CNN: News Central With John Berman: ‘Donald Trump’s Attorney Has Tense Exchange With Judge’

Posted on January 16, 2024 by FredSchneiderUS

CNN: Donald Trump's Attorney Has Tense Exchange With JudgeSource:CNN– left to right: Defendant Don & one of his MAGA propagandists, acting as legal counsel, Alina Habba.

Source:The New Democrat

“Donald Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, sparred with Judge Lewis Kaplan at the start of the trial to determine how much money Trump will have to pay E. Jean Carroll for his 2019 defamatory statements about her.”

From CNN

CNN legal correspondent Paula Reid referring to Alina Habba: “She has a duel role. She is Trump’s attorney on the record, she worked for him on his civil cases. But she’s also his spokeswoman. You can see her working in both of those roles today.”

From what my colleague Kire Schneider wrote about Alina Habba back in November:

“Alina Habba is not really a trial lawyer. She can barely afford to do whatever she does as a lawyer right now. She’s more of a public relations lawyer, if anything at all, who makes her living trying her client’s cases on TV and on social media. But she’s officially Donald Trump’s civil lawyer right now because she’s about the best of what’s left to try to defend him, because of his own financial situation and all the evidence that’s against him right now, in multiple cases.

Perhaps one of the reasons right now that Alina Habba owes millions of dollars, is because her own client is not paying her. But she’s trying to work for him anyway, perhaps banking on the fact that defending a former President of the United States, would lead to clients who can and would pay her very well for her legal advice and actions in the future. But that career strategy is obviously not working out for her right now.”

From The New Democrat

Just to give you one more example of why the MAGA movement is only not conservative, but is actually anti-conservative and they believe in the opposites of what even fundamentalist religious Conservatives, or Constitutional Conservatives believe in and this dealing with legal cases:

Led by their leader Donald Trump, (I at least would argue cult leader) they believe that the rules of society simply don’t apply to them. And that even though they physically live in a civil society, a constitutional republic, based on both individual rights, as well as equal rights, and the rule of law, they believe those civil and constitutional values simply don’t apply to them.

So what MAGA basically does is whatever they want, not seeming to care even if they lose in court, let alone get caught, because they believe at the end of the day, they’ll win the publication relations battle and the charges against them will be dropped. Or hold out for a pardon, or win appeals based on their public relations battles. That’s what you see with Alina Habba today, whose more of a legal political activist for Donald Trump’s MAGA movement, that a legitimate, credible, serious, practicing attorney.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Michael Popok: ‘Judge Hits Donald Trump With BRUTAL Ruling, Lawsuit BACKFIRES’

Posted on January 15, 2024 by kireschneider

Meidas Touch: Judge Hits Donald Trump With BRUTAL Ruling, Lawsuit BACKFIRESSource:Meidas Touch– left to right: Donald Trump propagandist & perhaps Trump University graduate Alina Habba and her defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“The team of Trump and Habba strike again, as a New York judge awards the New York Times almost $500,000 in attorneys fees because Trump violated their First Amendment rights by suing them over a Pulitzer Prize winning article that detailed Trump and his father’s tax fraud that let Trump pocket almost $500 million when his father died in 1999. Michael Popok of Legal AF explains that yet another legal screw up by Habba by filing a suit in direct violation of a NY statute that had just been amended TO ADDRESS TRUMP’S OWN LITIGATION MISCONDUCT, led to the judge’s easy decision.”

From Meidas Touch

“Donald Trump must pay nearly $400,000 in legal fees to The New York Times and three of its reporters, a judge ruled Friday.

The former president unsuccessfully sued the Times, along with reporters Susanne Craig, David Barstow and Russ Buettner, over a 2018 Pulitzer-winning story on the Trump family’s wealth and tax filings…

From POLITICO

“What happened in Room 300 of the New York County Courthouse in lower Manhattan in November had never happened. Not in the preceding almost two and a half centuries of the history of the United States. Donald Trump was on the witness stand. It was not unprecedented in the annals of American jurisprudence just because it was a former president, although that was totally true. It was unprecedented because the power dynamic of the courtroom had been upended — the defendant was not on defense, the most vulnerable person in the room was the most dominant person in the room, and the people nominally in charge could do little about it.

It was unprecedented, too, because over the course of four or so hours Trump savaged the judge, the prosecutor, the attorney general, the case and the trial — savaged the system itself. He called the attorney general “a political hack.” He called the judge “very hostile.” He called the trial “crazy” and the court “a fraud” and the case “a disgrace.” He told the prosecutor he should be “ashamed” of himself. The judge all but pleaded repeatedly with Trump’s attorneys to “control” him. “If you can’t,” the judge said, “I will.” But he didn’t, because he couldn’t, and audible from the city’s streets were the steady sounds of sirens and that felt absolutely apt.”

From POLITICO

Again, from I wrote about Alina Habba. And if you disagree with anything that I’ve written about her as a lawyer the last two months, feel free to make the case against me on this post and The New Democrat in general:

“Alina Habba is not really a trial lawyer. She can barely afford to do whatever she does as a lawyer right now. She’s more of a public relations lawyer, if anything at all, who makes her living trying her client’s cases on TV and on social media. But she’s officially Donald Trump’s civil lawyer right now because she’s about the best of what’s left to try to defend him, because of his own financial situation and all the evidence that’s against him right now, in multiple cases.

Perhaps one of the reasons right now that Alina Habba owes millions of dollars, is because her own client is not paying her. But she’s trying to work for him anyway, perhaps banking on the fact that defending a former President of the United States, would lead to clients who can and would pay her very well for her legal advice and actions in the future. But that career strategy is obviously not working out for her right now. ”

From The New Democrat

As much as Donald Trump’s opponents (and that means Republicans, Democrats, and Independents) like to argue that Donald Trump is an idiot, he actually isn’t. I think the way to look at Donald Trump (at risk of sounding very insulting) is to look at him like a street mobster, but with a college degree and a white-collar background. Not saying the man should be a brain surgeon, an astronaut, American history professor, etc. But if you think you are being overtaxed, or perhaps shouldn’t have to pay taxes at all, Donald Trump would probably be a good guy to go to for that.

And I only mention this because I for the life of me (and of course we could all speculate here) I have no idea what Donald Trump personally sees in Alina Habba as a lawyer. And I guess I go back to my November article about her and the differences between a sitting President of the United States and a disgraced former President of the United States, when it comes to legal counsel. The current president’s have access to the best lawyers in the entire country, if not world. But former president’s who are simply trying to stay out of prison, have access to what’s left.

What’s left in the legal profession for disgraced, former president’s, are the lawyers who are simply struggling with their own careers, who need a wealthy client to jumpstart their careers. It’s obvious what Alina Habba sees in Donald Trump. I mean he’s her ticket to becoming a wealthy, big time lawyer, at least when it comes to her clients. If you can forget about all the amateur screw ups that she’s made trying to defend him and her horrible court losses. But the question is what does he see in her simply as a lawyer.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rosemary Church: Ron Brownstein: This Is The Big Picture Takeaway From The Iowa Poll

Posted on January 15, 2024 by FredSchneiderUS

CNN: Ron Brownstein_ This Is The Big Picture Takeaway From The Iowa PollSource:CNN– the big 3 in the Republican Party in Iowa.

Source:The New Democrat

“CNN’s senior political analyst Ron Brownstein says that the big picture takeaway from the latest Des Moines Register poll of Iowa voters is that Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis have not done enough to close the gap with former President Donald Trump.”

From CNN

I think Ron Brownstein hit the nail on the head (to use an old cliche) about Nikki Haley when he said that:

“I think she’s on track to being the one, viable, alternative, to Donald Trump after Iowa and New Hampshire. But if she doesn’t develop a stronger rationale for Republican voters for why they should leave the former President (meaning Donald Trump) who may be generally favorable to him, but who are open to an alternative, she’s going to run out of room not long after Ron DeSantis. A decent showing here (meaning Iowa) and a decent showing in New Hampshire, sets herself up for a shot in her home state of South Carolina. But she’s going to have to broaden her coalition to put Donald Trump at real risk.”

Nikki Haley politically has basically been running for President in the Republican Party, as a high school student running for class president, on just her personal popularity and hoping people will vote for her, because they personally like her, because she’s popular, has the right friends, throws the cool party’s, maybe one of her parents is a popular celebrity, etc. And not bothering to get into what Haley presidency would look like and why she should be President of the United States. Because details like that tend to bore high school voters.

Back in the summer, Ambassador Haley was running for President of the United States, against Vice President Kamala Harris, as if the Vice President was actually running for President. And then against President Biden, as if she already had the Republican nomination locked up. And then we get into the fall, the debates start happening and she turns her attention to Governor Ron DeSantis, perhaps forgetting the fact that he was buried in the polls with her in the teens, when it came to Republican support, behind of course Donald J. Trump.

The only person that Nikki Haley doesn’t seem to want to run for President against, is Donald Trump. I think that’s why she screwed up the civil war question so badly and that perhaps it was attentional. She doesn’t want to do anything that can either offend him, or his supporters, as if someone who thinks slavery wasn’t that bad of a thing in America, might even consider voting for someone who happens to be East Indian, a woman, a gen-xer, daughter of immigrants, highly educated, very intelligent, well-spoken, etc, all characteristics that MAGA voters don’t like in a presidential candidate.

At some point if Nikki Haley even gets past New Hampshire and is able to even get into the race in South Carolina, she’s going to have to start running against the one man, that she really has to defeat, (if Ron DeSantis is no longer in the race at that point) and that of course is Donald J. Trump. She obviously thinks that she’s more qualified to be President of the United States and would make a better President than Donald Trump. Otherwise she’s wasting a helluva lot of time running for President against him. And perhaps she owes her financial backers a huge refund.

As far as Ron DeSantis, he’s the only Republican candidate whose still in the Republican race, whose actually running against Donald Trump for President. He’s had two excellent weeks back to back in Iowa and two excellent Republican debates back to back, making the case against Nikki Haley by arguing that Republicans don’t actually know what she believes and why she’s running for President at all, other than that she wants to be President of the United States.

While Governor DeSantis has gone after Nikki Haley, at the same time, making the case against Donald Trump by not just pointing out his failures to deliver on his promises like eliminating the national debt and deficit in 4 years, the border wall, and even mentioning the fact that Donald Trump will probably lose his presidential immunity claim, but will probably be a convicted felon and be convicted in Washington this summer, and perhaps still be the Republican nominee for President. As well as talking about what he’s already accomplished as Governor of Florida and essentially calling himself the Conservative with results.

Iowa is roughly 30% German-American and 60% Protestant and overwhelmingly blue-collar, especially outside if it’s major cities like De Moines. These are obviously Donald Trump voters. But, what we’re seeing now in the Republican polling, is even a state like Iowa that’s so rural and blue-collar, even these voters are looking for a serious alternative to Donald Trump.

I think to be the Trump alternative, you have to show why you are not just Donald Trump, but why you would make a better Republican nominee and President than Donald Trump. I think if there’s any real surprise on Monday night, it’s that Ron DeSantis has a big night. I’m not talking about winning the caucus. I’m talking about emerging as the main alternative to Donald Trump and maybe taking 30% of the vote and beating Nikki Haley by 10 points or something like that and perhaps even coming within shouting distance of Donald Trump.

For reasons that I already mention, I think this could happen with DeSantis locking in what’s left of the alternative vote to Donald Trump and those Iowa Republicans saying that DeSantis is the real Conservative in the race and the real anti-Trump candidate, whose already delivered as Governor of Florida and could deliver as President of the United States as well.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Karen F. Agnifilo: ‘Supreme Court Drops MAJOR HINT On Donald Trump’s Future’

Posted on January 12, 2024 by kireschneider

Meidas Touch: Supreme Court Drops MAJOR HINT On Donald Trump’s FutureSource:Meidas Touch– left to right: U.S. Chief Justice John Roberts & Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“Former Prosecutor and Legal AF Host, Karen Friedman Agnifilo, reports on a new hint from the Supreme Court and what it might tell us about what is next on their docket.”

From the Meidas Touch

“The Supreme Court will decide whether the Colorado court was right to bar the former president from the ballot.

Donald trump is well on his way to becoming history’s greatest litigation loser ever. But in the multifront war of Trump v. Seemingly Everyone Else, he has just prevailed in one small skirmish: The Battle of the Questions Presented.

Late Friday afternoon, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to review the Supreme Court of Colorado’s decision that held Trump ineligible to serve again as president under Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment, the provision barring insurrectionists from public office. That came as no surprise.

The nation’s high court also ordered an unusually fast schedule, with oral argument to be held in 34 days—on February 8. That, too, came as no surprise. All parties to the case agreed that the Court should hear the case, and do so expeditiously, so that states and voters could know before the presidential-primary season ends whether Trump was eligible for office.

What was unusual was the Court’s choice to grant review without specifying the particular legal issues it intends to decide…

From The Atlantic

Not just myself, but The New Democrat in general has stayed away from the 14th Amendment argument against Donald Trump, for the simple reason that you could make a good argument either way. I think it’s obvious that Donald Trump is guilty of insurrection from 2021. All the video evidence, his own statements and actions relating to even what he was doing in the last 2 weeks of his presidency has made that clear. As well as all the testimony from his own people against him.

But, Donald Trump has yet to be convicted even by Congress for his role in the January 6, 2021 insurrection against the U.S. Government. He was just impeached by Congress in the House, but then acquitted by the Senate. And has yet to go on trial even for his role in the insurrection.

I’m not saying this a flip of the coin, 50-50 case here, but if the choice is between prosecuting and convicting Donald Trump in court and then having him in jail for perhaps the entire 2nd half of the 2024 presidential campaign and just kicking him off the ballots in two states, (Colorado and Maine) I’m going with legal and democratic process here, as an at best independent Democrat, but more like a small d democrat, who believes in liberal democracy, including the rule of law in America.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Harry Litman: ‘Mike Pence Shared APPALLING DETAILS On 2020 Election’

Posted on January 12, 2024 by FredSchneiderUS

Harry Litman: Mike Pence Shared APPALLING DETAILS on 2020 electionSource:Harry Litman– former Vice President of the United States Mike Pence (Republican, Indiana) 2017-2021.

Source:The New Democrat

“Former Vice President Mike Pence spoke to the January 6th special counsel earlier this year, revealing some shocking new information about Trump’s behavior leading up to the insurrection. Pence shared that he had told Trump multiple times that there was no sign of “outcome-determinative fraud.” He also referred to Trump’s lawyers as “crank” attorneys who relied on “un-American” legal theories.”

From Harry Litman

“Speaking with special counsel Jack Smith’s team earlier this year, former Vice President Mike Pence offered harrowing details about how, in the wake of the 2020 presidential election, then-President Donald Trump surrounded himself with “crank” attorneys, espoused “un-American” legal theories, and almost pushed the country toward a “constitutional crisis,” according to sources familiar with what Pence told investigators.”

From ABC News

“The advice of counsel defense is based on the common sense principle that a defendant should not be held liable for actions taken based on reasonable reliance on the advice of counsel. Such reliance negates wrongful intent. The defense contains four elements: (1) The defendant made a complete disclosure to counsel concerning the matter at issue, (2) the defendant sought advice as to the legality of his conduct, (3) the defendant received advice that his conduct was legal, and (4) the defendant relied on that advice in good faith.3 A defendant who asserts the defense must, of course, waive the attorney-client privilege, which is why defendants often prefer to allude to the involvement of lawyers without formally asserting the defense. Even those defendants who earnestly want to assert the defense face a difficult hurdle of showing that they made a complete disclosure to counsel concerning the matter at issue.”

From Steward & Kissel

I think we knew even before Mike Pence announced his presidential campaign last year, that then Vice President Mike Pence told then President Donald Trump, that there’s nothing that the Vice President could do according to the Constitution, to unilaterally reverse the 2020 presidential election result in favor of President Trump, or unilaterally just go past Congress, to send the election back to the states. But like every other time that Donald Trump gets bad news about himself, he ignores that and looks for another option.

The advice of counsel defense can only be used when you are completely reliant on bad legal advice and lawyers who are either crooked or incompetent. The problem that Donald Trump has here, is that his own Attorney General Bill Barr (who also happens to be a lawyer) told President Trump in December, 2020, that there was no real election fraud in the 2020 presidential election and the President ignored that as well. Along with a team of lawyers working for Donald Trump on his 2020 appeals telling the President that they are out of legal options and that he lost. Which is what one of Donald Trump’s co-defendants Ken Chesebro, has already told Special Counsel Jack Smith.

Posted in Harry Litman, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump LOSES IT in UNHINGED Outburst in Court, STORMS OUT’

Posted on January 11, 2024 by kireschneider

Trump LOSES IT in UNHINGED Outburst in Court, STORMS OUTSource:Meidas Touch– Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump ignoring all warnings and giving his own closing statement in the New York Attorney general civil fraud trial which went quickly off the rails.”

From the Meidas Touch

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump showing up to closing arguments in the New York civil fraud case and instantly whining and complaining.”

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump THROWS A FIT in Court at Closing ArgumentSource:Meidas Touch– Defendant Don.

From the Meidas Touch

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump’s disastrous town hall on Fox as Nikki Haley went on the offensive against him.”

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump Instantly INCRIMINATES HIMSELF on LIVE TV During Town HallSource:Meidas Touch– Fox News Defendant Don Townhall.

From the Meidas Touch

Donald J. Trump in court today: “We have a situation where I’m an innocent man,” Trump told the judge. “They should pay me for what I’ve gone through.”

“This is not consumer fraud,” Trump added. “This is no fraud. It is a fraud on me.”

Trump, Amer said, was the one responsible for the preparation of the documents “and the buck stops with him.”

From NBC News

“Alina Habba, pacing the well of the courtroom, says the case started before James was elected and points at the attorney general. Engoron reminds her to stick to the facts, which she says she is trying to do, but that James’ conduct is part of the factual record.

James has not proven her case in the six weeks of trial, Habba argues, and repeats the defense’s allegation that Cohen lied on the stand.”

From The New Democrat

From what I said yesterday about Alina Habba:

“I still stand by what I said about Alina Habba back in November. Alina Habba is someone whose simply trying to make a name for herself as a lawyer, or MAGA political activist, before becoming a real lawyer. And I’m sure she passed the bar and has a legal license, (perhaps from Trump University) but that’s not the same as being a lawyer.

A real, competent, responsible, honest, sane, and sober lawyer, (and hopefully that’s some small club of lawyers that has their get togethers in public bathrooms) doesn’t spend most of their time on TV, making garbage arguments that no one believes. (That no serious lawyer would make in court (because they don’t want to lose their law license)

What serious lawyers do instead is put together a competent, case, in favor of their client, based on hard evidence, that at least suggests, if not proves that their client is innocent of what they’re being charged of. And if they can’t do that, perhaps they seek a deal with the prosecutors, or try to win their case on appeal.”

From The New Democrat

If you were any prosecutor in America and Donald Trump was one of your defendants and somehow it was Christmas everyday, (or whatever holiday that you celebrate) and you could have anything in the world that you want, you would ask for Donald Trump to try to speak for himself as long as he wants, under oath.

For anyone whose younger than a gen-xer in America; there was a very popular, late night, comedic talk show, on NBC back in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, that was hosted by Johnny Carson, The King of Late Night TV. Back in 1982, (when I was 5 years old. I saw the thing on YouTube) there was a skit on Johnny Carson’s show, where he’s playing a career, crooked, politician, who voluntarily has a press conference under a lie detector machine. And every time that this politician spoke about anything, he even lied about being happy to be there, the buzzer went off and he got caught.

I mean Donald Trump is the American politician under a human lie detector machine, every time he speaks about anything, at anytime. The man even lies about his height and weight. He’s 6’2, not 6’3, still a tall man. He’s probably around 250 pounds now and that’s from his original physical when he was at The White House, instead of 215 pounds today. He claims to be a billionaire, but he can’t prove it.

I mean a man who can’t even tell the truth about his own financial assets and business, or even height and weight, can’t be trusted to defend America and lead our great country at any point in our history.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Anderson Cooper & Kaitlan Collins: Analysts Break Down Ron DeSantis’ & Nikki Haley’s Debate Performances

Posted on January 11, 2024 by FredSchneiderUS

CNN: Analysts Break Down Ron DeSantis' and Nikki Haley's Debate PerformancesSource:CNN– left to right: Governor Ron DeSantis (Republican, Florida) & former U.N. Ambassador & Governor Nikki Haley (Republican, South Carolina)

Source:The New Democrat

“CNN’s Anderson Cooper, Abby Phillip, John King, and CNN political commentators David Axelrod and Scott Jennings discuss the debate performances of former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis.”

From CNN

“GOP presidential candidate Gov. Ron DeSantis joins CNN’s Anderson Cooper after the CNN debate to discuss the criticism of not taking on former President Donald Trump enough.”

CNN: Ron DeSantis Reacts To Criticism For Not Going After Donald Trump More During DebateSource:CNN– Governor Ron DeSantis (Republican, Florida)

From CNN

Governor Ron DeSantis on Nikki Haley: “We don’t need another mealy-mouthed politician who just tells you what she thinks you want to hear just to try to get your vote, then to get an office and to do her donors’ bidding,” he said.”

From WION

Going into this debate, Nikki Haley had a great opportunity, especially with Chris Christie dropping out on that very day of the race, to lock up what’s left of the center-right of the Republican Party (who now are like goldfish swimming for their lives in a shark tank, politically) and lock down what’s left of the Conservative Republican vote behind her and combine those voters with New Hampshire Independents and perhaps center-right Democrats in that state (the live free or die state) and knock Ron DeSantis out of the race or at least in Iowa.

Going into the debate Ron DeSantis I believe was fighting for the rest of his 2024 presidential campaign. We’re talking about a guy (again, to go back to football ) who was down 21 points going into the 4th quarter, with the ball and with the last opportunity of the game, just to get back into the game and tell voters that he’s not just still in the race and but there’s reason for not just Iowa voters, but perhaps with the center-right of the New Hampshire Republican Party, to look at his campaign and. make him the clear alternative to Donald Trump.

To go back to the WION quote of Governor DeSantis, he just didn’t win the debate last night, but you could argue that he won the debate with that one line right there. If there in one weakness with the Haley presidential campaign, is that Nikki Haley has this habit of trying to speak to very different political factions of the modern Republican Party (Conservatives and Nationalists) at the same time, without trying to offend either.

As I mentioned about Nikki Haley back in October, this has always been the main problem with her presidential campaign:

“Nikki Haley goes out-of-her-way for the MAGA vote and just tries to appeal to those voters, would that turn Independents off for her and also turn out more Democrats against her?” She tries to appeal to both wings of the Republican Party at the sane time. There are times in political careers where you have to decide where you get your bread politically and when you can’t be everything to everyone.”

From The New Democrat

This is what I said about Nikki Haley a couple weeks ago:

“There are times in every successful leader’s career where they are tested and you know right there how strong of a person and leader that they are and how good their character is. The old expression you: “You never have a 2nd chance to make a 1st impression”, is how I look at Nikki Haley right now.”

From The New Democrat 

This is what I said about Nikki Haley last week about her colossal screw up dealing with the Civil War:

“A strong, honest, and, moral, political leader, who wants to be President of the United States, doesn’t shoot her foot off, when asked a basic question like what was the American Civil War about.”

From The New Democrat 

This all goes to Ron DeSantis’s quote about Nikki Haley trying to be everything to everyone and saying one thing and doing another. It’s not just that DeSantis presented himself as the only Conservative Republican in the race, but he even went after Donald Trump not just on the racial riots in the summer of 2020, where then President Trump did almost nothing about them, he even predicted that Trump would not just lose his presidential immunity appeal, but will be tried and convicted in Washington this year before the presidential election, while he’s still running for President.

What you got with Ron DeSantis, is him saying that he was a Conservative with results. Just look at his record in Florida and the economic success that his state has had since he’s been Governor. While at the same time arguing why he’s more Conservative than Donald Trump as it relates to both fiscal responsibility, economic and job growth, fiscal responsibility, and even things like the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution.

Ron DeSantis presented himself as the real Conservative Republican in the race. While Nikki Haley spent most of the debate just trying to defend herself and getting flustered and instead of responding to DeSantis’s attack against her, she promoted some website about his supposed lies about her.

If there’s any surprise whatsoever in Iowa on Monday night, it’s that Ron DeSantis has a strong showing in Iowa and becomes the only alternative to Donald Trump going forward. He’s had two excellent weeks back-to-back now. The question is it enough for him to even get back in the race now. We’ll see next week.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ben Meiselas: ‘Donald Trump WANTS TO REPLACE Alina Habba With Himself As Lawyer’

Posted on January 10, 2024 by kireschneider

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump WANTS TO REPLACE Alina Habba with Himself as LawyerSource:Meidas Touch– perhaps Alina Habba should be seeking a refund from Donald Trump, for her time as a law student at Trump University. (Assuming that’s where she graduated)

Source:The New Democrat

“MeidasTouch host Ben Meiselas reports on Donald Trump claiming he is going to give the closing argument at the New York civil fraud trial instead of Alina Habba and how this fits the pattern of Trump’s playbook of hiring the worst lawyer so he can whine all the time about losing and getting called out by judges.”

From the Meidas Touch

As I said in November about Alina Habba back in November:

“If you followed Donald Trump’s presidency, I have some therapy that I could recommend that could help you get through that experience. Actually, that’s just a joke, since no such therapy has been invented yet. But if you survived the experience of the Donald Trump presidency and so far his post-presidency, you are getting an excellent legal education of the differences between being President and Ex-President, when it comes to your own lawyers.

When you are the President of the United States, regardless of the POTUS, you have access to be the best of legal profession in this country. Any lawyer just about would be honored to either work in your White House, or work as your personal attorney to address any personal legal issues that you might have when you are President. At least access to the best lawyers in your own party.

But when you leave The White House, especially in disgrace, when you’ve just lost reelection and only managed 46% of the popular vote and 232 out of 574 electoral votes, in a two-way race, you’ve been impeached twice in just 4 years, you have all the legal issues that are now in front of you because of your illegal conduct as President of the United States, you are very unpopular, at least outside of your own party, you have mounting financial debt in front of you because of all the money that you lost when you were President, you have access to whatever is left.

Alina Habba is not really a trial lawyer. She can barely afford to do whatever she does as a lawyer right now. She’s more of a public relations lawyer, if anything at all, who makes her living trying her client’s cases on TV and on social media. But she’s officially Donald Trump’s civil lawyer right now because she’s about the best of what’s left to try to defend him, because of his own financial situation and all the evidence that’s against him right now, in multiple cases.”

From The New Democrat 

Ron Filipkowksi on Donald Trump: “I’ve said this before. It truly a blessing that Trump surrounds himself with so many morons. If he hired competent people we’d be in worst trouble.”

Donald Trump’s lawyer (and I use the term lawyer very generously when talking about Alina Habba) I believe back in November, talking about her client testifying at the New York state civil fraud trial that’s against him: “He’s so firmly against what is happening in this court. And so firmly in favor of the old America that we know, not this America, that he’ll take that stand on Monday.”

“Closings are the last opportunity to present legal arguments, and they are almost always conducted by lawyers, unless a defendant has chosen to represent themselves. Engoron pointed out that whether Trump would be allowed to speak was “completely at my discretion” under New York state law.

In a message to the former president’s legal team and lawyers from the New York Attorney General’s Office on Jan. 5, Engoron laid out the conditions that Trump must adhere to if he wished to address the court.

“He may not seek to introduce new evidence. He may not ‘testify.’ He may not comment on irrelevant matters. In particular, and without limitation, he may not deliver a campaign speech, and he may not impugn myself, my staff, plaintiff, plaintiff’s staff, or the New York State Court System, none of which is relevant to this case,” Engoron wrote, later calling the limits “reasonable” and “lawful.”

In his replies to Engoron, Trump attorney Christopher Kise complained about the restrictions the judge imposed.

“This is very unfair, your Honor. You are not allowing President Trump, who has been wrongfully demeaned and belittled by an out of control, politically motivated Attorney General, to speak about the things that must be spoken about,” Kise wrote Wednesday morning.”

From CBS News

So Donald Trump I guess wants to give at least part of his closing arguments himself (there’s so many ways to make fun of that as well, but too little time) but Judge Engeron said that Mr. Trump can’t because he didn’t agree to the conditions that the Judge laid out for those closing arguments.

I still stand by what I said about Alina Habba back in November. Alina Habba is someone whose simply trying to make a name for herself as a lawyer, or MAGA political activist, before becoming a real lawyer. And I’m sure she passed the bar and has a legal license, (perhaps from Trump University) but that’s not the same as being a lawyer.

A real, competent, responsible, honest, sane, and sober lawyer, (and hopefully that’s some small club of lawyers that has their get togethers in public bathrooms) doesn’t spend most of their time on TV, making garbage arguments that no one believes. (That no serious lawyer would make in court (because they don’t want to lose their law license)

What serious lawyers do instead is put together a competent, case, in favor of their client, based on hard evidence, that at least suggests, if not proves that their client is innocent of what they’re being charged of. And if they can’t do that, perhaps they seek a deal with the prosecutors, or try to win their case on appeal.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

CNN: ‘Devastating’: George Conway Reacts To Donald Trump Team’s Day in Court’

Posted on January 10, 2024 by FredSchneiderUS

CNN: ‘Devastating’_ George Conway Reacts to Donald Trump Team’s Day in CourtSource:CNN– The Source With Kaitlan Collins & George Conway. Perhaps you are up to telling for yourself who is who.

Source:The New Democrat

“Conservative lawyer George Conway tells CNN’s Kaitlan Collins how he thinks former President Donald Trump’s hearing in a circuit court of appeals went. CNN legal analyst Elliot Williams and Former Nixon White House counsel John Dean join to discuss.”

From CNN

“GEORGE CONWAY, CONSERVATIVE LAWYER: Well, the short answer is what they were doing there, was taking a bad argument, their immunity argument, and conflating it with another bad argument, which is something based upon the impeachment judgment clause, and mixing them all together, in the hope of getting a stronger argument.

And what happened was the Trump attorney, Sauer, set a trap for himself that Judge Pan just completely, completely closed off. And she was — it was an intellectual tour de force by Judge Pan. Not only did she highlight the extreme nature of their position that a president might not be prosecutable, for assassinating political rivals, she did something else.

His exception — his attempt to explain well, you could hold the president liable, was based upon that impeachment judgment clause, and misreading it by saying that if — you can prosecute a former President, if they were convicted by the Senate.

Well, the problem was that completely is inconsistent with their main position, which is the President is absolutely immune. And let me elaborate just a little more on that.

Their position that the President is absolutely immune from being prosecuted for official acts, it stems from the notion that — which he repeated, Sauer repeated, over and over again, that we must be — we have — we have to be afraid that there’ll be political prosecutions.

And then, he’s taking this other position, which again, is nonsense by itself, but trying to mix it in by saying, but you could prosecute him, if the Congress, which happens to be the most political body, in the United — in the Capitol, says you can.

So, what he’s saying on one hand, he’s saying we can’t have presidents prosecuted, because apart — because it could be political. And then, he’s saying that the political Congress gets to decide. It made absolutely no sense. And I was there, in the courtroom. And it was just, it was devastating.”

From CNN

From what I said yesterday about this case:

“I think pretty much everyone whose not in the MAGA movement in America, (which is about 70% of the country) has predicted that Donald Trump would not lose his presidential immunity claim at the appeals court.

I think the only question here is how big of a loss would it be. Would it be 2-1, with perhaps Judge Karen Henderson voting no and expressing a strong dissent to the decision. Would she vote no, but without giving an official dissent to the decision. Or would it be a strong 3-0 decision against the former President, with a strong, unified opinion against the former President’s immunity claim, giving the Supreme Court some cover here and raising the possibility that they wouldn’t even take Donald Trump’s appeal here, because no new ground had been raised here and they know he would definitely lose. But perhaps the Trump’s Justices don’t want to make that official decision against him.

Based on Judge Henderson’s questioning of Donald Trump’s lawyer John Sauer, I think we’re looking at a strong 3-0 decision against the former President (not former King) and they’ll have a strong, unified opinion against the former President’s presidential immunity claim. But as I keep saying, I’m not a lawyer.

Just to correct the record on something that John Sauer said: his client Donald J. Trump, is not being prosecuted for official acts that he did when he was President. He’s being prosecuted for criminal acts that Special Counsel Jack Smith believed he committed when he was President. As well as criminal acts that Jack Smith believes he committed since leaving the presidency.”

From The New Democrat

From what my colleague Kire Schneider wrote yesterday about this case:

“Michael Popok: “The Judge’s aren’t buying the impeachment argument (Donald Trump’s double jeopardy claim) and are troubled whether they even have jurisdiction as far as if they can’t even rule on this yet. I’ll just wrap it up this way, Ben. They are going to as we think, they are going to rule against Donald Trump. I think it will be 3-0. I don’t think it will go back to Judge Chutkan for anything. And I think the loser will have to take an emergency writ up to the Supreme Court.”

Ben Meiselas thinks that the Washington appeals court will rule against Donald Trump on jurisdiction grounds. Meaning that the appeals court doesn’t think they should be ruling on this case, until Donald Trump is convicted.

Ben Meiselas then goes on to talk about President Richard Nixon in 1974, who resigned the presidency before he could get impeached and convicted by Congress. Well, that goes to one of Donald Trump’s arguments having to do with double jeopardy, since the former President was impeached, but then acquitted by Congress back in 2021.

But then Meiselas also mentions that President Gerald Ford pardoned President Nixon after Nixon was already out of office, in September of 1974. But if any President has presidential immunity from prosecution while as President, why wold any President ever have to be pardoned for anything at all?

I think this is very simple. Donald Trump and his lawyers don’t have any constitutional or legal case, for why their client should be immune for anything while as President, or as a former President. They might as well just argue that Donald Trump is immune from civil litigation or prosecution, simply because he’s Donald Trump. Because that’s the quality (if you want to call it that) of their arguments right now.”

From The New Democrat

Just to go back to what George Conway said: “GEORGE CONWAY, CONSERVATIVE LAWYER: Well, the short answer is what they were doing there, was taking a bad argument, their immunity argument, and conflating it with another bad argument, which is something based upon the impeachment judgment clause, and mixing them all together, in the hope of getting a stronger argument.

And what happened was the Trump attorney, Sauer, set a trap for himself that Judge Pan just completely, completely closed off. And she was — it was an intellectual tour de force by Judge Pan. Not only did she highlight the extreme nature of their position that a president might not be prosecutable, for assassinating political rivals, she did something else.”

To put this very simply: Donald Trump’s legal team doesn’t have a case. Yesterday in court, Donald Trump’s lawyers were trying to swim up stream, with just one arm and a leg. And that arm and leg was probably broken, just like their arguments and whatever case that they tried to argue in court yesterday.

Donald Trump is an American citizen just like everyone else. And like with everyone else, when there’s strong evidence that just didn’t break the law, but broke multiple laws, but just didn’t break multiple laws, but committed multiple felonies, even while as President of the United States, under Federal law and according to the U.S. Constitution as it relates to the rule of law and equal justice under law, you are supposed to be prosecuted.

If Donald Trump actually thinks that he’s innocent, or he knows he is guilty, but he thinks he can beat the case anyway, (perhaps simply because he’s Donald J. Trump) he gets prosecuted and has his day in court. And of course he can always plead guilty, or cooperate with the prosecutors to get a lighter sentence. But you don’t walk away from all of this simply because you were President of the United States, or your crimes were committed while you were President of the United States. Because that would be inconsistent with our system of rule of law, equal justice under law, and checks and balances.

Posted in CNN, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Ben Meiselas & Michael Popok: ‘Donald Trump RIPPED TO SHREDS by DC Appeals Court’

Posted on January 9, 2024 by kireschneider

Meidas Touch: Donald Trump RIPPED TO SHREDS by DC Appeals CourtSource:Meidas Touch– left to right: U.S. Judge Florence Pan & Defendant Don.

Source:The New Democrat

“LegalAF hosts Ben Meiselas and Michael Popok report on the oral argument before the DC Circuit Court of Appeals in connection with Donald Trump’s claim of absolute presidential immunity which was denied at the district court level. As predicted, Trump’s lawyers were grilled by the judges on their baseless and dangerous claims.”

From the Meidas Touch

“Special counsel attorney James Pearce delivered a fiery response to questions about the implications of Trump’s indictment, calling it an “extraordinarily frightening future” if a president were to be granted complete presidential immunity.

“I mean, what kind of world are we living in?” Pearce said. “If, as I understood my friend on the other side to say here, a president orders a SEAL team to assassinate a political rival and resigned, for example before an impeachment, it’s not a criminal act. I think that is extraordinarily frightening future.”

Judge Karen Henderson asked Pearce how the court could rule regarding presidential immunity in a way that “would stop the floodgates?”

“I want to push back a little bit against this idea of a floodgate.” Pearce responded, arguing that Smith’s indictment of Trump was not risking a continuation of “tit-for-tat” prosecutions that could cascade into the future.”

From ABC News

From what my colleague Fred Schneider wrote earlier today:

“I think pretty much everyone whose not in the MAGA movement in America, (which is about 70% of the country) has predicted that Donald Trump would not lose his presidential immunity claim at the appeals court.

I think the only question here is how big of a loss would it be. Would it be 2-1, with perhaps Judge Karen Henderson voting no and expressing a strong dissent to the decision. Would she vote no, but without giving an official dissent to the decision. Or would it be a strong 3-0 decision against the former President, with a strong, unified opinion against the former President’s immunity claim, giving the Supreme Court some cover here and raising the possibility that they wouldn’t even take Donald Trump’s appeal here, because no new ground had been raised here and they know he would definitely lose. But perhaps the Trump’s Justices don’t want to make that official decision against him.

Based on Judge Henderson’s questioning of Donald Trump’s lawyer John Sauer, I think we’re looking at a strong 3-0 decision against the former President (not former King) and they’ll have a strong, unified opinion against the former President’s presidential immunity claim. But as I keep saying, I’m not a lawyer.”

From The New Democrat

Michael Popok: “The Judge’s aren’t buying the impeachment argument (Donald Trump’s double jeopardy claim) and are troubled whether they even have jurisdiction as far as if they can’t even rule on this yet. I’ll just wrap it up this way, Ben. They are going to as we think, they are going to rule against Donald Trump. I think it will be 3-0. I don’t think it will go back to Judge Chutkan for anything. And I think the loser will have to take an emergency writ up to the Supreme Court.”

Ben Meiselas thinks that the Washington appeals court will rule against Donald Trump on jurisdiction grounds. Meaning that the appeals court doesn’t think they should be ruling on this case, until Donald Trump is convicted.

Ben Meiselas then goes on to talk about President Richard Nixon in 1974, who resigned the presidency before he could get impeached and convicted by Congress. Well, that goes to one of Donald Trump’s arguments having to do with double jeopardy, since the former President was impeached, but then acquitted by Congress back in 2021.

But then Meiselas also mentions that President Gerald Ford pardoned President Nixon after Nixon was already out of office, in September of 1974. But if any President has presidential immunity from prosecution while as President, why wold any President ever have to be pardoned for anything at all?

I think this is very simple. Donald Trump and his lawyers don’t have any constitutional or legal case, for why their client should be immune for anything while as President, or as a former President. They might as well just argue that Donald Trump is immune from civil litigation or prosecution, simply because he’s Donald Trump. Because that’s the quality (if you want to call it that) of their arguments right now.

Posted in Meidas Touch, The New Democrat | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments