them?
For instance, no one has said that Biden got 81 million more votes than Trump. The number is 8.1 million that was tossed around https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 512962001/
If you're trying to quote Pete Stryok about J6, at least don't let others tell you what to think, go to the actual interview. He laid out the difference between attacks by foreign entities against this country and an insurrection that was a domestic terror attack. So, no, there is no comparison with 9/11 or Pearl Harbor with J6.
For instance, no one has said that Biden got 81 million more votes than Trump. The number is 8.1 million that was tossed around https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/fac ... 512962001/
If you're trying to quote Pete Stryok about J6, at least don't let others tell you what to think, go to the actual interview. He laid out the difference between attacks by foreign entities against this country and an insurrection that was a domestic terror attack. So, no, there is no comparison with 9/11 or Pearl Harbor with J6.
-
- Posts: 850
- Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2021 1:08 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
‘DT is a secret Russian agent’
‘There were absolutely no irregularities or differences in the 2020 election and JB (from his basement) got 81 million votes (hugely higher than Obama and H. Clinton)’
‘J6 was an insurrection (worse than 9/11 and Pearl Harbor) and Siknek died from his head bashed in that day’
That’s just 3, I could do a ton more. But the pack of cackling hyenas here will never consider that ‘their’ news lies to them!
‘There were absolutely no irregularities or differences in the 2020 election and JB (from his basement) got 81 million votes (hugely higher than Obama and H. Clinton)’
‘J6 was an insurrection (worse than 9/11 and Pearl Harbor) and Siknek died from his head bashed in that day’
That’s just 3, I could do a ton more. But the pack of cackling hyenas here will never consider that ‘their’ news lies to them!
- mister_coffee
- Posts: 1417
- Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
- Location: Winthrop, WA
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
I think we can all agree that certain right-wing talking points, like:
"Jewish space lasers cause forest fires"
"The January 6th protests at the US Capitol were peaceful"
"The 2020 election was stolen by the Democrats"
are not facts. There aren't really any equivalent left-wing talking points at this point.
More, I strongly suspect (but do not know for certain) that these talking points aren't put out in good faith by people who really believe them. The intention, as Steve Bannon so pithily put it, is to "flood the zone with s**t". More precisely, the intention is to (1) confuse the public discourse, and (2) serve as a signaling mechanism to other members of the tribe. As such well-intentioned folks who want to figure out the truth in this confusing media environment should dismiss them post haste.
In a media environment polluted with misinformation, I think weighing all information sources equally is a foolish approach. One has to exercise some judgement, and I think 99 percent of the time doing so is not grossly difficult.
On the Trump case, I think the reason we are talking about it so much is because we can't really know how it will all turn out. But we'll all pay to watch it on premium YouTube.
On one hand, he is the subject of four separate criminal investigations. And he isn't employing the very best attorneys. Even if he was, what his legal counsel needs to do to successfully defend against one will very likely to weaken his defense in other cases.
On the other hand, you can never really know what a jury is going to do. And prosecuting a very high profile figure like Trump is going to be risky, and prosecuting attorneys at all levels, and most especially US Attorneys, abhor risky prosecutions.
"Jewish space lasers cause forest fires"
"The January 6th protests at the US Capitol were peaceful"
"The 2020 election was stolen by the Democrats"
are not facts. There aren't really any equivalent left-wing talking points at this point.
More, I strongly suspect (but do not know for certain) that these talking points aren't put out in good faith by people who really believe them. The intention, as Steve Bannon so pithily put it, is to "flood the zone with s**t". More precisely, the intention is to (1) confuse the public discourse, and (2) serve as a signaling mechanism to other members of the tribe. As such well-intentioned folks who want to figure out the truth in this confusing media environment should dismiss them post haste.
In a media environment polluted with misinformation, I think weighing all information sources equally is a foolish approach. One has to exercise some judgement, and I think 99 percent of the time doing so is not grossly difficult.
On the Trump case, I think the reason we are talking about it so much is because we can't really know how it will all turn out. But we'll all pay to watch it on premium YouTube.
On one hand, he is the subject of four separate criminal investigations. And he isn't employing the very best attorneys. Even if he was, what his legal counsel needs to do to successfully defend against one will very likely to weaken his defense in other cases.
On the other hand, you can never really know what a jury is going to do. And prosecuting a very high profile figure like Trump is going to be risky, and prosecuting attorneys at all levels, and most especially US Attorneys, abhor risky prosecutions.
Last edited by mister_coffee on Thu Mar 23, 2023 10:14 am, edited 1 time in total.
![Arrow :arrow:](./images/smilies/icon_arrow.gif)
![Idea :idea:](./images/smilies/icon_idea.gif)
-
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
what, views differ? You said we were both wrong so it sounded like you were saying that you were right.
Math however doesn't concern itself with opinion as math is either right or wrong.
However, your numbers didn't add up as usual.
Learn what facts are dude and use those to support your opinion.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
I'd forgotten about this investigation but it's popping up again. $ tied to Putin's allies went to Trump Media and are being investigated.
https://www.salon.com/2023/03/15/media- ... jr-report/
'Federal prosecutors in New York investigating former President Donald Trump's social media company "examined" whether it violated money laundering laws by accenting $8 million in loans with suspected Russia ties, according to The Guardian.
Trump Media, which owns Truth Social, came under a criminal investigation last year in connection to its planned merger with a blank check company called Digital World (DWAC). Towards the end of the year, prosecutors began looking at two loans totaling $8 million sent to Trump Media through the Caribbean from two obscure entities that appear to be "controlled in part by the relation of an ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin," according to the report.
The first loan, a $2 million wire transfer, appears to have been approved by Donald Trump Jr., who sits on the company's board, according to the report.
"Just want to keep you in the loop – no guaranty that these will get signed and funded, but we remain hopeful," John Haley, a lawyer for Trump Media, wrote in a December 2021 email.
"Thanks john much appreciated," Trump Jr. replied.
"I'm really rich": Trump claims he doesn't even "need financing" as Truth Social deal falls apart
Guardian reporter Hugo Lowell explained on MSNBC that prosecutors "got a tip" at the end of last year over the loans that came at a time when Trump's company was "cash poor."
"They went and got bridge financing from first a bank, then in February 2022 they got a second loan of $6 million from two different companies," Lowell said. "As it turned out, they're pretty much one and the same company, and if you trace the beneficiaries back you get to the nephew of a Putin ally who was the first deputy justice minister in Russia and previously served in Putin's executive office."
https://www.salon.com/2023/03/15/media- ... jr-report/
'Federal prosecutors in New York investigating former President Donald Trump's social media company "examined" whether it violated money laundering laws by accenting $8 million in loans with suspected Russia ties, according to The Guardian.
Trump Media, which owns Truth Social, came under a criminal investigation last year in connection to its planned merger with a blank check company called Digital World (DWAC). Towards the end of the year, prosecutors began looking at two loans totaling $8 million sent to Trump Media through the Caribbean from two obscure entities that appear to be "controlled in part by the relation of an ally of Russian president Vladimir Putin," according to the report.
The first loan, a $2 million wire transfer, appears to have been approved by Donald Trump Jr., who sits on the company's board, according to the report.
"Just want to keep you in the loop – no guaranty that these will get signed and funded, but we remain hopeful," John Haley, a lawyer for Trump Media, wrote in a December 2021 email.
"Thanks john much appreciated," Trump Jr. replied.
"I'm really rich": Trump claims he doesn't even "need financing" as Truth Social deal falls apart
Guardian reporter Hugo Lowell explained on MSNBC that prosecutors "got a tip" at the end of last year over the loans that came at a time when Trump's company was "cash poor."
"They went and got bridge financing from first a bank, then in February 2022 they got a second loan of $6 million from two different companies," Lowell said. "As it turned out, they're pretty much one and the same company, and if you trace the beneficiaries back you get to the nephew of a Putin ally who was the first deputy justice minister in Russia and previously served in Putin's executive office."
- mister_coffee
- Posts: 1417
- Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
- Location: Winthrop, WA
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
again, it's constructive when you consider the current right wing meme that Democrats are above the law and Trump is being unfairly prosecuted in a political Witch Hunt.mister_coffee wrote: ↑Wed Mar 22, 2023 11:22 am
Again, making this simple when it just ain't isn't at all constructive or wise.
The facts clearly show that politicians from both sides of the aisle commit crimes and it doesn't appear that one party is favored over another.
And again to my point, both left and right media targets Americans with speculation, innuendo and in some cases downright lies designed to keep us viewing in order to sell product and make them a bucket load of money.
No need to amplify the divisive crap on social media, just wait for the facts to come out.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Points well taken.
It is also useful to look outside the professional politicians. Case in point, look at Steve Bannon, Rudy G, Steve Bannon's sugar daddy, the Mercers and the whole list of those who got Trump pardons.
Clearly, the Trump admin ushered in a wide array of law breakers, both inside and outside of the paid politician category. There's never been a Republican nor a Democratic administration in history that has brought the sheer volume of lawlessness to our judicial system.
It is also useful to look outside the professional politicians. Case in point, look at Steve Bannon, Rudy G, Steve Bannon's sugar daddy, the Mercers and the whole list of those who got Trump pardons.
Clearly, the Trump admin ushered in a wide array of law breakers, both inside and outside of the paid politician category. There's never been a Republican nor a Democratic administration in history that has brought the sheer volume of lawlessness to our judicial system.
- mister_coffee
- Posts: 1417
- Joined: Thu Jul 16, 2020 7:35 pm
- Location: Winthrop, WA
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
You're both kind of mistaken, and the facts are a bit complicated and murky. The Real World has a funny way of doing that.
Some of the things that make this more complicated is that if you consider a 40-year time span and just look at Congress there were a lot more Democrats than Republicans. I think if you considered just the last 20 years or so or considered the executive branch it would also look a lot different.
Also keep in mind that indictments are generally only for felonies and not misdemeanors.
Some executive branch political appointees do not have a clear political affiliation. One prominent example of someone who got themselves in quite a bit of trouble was Gen. David Petraeus.
So I Did My Own Research and found this Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A ... _of_crimes
Note this list is of convictions, not indictments. Thus it necessarily is comparing apples to oranges. It is, in my opinion, more complete and accurate than just counting congress critters. And I think it is legit to count political appointees as well.
What I get from the above is:
39 Republicans
35 Democrats
4 Unaffiliated or Unknown
Note that is from 1981 to present.
What I find **very** interesting is that if you consider 2001 to present the "balance" changes quite dramatically:
26 Republicans
9 Democrats
1 Unaffiliated
One thing that makes this complicated is that some elected officials switched parties during this time period. I attempted to use the political affiliation (nearly always D) that they held when they apparently committed their crimes, but this is by its nature kind of ambiguous.
My own personal suspicion is that very little in these numbers can be generalized to the inherent moral failings of one political affiliation over the other. I think the dominant factor is probably that there were large Democratic Majorities in Congress until 1994, and thus more Democrats around to get caught with their greedy hands in the cookie jar.
Again, making this simple when it just ain't isn't at all constructive or wise.
Some of the things that make this more complicated is that if you consider a 40-year time span and just look at Congress there were a lot more Democrats than Republicans. I think if you considered just the last 20 years or so or considered the executive branch it would also look a lot different.
Also keep in mind that indictments are generally only for felonies and not misdemeanors.
Some executive branch political appointees do not have a clear political affiliation. One prominent example of someone who got themselves in quite a bit of trouble was Gen. David Petraeus.
So I Did My Own Research and found this Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A ... _of_crimes
Note this list is of convictions, not indictments. Thus it necessarily is comparing apples to oranges. It is, in my opinion, more complete and accurate than just counting congress critters. And I think it is legit to count political appointees as well.
What I get from the above is:
39 Republicans
35 Democrats
4 Unaffiliated or Unknown
Note that is from 1981 to present.
What I find **very** interesting is that if you consider 2001 to present the "balance" changes quite dramatically:
26 Republicans
9 Democrats
1 Unaffiliated
One thing that makes this complicated is that some elected officials switched parties during this time period. I attempted to use the political affiliation (nearly always D) that they held when they apparently committed their crimes, but this is by its nature kind of ambiguous.
My own personal suspicion is that very little in these numbers can be generalized to the inherent moral failings of one political affiliation over the other. I think the dominant factor is probably that there were large Democratic Majorities in Congress until 1994, and thus more Democrats around to get caught with their greedy hands in the cookie jar.
Again, making this simple when it just ain't isn't at all constructive or wise.
![Arrow :arrow:](./images/smilies/icon_arrow.gif)
![Idea :idea:](./images/smilies/icon_idea.gif)
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
It's behind a paywall but I notice that it was written 7 years ago, well before Trump & his Rep's started their foray into our justice system.
Not current but closer: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... p-reagan-/
Not current but closer: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2 ... p-reagan-/
-
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Lets look at the facts.
A quick count in this WP article reports 18 Democrat vs 10 Replubican members of Congress convicted of crimes since 1980 to date of article.
"More than two dozen members of Congress have been indicted since 1980"
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... ince-1980/
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Yes you indeed posted a direct counter to Jingles argument.
Jingles needs to recognize that what you posted also demonstrates that to find cases of Dem Congressmen being arrested and prosecuted does happen, but the cases are far and few between compared to the Reps and that is simply because the sheer number of crimes that the Reps commit on a regular basis far far outweighs the lawbreaking by the Dems. The Reps are prosecuted more frequently simply because they break the law more frequently, not because the justice system is out to get them.
Jingles needs to recognize that what you posted also demonstrates that to find cases of Dem Congressmen being arrested and prosecuted does happen, but the cases are far and few between compared to the Reps and that is simply because the sheer number of crimes that the Reps commit on a regular basis far far outweighs the lawbreaking by the Dems. The Reps are prosecuted more frequently simply because they break the law more frequently, not because the justice system is out to get them.
-
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Rideback wrote: ↑Tue Mar 21, 2023 12:39 pm There are laws broken with arrests and then they are laws broken...
To link to an article where Dem Congresspeople a year ago showed up to protest, at a lawful protest, the end of Roe v Wade is somehow comparable to the severity much less volume of lawbreaking that we've been exposed to by Rep politicians doesn't carry the load of a whataboutism argument.
No, blocking traffic and then not following police instructions after 3 warnings, is NOT what you characterize as a "lawful protest".
And yes there are degrees in severity of crime and resulting punishment. In this case, those Congress people paid a fine, but still that was really just all political theater.
The point is, if you break the law whether you are skewed left or right you will be arrested and prosecuted which is contrary to Jingles point. Being found guilty is another matter.
Jingles point is one of the current right wing misinformation talking points meant to further divide us (i.e. that the left isn't subject to laws) and to support the former POTUS claims that he is the target of an unfair political Witch Hunt.
The facts I presented directly contradict that "meme.
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
There are laws broken with arrests and then they are laws broken...
To link to an article where Dem Congresspeople a year ago showed up to protest, at a lawful protest, the end of Roe v Wade is somehow comparable to the severity much less volume of lawbreaking that we've been exposed to by Rep politicians doesn't carry the load of a whataboutism argument.
To link to an article where Dem Congresspeople a year ago showed up to protest, at a lawful protest, the end of Roe v Wade is somehow comparable to the severity much less volume of lawbreaking that we've been exposed to by Rep politicians doesn't carry the load of a whataboutism argument.
-
- Posts: 1440
- Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:22 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Remember when Former Democratic VP candidate John Edwards was prosecuted for campaign funding violations (funneling money to his mistress while his wife was dying of cancer).
"On June 3, 2011, Edwards was indicted by a federal grand jury in North Carolina on six felony charges, including four counts of collecting illegal campaign contributions, one count of conspiracy, and one count of making false statements."
Recently Former Democratic
"U.S. Congressman Michael “Ozzie” Myers, 79, of Philadelphia, PA, was sentenced to 30 months in prison, three years of supervised release, and ordered to pay $100,000 in fines, with $10,000 of that due immediately, by United States District Court Judge Paul S."
That's just a few. I'm sure there is more.
Here's some Democrats being arrested recently.
"17 members of Congress arrested during Supreme Court protest, Capitol Police say."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/representa ... 022-07-19/
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding--Nick Lowe
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
Can't talk to a man who don't want to understand--Carol King
-
- Posts: 657
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Help us out here, jingles….
You and a lot of the R party have been jumping up and down mad about “the border- drugs, illegals, the wall”, etc….
Can you help me out and explain why kevin mccarthy has proposed cutting 2000 Border Patrol agents?
Just wondering….
You and a lot of the R party have been jumping up and down mad about “the border- drugs, illegals, the wall”, etc….
Can you help me out and explain why kevin mccarthy has proposed cutting 2000 Border Patrol agents?
Just wondering….
-
- Posts: 1314
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2021 1:25 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
"where the government controls the people instead of the way the founders intended of the people controlling the government.
I kinda feel sorry you are so blind and set in your ways you can't see the truth but continue to spew TOTAL BS."
Can't let this one go by Jingles. Your government wants to control women's bodies. Oh, but that's different you will say. BS to that, i say.
What Rideback and Jim are posting are not false. You have been brainwashed. Do you collect Medicare and Social Security?
Trump is going more and more off the deep end with his latest tweets.
He is an insane old man.
I kinda feel sorry you are so blind and set in your ways you can't see the truth but continue to spew TOTAL BS."
Can't let this one go by Jingles. Your government wants to control women's bodies. Oh, but that's different you will say. BS to that, i say.
What Rideback and Jim are posting are not false. You have been brainwashed. Do you collect Medicare and Social Security?
Trump is going more and more off the deep end with his latest tweets.
He is an insane old man.
Pearl Cherrington
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
I've been waiting for one of these cases to include RICO, it just makes sense.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/20/politics ... %3A28%3A03
https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/20/politics ... %3A28%3A03
-
- Posts: 1822
- Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2021 5:53 am
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
Thanks, I couldn't get the charts to post.
It might be a good time to mention that after the disastrous administration of Bush that left Obama the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression Obama was able to claw our way out and pass on to Trump a sturdy economy and good job growth. He couldn't get us out of the Afghanistan war but he did get us out of Iraq. Trump took that sturdy economy and trashed it to once again leave a poor economy to an incoming Dem president. We're tired of being the fixers.
It might be a good time to mention that after the disastrous administration of Bush that left Obama the worst economic disaster since the Great Depression Obama was able to claw our way out and pass on to Trump a sturdy economy and good job growth. He couldn't get us out of the Afghanistan war but he did get us out of Iraq. Trump took that sturdy economy and trashed it to once again leave a poor economy to an incoming Dem president. We're tired of being the fixers.
-
- Posts: 657
- Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2022 8:24 pm
- Contact:
Re: More trump grift
.
First of all…you do realize that 25% of all the US debt - in ALL 250+ years of US history - has come from just 4 years of guilty donnie? ..…yes 1/4 of all our debt. Yes, there was pandemic expenditures in there, but mostly due to his unpaid for tax cuts.
Beyond that…..Here’s some simple charts and numbers for you you, jingles. It funny…when you turn off fox nooz and actually look at the actual numbers instead of swallowing Republican campaign news bite bs…there is actual REAL data out there!:
.
Jobs first.
Nope, the orange one didn’t do so well, there….
. .
Deficits? Notice that the yearly federal deficit went DOWN in just about every D administration!
And Clinton actually created a surplus.
. .
And finally, an economic recap…. Who did the best at job creation and helping out the economy?
Not the ‘trickle down’, ‘supply side’, ‘a rising tide lifts all boats so we gotta cut rich peoples taxes’ party…
. .
I keep hearing “you just don’t see all the bad stuff the Dems did/do”…..
So, you can go ahead and list it anytime. Instead of just making empty claims.
.
First of all…you do realize that 25% of all the US debt - in ALL 250+ years of US history - has come from just 4 years of guilty donnie? ..…yes 1/4 of all our debt. Yes, there was pandemic expenditures in there, but mostly due to his unpaid for tax cuts.
Beyond that…..Here’s some simple charts and numbers for you you, jingles. It funny…when you turn off fox nooz and actually look at the actual numbers instead of swallowing Republican campaign news bite bs…there is actual REAL data out there!:
.
Jobs first.
Nope, the orange one didn’t do so well, there….
. .
Deficits? Notice that the yearly federal deficit went DOWN in just about every D administration!
And Clinton actually created a surplus.
. .
And finally, an economic recap…. Who did the best at job creation and helping out the economy?
Not the ‘trickle down’, ‘supply side’, ‘a rising tide lifts all boats so we gotta cut rich peoples taxes’ party…
. .
I keep hearing “you just don’t see all the bad stuff the Dems did/do”…..
So, you can go ahead and list it anytime. Instead of just making empty claims.
.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests